MPR-SAT-FE-66-12 September 22, 1966

SP,dC FLI6ttT CENTE#

HUNTSVILZ_r. 4LAB,4 M,4

..

(ACCESS

]ER)

(TH,HRU)

RESULTS

OF THE

IB LAUNCH SECOND. TEST VEHICLE SATURN FLIGHT (NASACR AV_LULeoNASA . OR AO NUMBER) JU_,o OF.CeS (CATEGORY) .AS,,,
ONLY

AS -20 3

NATIONALERONAUTICS A ANDSPACE ADMINISTRATION.

MSFC

- F_m

T?4

(Rev

Febnmr7

1961)

,._

NOTE

This document contains information affecting the national defense of the United States within _h_ meaning of the Espionage Law, Title 18, U.S.C., Section_ 793 and 794 as amended. The revelation of its contents in_y-manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.

_J

MPR-SAT-FE-66RESULTS OF THE SECOND

I_ VEHICLE TEST FLIGHT

SATURN IB LAUNCH AS-203 By

Saturn George

Flight C.

Evaluation Space ABSTRACT

Working Flight

Group Center

Marshall (U)

This report presents the results of the Early Engineering of AS-203, the second Saturn IB vehicle to be flight tested. of this flight was to evaluate the behavior and determine the

Evaluation The mission character-

istics of LH 2 in orbit. The launch vehicle was launched from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 37B at 0953:17 EST on July 5, 1966. After I hour 53 minutes and 17 seconds of countdown holds, the vehicle lifted off and performed nearly nominal throughout the powered of flight. No major system malfunctions were evidenced; deviations were encountered and are discussed in detail and orbital phases however, some within this text.

B__ ,_ ..... C!._.. []_

_ ;-- _ .

..... . ....

_ ....... _

%._tlon

N,_A

in

Any questions this report are

or comments invited and

pertaining should be

to the directed

information to:

contained

Director, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama 35812 Attention: Chairman, Saturn Flight Evaluation Working R-AERO-F (Phone 876-4575)

Group

GEORGE

C. MARSHALL

SPACE

FLIGHT

CENTER

MPR- SAT-FE -66-1 2

RESULTS

OF THE SECOND

SATURN

IB LAUNCH

VEHICLE

TEST FLIGHT

(U)

AS-203

: This document con_i_ormation the national(_ of the ,_tes withi,_ I_ I_._ea+]in_of the Espiona,$e_3"ltle 1S. CSC, Sections 793 and 7_. '+ Tile transmission or the revel_P_o-_"o_ its contents in arty,lnfl_nner _ t_unauthorized #fly law. per=on is prohibii_,

SATURN FLIGHT WORKING

EVALUATION GROUP

.p,@L .==, ,__. =_. l,l&| '_Vl_ll ll,,It-l_[ [ IInL I-

(U)

TABLE

OF CONTENTS Page

1.0 2.0 3.0

(U) (U) (U) 3.1 3.2 (U) 4.1 4.2 (U) 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

Flight Test Introduction

Summary

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

i 5 -.. 6 6 7 8 8 8 16 16 16 16 19 19 19 20 20 " 20 21 24 24 24 26 27 27 27 28 38 38 38 40 48 48

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

Test Objectives .................. Launch Vehicle Primary Objectives Launch Vehicle Secondary Objectives Times of Events .................... Summary of Events ................... Sequence of Events (Powered Flight)

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

4.0

......

5.0

5.5 5.6 5.7 6.0 (C) 6.1 6.2 6.3 (U) 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5

Launch Operations .................. Summary ................... Prelaunch Milestones ................ Countdown ....................... Propellant and Cold Helium Loading .......... 5.4.1 RP-I Loading ................ 5.4.2 Lox Loading ............. 5.4.3 LH2 Loading .............. 5.4.4 Cold Helium Loading . . . 5.4.5 Auxiliary Propulsion System Propellant Loading 5.4.6 S-IB Stage Propellant Load . .......... 5.4.7 S-IVB Stage Propellant Load . . Holddown ....................... Ground Support Equipment ............ Launch Facility Measurements ........... Mass Characteristics ....... Summary .............. Mass Analysis ........... Center of Gravity and Moment of Inertia Trajectory Summary Powered Powered Orbital Orbital ...............

. . . Analysis"

7.0

- ................. "" Flight Tracking Data Utilization ....... Flight Trajectory Analysis .......... Tracking Data Utilization ........... Trajectory Analysis ......

iii

(U)

TABLE

OF CONTENTS

(CONT) Page

8.0

(U) 8.1 8.2

8.3 8.4

8.5 9.0 (U) 9.1 9.2

S-IB Propulsion ................... Summary ...................... S-IB Propulsion Performance ............. 8.2.1 Stage Engine Performance ........... 8.2.2 Individual Engine Characteristics ....... S-IB Propellant Utilization ............. S-IB Pressurization Systems ............. 8.4.1 Fuel Pressurization System .......... 8.4.2 LOX Pressurization System .......... 8.4.3 Control Pressurization System ........ Camera Ejection System ................ S-IVB Propulsion and Associated Systems ....... Summary ...................... S-IVB Propulsion Performance .......... 9.2.1 Engine Chilldown ............ 9.2.2 Start Characteristics ......... 9.2.3 Mainstage Engine Analysis ....... 9.2.4 Cutoff Characteristics ......... S-IVB Propellant Utilization ......... S-IVB Pressurization Systems ............ 9.4.1 Fuel Pressurization System .......... 9.4.2 LOX Pressurization System .......... 9.4.3 Auxiliary Pressurization Systems ....... S-IVB Auxiliary Propulsion System (APS) ....... Summary ...................... APS Performance ................... 10.2.1 Propellant and Pressurization Systems .... 10.2.2 APS Motor Performance ............ Hydraulic System .................. Summary ...................... S-IB Hydraulic Systems ............... S-IVB Hydraulic Systems ............... Guidance and Control ................ Sugary ...................... System Description ................. 12.2.1 Changes for Saturn IB AS-203 ..... 12.2.2 Function and Hardware Description ..... 12.2.3 Guidance and Navigation Scheme Description

52 52 52 52 64 66 69 69 71 72 74 75 75 75 75 77 80 86 88 92 92 95 I01 104 104 104 104 107 109 109 109 109 I14 114 114 114 115 117

9.3 9.4

i0.0

(U) I0.i 10.2

ii.0

(U) Ii.i 11.2 11.3 (C) 12.1 12.2

12.0

iv

(U)

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

(CONT) Page

12.3

Launch 12.3.1 12.3.2 12.3.3 12.3.4

Vehicle

Flight

Control

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

118 118 128 137 141 141 141 141 144 148 148 151 154 154 155 157 157 ]57 157 157 162 168 168 168 170 173 178 178 178 179 180 180 180 183 184 184 188 188 ;88

S-IB Stage Control Analysis ......... S-IVB Stage Control Analysis ........ Control During Orbit ............. Control Component Analysis ......... 12.3.4.1 Control Aeeelerometers ....... 12.3.4.2 12.3.4.3 12.3.4.4 Vehicle Angle-of-Attack Sensor ........ Rate Gyros ............. Actuator Performance ........ Guidance ............... Intelligence Errors ........ and Navigation Scheme Performance ................... System Components Analysis ...... LVDC/LVDA Analysis ........... ST-124M3 Stabilized Platform Analysis ................

12.4

Launch 12.4.1 12.4.2

Guidance Guidance Analysis 12.4.3 Guidance 12.4.3.1 12.4.3.2

13.0

(U) 13.1 13.2

Separation ...................... Summary ........................ S-IB/S-IVB Separation ................ 13.2.1 Ullage Motor Performance ........... 13.2.2 Retro Rocket Performance ........... 13.2.3 Separation Dynamics ..............

14.0

(U) 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 (U) 15.1 15.2 15.3 (U) 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 16.8

Vehicle Electrical Systems .............. Summary ........................ S-IB Stage Electrical System ............. S-IVB Stage Electrical System ............. Instrument Unit (IU) Electrical System ........ Range Safety and Command Systems Performance ..... Summary ........................ Command Destruct Systems Performance .......... Instrument Unit Command System Performance ....... Emergency Detection System (EDS) Performance Summary ....................... System Description .................. EDS Bus Voltage ................... EDS Event Times ................... Thrust OK Pressure Switches ............. EDS Rate Gyros ................... Q-Ball Differential Pressures ............. Launch Vehicle Attitude Reference Monitoring .....

15.0

16.0

.....

(D)

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

(CONT) Page

17.0

(U) 17.1 17.2

Structures .................... Summary .................... Total Vehicle Loads and Moments

..........

192 192 192 192 192 196 196 200 200 200 200 200 200 207 210 212 212 212 212 214 214 214 214 219 226 229 229 229 233 233 233 236 242 256 256 256 260 261 261 261 261

17.3

17.4

17.2.1 Longitudinal Loads ........... 17.2.2 Bending Moments .............. 17.2.3 Body Bending Oscillations .......... 17.2.4 Longitudinal Dynamic Analysis (Pogo) S-IB Stage Analysis ................. 17.3.1 S-IB Fin Bending and Torsion ....... 1.7.3.2 S-IB Stage Vibrations ............ 1.7.3.3 H-I Engine Vibrations ........... S-IVB Stage Analysis ............... 17.4.1 S-IVB Vibrations ............. 17.4.2 17.4.3 J-2 Engine Vibrations ......... S-IVB Internal Acoustics .......

....

17.5

Instrument Unit Analysis ............ 17.5.1 Instrument Unit Viuration ...... 17.5.1.1 Structural Measurements .... 17.5.1.2 Component Measurements .....

18.0

(U) 18.1 18.2

Pressure Summary Vehicle 18.2.1 18.2.2 18.2.3 1.8.2.4 18.2.5 18.2.6 18.2.7 Vehicle

and Thermal Environment .......... ....................... Pressure and Acoustic Environment ...... External Surface Pressures ......... External Acoustics ............. S-IB Stage Internal Pressures ..... S-IB Stage Base Pressures ....... S-IB/S-IVB Interstage Environment . . . S-IVB Stage Internal Pressure . . . Instrument Unit Pressures . . . Thermal Environment ........

18.3

18.4

18.3.1 S-IB Stage Aerodynamic Heating . . 18.3.2 S-IVB Stage Aerodynamic Heating . . . 18.3.3 S-IB Stage Base Thermal Environment . . 18.3.4 Instrument Unit Temperatures ..... Instrument Unit Environmental Control Systems . . 18.4.1 Thermal Conditioning System (TCS) ...... 18.4.2 Gas Bearing Supply System (GBSS) ...... Aerodynamics .................... Summary ....................... Fin Surface Pressures ................ Drag ........................

19.0

(U) 19.1 19.2 19.3

vi

(U)

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

(CONT) Page

20.0

(U) 20.1 20.2

Instrumentation Summary Vehicle 20.2.1 20.2.2 20.2.3 Airborne Airborne 20..4 1 20.4.2 20.4.3

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

265 265 265 265 268 272 272 274 274 274 275 275 276 276 278 283 283 283 285 285 285 285 287 292 292 299 302 302 302 306 311 311 316 316 320 320 320 325 334

....................... Measuring Analysis

_" 20.3 20.4

S-IB Stage Measuring Analysis ....... S-IVB Measuring Analysis ......... IU Measuring Analysis ........... Telemetry Systems ............. Tape Recorders S-IB Recorder S-IVB Recorder Instrument Unit ............. .............. ............. Recorder ........

20.5

20.6

Rim SystemS Analysis ................ 20.5.1 Telemetry .............. 20.5.2 Onboard Television .......... 20.5.3 Tracking .................. Optical Instrumentation .............. 20.6.1 Ground Cameras ............... 20.6.2 Onboard Cameras ............... LH 2 Orbital Experiment .............. Summary ....................... System Description .......... 21.2.1 Hardware Description ........... 21.2.2 Orbital Experiment Scheme and Description System Analysis ....... 21.3.1 Continuous and Non-Pr4ulsive Vent Systems 21.3.2 LOX Ullage Thrusting System ........ 21.3.3 Restart Systems ............. 21.3.3.1 21.3.3.2 21.3.3.3 21.3.3.4 21.3.3.5 21.3.3.6 21.3.3.7 21.3.4 Stage Fuel Fuel Fuel Fuel Repressurization System . . Recireulation Chilldown System Lead During Simulated Restart Anti-Vortex Screen ......

21.0

(U) 21.1 21.2

21.3

LOX Recirculation Chilldown System Engine Start Tank and Control Bottles Cold Helium Bottles ......... Pneumatic Control System .......

21.4

LH 2 Orbital Experiment Evaluation .......... 21.4.1 Propellant Control ............. 21.4.2 J-2 Engine Chilldown ........... 21.4.3 Pressure Rise Test ...........

vii

(U)

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

(CONC) Page

22.0

(U) 22.1 22.2 22.3 (U) 23.1 23.2

Subcritical Cryogenic Nitrogen Experiment ...... Summary ..................... System Description ................. System Operation and Performance .......... Summary Summary Systems A of Malfunctions .................. Malfunctions and and Deviations ....... .........

337 337 337 337 340 340 340 343 343 343 343 346 349 349 351 355 355 355 359 359 359 361 361 361 361 361 365 372 375

23.0

Deviations

Appendix A.I A.2

(U) Vehicle Description ...... Summary ...................... S-IB Stage .................. A.2.1 S-IB Configuration ............. A.2.2 S-IB-3 Configuration Differences

.......

A.3

A.4

A.5

S-IVB Stage ................ A.3.1 S-IVB Configuration ............. A.3.2 S-IVB-203 Configuration Differences ..... Instrument Unit ................. A.4.1 IU Configuration ............. A.4.2 IU-203 Configuration Differences ....... Nose Cone ...................... A.5.1 Nose Cone Configuration ........... A.5.2 Nose Cone Configuration Differences ..... B (U) Atmospheric Summary .............. Introduction .................... General Atmospheric Conditions at Launch Time Surface Observations at Launch Time ......... Upper Air Measurements ............... Thermodynamic Data ................. Comparison of Wind Data with Previous ...................... ............ ................

Appendix B.I B.2 3.3 B.4 B.5 B.6 References Approval

....

Saturn

Launches

376

viii

(U) Figure 5-1 6-1 6-2 7-1 7-2 7-3 7-4 7-5 8-1 8-2 8-3 8-4 8-5 8-6 8-7 8-8 8-9 8-10 9-1 9-2 9-3 9-4 9-5 9-6 9-7 9-8 9-9 9-10 9-11 9-12 9-13 9-14 I0-I 10-2 ii-i 11-2 12-1 12-2 12-3

LIST OF FIGURES Page

Fuel Density (Launch Complex 37 Storage) ........ Vehicle Mass, Center of Gravity, and Mass Moments of Inertia During S-IB Stage Powered Flight ..... Vehicle Mass, Center of Gravity, and Mass Moments of Inertia during S-IVB Stage Powered Flight ..... S-IB and S-IVB Trajectories ............... Earth-Fixed Velocity .................. Total Inertial Acceleration .............. Mach Number and Dynamic Pressure ............ Booster Trajectory Ground Track ............ S-IB Individual Engine and Stage Thrust Buildup ..... S-IB Stage Longitudinal Thrust and Specific Impulse. S-IB Stage Propellant Mixture Ratio and Flowrate .... S-IB Stage LOX & Fuel Flowrates and LOX Density .... S-IB Longitudinal Engine Thrust and Effective Force. S-IB Inboard and Outboard Engine Thrust Decay ...... Individual Engine Performance Parameters ........ Fuel Depletion Times and Propellant Levels ...... Fuel Tank Ullage and Helium Sphere Pressures ...... LOX Pressurization System Characteristics ........ Engine Chilldown - Thrust Chamber and Manifold Temperatures ..................... S-IVB Thrust Buildup .................. S-IVB Start Transient - Chamber Pressure and MOV Position ....................... MOV Environment and Fuel Turbine Inlet Temperature S-IVB Steady State Operation ........... S-IVB Thrust and Chamber Pressure Cutoff Transient AS-203 Ignition and Cutoff Mass .......... Overall LOX and LH 2 Sensor Non-Linearities .... LH 2 Tank Pressurization System Performance LH 2 Pump Conditions ............... Propellant Pumps Inlet Start Requirements ....... LOX Tank Pressurization System Performance LOX Pump Conditions ........ Pneumatic Control and Purge System Performance APS Oxidizer and Fuel Consumption .......... APS Total Impulse ................... Hydraulic Oil Pressure, Level, and Temperatures (S-IB Stage) ..................... S-IVB Hydraulic Fluid Temperature and Level ....... Guidance and Control System Block Diagram ........ Attitude Error S-IB Powered Flight ........... Angular Rate Gyros S-IB Powered Flight .........

22 34 35 41 42 43 45 47 55 56 57 58 61 63 65 68 70 73 76 78 79 81 85 87 90 91 93 96 97 98 i00 . 102 106 108 ii0 113 116 119 120

ix

(U) Figure 12-4 12-5 12-6 12-7 12-8 12-9 12-10 12-11 12-12 12-13 12-14 12-15 12-16 12-17 12-18 12-19 12-20 13-1 13-2 13-3 13-4 13-5 13-6 13-7 14-1 14-2 14-3 14-4 14-5 14-6 16-1 16-2 16-3 16-4 17-i 17-2 17-3

LIST OF FIGURES

(CONT) Page

S-IB Average Actuator Positions ........ "" " S-IB Stage Command Angles .............. Pitch Plane Wind Velocity and Free Stream Angle-of-Attack .................. Yaw Plane Wind Velocity and Free Stream Angle-of-Attack .................. Slosh During S-IB Powered Flight ........... Attitude Errors During S-IVB Powered Flight ..... Angular Rate Gyros - S-IVB Powered Flight ...... Actuator Position S-IVB ............... S-IVB Stage Command Angles .............. S-IVB LH 2 Slosh ................... LH 2 Slosh at S-IVB Engine Cutoff ........... APS Operation in Orbit ................ LH 2 Slosh During Orbit ................ Pitch and Yaw Control Accelerometers ......... Q-Ball and Flight Simulation Free Stream Angles-of-Attack .................. Oscillations After Ignition ............. (C) Guidance Velocity Comparisons (Reference Trajectory-Guidance) ................ S-IV_ Ullage Motor Performance ............ Typical Retro Rocket Thrust ............. Separation Sequence of Events ............ S-IVB Separation Distance .............. S-IVB Relative Velocity and Longitudinal Acceleration S-IVB Attitude During Separation ......... Separation Angular Velocities ........ S-IB Stage Current and Voltage ............ S-IVB Battery Voltage and Current During Powered Flight ................... S-IVB Battery Voltage and Current During Orbital Period ..................... Battery Voltages and Currents ..... Battery Temperature .............. 6D51 Bus Voltage Envelope and Regulation Requirements Emergency Detection System General Block Diagram AS-203 EDS Functional Diagram ........ EDS Rate Gyro Output ............... Q-Ball Differential Pressures .......... Vehicle Longitudinal Force Distribution ...... Longitudinal Load (from Strain Data at Sta. 23.9 m) Vehicle Bending Moment .............

121 123 124 126 127 129 130 131 133 136 138 139 140 142 143 145 149 158 161 163 164 165 166 167 169 171 172 175 176 177 181 182 189 190 193 194 1!)5

(U) Figure 17-4 17-5 17-6 17-7 17-8 17-9 17-10 17-11 17-12 18-1 18-2 18-3 18-4 18-5 18-6 18-7 18-8 18-9 18-10 18-11 18-12 18-13 18-14 18-15 18-16 18-17 18-18 18-19 18-20 18-21 18-22 18-23 18-24 18-25 18-26 18-27 18-28

LIST

OF

FIGURES

(CONT) Page

"

Vehicle Bending Modes ............. Vehicle Bending Amplitudes .............. Fin Bending and Torsion Modes ............ S-IB Structure Vibration Envelopes ....... S-IB Component Vibration Envelopes ......... H-I Engine Vibration Envelopes ......... S-IVB Vibration Envelopes .......... S-IVB Internal Acoustics and Turbopump Vibration Instrument Unit Vibration Envelopes ..... Pressure on Tanks and 60 Fairing ......... S-IVB Forward Skirt Pressure Coefficients ...... S-IVB Aft Skirt Pressure Coefficients ....... LH 2 Feedline Nose Shroud IU and Nose

197 198 201 202 203 205 208 211 213 215 217 218 220 221 222 224 225 227 228 230 231 232 234

and APS Fairing Pressure Differentials and IU Surface Pressure Coefficients Shroud Pressure Differentials ..... ....... Vehicle

H-I Engine Noise Environment at Liftoff Overall Sound Pressure Levels at Various Locations .....................

Unsteady Shock Wave Pressure Spectrum ........ S-IB Stage Base Internal and Differential Pressures S-IB Stage Base Pressures ............... S-IB Stage Base and S-IB/S-IVB Interstage Pressures S-IVB Forward and Aft Compartment Pressure Differential .................. IU Compartment, Forward Compartment, Component Pressures ............... Typical S-IB Thermal Environment and Temperatures ................... and Tail IU Shroud

235 . . 237 239 240 243 244 246 248 . 249 251 252 253 Spectra 255 Orbital 257

Forward Skirt Skin and LH 2 Tank Temperatures ..... S-IVB Aft Skirt Skin and APS Fairing Temperatures Forward Skirt Heat Flux and APS II Fairing Temperatures .................. Heat Shield Outer Region Thermal Environment . Heat Shield Inner Region Thermal Environment . . Heat Shield Skin and Honeycomb Thermal Environment Flame Shield Thermal Environment ........ Typical Turbine Flame Shield Region Thermal Exhaust Thermal Environment Environments .......

Outboard Engine Aspirator Thermal Environment Fin Trailing Edge Thermal Environment .... Variation in Outboard Engine Plume Infra-red with Altitude .................. IU Inner Flight Skin Temperatures During ....................... BoOst and

xi

(U) Figure [8-29 18-30 19-1 19-2 19-3 20-1 20-2 20-3 20-4 20-5 21-1 21-2 21-3 21-4 21-5 21-6 21-7 21-8 21-9 21-10 21-11 21-12 21-13 21-14 21-15 21-16 21-17 21-18 21-19 21-20 21-21 21-22 21-23 21-24 21-25 21-26 21-27 21-28 21-29 21-30 21-31

LIST

OF

FIGURES

(CONT) Page

IU Component Temperatures ............... Environmental Control System Operation ........ Fin 5 Differential Pressure Coefficients ....... Fin 7 Differential Pressure Coefficients ....... Base Drag and Axial Force Coefficients ...... Quality Meter Calibration Curve ............ Overall Telemetry Coverage ....... Ground Station Tracking Coverage .......... Orbital Radar Coverage ............... Azusa/GLOTRAC Antenna Gain and Signal Level ...... S-IVB-203 Stage Versus S-IVB-201 Differences and Vehicle Station Continuous LOX Ullage Stage Configuration Location ......

258 259 262 263 264 270 277 279 280 282 286 288 289 290 291 293 294 295 296 297 298 300 301 303 304 305 307 308 309 310 312 313 314 315 317 318 319 321 324 326 329

Vent System ................ Thrusting System .............

S-IVB-203 LH 2 Tank Television Installation ...... LH 2 Experiment Orbit Events .............. Heat Input to LH 2 and Ullage Gas (as Determined from CVS Performance) ................ LH 2 Tank Pressure ................... Cumulative Mass Flow for CV and NPV Systems ...... Continuous Vent System Line Pressure ......... Vehicle Acceleration Oscillations ........... Vehicle Acceleration ............ NPV LOX System Tank Blowdown .......... Tank Pressure .............. Performance

LH 2 Tank Repressurization System LH 2 Restart Chilldown ..........

LH 2 Restart Chilldown Temperatures . LH 2 Unpressurized Chilldown .... LH 2 Unpressurized Chilldown Temperatures Fuel Lead Performance ......... Fuel Lead Conditions ....... Anti-Vortex Screen Performance - ist Chilldown Anti-Vortex Screen Performance - 2nd Chilldown LOX Restart Chilldown System Temperatures LOX Restart Chilldown ............ Engine Start Sphere Conditions ........ Engine Pneumatic Control Sphere ........ Cold Helium Sphere Conditions ......... Stage Pneumatic Control System .......... Sketch of S-IVB J-2 Conditions LH 2 Tank Showing Engine Chilldown of LH2 at Fuel

Deflected Wave ..... System ......... Pump Inlet - ist Chilldown

xii

(U) Figure 21-32 21-33 21-34 21-35 21-36 22-1 A-I A-2 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 B-I B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 Conditions

LIST OF FIGURES

(CONC) Page

of LOX Prior

to Prevalve

Opening

330 332 333 335 336 338 344 345 350 356 357 360 364 366 367 368 369 370

LH 2 Temperature at Fuel Pump Inlet - Second Chilldown Postflight Predicted Engine Tube Temperature Variations Hydrogen Tank Ullage Temperature Profiles During Tank Pressure Rise Experiment ............. LH 2 and LOX Ullage Pressures During the Pressure Rise Test .............. t ..... Storage and Supply System ........... AS-203 Configuration ............. S-IB Stage .................. q-TVB Sta_e ............... Instrument Unit Layout and Antennae Orientation Instrument Unit Components Layout ...... Nose Cone (Upper Portion) ........... AS-203 Scalar Launch Wind .......... AS-203 Launch Time Wind Direction ........... AS-203 Launch Time Pitch Wind Component (Wx) ..... AS-203 Launch Time Yaw Wind Component (Wz) .... AS-203 Launch Time Pitch (Sx) and Yaw (Sz) Component Wind Shears ............. Relative Deviation of AS-203 Temperature and Density from PAFB (63) Reference Atmosphere ......... Relative Deviation of Pressure and Absolute Deviation of the Index of Refraction from the PAFB Reference Atmosphere, AS-203 ........ (63)

371

xiii

(U) Table 4-I 4-II 4-III 5-I 5-II 5-III 5-IV 6-1 6-If 6-1II 7-I 7-II 7-III 7-IV 7-V 7-VI 7-VII 7-VIII 8-I 8-II 8-III 8-IV 8-V 8-VI 9-I 9-II 9-III 9-IV 9-V lO-I ll-I 12-I 12-II 12-III 12-IV 12-V 12-VI 12-VII 13-I 13-II 16-1 16-11 AS-203 Event Times

LIST

OF

TABLES Page

Summary

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

9 i0 14 17 18 23

AS-203 Sequence of Events--Powered Flight AS-203 Sequence of Events--Orbital Flight AS-203 Prelaunch Milestones .......... Countdown Lost Time Summary ...... AS-203 S-IB Stage Propellant Weights I_nition Command ................ AS-203 S-IVB Stage Propellant Weights Ignition Command .................. (C) (C) Flight Vehicle Sequence Masses at

at S-IB 25 29 30 36 38 39 40 44 46 49 50 51 54 60 59 62 66 69 80 83 84 86 89 105 ii! 122 134 147 147 150 152 153 159 160 185 186

Mass Summary ........... ..................

(C) Mass Characteristics Comparison .......... Data Utilization .................... Insertion Conditions .................. Velocity Gains (m/s) .................. Cutoff Conditions ................... Significant Events ................... AS-203 C-Band Tracking Summary ............. AS-203 Orbital Parameters ............... AS-203 Orbital Tracking Data Utilization ........ Engine Start Characteristics .............. Average S-IB Stage Propulsion Parameters ........ Velocity Deviation Analysis .............. Time Deviation Analysis ................ Propellant Utilization ................ Cutoff Probe Activation Characteristics ........ MOV Opening Times .................. S-IVB Propulsion System Performance .......... S-IVB Mainstage Performance Flight Simulation Parameter - Flight Variables Differences .....

S-IVB Propellant Mass History ........... APS Propellant Consumption .............. Hydraulic System p_rameters ............. Maximum Control Parameters ............. APS Event Summary - Powered Flight ..... S-IB Actuator Maximum Performance Data .... S-IVB Actuator Maximum Parameters .......... (C) Guidance Inertial Velocity Comparison .... (C) Guidance Comparisons at S-IVB Cutoff ..... (C) Guidance Comparison at Orbital Insertion - Ullage Rocket Performance ............. Retro Rocket Performance ............. Telemetered EDS Signals .............. Switch Selector Functions Pertinent to EDS .....

xiv

(U) Table 16-III 17-I 17-II 17-III 17-IV 17-V 18-I 20-I 20-II 20-III 20-1V 23-I B-I B-If B-III B-IV

LIST

OF

TABLES

(CONC) Page

Switch Actuation Times and Pressures for S-IB Thrust OK Pressure Switches .............. Longitudinal Response Frequencies ........... S-IB Vibration Summary ................. S-IVB Vibration Summary ................ LOX Turbopump Vibration During Flight and Acceptance Firing .................. S-IVB-201 Thrust and LOX Turbopump Speed Versus Vibration (Flight) .................. AS-203 APS Component Temperatures (Module Three Orbits .................... Measurement Malfunctions ...............

& S-IVB 187 199 204 206 209 209 241 266 273 275 278 341 362 363 373 374

2) First

AS-203 Launch Vehicle Telemetry System Description S-IVB Antenna Characteristics at Separation ...... Data Acquisition Equipment .............. Summary of Malfunctions and Deviations ........ Surface Observations at AS-203 Launch Time ...... Systems Maximum Extreme Used Wind Wind to Measure Speed Shear Upper Air Wind Data ...... Region Region in High in High Dynamic Dynamic Pressure Pressure

x%/

(U)

ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviation APD ABS AS AGC AGCS APS CG CIF CW CM CSM CSP CCF CCW CO DOM DDAS ELS EST ETR EPS ESE EDS EMR EMRC ESC ECS ETW EBW FRR GFCV GBI GTI GSE GRR IECO IGM LC LCC LES LET LV Adapter Positioning Air Bearing Supply Device System

Apollo-Saturn Automatic Gain Control Automatic Ground Control

Station

Auxiliary Propulsion System Center of Gravity Central Information Facility Clockwise Command Module Command Service Module Control Signal Processor Facility

Converter Compressor Counterclockwise Cutoff

Data Output Multiplexer Digital Data Acquisition Earth Landing System Eastern Standard Time Eastern Test Range Electrical Power System

System

Electrical Support Equipment Emergency Detection System Engine Mixture Ratio Engien Mixture Ratio Change Engine Start Command Environmental Control System Error Time Words Exploding Bridge Wire Flight Readiness Review GOX Flow Control Valve Grand Bahama Island Grand Turk Island Ground Support Equipment Guidance Reference Release inboard Engzne Cutot_ Iterative Guidance Mode Launch Launch Launch Launch Launch Complex Control Escape Escape Vehicle Center System Tower

xvi

(U)

ABBREVIATIONS

(CONC)

Abbreviation LVDA LVDC MOV MILA MI NPSP NC NO OECO OASPL PACPS PSD PCD PTCS PU PCM PDM RCS RMR RMRC RDSM RMS SA SM SPS SSB SV S/C SCS SLA SMCX SCO SS TM T/C P/M TOPS UT VCO VSWR Launch Vehicle Data Adapter Launch Vehicle Digital Computer Main Oxidizer Valve Merritt Island Launch Area Mineral Insulation Net Positive Suction Pressure Normally Normally Outboard Overall Closed Open Engine Cutoff Sound Pressure

Level

Platform AC Power Supply Power Spectral Density Pressure Control Device Propellant Propellant Pulse Code Pulse Tanking Computer Utilization Modulation Modulation System Ratio System

Duration

Reaction Reference

Control Mixture

Reference Mixture Ratio Change Remote Digital Submultiplexer Root Mean Square Saturn Service Module Service Propulsion Single Side Band Space Vehicle Spacecraft System

or

SC

Spacecraft Control System Spacecraft LEM Adapter Steering Misalignment Correction Sub Carrier Oscillators Switch Selector Telemetry Thrust Chamber Thrust/Mass Thrust OK Pressure Switches Universal Time Vehicle Carrier Oscillators Visual Standing Wave Ratio

Term

xvii

CONVERSION FACTORS TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF IFNITS OF

1960

Parameter acceleration area barometer density energy mass flow Rate volume force heating impulse rate pressure

Multiply ft/s 2 in 2 mb ibm/ft 3 Btu ib s/ft gpm ib Btu/ft2-s ib-s ft

By 3.048xi0 -l (exact) 6.4516xi0 -4 (exact) 1.00xl0 "2 (exact) 1.6018463xi01 1.0543503xi03 4.5359237xi0 6.30901064xi0 4.448221615 1.1348931 4.448221615 3.048xi0 "I (exact) 2.54xi0 -2 (exact) 4.5359237xi0 1.355817948 1.12984829xi0 -I 1.355817948 2.9287508xi0 -4 6894757293xi0 4o788025898xi0 1.57087468xi02 5o555555556xi0 1.00 3.048xi0 -I (exact) 5.144444444xi0 2.8316846592xi0 -I -2 (exact) -3 (exact) -I -I -3 -I (exact) (thermal chemical) (thermal -I (exact) -5 chem.)

To Obtain m/s 2 m2 N/cm 2 kg/m 3 watt-s kg/s m3/s N (Newton) watt/cm 2 N-s m m kg N-m N-m kg-m 2 kw N/cm 2 N/cm 2 N/m 3 oK oK m/s m/s m3 m3

length in mass ib s2/ft Ib-ft moment ib-in moment power of inertia Ib-ft-s 2 Btu/hr ib/in 2 pressure ib/ft 2 specific weight ib/ft 3 F+459.67 temperature C+273.15 ft/s velocity knot* ft3 volume gallon ** 3.785411784xi0

Note:

go = 9.80665

m/s 2 (exact)

* knot (International) _* gallon (U.S. Liquid) xviii

......
MPR-SAT-FE-66-12 RESULTS OF THE SECOND SATURN IB LAUNCH AS-203 VEHICLE TEST FLIGHT

1.0 Saturn ._

(U)

FLIGHT AS-203,

TEST

SUMMARY of the Saturn IB series

IB Space Vehicle

second

vehicles, was launched at 0953:17 EST on July 5, 1966. The flight test was the second in a series of RAD test flights. The primary objective of the flight was to conduct the S-IVB LH 2 experiment, which utilized the S-IVB/V stage design. Other important objectives were: to demonstrate the launch vehicle guidance operation, to establish the launch vehicle environment, and to conduct the MSC subcritical cryogenic experiment. All flight objectives were successfully accomplished. AS-203 was launched from Launch Complex 37B at Cape Kennedy, Florida, after holds totaling 1 hr, 53 min, 17 sec, caused principally by loss of signal from TV camera number 2, intended for use in the S-IVB LH 2 experiment. The launch terminal countdown had proceeded satisfactorily, with no major problems requiring holds, until T-15 minutes, when loss of signal from TV camera 2 was indicated. All ensuing holds resulted from efforts to regain signal from this camera, with the exception of one 2 min hold called to verify Bermuda radar. The AS-203 vehicle was launched on an azimuth of 90 deg east of north and was rolled into the proper flight azimuth of 72 deg east of north. The actual trajectory of AS-203 was somewhat higher than nominal. The space-fixed velocity was 0.6 m/s lower than nominal at S-IVB cutoff. At S-IV-B cutoff, the altitude was 0.12 km higher than nominal and the range was 6.93 km shorter than nominal. The S-IVB payload at orbital insertion (S-IVB cutoff + i0 sec) had a space-fixed velocity 0.8 m/s higher than nominal, yielding a perigee altitude of 185.2 km and an apogee altitude of 187.3 km. The orbital period was 88.21 minutes. The propulsion system performed satisfactorily throughout flight. The S-IB stage thrust, specific impulse, and propellant flowrate were 1.55%, 0.98%, and 0.56% higher than predicted, respectively. Inboard engine cutoff occurred 1.20 sec earlier than predicted. Outboard engine cutoff occurred 3.44 sec after inboard engine cutoff as compared to a scheduled 3.0 seconds. S-IVB stage thrust was 0.37% higher than predicted, specific impulse was 0.12% lower than predicted, and weight loss rate was 0.50% higher than predicted. Engine cutoff occurred at 433.35 sec, 2.90 sec earlier than predicted. The S-IVB stage PU system was flown in open loop with an average mixture ratio of 4..95 to 1 throughout flight. All

mechanical systems on the S-IB and S-IVB stages functioned properly, except that _he fuel recirculation chilldown shutoff v_Ive (S-IVB) failed to close after engine start command. In general, the performance of the guidance and control system was satisfactory. The performance of the computer flight program was nominal. The boost navigation and guidance schemes were executed properly,:and terminal conditions were within expected tolerances. All orbital guidance operations were as expected. The control system functioned properly. No excessive body rates _ere observed, and no instabilities were detected. The maximum values for the parameters of attitude error and angle-ofattack, observed near the maximum dynamic region, were: attitude errors of i.I deg in pitch, -0.9 deg in yaw, and 0.6 deg in roll; and angleof-attack of -1.3 deg in pitch and 1.3 deg in yaw. The most significant deviations from predicted control transients occurred during S-IB/S_IVB separation and guidance initiation. The Auxiliary Propulsion System (APS) provided roll control during S-IVB powered flight and attitude control during orbital flight. Approximately 1% of the available propellants was required for control during powered flight. At the end of the mission, approximately 29.5% of the APS propellants was consumed. The APS performed effectively during S-IVB powered flight and orbital flight. S-IB/S-IVB separation was accomplished as planned and the sequence was executed within the desired time period. Separation transients were small and within the design requirements. The vehicle electrical systems performed satisfactorily throughout flight. All current, voltages, and temperatures were within the operating specifications. The range safety and command systems were operable throughout flight. The launch vehicle emergency detection system (EDS) lunctioned properly in that no false abort signals were generated. This system was again flown in open-loop as on AS-201. Manual/EDS cutoff was armed at the right time by the switch selector. The cutoff enable backup timer also functioned properly. Thrust indications were proper throughout powered flight, and two or more S-IB engines-out were indicated at S-IB inboard engine cutoff. The redundant Q-ball operated satisfactorily. There were no guidance failure indications. There were no overrate switch closures, and the auto-abort bus was not energized. The noise that appeared on the EDS angular rate sensors on AS-201 was adequately filtered on AS-203. A structural analysis of AS-203 indicates that all structural components performed satisfactorily. The vehicle loads and bending moments were well below their limit design values. There was no indication that Pogo occurred. In general, the vibrations on AS-203 were as

expected; however, the J-2 engine LOX the highest recorded in flight test or ure or degradation in pump performance

turbopump vibration level was static test. No structural failwas apparent.

The pressure and thermal environment of the flight was in general agreement with predictions. However, the flame shield pressure was approximately 1.4 N/cm 2 above the prediction, but below the design _imit. The temperatures were consistently lower than expected. These exceptions are attributed to the rerouting of the turbine exhaust. The IU environmental control systems appeared to operate satisfac-

torily during powered flight. During the orbital coast period, the methanol/water temperature dropped belo_ the 288.15K control point and continued a downward trend to 284.82K over Bermuda during the fourth orbit. This indicated that component heat dissipation was lower than expected and/or thermal losses from the environmental control system and components The were greater than expected. on AS-203 revealed that 98.8% of the

measurement

evaluation

1434 measurements, active at liftoff, performed satisfactorily. A total of 17 measurements failed during flight. Performance of the RF telemetry system was as expected. Performance of the tracking systems was good, except that the Azusa/GLOTRAC overall coverage was poor. The secure command system and range safety decoder operated satisfactorily. Thirty-six of the 70 engineering sequential cameras provided good quality coverage. The 12 tracking cameras provided good coverage. An unidentified falling particle was seen by two up-range cameras in the same field of view as the vehicle at about 96 seconds. Both onboard cameras, viewing the separation sequence, were however, only one camera capsule was recovered. experiment was very good, even though only one cameras was operational at liftoff. ejected successfully; TV coverage for the LH 2 of the two scheduled TV

The LH 2 orbital experiments verified the adequacy of the LH 2 ullage pressure thrusting system under general conditions approaching those of a Saturn V orbital flight. Directly pertinent to Saturn V development were the evaluations of propellant control at J-2 cutoff, propellant control during continuous venting, restart systems, and bottle storage characteristics. by LOX ullage the propellant phase allowed position during During orbital insertion, LH 2 was successfully controlled thrusting and by tank baffles and deflectors. Control of in an essentially settled condition during this critical the continuous vent system to maintain the propellant in orbital coast.

The J-2 engine restart systems and operations--including fuel repressurization, fuel recirculation chilldown, fuel lead during simulated restart, fuel anti-vortex screen, LOX recirculation chilldown, and storage bottles--functioned satisfactorily in general and gave confidence that restart of the J-2 engine under Saturn V conditions will be successful. The pressure rise test provided valuable knowledge of the thermodynamic and heat transfer characteristics of the LH 2 tank. The indicated pressure rise rate was greater than expected. The subcritical cryogenic nitrogen storage experiment, flown on AS-203 for MSC to demonstrate the feasibility of the subcritical cryogenic storage and delivery systems in a low "g" environment, was conducted satisfactorily and all objectives were met.

2.0 This report presents the

(U)

INTRODUCTION of the early engineering evalua-

results

tion of AS-203, the second evaluation is centered on with special emphasis

Saturn IB launch vehicle flight-tested. The the performance of the major vehicle system, and deviations.

on malfunctions

This report is published by the Saturn Flight Evaluation Working Group-composed of representatives of Marshall Space Flight Center_ John F. Kennedy Space Center, and MSFC's prime contractors-and in cooperation with Manned Spacecraft Center. Significant contributions to the evaluation have been Space made by: Center Operations

George

C. Marshall Research and

Flight

Development

Aero-Astrodynamies Laboratory Astrionics Laboratory Computation Laboratory Propulsion Industrial John Manned Chrysler Douglas F. Kennedy Spacecraft Corporation Aircraft and Vehicle Engineering Laboratory

Operations Space Center

Center Space Division

Company Machines North Corporation Aviation

International Rocketdyne The report. analysis

Business Division of

American

official MSFC position It will not be followed or new evidence should

at this time is represented by this by a similar report unless continued prove the conclusions presented herein

to be significantly incorrect. Final stage evaluation reports will, however, be published by the stage contractors. Reports covering major subjects and special subjects will be published as required.

3.0 3.1 LAUNCH The i. 2. VEHICLE PRIMARY

(U)

TEST OBJECTIVES

OBJECTIVES objectives were as follows: system. system.

launch vehicle Evaluate Evaluate

primary

the S-IVB LH 2 continuous S-IVB engine chilldown

venting

and recirculation

Specifically Evaluate the J-2 engine LH 2 chilldown and recirculation and ullage requirements for simulated engine restart. 3. Determine S-IVB tank fluid dynamics. system,

Specifically Determine cryogenic liquid/vapor interface configuration fluid dynamics of propellants in near zero-g environment. 4. Determine heat transfer into liquid hydrogen and obtain data required for propellant thermodynamic 5. Evaluate the S-IVB and IU checkout in orbit. attitude Through model. and

tank wall

6. Demonstrate orbital operation control and thermal control systems. Specifically a. and evaluate b. system. 7. Demonstrate the ability a payload into orbit. Specifically Demonstrate performance Demonstrate

of the launch vehicle

the S-IVB auxiliary parameters. the adequacy

propulsion

system operation

of the S-19-B/IU thermal

control

of the launch vehicle

guidance

to insert

achieve

Demonstrate the launch vehicle guidance system guidance cutoff, and determine system accuracy.

operation,

8.

Demonstrate Specifically Demonstrate

the operational

structure

of the launch vehicle.

the structural

integrity

of the launch vehicle

dynamic 9. required 3.2

characteristics. Demonstrate the mission support for launch and mission conduct. VEHICLE SECONDARY OBJECTIVES objectives powered were as follows: flight external environment. facilities and operations

LAUNCH The i. 2. 3. 4.

launch vehicle Evaluate Verify

secondary

the launch vehicle

the launch vehicle performance separation

sequencing

system operation.

Evaluate Evaluate

of the EDS in an open loop configuration. of S-IVB/IU/Nosecone from S-lB. operation and

5. evaluate 6.

Verify the launch vehicle propulsion system performance parameters. Evaluate the MSC subcritical

systems'

cryogenic

experiment.

4.0 4.1 SUMMARY OF EVENTS

(U)

TIMES

OF

EVENTS

Table 4-1 presents s summary of event times, obtained from performs nce analysis of launch vehicle AS-203. Event times generally were quite close to prediction. The most significant deviations from predicted shown in the table are IECO and S-IVB cutoff. Causes of these time deviations are discussed i_ detail in Sections 8.0 and 9.0 of this report. 4.2 SEQUENCE OF EVENTS (POWERED FLIGHT) 0.86 sec later or would be expected at Reference Release the vehicle

.'

st

Range zero was 1453:17 1453:17.86 UT. Guidance

liT and liftoff occurred Reference Release (GRR) zero). First

-4.4 sec actually occurred

range time (time from range occurred at -4.485 seconds. at 0.6 sec range time. selectors in the S-IB

Guidance motion of

Switch

stage,

S-IVB

stage, and

Instrument

Unit provided programmed event sequencing for the vehicle. The Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC) provided programmed input to the appropriate switch selector. If a switch selector malfunction had occurred, a complement address would have been sent to the switch selector, thereby providing redundancy. The analysis indicated that no output resulted from complement addresses to the switch selector; hence, the operation was normal. Table flight. follows: 4-11 The lists the time switch bases selector in range event time times through powered as

nominal

were

established

Liftoff Propellant Outboard S-IVB The orbital

= Time Level Engine

Base

i = 0.86 = Time = Time

sec Base Base 2 = 3 = Base 136.27 142.68 sec sec sec

Sense Cutoff

Engine event

Out

Interrupt are

= Time

4 = 433.56 4-111.

times

presented

in Table

9 TABLE 4-1

AS-203

EVENT

TIMES

SUMMARY

Event First Liftoff Start End Pitch/Roll Motion

Range Actual 0.63 0.86 12.2 30.1 EDS Cutoff 60.82 133.9

Time

(sec) Act-Pred

003 1.4 1.3 -0.01 -0.73 -I_17 -1.20 -0.76 -0.80 -0.83 0.86 -0.79 -2.90

Roll Engines Pitch Level Sense (LLS)

Enable Stop Low IECO OECO

136.27 139.24 142.68

S-IB/S-IVB S-IVB Start Command S-IVB Start IGM

Separation Command

143.44 144.89 158.49

Panel Cutoff

Separation

174.85 433.35

i0 TABLE AS-203 SEQL_NCE OF 4-II FLIGHT

EVENTS--POWERED

Range Function Stage

Time

Time

From

Base

(sec

(sec)

Actual

Nominal

Liftoff

Start

of Time

Base

i (TI) Reset IU S-IB S-IB Calibrate Enable IU S-IB S-IB Calibrate IU S-IB EDS Cutoff i 2 IU IU IU IU IU S-IB Point 3 IU IU S-IB On On Off Off S-IVB 8-1VB S-IVB S-IVB

0.86 5.83 10.87 25.82 27.81 30.82 31.03 32.83 39.82 60.82 61.03 90.84 91.01 96.01 120.62 120.83 121.01 125.61 128.33 128.51 133.31 133.52

0.0 4.97 i0.0 24.6 26.95 29.96 30.17 31.97 38.96 59.96 60.17 89,98 90.15 95.15 119.76 119.97 120.15 124.75 127.47 127.65 132.45 132.66

0.0 5.0 I0.0 25.0 27.0 30.0 30.2 32.0 39.0 60.0 60.2 90.0 90.2 95.2 119.8 120.0 120.2 124.8 127.5 127.7 132.7 132.7

Auto-Abort Multiple S-IB

Enable Engine

Relays

Cutoff Calibrate

Enable On

Telemeter

Telemeter LOX S-IB Tank

Calibrator Relief

Inflight Valve Off

Control calibrate

Telemeter

Telemeter Tape

Calibrator Record Vehicle

Stop On

Inflight

Recorder Launch Control Control

Enable Flight Flight

Engines Switch Switch

Computer Computer

Point Point Calibrate

Telemeter Telemeter S-IB

Calibrator calibrator

Inflight Stop On Switch Power Off Relays Relays Relays Relays

Inflight

Calibrate

Telemeter Control

Calibrate Computer

Flight Control

Accelerometer calibrate Calibration Calibration Calibration Calibration

Off

Telemeter Special Regular Special Special

ii Table 4-II (Cont) Range Time (see) 134.83 Time From Actual 133.97 Base(see Nominal 134.0

Function Excessive Enable Rate (Y,P or R) Auto-Abort Inhibit

Stage IU

Excessive S-IB S-IB Two Two

Rate Engine Engine

(Y,P Out Out

or R) Auto-Abort Auto-Abort Auto-Abort Sensors Actuation-Start Inhibit Inhibit

Inhibit

IU IU S-IB S-IB

135.01 135.21 135.43 135.61 136.27

134.15 134.35 134.57 134.75 0.0

134.2 134.4 134.6 134.8 0.0

Enable

Propellant Level 2 (T2)

Level Sensor

Propellant Time Base

of

S-IB

IU Tape Fast

Recorder On

Record

On

IU S-IVB S-IB

136.83 137.05 138.63 139.24 139.62 140.23 140.53 140.74 141.73 142.68

0.56 0.78 2.36 2,97 3.35 3.96 4.26 4.47 5.46 0.0

0.6 0.8 2.4 3.0 3.4 4.0 4.3 4.5 5.5

Record Start

Cameras Inboard Charge Q-Ball

Engines Ullage Power

Cutoff Ignition On

S-IB S-IVB IU

Off Off Enable Enable CO-Start of Time Base 3

Prevalves LOX Fuel S-IB (T3)

Closed

S-IVB S-IB S-IB S-IB

Depletion Depletion Outboard

Cutoff Cutoff Engines

Engine Fire

Cutoff

Off Ignition On On S-IVB Burn Mode On

S-IVB S-IVB S-IB IU S-IVB Bypass On S-IVB S-IVB

143.05 143.23 "143.44 "143.68 "143.88 "144.'08 "144.28

0.37 0.55 _ o _ _ _ _

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

Ullage

S-IB/S-IVB Flight Engine Engine Fuel

Separation Computer Bypass Interlock Pump Times

Control Ready Start

Chilldown *Estimated

Off

12 Table 4-II (Cont) Range Function LOX Chilldo_,n Pump Off Valves Close On Stage S-IVB S-IVB Time rime From Base (sec

(see) "144.48 "144.68

Actual

_ Nominal 1.8

Chil!down

Shutoff

_ o _ _ _ _

2.0

J-2

Engine

Start

On Eng. Press. Switches

S-IVB IU 8-IVB System OK On S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB On 8-1VB $-IVB On S-IVB S-IVB 8-1VB Off Calibrate IU IU S-IVB Calibrate IU IU Open i On Calibrate IU S-IVB IU S-IVB calibrate IU S-IVB

"144.89 "145.08 "145.38 "145.68 "145.88 151.73 152.34 154.55 154.73 155.43 157.23 157.43 166,25 169.63 171.83 174.64 174.85 179.85 224.84 349.83 353.93 354,83 358.95

2.2 2.4 2.7 3 0 3.2

EDS Arming J-2 LOX Fuel Engine Tank

of S-IVB Start Off

Flight

Pressure Temperature

Injection Start Ullage

Bypass Off

Engine Charge
L

Interlock Jettison

Bypass On

9,05 9.66 11.87 12.05 12.75 14.55 14.75 23,57 26.95 29o15 31.96 32.17 37.17 82.16 207.15 211.25 212.15 216.27

9.1 9.7 ii.9 12.1 12.8 14.6 14.8 23.6 270 29.2 32.0 32.2 37.2 82.2 207.2 211.3 212.2 216.3

F_ergency Fast Fire Ullage Ullage IU Tape Telemeter Emergency Telemeter Panel Water Engine

Playback Off Jettison

Enable

Record Ullage

Charging Firing

Reset Reset Record

Recorder

Calibrator Playback

Inflight Enable Off

CalibratorStop

Inflight

Separation Coolant Burning Valve Relay

Telemeter Regular Telemeter Regular

Calibrator Calibration Calibrator calibration

Inflight Relays Stop Relays On

Inflight Off

*Estimated

Times

13 Table 4-1I (Conc) Range ,, Function Calibrator Inflight Calibrator Sensor Cutoff Base 4 (T4) Control Valve Open On Stop Arming Stage IU IU S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB 8-1VB 8-1VB Disarming S-IVB S-IVB Pressure System Off S-IVB Time Time From Base(sec] ] Nominal 268.6 273.6 2?7.7 293.6 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.9 I.I

Telemeter Telemeter Point J-2 Level Engine

Calibrate Calibrate

(see) 411.25 416.24 420.35 433.35 433.56 433.77 434.01 434.22 434.43 434.61

Actual 268.57 273.56 277.67 290.66 0.0 0.i 0.45 0.66 0.87 1.05

Inflight

Start LOX

of Time

ullage

Thrust Close On

Prevalves Point Coast LOX Level

Sensor On

Period Tank

Flight

14 TABLE AS-203 SEQUENCE OF 4-III FLIGHT

EVENTS--ORBITAL

Function Start LOX of Time Base 4 (T4) Control On Valve Open On

Stage S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB

Range Time hr:min:sec 0:07:13.56 0:07:13.77 0:07:14.01 0:07:14.43 0:07:14.61 0:08:08.71 0:08:33071 0:08:34.71 1:31:59.01 1:32:20.01 1:32:21,11 1:32:43.11 "1:32:45.2 1:32:55.11 "1:38:07.2 "1:38:07.4 "1:38:07.6 "1:38:13.4 "1:38:24.7 "1:38:25.9 1"1:38:26.1 "1:38:51.1 "3:01:25.7

rime From Actual 0.0 0.21 0.45 0.87 1.05 55.15 80.15 81.15 5085.45 5106.45 5107o55 5129.55

Base(sec Nominal 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.9 I.i 55.2 80.2 81.2 5085.5 5106.5 5107.6 5129.6 5131.6

Ullage

Thrust Close On

Prevalves Coast LOX

Period

Tank

Flight LH 2 Tank Thrust

Pressure Cont.

System Vent Valve

Off Open Close On On

S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB IU

Command LOX Low LOX

Ullage "G"

Control On Control Vent Valve On On

Valve

Experiment Thrust Continuous Control Pump Pump On Pump Pump

Ullage

Valve Valve Open

Open Close On

On On

S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB

LH 2 Tank

LH 2 Repress LOX Fuel Chilldown

Chilldown Close

Prevalves Fuel LOX

5141.55

5141.6 5453.6 5453.8 5454.0 5459_8 5471.1 5472.3 5472.5 5497.5 10452.1

Chilldown Chilldown

Off Off Pump On

S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB

Auxiliary Engine

Hydraulic On

Start

LH 2 Tank Engine

Continuous On

Vent

Valve

Open

On

S-IVB S-IVB

Cutoff

Auxiliary LOX Fuel Ullage

Hydraulic Thrust

Pump Control On

Off Valve Close On

S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB

Chilldown

Pump

*Estimated

Times

15

TABLE

4-III

(Cone) Range Time Time From Base(sec Nominal 10462.1 10774.1 10804.15 11106.96 11205.67 11229.66 13860.45 13861.45 14044.45 14050.45 16242.45 16335.45 16542.45 16635.45 16638.45 10804.2 11107.0 11205.7 11229.7 13860.5 13861.5 14044.5 14050.5 16242.5 16335.5 16542.5 16635.5 16638,5

Function Prevalves Fuel Close On pump Off Vent Control Vent Control Control valve Valve Valve Valve Valve Vent Vent Close Open Open On On On On On On On

Stage S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB s-IvB S-IVB On On On On S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB

hr:min:sec "3:01:35.7 *3:06:47.7 3:07:17.71 3:12:20.52 3:13:59.23 3:14:23.22 3:58:14.0'1 3:58:15.01 4:01:18.01 4:01:24.01 4:37:56.01 4:39:29.01 4:42:56.01 4:44:29.01 4:44:32.01

Actual

Chilldo_n

LN 2 Tank LOX

Continuous Thrust Continuous Thrust Thrust

Ullage

LH 2 Tank LOX LOX Ullage Ullage

Close Open

LH 2 Tank LH 2 Tank Lox Ullage

Non-Propulsive Non-Propulsive Thrust

Valve Valve

Open Close On

Control

Valve Vent Vent Vent Vent

Close Open

LH 2 Tank LH 2 Tank LH 2 Tank LH 2 Tank LOX Ullage

Non-Propulsive Non-Propulsive Non-Propulsive Non-Propulsive Thrust Control

valve Valve Valve Valve

Close Open Close On

Valve

Open

LH 2 Tank

Continuous

Vent

Valve

Close

On

S-IVB

4:44:52.01

16658,45

16658,5

*Estimated

Times

16

5.0 5.1 SUMMARY

(U)

LAUNCH

OPERATIONS

was the was

Apollo/Saturn vehicle AS-203, second of the Saturn IB vehicles, launched from Launch Complex 37B st Cape Kennedy. At launch time, winds were light from the west and northwest, and the visibility about 16 km with a few scattered clouds (See Appendix B.) The 1966, final countdown and proceeded, was with picked up at T-II30:O0 at 2030 EST no major problems requiring holds, on July until

4,

T-15 min at 0745 EST on July 5, 1966. At this time, the S-IVB LH 2 experimental television camera 2 indicated loss of signal. After a short hold, the countdown proceeded to T-5 min, when a hold was again called because of television camera 2. The decision was made to launch with only camera i. The countdown was recycled to T-15 min and was resumed at 0936:17 EST. A two-min hold was called at T-3 min to verify Bermuda radar, and liftoff occurred at 0953:17 EST without further incident. A total time delay of i hr 53 min 17 sec resulted from the holds. All launch support equipment functioned satisfactor{ly and the launch control measurements indicated nominal operation of the vehicle and support systems. Following the launch, an assessment of damage indicated the general condition of the facility to be nominal, if not better than on previous launches. 5.2 PRELAUNCH MILESTONES summary of events and shown in Table 5-I. preparations leading to the

A launch 5.3

chronological of AS-203 is

COUNTDOWN

Part II of the countdown was picked up at 2030 EST on Monday, July 4, 1966. The Part I portion was deleted since all preparations for launch were made during the countdown demonstration test on July i, 1966. At T-I059, approximately 2103 EST, a count clock problem occurred causing erroneous minus time indication. The clock was checked and reset without a hold being called. seepage was detected at fuel pump inlet very small and launching was recommended At approximately 2; however, the _ithout a fix. T-0808, seepage No hold a fuel was was

called. It should be noted that this problem is not related to the 8 to i0 cm3per hour fuel leak which occurred on engine 4 main fuel valve during CDDT RP-I loading. This leak was also waived. At approximately T-0457, 0304 EST, a fuel spillage was noted at the fuel mast. Digital Events Evaluator (DEE) - 3 records indicated that the fuel fill and drain valve had been opened for 5 min at this time. Investigation revealed

17 TABLE Date 5-I AS-203 PRELAUNCH MILESTONES Event

April

12,

1966

S-IB Stage off-loaded Installation S-IB Fin S-IVB IU Nose Stage

arrived at KSC and moved into of three oK

via barge hangar AP

"Promise" and on this date. on S-IB

was

April April April . April April April April April April April April May May May June June June June 2,

15, 18, 19, 21, 21, 21, 22, 23, 25, 28, 28,

1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966

horizontal Launch on

fins

stage

completed.

erected

Complex S-IB

LC-37B. Stage.

installation Stage

completed

erected.

Erected. Cone erected. and Propulsion male the the the checkout accomplished. S-IB IU. S-IVB Stage. Stage. started.

Vehicle Launch Initial Initial Initial Launch

Mechanical vehicle power power power Vehicle

electrical applied applied applied Stitch to to to

1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966

Selector Test

functional.

25, 26, 3, 6, 7, 9,

Propellant Launch Launch RP-I LOX

Dispersion

accomplished. full pressure test. Test accomplished.

Vehicle Vehicle Simulate

completed LOX and

Simulate Malfunction Test

and

Malfunction

Test

accomplished.

and

LH 2 Loading Flight

accomplished. Exploding Bridge Wire (EBW)

Launch _ehicie Test completed. Launch Launch Launch Launch Launch Space Flight Commenced Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle

Sequencer

June June June June June June June June

9, iI, 13, 20 20 22 27 28

1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966 1966

Sequencer PlugsIn Plugs Plugs In Out

Malfunction Overall Overall Overall Test Test Test

Test No. No.

completed. 1 accomplished. 2 accomplished.

completed. completed.

Ordnance Flight Test Tanking

Installation Sequence Test

completed.

Readiness RP-I

completed. operations.

June

29

1966

S-IVB Stage Auxiliary fire accomplished. Countdown Countdown Demonstration Demonstration

Propulsion

System

(APS)

load

and

June July July

29, I, 4,

1966 1966 1966

Test Test

(Part (ParL

I) II) up

completed. completed. at 2030 EST this

Launch Countdown for AS-203 picked date at T-11 hours and 30 minutes. LAUNCH

July

5,

1966

18

that the vacuum break check valve was not seated, allowing fuel to run out the mast. The check valve was removed and foreign matter was found holding the valve open. It was cleaned and replaced and the leak was stopped. No hold was called. At T-0221, approximately No hold was called. 0504 EST, the Bermuda station reported out.

The count continued to T-15 min, at 0745 EST, when a hold was called because the LH 2 TV camera 2 failed to transmit a picture and in order to complete checks scheduled for completion prior to T-15 minutes. The count was resumed at 0756:30 EST and continued a hold was called for the same TV camera. The decision to T-5 min, when was made to launch

with only camera i, with the stipulation that camera i was mandatory to T-3 sec and that the ground commanded alternate sequence No. 3 would be ordered over Bermuda in the event that camera I subsequently failed. The alternate sequence No. 3 would have used LOX ullage venting to ensure that the LH 2 was seated, to provide a reference for the LH 2 experiment. The countdown was resumed at 0936:17 EST and continued to T-3 min when a two-min hold was called to verify Bermuda station radar. The Bermuda station cleared and the count continued without recycle with liftoff occurring at 0953:17 EST. Table 5-II is a summary of the terminal countdown problems encountered and the resulting lost time. TABLE Lost 5-II COUNTDOWN holds LOST TIME SUMMARY was as follows: showing the major

time due to unscheduled

and recycle

Countdown Time T-I5

Lost Time 12 min 40 sec Hold to complete checks scheduled prior to T-15 and to investigate LH 2 TV camera 2 failure to transmit a picture. Hold for further investigation camera 2 failure. Recycle Hold to T-15 of TV

T-5

88 min 37 sec

I0 min T-3 Total Lost Time 2 min

in the countdown. radar.

to verify Bermuda

113 min

17 sec

19

5.4 5.4.1

PROPELLANT

AND COLD HELIUM

LOADING

RP-I LOADING

Initial tanking of RP-I for launch was accomplished on June 28, 1966. Other preparations were made during the countdown demonstration test (CDDT) on July i, 1966. During Part II of the countdown, fuel seepages were noted at T-0808 and T-0457 as reported (see Section 5.3). Control functions that were performed for the launch of AS-203 are outlined below. At T-I hour, the propellant tanking computer system (PTCS) was set at 8841, based for a projected RP-I temperature at T-0 of 295.3K. Delta p between ullage gas pressure and the head pressure from the bottom of the tank at this setting equals 12.275 N/cm 2 differential (17.8033 psid). RP-I density at this setting equals 804.383 kg/m 3 (50.216 ib/ft3). This PTCS setting would have permitted an RP-I temperature drop in the range of 291.5K before a replenish would have been required. At T-58 min, RP-I factory completion. At T-18 min, replenish was initiated and proceeded to a satis-

the PTCS was set at 8793,

based

for a projected

RP-I

temperature of 295.3K at T-O. At this setting, _P equals differential (17.707 psid). RP-I density at a temperature equals 801.019 kg/m 3 (50.006 ib/ft3). At T-II min, adjust satisfactory completion. At T-6 min, completion. level drain was initiated

12.209 N_cm 2 of 295.3 K

and proceeded

to a

line inert was initiated

and proceeded

to a satisfactory

At T-5 min, the _ P was 12.207 N/cm 2 differential (17.705 psid)_ the mass readout was 100.01%, and the manual mass readout was 99.9_/o. The RP-I temperature was plotted during the hold and did not drop out of permissible tolerance; therefore, a second RP-I replenish and adjust level drain was not required. 5.4.2 LOX LOADING that were performed for

An outline of the LOX control functions the launch of AS-203 is presented below.

Main fill command was initiated at T-0430:05. The S-IB stage was filled in 66 min and 40 seconds. Thirty seconds after the S-IB replenish light came on, the S-IVB system started main line chilldown, and

20

the main line fill command came at T-0318:38. The S-IVB stage was loaded at a rate of 0.05 m3/s (875 gpm) to the 98% level, then at 0.02 m3/s (365 gpm) to the 100% level, at which point automatic replenish was initiated. The S-IVB stage was filled in 26 min and 4 seconds. The S-IB/ S-IVB stages loading time were both replenishing at 100% at T-0302:27. Total for both stages was I hr 27 min and 38 seconds. not hold or delay the launch, elapsed

Two minor problems, which did encountered during the operations:

were

LOX was

i. At approximately 2 min into S-IB isolation valve _as lost momentarily. decided to reinitiate fill. A similar on June 7, 1966. The

chilldown, the feedback on the Revert was received and it loss was noticed on the LOX/ switches were readjusted

LH 2 loading test at this time.

micro

2. At approximateiy T-5 min on the first countdown from T-15 min, it was noted that the propellant tanking computer system (PTCS) for S-IVB was not responding properly. The panel operator quickly changed the system operation of the PTCS from automatic to manual and continued to manually adjust the S-IVB replenish system until launch. 5.4.3 LH 2 LOADING LH 2 system the stem slow fill loading packing valve was satisfactory of the fast fill and the leak but exhibited a very valve. The flow was No hold was small leak shifted and

around to

the

subsided.

necessary

all automatic sequences were accomplished. The S-I_B was loaded at 0.019 m3/s (305 gpm) to the 5% level, then at 0.14 mO/s (2,275 gpm) to the 98% level. Fill to the 100% level was accomplished st 0.026 m3/s (420 gpm); then automatic replenish was initiated. 5.4.4 COLD HELIUM LOADING

Prior to the initiation of LH 2 loading, the cold helium spheres were pre-pressurized to 869 N/cm 2 (1,260 psi) from the ground support equipment (GSE) cold gas system, to prevent them from collapsing as they cooled during the initial part of LH 2 loading. Cold helium loading was initiated when the LH 2 92% mass level was achieved. The sphere pressure was increased to and maintained at 2,167 N/cm 2 (3,143 psi) at 8,900 sec after the start of cold helium loading. At liftoff, the spheres indicated 2,167 N/cm 2 (3,143 psi) at 21.6K. 5.4.5 AUXILIARY The oxidizer auxiliary on June PROPULSION propulsion 29, 1966, for SYSTEM system the PROPELLANT (APS) APS was LOADING loaded with fuel and

confidence

firing.

Propellants

21

were

not

unloaded, until the

but

were

maintained

in

the

tanks

under

a blanket

pressure

launch.

module (0.91 25.02

During oxidizer loading, the bellows extension (fill) rate for I was 2.39 cm/min (0.94 in/min) and for module 2 was 2.31 cm/min in/min). cm (9.85 Fuel was The in), loaded in/min) loaded oxidizer tanks respectively. in module and to 25.20 i at cm were loaded to 25.25 em (9.94 in) and

a bellows 2 at 4.17 (9.92 in)

extension em/min and 25.04

rate cm

of

4.32 The in),

cm/min -

(1.70

in module

(1.64

in/min) (9.86

fuel tanks were respectively. 5.4.6 S-IB STAGE

PROPELLANT

LOAD to be

The new LOX vent system for the AS-203 S-IB stage was designed provide adequate venting capacity in order that vaporized LOX would dissipated without appreciably increasing the LOX ullage pressure. Therefore, unresponsive stand-by. the LOX weight indicated to the heat transferred

by the loading system is relatively to the LOX during loading and

The S-IB-3 propellant loading criteria were based on the environmental conditions expected at launch. The desired LOX weight, shown in the loading table, was computed by using the density predicted for these environmental conditions in conjunction with a nominal LOX ullage volume of 1.5%. Figure 5-1 shows the temperature density relationship of the fuel, determined by chemical analysis of a fuel sample taken from Launch Complex 37B storage tank on April 8, 1966. Propellant load adjustment was made at T-15 min for a 0800 EST launch. The average fuel temperature projected to launch time was 295.3K, requiring a fuel weight of 126,O45.2 kg (277,882 Ibm). Due to the two hour delay in launch, a 124.7 kg (275 ibm) increase in fuel load was required. However, it was decided not to adjust the fuel load. The average of temperature measurements in each tank showed the fuel temperature to be 294.6K at ignition. The desired weight, shown in the loading table, The propellant The values for this fuel temperature tanking weights are shown shown for the required was 126,155.8 kg in Table 5-1If. are the LOX (278,126 ibm).

load

and

fuel

weights

prescribed bY3the loading table for the fuel density 801.56 kg/m 3 (50.04 lbm/ft ) at stage ignition. The KSC load is based on the LOX and fuel manometer readings just prior to automatic sequence. At T-3 min in the terminal count, the LOX and fuel manometer readings were 16.972 N/em 2 differential (24.615 psid) and 12.207 N/cm 2 differential (17.705 psid), respectively. The reconstructed load was determined from discrete probe data telemetered during flight. Probes were located in three LOX tanks

Density 815

(kg/m 3)

Density

(ib/ft 3)

50.8

810

50.6

805

50.4

50.2 800

50.0

795

49.6 49.8

49.4 790 I 280 I 285 I 290 Temperature FIGURE 5-1 FUEL DENSITY

295 (OK) COMPLEX

300

305

(LAUNCH

37 STORAGE)

TABLE AS-203 S-IB STAGE

5-111 WEIGHTS AT IGNITION CO_fl4AND

PROPELLANT

Weight Propellant Pred. Launch Prior (1)

Requirements to Ignition (2) 286,881.8 632,466 126,155.8 278,126 413,037.6 910,592 KSC (3)

Weight

Indications Reconstructed Load (4) 286,864.9 632,418 125,904.4 277,567 412,762.3 909,985 KSC-Ign. (%) 0 0 -124.7 -275 -124.7 -275

Weight

Deviations Reconstructed-pred. (%) -16.9 -4U -628.3 -1390 -652.2 -1438

Reconstructed-lgn. (%) -16.9 -48 .251.4 -559 -275.3 -607

LOX

(kg) (ibm) (kg) (ibm) (kg) (Ibm)

286,881.8 632,466 126,532.7 278,957 413,414.5 911,423

286,881.8 632,466 126,031.1 277,851 412,912.9 910,317

-0.01

-0.01

Fuel

-0.I0

-0.20

-0.50

Total

-0.03

-0.07

-0.16

(i)

Predicted propellant 803.42 kg/m 3 (50.156

weights were ibm/ft3).

based

on a nominal

LOX

density

of 1131.30

kg/m 3 (70.625

Ibm/ft 3) and

nominal

fuel

density

of

(2)

Propellant weights required at ignition 801.56 kg/m 3 (50.04 ibm/ft 3) determined KSC propellant weights are based on

were based immediately loading on

on a nominal LOX density prior to launch. pressure probe values

of

1131.30

kg/m 3 (70.625

Ibm/ft 3) and

fuel

density

of

(3) (4)

system discrete

immediately

prior with

to propellant

system

pressurization. and are a

Reconstructed propellant weights are "best estimate" of the actual load.

based

data

in conjunction

the Mark

IV reconstruction,

24

(0C, 01, and is therefore ignition.

03) and a "best

two fuel estimate"

tanks (FI and F3). of the propellants

The on

reconstructed load board at stage

The LOX pump inlet temperatures monitored during f]ight indicated that the temperature of the LOX load at ignition was approximately 0.6K warmer than expected. The environmental conditions at launch time were very close to those predicted. The exact reason LOX temperature cannot be readily explained, but further investigated. 5.4.7 S-IVB STAGE PROPELLANT LOAD load at S-IB ignition determined from the PU for the the slightly warmer condition will be

Table 5-1V presents the S-IVB propellant command. The best estimate includes loading system, 5.5 engine analysis, and trajectory

reconstruction.

HOLDDOWN

The fire detection system performed satisfactorily during AS-203 launch. There were no sudden temperature rises of the fire detection measurements between ignition and liftoff. All functions occurred at nominal times during the holddown. 5.6 GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT after launch was nominal, observed areas and their if con-

The general condition of the facility not better than on previous launches. The ditions are listed as follows: I. 2. 3. Tower condition nominal nominal nominal pit

Launcher RP-I

condition -

System

condition

but

4. LOX System - The door on LOX no internal damage was noted. 5. 6. LH 2 System Holddown - condition Arms - The nominal

distributor

was

blown

ajar

condition the shear

of

arm

2 indicated otherwise, no

a harder abnormal

than

usual damage.

rebound

which

sheared

rods;

7. Pneumatic Distribution System - Minor damage was sustained on two tube assemblies of the 10.7 m (35 ft) level. Also, flame damaged the insulation of the water glycol lines on the 10.7 m (35 ft) level.

TABLE AS-203 S-IVB STAGE PROPELLANT

5-1V WEIGHTS AT S-IB IGNITION COMMAND

Weight Propellant

Requirements Ignition

Weight Loading System

Indications Best Estimate 53,844.6 118,705 19,149.2 42,216 72,993.8 160,921 Loading Sys-lgn (%)

Weight

Deviations Best Est-Pred (%)

Pred. Prior to Launch 53,753.4 118,504 19,188.2 42,302 72,941.6 160,806

Best Est-lgn (%) 91.2 201 -39.0 -86 52.2 115

LOx

(kg) (ibm) (kg) (ibm) (kg) (ibm)

53,753.4 118,504 19,188.2 42,302 72,941.6 160,806

53,972.5 118,987 19,188.2 42,302 73,160o7 161,289

219.1 483 0 0 219.1 483

0.41

0.17

91.2 201 -39.0 -86 52.2 115

0.17

Fuel

-0.20

-0.20

Total

0.30

0.07

0.07

PO

26

8.

Environmental

Control

System

- The Johnson

Controller

beams

vibrated off their pivot points on units A-l, A-2, and A-4, similarly to the AS-201 launch. Unit A-3 had been equipped with vibration dampers. 9. Propellant Tanking Computer System - condition nominal

I0. Swing Arms - A hydraulic leak was observed in the auxiliary hydraulic control panel at the 26.8 m (88 ft) level. It appears that a tube coupling vibrated loose. ii. Firing Accessories - The fuel mast mechanical assembly holding the retract cylinder broke and fell back. Engineering sequential camera film indicated that an unusual amount of RP-I burned at the mast exit. This indicates a possible failure to obtain a good line drain and inert. Also, an unusually large puff of GOX was observed at the LOX mast at ejection. This indicates an unusual pressure in the mast; however, no measurements are svailable in this area. 5.7 LAUNCH FACILITY MEASUREMENTS

All Launch Control Center (LCC) measurements indicated nominal operation of the launch vehicle and support systems. The red line values were all within limits.

6.0 6.1 SUMMARY Postflight analysis

_MASS

CHARACTERISTICS

indicated

that

the

vehicle

weights

were

lower

than predicted during S-IB powered flight, ranging from 259 kg (570 ibm) at first motion to 2,950 kg (6,504 lbm) prior to the establishment of time base 2. These deviations were primarily attributable to 630 kg (1,390 ibm) less fuel tanked in the S-IB stage and a higher mass flowrate during this period. The vehicle weight was 258 kg (568 ibm) higher than predicted for the inboard cutoff event and 329 kg (725 ibm) lower than predicted for the outboard cutoff event. Vehicle longitudinal center of gravity was slightly forward of the predicted value throughout S-IB powered flight, primarily due to a heavier upper stage weight and lower residuals in the S-IB stage. Mass moments of inertia were slightly less than predicted due to lower vehicle weights. Vehicle weight during the S-IVB powered flight was 193 kg (425 ibm) higher than predicted at engine start command and 105 kg (232 ibm) higher at cutoff signal. Vehicle longitudinal center of gravity and mass moments of inertia very closely approximated the predicted values during this period. 6.2 MASS ANALYSIS

Postflight mass characteristics are compared to the final predicted mass characteristics (Ref. i) which were used in determination of the final predicted trajectory (Ref. 2). The postflight mass characteristics were determined from an analysis of all available actual and reconstructed data, from ground ignition through S-IVB stage J-2 engine thrust decay. Dry weights of the S-IB nose cone were based on stage, S-IVB an evaluation stage, vehicle of the Weight instrument and Balance unit, and Log Books

(MSFC Form 998). S-IB stage prope!lan _ loading and utilization was evaluated from the S-IB propulsion system performance reconstruction. S-IVB propellant loading and utilization was evaluated from a composite of Propulsion Utilization (PU) system, tion,and level sensor residuals. engine flow integral, reconstruc-

Deviations in the dry weights of the stages were all within the predicted three sigma deviation limits. The total weight of the dry vehicle was 58 kg (127 ibm) higher than predicted. At ground ignition, the vehicle weight was determined to be 544,214 kg (1,199,765 ibm), which is 477 kg (1,052 ibm) lower than predicted. This decrease is primarily due to 652 kg (1,438 Ibm) less propellant loaded into the S-IB stage. The remaining deviation is primarily attributable to higher propellant and service item loading in the S-IVB stage and the dry stage deviations.

28

_l'll-I

IJl_l_lI ll'IkL

Thrust buildup mass losses were 219 kg (482 ibm) less than predicted due to lower propellant densities. The vehicle weight at first motion was 537,998 kg (1,186,062 lbm), which was 259 kg (570 ibm) less than predicted. At 130 sec, the vehicle weight was 2,785 kg (6,140 ibm) less than predicted,which reflects the h_her propellant flowrates. Inboard engine cutoff signal occurred 1.20 sec earlier than predicted and the vehicle weight for this event was 141,691 kg (312,370 ibm). The vehicle weight compared to that predicted for this event was 258 kg (568 lbm) higher than anticipated. At outboard cutoff signal,the deviation was 329 kg (725 ibm) less than predicted. The difference in the deviations of positive 258 kg at inboard cutoff and negative 329 kg at outboard cutoff was caused by a 0.44 sec longer time increment between these signals. The vehicle weight at separation was 135,289 kg (298,257 ibm), which is 395 kg (870 ibm) less than anticipated and is a result of lower propellant residuals. The second f_ght stage weight at S-IVB engine start command was 88,712 kg (195,573 ibm) and at 90% thrust was 88,466 kg (195,031 lbm). These weights were 193 kg (425 Ibm) and 165 kg (365 ibm) higher than predicted. Mass losses during the S-IVB powered flight were 60 kg (133 ibm) more than predicted, leaving a vehicle weight at cutoff signal 105 kg (232 ibm) higher than anticipated. The weight of liquid hydrogen available in the tank at end of thrust decay for experimentation was 8.633 kg (19,033 ibm) or 15 k_ (32 ibm) less than predicted. Vehicle flight sequence mass s_m_ary is presented in Table 6-i. vehicle ma_s history from ground ignition through S-IVB thrust decay is presented in Table 6-II. Graphical representations of this data, center of gravity, and mass moment of inertia histories with respect to time are illustrated in Figures 6-1 and 6-2 for the S-IB stage and S-IVB stage powered flights, respectively. 6.3 CENTER OF GRAVITY AND MOMENT OF INERTIA ANALYSIS

Evaluation of the vehicle longitudinal center of gravity during S-IB powered flight indicated that the CG was slightly forward of the predicted value. This deviation is caused by a heavier upper stage weight and lower residuals in the S-IB stage. Mass moment of inertia variations during S-IB powered flight were slightly less than predicted primarily due to the lower vehicle weights. The longitudinal center of gravity travel during the S-IVB stage powered flight closely approximated the predicted values. Mass moment of inertia deviations were minor and not considered significant. Weight, center of gravity, and moment of inertia data for the dry stages and the vehicle at significant events during flight are presented in Table 6-111. Weight data presented in this section are weights of masses under acceleration of one standard "g". The sign convention utilized herein conforms to the Project Apollo mass properties coordinate system (Ref. 3).

COY" ,, ..... _'1.1_11 I IAL_

_T_ _F:5*-;;7;nL
T49LE :-I

29

&-_,-_ T MASS HI/TORY S-7_ st_i_e ._t ground ignition (G.l.) S-Tg/S-TVE interstage at G.I. S-_,rZ _ta#-e at G. I. Vehicle instrument unit (V.I.U) at C.l. _!ose cone FIRST YLIGHT STAGE AT G. I. kg Zq_ j ......... 3 . - '_ ,;'qg.__ ;,016,9 ,i'?.i _.! qiA. 213.5 Ibm kg

FRED171%_E ibm "_ _*-: ! ,: _l_?. n_ .. ;_ _'" '_ i i, "-_ _ "

_c , ...... , ;4!,-P&,8 _,e" ........._, ,_.... '"'"_-_,427 _4,q60.l .,<L_ . . "-. _ [ :: " .,';_ ._ ju .8

1, 199,765

FIRST

FLIGHT

STAGE

AT FIRST propellants

MOTION

_37,997.7 ,-$'_,_ ,4,2 -22.6 -A._ -!fq." -li._ -98.9

_:_::,O62 -_8 ,_ 8 -50 -_" -cl_ -5 _ -.!,2!"C' 299,976 _1 c- _ -11 ?-_,257 [

=_4,. <_.4 -_ _.':_.'-._: .4 -L.] -".;: -_.9 -'_'7 ."

],i;, ,'_:_ -_l.G_ -_ , -_. -'_- ( - ,i.. _ ,'_ i -l, 57L

_-7_I mainstage

:<-F$} 3 frost fS-i_ sea[ purge (N2) S-TF_ gear box consumption (RP-I) S-TB fuel additive (oronite) 5-TH FIRST ITD FLIGHT propellants* STAGE AT OECO SIGNAL ":c_

_ _

_ ]24,069.1 -77"L,8 -5.0 iq_,289.3

.%_1=9_.i -" ]A,

:3f9 2:<TF_ ro separat ion S-PJB ulla}_e rocket _rain

FIRS 7 FLTG[_

STAGE ,_.T SffP/_PATI3_[

l _: ,; _...1

." ,_,\.

S-IB/S-_..t_ in*ersLage S-IV_ %ft frame S-]_FB ullage rocket _)rcpe!!:_n_ S-TVB sep%ratior: system ccmDonent_ .]-TIr_ u].la_'sr_ 7_-_n_onents 3E,ZOHE FLIGHT 3-IVB Z-UJB 7-!V9 S-IVB ]ECOND S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB STASF A[' Tq:TT:IOV (Z:;<)

-,,'-_ "{'_ ".... .,' -]I.{ -27.7 -1.3 -'._ eR, 712.0 -]95.6 -_'_ 6 .... -1.8 -I.O 88,466.0 roll -0.4 61,605.8 -99.3 37.6 26,722.9 __ -94-3 7/,628.6 22,865.1 .,=_ _qT._' .... ",A'_A i

-;/:

_ -2_ -/I -'_ -]

' ..... :. l -]_._ I _:: A -1.3 -". ,%e -- [}. 2 -igC,? __o " -1.8

:.:_'" -_ -72 -_ -_ "_q, iLe -Z _:, -I:$ -g

!_5, 573 -431 -105 -2. -2 195,O3% -I -135,815 -219 -83 5_,913 -, "e 58,705 5_,40g .... ',_;_ ,o _ "_

thr'as_ "m/i\du_ pr_t_. ullage toe,eL DroEe]lant GH 2 St._-rt*%nk frost FLIGI_T STAGE AT 9OZ THRUST power

88,500.6 -1.8 -61,581.3 -99.8

194.666 -4 -135,761 -220

auxiliary propulsion mains tage ullage rocket cases Frost ST_OE decay STAGE AT ETD***

_!rZ]_IDFLIGHT S-IVB _COr:D thrust FLIGHT

t,T _r!T_F_ tTGLAL

_:6,,_1c.7 -4-. '/ P/-,5'; .l ;',_!( .6 .,: _; . 3,481. <

;._, 81 -i" 9 :9,<"c 5 , :: 1 4,5,9 ,,'" T

'S-E#B stage %r._.t,.. _!ose ?or:e

*Inboard Engine Thrus_ Decay (IETD) **Outboard Engine Cutoff (OECO) ***Engine Thrust Decay (ETD)

TABLE 6-11a

VEHICLE MASSS (KILOGRAMS)

T_IIT[_ F_D:'I ..... _Rr<D

C(/_94AND :,CI[:AL

FIRST MOTION P,_ED _C_IAL

_GTNE P'8J,'.D

CUTOFF $C,_J&L

E_G]NE qU';_'N," PROS1) I AIIJAL :

?_EPAFo%I'T3N P_I,'_ _ AC'I_IAL

I |3-]B /;t'_ge drY," il)X i*l ':_nkn rP-1 in t_r_k:_ [7)X be]<_ {ank:] RP-] below t._k_; [I)X q],L%ge gas (G)X+HgS) RP-1 nl ]age gas (helbLm) Nitrogen HE-RP- ] pres sure supply tlydrau]ic oil Oronit.e 'rost TOTAL g-!B S-IB/8-]lrB Retrorocket STAGE interstage-d_ propellant 7

o9 i1_.9 ?8"_,]90., 3;&,_51.6 %/'_6 L * _a . !2.6 ! .8 : o ' :. _ 1..'.? 15.H &53.6 1.5<,_84.8 .!/, _ 8 ", &Sg,g

"g,1]L.P ,._ ..... [ ' !2_,7',7,! :,7_,i/ , _,l._7, i 1]._ ], R ::..si% 6 1.,? 1% , &5_.6 ,%52,A_5.3 2,510.2 &87,6 J,997.8 i_ 53,678.1 19,127.4 166.5 _1.8 170.] 19.1 11. ] ] ._ 99.'_ _O.3 56.2 8.8 ].i 19._ 9-q 165.1 ]./, 2. { 81.2 85,016.9 :!,],i7.h

<V,11%.9 39,!hk.g 277 ,r'l(' _. i 278,i]I. ' '',,' :.(" 12],917.v <,')25.0 _,_)7.8 . A(,i. ::,9'7.1 "J." ;!." 1.(,.o /; .7 iu. 8 _:!. 7 12.7 12.7 !%o 1... L53.6 LA(,450.L 2,508.O g8i,& P,99;.A ]_ 5_,186,9 !9,166.4 ]66._ 21.8 134.5 g8.1 l{.6 1.8 99.8 82.6 6:_,a 6.8 l.i 19.5 1,I. i;li.T .% :?. i kS.& 84,860.1 ,'j:72. ) _%6 ,A6,,:19.5 ;),51(I.2 &87,6 :!,997.8 1_'?:_{ 55,678.[ 19,127.4 166.5 2].8 2_].] 19.1 !i.{ ] .8 99.3 80.3 58,2 6.8 I.L ]9.9 9-5 165.1 1.4 2. { bl.2 8%016.9 ,?,107./_ _
i

INBCARD ,4 __3.) _'71, % 5,]1,:.: !,846., : ,6;.; : ],P'_9.: 26. :, ]4. 7. '! 12. v 3 2 ,
I

._, VL _,,', l.,.u,) _,8i9.1! 2,597, 5 ] _ { I 28, 1 :8. / % 3 !,,/ h,l

,_

OF!B ARD -'L ,_-

!',;,]!<9[

!%:i&._

_2#.:'l , 1,585.51 ]_62_-7 2, e._UJ:l .2_.746. ? I ,_ . 6 -'! .7 [ .') .0 [6.-_r 18.] 5.9 I '%h 1%71 ]:.7 _.21 L:!

"' _1 ],!1"7.;'I !,< [.': :2,29_.81 :,77L _ [,2:;_.R I ],:!_;8.: 27.7 29 .r; ]6.3 8. 5.9 /;. l. ]2.7{ 1:!._ 3.21 %:: I

] 1,9,872.7 _

I 49,')35.4

LA,R_7.5

I 44,_i_.5

1.4,1273.5 --_g.o

h_,538.5 2,518._ 487,6 ;!,99?._

2,yo8.) &Sg,g .... ,_,9%.,

2, 5_(_..--r/- -- _---_-,_O8, I -"_'_,5],, 1,87.6 ggh-k ! &87.6 -At",

[ &gA,& I

TOTAL S-IB/S-_VB

TNTSTG.

:',992.5 :] ,<7". 53,586.9 19,]66.4 ]66.5 2],3 236 5 i,8.] ]% 6 ] .8 99.8 82.6 _,O.8 6.8 ].4 ]'1.5 ].L ]2A.7 ,_ 2._ i%.h 84,88',.1

:2,'#g;!.&

8-1WB st.ge dry in orbit WOK [n t_nk L82 in tank TI3X below _ank LH., belo. tank I,O_ ullage, gas (GOX+}IE) H2 ull&ge g:_ (helium} Aft frame :eDaratfon and u!lage comp, l!_lage r_cket cases :Tllage rocker gr_in APS propellant !}!ydr_ulicoil !Ritrogen hydraulic reservoJl lEnvironmentak control f]uid Helium - Dneu_%tic {e]J'_-LO_ pressl[re s_pp]y 4e]ium - APS ]H: - start tank Proa_ TOTAL S-IVB STAGE 'f_
k

_-;::}-_._----]j_:8-5'_,:_(._ 53,678.l 1},J66.4 19,127.4 168.:, 166.5 21.8 t36.5 /8.1 13.6 ] .8 (19,8 82.(60.8 6.8 1.4 19.5 ].L leg." ._' 2.'_ :'1.8 174.6 19.[ 71.3 ].8 9'L') 8( ,'5 56 2 6.8 i.i 19.5 9.5 160.6 1.1; P. { 38.6

-_i:_

u,!_ig:g--K,e'z<3 I 1:,_7.8
53,586.9{ !9,166.4 ]86.5 2l.g i'_6.5 i_.6 1 i.8 99,8 I 82._, I 6Ca.8 1 6.8 ).l, 19 5 I 1.4 ]f{]_.'7 [ .q p. a 5_,678._ 1 19,t27.4 I 1,&6._ 21.i 174.6 ]!.9 ]._ 99. ! 75,3 -%.2 6._ 1.4 19._ 9,_i 180.6 ].$ 2. J 38.61 84 989 3

2 q_, 678.i ]'},i66.4 I Y)7127.4 1(6._ I ](TJ, 21.:8, 136 i_8.i [ ]3.6 ] 1.8 I 'a9.8 82.6 I &' .a ( 6.8 I ].L I 19.5 I 1.4 I [;;'I_.7 [ .5 _ 2._ t .I.g [74.6 lg.i ]1 ,% [ ].8 99. 8_).{ I 5( .2 I,.8 1.4 ]9.5 q._ 160_6 ].h 2._ 38.6

------------8A.SlA.7 4,994_3 8

gl

8 '

7 ']84 994"3-

8l

811,

VEHICLE rNSTR:_P,,E'

;?,O72.O

/'-,8E ,2oNE

_{___l 68].b]

!,456.1

_'j__

It656.1

1/,81.5

1_6_6.i

I ]

1,681.5

!/,56.1

1,681.q

]_65,6.1

TABLE 6-IIb

VE_I.CLE MASSES (POUNDS) TNP]A RD .'_OI_JE _JT_FF PRED LiO.44 P_-_,_50 1,9;>_ L,6_<! 8,57[ _ 5,7_ 2,732 5_ 36 16 28 7 AC_AiAL 2_9.4% _6,2_2 2,940 3,_]5 8,A86 5,?26 2,7$2 62 &] !6 _8 9 our_NARD 5]JGINE r'.rbOPF }'R/) F i4_,4!, ,q6,230 944 3,49] %,27& ?,76$ 6] _6 li! 28 ? __"JAL I42.68

EV_T

TONTION PRED

COMMAND ACTUAL -2.48? 86,2%2 624,251 2?2,767 8,167 4,6_0 26 l, %fl 74 28 33 1_ OLeO 997,$32 5,53$ I_O75 6,609 2&,951 iI_,338 &2,168 367 48 375 42 25 i 2]9 177 124 15 % 4_ 21 _64 3 5 1.B5 187,427 4,646 5,651

FIRST M@TION PRED .63 86,230 612,794 270/]08 8,653 _,7_9 74 6 46 6_ 28 39 I,O<K} 981,,679 5,529 I/]68 6,59? 24,_3 ]18,1157 i2,2_4 _67 A8 _O1 ]06 _<) i 220 182 ]_% ]5 _ &_ _ ;_5 I _ ]09 i_7,o81 4,56_ 3,7r_7 ], [86,6{_! _C_iAI, .Al _6_J_2 613,120 268,778 8,615 5,726 69 6 50 72 28 ]% l_O00 983,729 5,55i ]_075 6,609 24,951 118,338 &2,168 367 48 _7_ 42 25 4 7719 177 ]24 15 3 4_ 21 364 % 5 135 ig7,427 4,6A6 ],651 1,186,062

gE[L%E_T!0N P_ED ]44.74 _C'ITIhL 14_.44 86,YE? 0 f",q]z _,91_ 2,7vA 64 0 14 .;_ 7

RANGE TI_E (see). S-IB sta_e dry LOX in tanks RP-I in tanks LOX below tanks RP-_ below tanks [_)X u]]age gas (GOX+HF) RP-I u]lage gas (helium) Nitrogen HE-RP-I pzes_mre supply Hydrau l_ oil 0ronite Fro st TOTAL 8-IB STAGE S-IB/S-IVB Interstage-dry Retroroeket propellant TOTAL S-IB/S-IV8 INTSTG.

-2.47 86,2_0 62&,_17 27&,156 8,]49 4,811 30 A 46 70 28 5_ I t OOO 998,864 5', 52q 1,O68 6,597 2&,_53 i18_137 &2,254 367 48 501 106 _O i 220 182 15& 15 _% 43 "{ ;?75 ! 5 100 187,O81 4,568 3,707

86_>'1_'.> 86,230 0 {,594 4,9_ 2,771 6& 40 14 8 7 16" .',q/6 B,O48 ,761, 61 36 i'{ if_ 7

i09,949 5,q29 Ip368 6,597 2i,@q3 I!_,_7 $2,P54 36,7 48 _)I 106 10 7, 220 ]82 ]34 15 ! 4% 1 275 1 5

!10,,087 5,%3i !cOY5 6,609 21,qbl I]8,338 i2,168 ]{67 48 385 42 25 i 219 ]77 124 I_> 4_ ] !54 3 5 B5 ]87,377 4,646 ,6q] 12,")70

98,848 5,529 2_, O68 6,597 21,853 i18,2B7 42,254 7_67

97,69B _, 5"14 IIO75 6,609 2A,9171 118,338 &2,168 {67 48 385 42 25 4 21_ 177 ]24 15 % Y,_ P] _54 _ 5 85

97,_.7L 5,529 laO6g 6,59'7 7'&,853 118,157 62_24 {67 48 _'Jl ]06 "_O A _:2'; ]82 ]_4 15 B 4; _ 275 1 5

95,985 5,53i ]_{]75 _,6OQ 24,9q 118,338 4;?,168 q,7 48 355 42 2_ L .29 166 ]P4 li 2 4 .] 154 5 85 ]8_,366 i,646 B,651 2._R, 257

S-IVB stage dr_ in orbit LOX in tank [_{2 in tank LOX below tank LH2 below tank LOX ullage gas (COX+HE) _2 ullage gas (heLium) _ft frame Separation and ullage corn O. 31/age rocket cases 31lage rocket grain %PS Dropell_nt lydraul5c oi1 _itrogen hydraulic reservoir _viror_ental contro} f]uid _eliula - pneumatic He]ium-LOX pressure supply eli_ - APS 3ll - start tank 2 Frost TOTAL S-TVB STAGE VEHICLE INSTRUMENT [[NIT NOSE CONE VD]{ [CLE

48 [k_l ]06 '_O 4 .!;'I.} 182 !Z& ]_ ! 4% _ ,_'75 1 %

i86,(_ _,668 3,7)7 !l!,_[<

i_B,981 4,568 1,7(_ Vk[) ,7:)i

187,377 4,646 _,651 299,976

186,981 4,_68 B,70 v 290, i27

],2(_),817 i, [99.765

TABLE

6-Iic

VEHICLE

MASSES

(KILOGRAMS)

TABLE 6-11d

VEHICLE MASSES (POUNDS)

S-IVB _V,_N T

STAGE

S-IVB STAGE 90% THRUST PRED ih9.53 26,853 117,85] 42,130 397 58 _()I 106 ACTUAL 148.21 21,951 117,976 42,057 397 58 387 44

S-IVB STAGE

S-IVB STAGE

IGNITION CCMMAND (ESC) PRED ACTUAl, I&.89 2A,951 ]18,338 472,168 367 48 385 42

ENGINE CUTOFF CCI_MAND i_GINE TIIRUST DF_AY PRED A36.19 2L,853 _,8]A 19,O8,6 397 58 538 261t AC_/AL &33.35 2,4,951 A,948 19,O61 397 58 515 231 FRED $36.9 2.6,853 6,730 19,065 397 58 538 26'j ACTUAL 4'36.1 26,951 4,808 ]*9,033 7367 48 515 231

RANGE 'FIRE (see) S-IVB stage dry in orbit LOX in tank KW2 in tank LOX below tank LH2 below tank LOX ullage gas (GOX+HE) _I ullage gas (helium) 2 _ft frame Set.ration and ullage comp. Ullage rocket cases 211age rocket grain _PS propellant Hydraul_i:oil Nitrogen hydraulic reservoir gnvironment_l control f'lu_d qeliJm - pneumatic :{elimn-LOXpressure :_upply ilelittm APS 3I{ - start tank 2 Frost TOTAL S-IVB STAGE JEHfCLE TNSTRUM_J_T [NIT NOSE CONE VEUTCLg

145.72 2A,853 118,132 42,7'54 367 48 "301 10,6

220 108 134 15 3 43 3 275 ] _

219 105 124 15 3 43 21 354 _ 5 85 187,276 4,646 3,652 195,573

22 _ l_4 15 3 1% 3 275 1 I

219 1;74 15 3 43 21 352 "_ i 83 ]46,734 4,646 3,651 ]95,031 ]30 ]5 3 43 3 194 I 8 1"73 15 3 L3 21 240 '3 7 130 15 "3 L3 3 191 I 8 ]23 15 3 t,3 21 ?40 3 7

186,873 6,568 3,707 195,148

]8(,39] A,568 3,'707 ]94,666

5q .%06 L,168 _,70'7 58,6_.I

50 616 14,646 %,_,1 58,913

50,30] A,568 3,77 58,576 1 I

50 408 6,646 3,651 58,705

I
i

35 Center of Gravi*y in Calibers t_ _,,ef. St.a 2"7 ._ _em) (l :al = _.5::Lra) 1

Mass (lOG) 120

kg)

CEN_R

OF (N_AVITY_

2C_

"I 907 Thrust (148.73 see)

d 50

I q

O 7 5_ I0(_ 150 200 2 _<" 3CO ?52"

S-_TB Burn Time ( sec ) _omer:t of Inertia (13,',:;:, 2 ) kg-m Pitch Ma_..en*. of inertia (IOC_Dkg-m_) - Ro'I

l, 80C;

_'19

1,600

lib

l,_,_o

'_'-_._.

..

1.17

,' .... 90"/o Thrust (148.73 aec) I 0

13.5

"_80h ~50

_ llA 5Z, i0_ 150 2OC 25:3 _, _5_ S-IVB Burn Time ( sec )

FIGURE 6-2

VEHICLE MASS, CENTER OF GRAVITY, AND MASS MOMENTOF INERTIA D_I_ S-IVB STAGE POURED FLIGHT

TABLE 6-III MA_ CH_ACTFPTST]CS

a COMPAR]30N

MASS EVENT l(g Ibm 39,113.9 Pred S-IB Stage, Dry m 86,230.0 39, t14.8 86,232.0 2,992.L S-IB/S-IVB Interstage (Inel'4des RR Prop.) Pred _ 2,997.8 6, 6,09.0 11,388.5 Pred Actual 25,107 0 Ii,&30.2 25;199.0 2,072.0 Vehicle Instrument Unit @ G.I. Actxm] I (Includes Ullage Nose Cone Rockei Pred Pred &_568.0 2,107.6 I,,646.0 1,68].5 _a707.O 1,656,1 Actual 3,651.0 544,6 90.8 ist Flight Stage @ G.T. Pred. 1,2OO,817 0.09 Actu_l 544, 213.5 1,199,765 538,256.4 ist Flight Stage First Motion @ Pmed I _ct.ual 11186,6_2 1,186,062 537,997,7 0.05 1.53 1.68 C 36 _,_Dev

UJNGI'IUDINAL C.G. (X STATIO_) meters inches 8.727 343.6 8.'700 %2.5 26. _ I047.1, 26.604 ]O/+7.& 33. 579 1322 _ __ 33- 579 1322,0 lu% 799 1685.O L,2.802 1685.1 &7.23! 1859.5 A7.181 1857.5 16.972 668.2 16.982 668.6 16.883 664.7 0.013 0 _ 1 .. 0.0]O O.L -0,050 -2.00 0.003 0.i0 0.000 -0.00 -0.02 7 -I.i0

RADIAL C.G. meters inches 0.022 0.85 0.022 O.gg 0.060 2 35 0.058 2.30 O. i/,9 5.gg O. 19 5.88 O.PAI 9.50 0.247 9.72 0.c*35 O. 20 0,005 0.20 .006 .230 .C<]& .161 ,006 ,239 -/1)2 -._78 -.002 -.069 O.OCX) OAYO 0.006 0.22 -O.<X)2 -0.05 0.000 0.03

ROLL MCI4_I_T OF _i .r.TA ,_,ERI,,I

PITCH MOMI.ICT A_ r%Fn_m_^ ...................

YAW MC]MgNT OF _TPPJI'TA

Act-P_ed

Act-Pred

kg-m2

_ Dev

kg-m2

_ i]ev

kg-m2

f_ Dev

_ 2_8, ,01

2,681,805

2,6_q,i&7

Actu_l

O.CX]2

228,509

0.08

2,68],502

0.$]

2,689,L82

0.0]

32,;,92

20,683

21,127

&ctual S-IVB Stage, Dry Cases, Aft T_me, and Detonation Pac}_ge)

0,18

32,556

0.20

20,725

0.;70

21,169

0.20

85,_63 O.000 O.(X] 85,913 0.99

322,786 325,998 0.99

322,7_6 325,998 0.98

0.OOO 0.00

20,055

ii, 11_O

9,905

20,388

1.63

11,189

O.ZJ,

9,964 ,__)___

8,9,]L

]a, 122

l/_, 51 1

8,9]4

O.11

ii ,778

2. 50

13,798

2.56

2,136,865 O.O7 2,135,277

_%,21L,950 0.] 9 _,,130,91,I

&3,211,870 O.l 9 L6,13(2,8%]

2,]01+,553 0.02 2,104,993

!_%,1!3,690 O.OO &_,II],SPF_

&3,110,750 0.00 L3,109,998

f65 2 i6.896

.]63 .001+

TAB!Z

6-III b COMPAi!LI,_N

MADB CHANACTERL_TIC3

38

7.0 7. I SUMMARY

(U)

TRAJECTORY

The AS-203 vehicle was launched on an azimuth of 90 deg east of north and rolled into the proper flight azimuth of 72 deg east of north. The actual trajectory of AS-203 was somewhat higher than nominal. The space-fixed total velocity was 23.1 m/s higher than nominal at OECO and 0.6 m/s lower than nominal at S-IVB cutoff. At S-IVB cutoff the actual altitude was 0.12 km higher than nominal and the range was 6.9_ km shorter than nominal. The cross range velocity deviated ii m/s to the left of nominal at S-IVB cutoff. A theoretical free flight trajectory of the separated S-IB booster indicates that the impact ground range was 27.4 km longer than nominal. Impact, assuming the tumbling booster remained intact, occurred at 584.3 seconds.

The S-IVB payload at orbital insertion a space-fixed velocity 0.8 m/s higher than altitude of 185.2 km and an apogee altitude 7.2 POWERED FLIGHT TRACKING DATA UTILIZATION

(S-IVB cutoff + nominal, yielding of 187.3 kin.

I0 see) had a perigee

Tracking data were Tracking data, excluding

available radars,

from first motion showed deviations

through between

insertion. the various

systems of less than 30 m in position component prior to S-IB/S-IVB separation. After separation, GLOTRAC was the only precision tracking system available, but it only furnished limited data. However, due to onboard problems (see Section 20.0) _he GLOTRAC composite data was of no better quality than the radar data. The postflight powered sources shown in Table 7-1. TABLE Time Interval - 19.0 - 105.0 - 130.0 - 150.0 - 443.348 (sec) CZR ODOP GLOTRAC Adjusted Best Station I guidance trajectory was established from the data

7-1

DATA

UTILIZATION Data Source

0.63 19.0 105.0 130.O 150.0

Camera

telemetered

Estimate

Trajectory

39

point

All tracking data were smoothed and transformed to the vehicle center of gravity. Telemetered

from the tracking guidance data--

adjusted to ODOP, GLOTRAC Station l_and the best estimate trajectory-were used to obtain the proper velocity and acceleration profiles through Mach i, S-IB stage cutoff, and S-IVB stage cutoff time periods. The best estimate trajectory, utilizing the telemetered guidance velocities as the generating parameters, was cons trained to GLOTRAC S_tion I data along with data from 5 radar stations through an 18-term guidance error model. Comparison of the resultant trajectory with all available tracking data indicated good agreement between all systems. " GLOTRAC was the only high precision system that tracked after S-IB/ S-IVB separation. The random error was considerably higher on the AS-203 GLOTRAC composite data than on previous flight tests. This was a result of intermittent and very limited GLOTRAC Station I coverage and radar data being used to span the dropouts. The high noise level and the data shifts which occurred after the dropouts made the data useless for establishing a precision trajectory or performing a guidance error analysis. To show the consistency of the powered flight and orbital tracking data, selected parameters at insertion from independent solutions are compared in Table 7-II. One solution for the insertion parameters is based on the powered flight tracking only and the other on subsequent orbital tracking data only. TABLE 7-II Parameter INSERTION CONDITIONS Deviation (Orbit Determ. Altitude Vector (m) from Launch (m/s) Site (m) Minus Powered Fit.)

90.0 35.0 0.2 8.0 90.0 -Ii.0 0.2 -0.2 -i.0 flight

Distance

Space-Fixed Xe Ye Ze

Velocity

Earth-Fixed

Pos. Components

(m)

)e Ze

Earth-Fixed

Vel.

Components

(m/s)

An intermediate solution _as obtained which allowed the powered and orbital tracking data to be matched satisfactorily.

40

7.3

POWERED

FLIGHT

TRAJECTORY

ANALYSIS

Actual and nominal altitude, surface range, and cross range for the launch vehicle powered flight are presented in Figure 7-_. The actual and nominal total earth-fixed velocities are shown in Figure 7-2. Through the entire powered flight the altitude was higher than longifor

nominal and the earth-fixed velocity was greater than tudinal acceleration, shown in Figure 7-3, was greater both the S-IB and S-IVB powered flight phases.

nominal. The than nominal

The S-IVB stage cut off 2.90 sec earlier than nominal; considering a 0.76 sec early S-IB stage cutoff, the S-IVB stage had a 2.14 sec shorter than nominal burn time. The actual space-fixed velocity at the S-IB cutoff signal given by the guidance computer was 0.6 m/s less than nominal. with the Higher excess than nominal S-IVB stage thrust and flowrate, along S-IB cutoff velocity, account for the early S-IVB cutoff. signal was given by the guidance computer at velocity increments imparted to the vehicle subsecutoff signal are given in Table 7-III for the at OECO 7-III and S-IVB guidance GAINS cutoff, (m/s) respectively.

The S-IVB cutoff 433.348 seconds. The quent to the guidance S-IB and S-IVB stages

TABLE Event OECO S-IVB Comparisons events are shown Reference 2.

VELOCITY Actual 2.9

Nominal 3.5 7.7

CO

9.0

of the actual and nominal parameters at the three cutoff in Table 7-IV. The nominal trajectory is presented in

Mach number and dynamic pressure are shown in Figure 7-4. These parameters were calculated using measured meteorological data to an altitude of 60 km. Above this altitude, the U. S. Standard Reference Atmosphere _as used. Comparisons of actual and nominal parameters at significant and impact event times are given in Table 7-V. Apex, apply only to the discarded S-IB stage. loss of telemetry,

The theoretical free flight trajectory for the discarded S-IB stage used initial conditions from the reference trajectory at separation. There was no tracking coverage of the discarded S-IB stage. A nominal tumbling drag coefficient was assumed for the reentry phase. The calculated impact location relative to the launch site is shown in Figure 7-5.

41 Actual Nominal Surface Range (_) 1500 Altitude (_) 200

Cross s-ivs co Range (_) I00

1200

160

80

900

120

60

,---Cross

300 0 150

401___ 190

I 230

P 270 Range

I 310 Time (sec)

I 350

I 390

I A30

20 0 470

Surface

Range (kin) 200

Altitude (k_) i00 OECO

Cross

Range (m) I000

160

80

IECO

_.J

800

120

60

_//

600

,o
,o _o
"---0 20 _ 4(]_ --6"I) FIGURE 7-1

\Range

JJ

I I

___
-- -'-'[00 Time AND (sec) S-IVB TRAJECTORIES Range S-IB

_:::i_ _
0 120 140 160

Cross

42 Actual ------Nominal

Earth-Fixed 8000

Velocity

(m/s)

I
7000

6000

5000

/
/

/,

I
_S-IV'B Cutoff

4000

3000

2000 140 ].80 220 260 Range 300 Time (sec) 340 380 420 460

Earth-Fixed 3000

Velocity

(m/s)

OECO IECOI I I

I
2000 I

i000

0 20 40 60 Range FIGURE 7-2 80 Time 100 (sec) VELOCITY 120 140 160

EARTH-FIXED

43 Actual -----Nominal

Total 40

Inertial

Acceleration

(m/s 2)

S-IVB

CO

0 150 190 230 270 Range (m/s 2) 310 350 Time (sec) 390 430 IECO Total 60 Inertial Acceleration 470

5O

40 OECO

3O

20

"

I0 0 0 20 40 60 Range FIGURE 7-3 TOTAL 80 Time i00 (sec) ACCELERATION 120 140 160

INERTIAL

TABLE

7-IV

CUTOFF

CONDITIONS

IECO Parameter Range Time (sec) (km) Range Range, Range (km) Ze (kln) Ze (m/s) Vector (m/s) Actual 139.24 62.34 85.53 0.59 7.03 2620.72 23.783 Nominal 140.4460.72 86.15 0.7] 4.38 2608.80 22.934 Act-Nom -1.20 1,62 -0.62 -0.12 2.65 11.92 0.849 Actual 142.68 66.01 93.87 0.62 7.63 2714.46 23.182

OECO Nominal 143.44" 63.80 93.42 0.72 4.84 2689.73 22.423 A(t-Nom -0.76 2.21 0.45 -0.I0 2.79 24.73 0.759 Actual 433.348 191.01 1536.87 41.87 356.57 7378.73 -0.003

S-IVB Nominal 436.253* 190.89 1343.80 42.23 357.65 7379.31 0.007

CO Act-Nom -2.905 O.12 -6.93 -0.73 -1.08 -0.58 -0.010

Altitude Surface Cross Cross

Velocity, Velocity

Earth-Fixed

Earth-Fixed Velocity E1e_atlon (deg)

Earth-Fixed Velocity Azimuth (deg)

Vector

72.499

72.450

0.049

72.547

72.493

0.054

81.557

81.613

-0.056

Space-Fixed Total

Velocity

(m/s) (m/s 2)

2987,08 57.03

2977.00 56.76

iO.O8 0.27

3082.27 28.59

3059.14 24.25

23.13 4.34

7784.48 33.97

7785.06 33.79

-0.58 0.18

Inertial

Acceleration

*Based

on

first

motion

time

of

0.63

seconds

Earth-Fixed OECO S-IVB Altitude OECO S-IVB CO

Velocity + 0.3 _ 1.0

Accuracy m/s m/s

Accuracy + 00 _

30 m 250 m

45

_Actual ------ Nominsl

OECO IECO Mach Number 9 Dynamic Pressure (N/c m2) 4.5 Dynamic [ I [ I

4.0

essure

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0iECO 1 0.5 IECO 1

IL
I
16C

0 0 20 40 60 Range FIGURE 7-4 MACH 80 Time i00 (sec) AND DYNAMIC PRESSURE 120 140

NUMBER

46 TABLE SIGNIFICANT 7-V E%' Eh_fS

Event First Motion Range Total

Parameter Time (see) Inertial Acceleration

Actual 0,63 13.41 51.54 6.67 70.00 4.10 13.16 139.34 57.10 143.08 2718.9 143.44 95.75 66.82 0.62 3086.2 20.181 271.5 134.0 403.8 2434.3 425.0 38.0 771.6 -44.43 -O.66 584.3 809_O I0.0 30.4620 72.5167 433.45 34.12 435.1 7387.8

Nominal 0.63 12.99 52.26 6.62 69.63 4,04 12.55 146.54 56.86 143.8_ 2693,0 144.24 95.59 64.70 0.72 3062.7 19.475 266.8 126.9 389.8 2429.2 425.0 28.2 762.1 -97.38 -1.31 574.4 781,6 8.2 30.4174 72.7976 436.25 33.81 437.9 7387.0

Act-Nom 0.0 0.01 -0.71 0.05 0.37 0.06 0.61 -1.20 0.10 -0.76 25.9 -0.80 0.23 2.07 -O. I0 23.5 0,700 4.7 7.1 14.0 5.1 0.0 9.8 9.5 52.95 0.65 9.9 27.4 1.8 0.0446 -O.2809 -2.80 0.36 -2.8 0.6

(m/s 2)

Math

Range Time (sec) Altitude (kin) Dynamic Pressure Range Time (set) Dynamic pressure Altitude (km)

Maximum

(N/cm 2)

Maximum Total Inertial Acceleration (S-IB Stage) M_ximum E_rth-Fixed (S-IB Stage) S-IB/S-IVB Separation Velocity

Range Time (set) Acceleration (m/s 2) Range Time (set) Velocity (m/s) Range Time (set) Surface Range (km_ Altitude (k m) Cross Range (km) Space-Fixed Velocity (m/s) Flight path Angle (deg) Range Time (sec) Altitude (k m) Surface Range (km) Earth-Fixed Velocity

Apex

(S-18

Stage)

(m/s)

Loss of Telemetr'_ (S-IB Stage)

Range Time (sec) Aititude (k m) Surface Range (km) Total Earth-Fixed Acceleration (m/s 2) Elevation Angle From Pad (deg) Range Time (set) Surface Range (km) Cross Range (km) Geodetic Latitude (deg) Longitude (deg) Range Time (set) Acceleration (m/s 2) Range Time (set) Velocity (m/s)

Impact

(S-IB

Stage)

Maximum Total Inertial Acceleration (S-IVB Stage) Maxim_ ($-IVB Ear,h-Fixed Stage) Velocity

,m

80

72o

"

Latitude

160" _o 28 o

__.

*Range

Time

(see)

:
S _

!
_

24 80 Longitude 76 72

FIGURE

7-5

BOOSTER

TRAJECTORY

GROUND

TRACK

48

7.4

ORBITAL

TRACKING

DATA

UTILIZATION

A summary of the C-Band tracking data received for the entire orbital lifetime of the AS-203 vehicle is presented in Table 7-VI. The last valid radar track was obtained by Hawaii on the fourth revolution. The increased venting activity experienced during the AS-203 introduced significant disturbing forces into the vehicle orbital orbit scheme.

For this reason initial conditions were determined for each revolut_n, selecting an epoch near the time the vehicle crossed 80 deg west longitude. The orbital elements for each revolution at the selected epoch times are given in Table 7-VII. The vent model used in determining these elements Table ditions the RMS 7.5 is shown lists as the a total tracking acceleration data used profile (see Figure initial 21-11). con-

7-VIII

in obtaining

for each error of

revolution, the number of observations per tracker_and the residuals associated with each data type. ANALYSIS

ORBITAL

TRAJECTORY

A least squares differential correction procedure using selected tracking data and the actual vent model was used to determine the initial conditions for each revolution. The RMS tracking residuals given in Table 7-VIII represent the difference between actual radar observations and the calculated observations based on the orhital ephemeris defined by the appropriate initial conditions. The RMS residual errors for range and the angle measurements were five to ten times larger than the expected accuracy of the measuring system. High frequency errors inherent in the radar measuring systems are 3 m (i0 ft) in range and 0.003 deg in angles for FPQ-6/TPQ-18 radars (design specifications). Several nominal venting mately orbital parameters for each revolution are compared with

in Table 7-VII. The orbit is very near nominal; however_the impulses needed to fit the orbital tracking data were approxi10% higher than nominal. Several biases were identified in the for a 55.44 sec timing timing bias.

orbital tracking data. Woomera azimuth angle was corrected deg bias and second pass MILA data was corrected for a 0.55 bias. Fourth pass Hawaii data was corrected for a 0.12 sec

49 TABLE AS-203 C-BAND 7-VI TRACKING SUMMARY

[ Station Patrick -" Merritt Grand Bermuda Canary Island AFB Island Turk Island Insertion X X X X

Revolution i 2

Number 3 4

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Carnarvon Woomera California White Eglin Hawaii Antigua Ascension Island

,, L

X X X X X X X X X

Sands AFB

TABLE AS-203

7-VII PARAMETERS REVOLUTION ., NI_MB ER 3 ACT-NOM 3.4 2.1 -I.i ACTUAL 208.6 196.4 7789.9 ACT-NOM -1.4 3.2 -3.1 ACTUAL 216.6 201.7 7787.7
.,,,,

ORBITAL

PARAMETER

Insertion ACTUAL

(i) ACTUAL 200.1 192.6 7790.1

4 ACT-NOM i,i 4.6 -3.3

ACT- NOM 3.1 2.9 0.8

APOGEE PERIGEE

(kin) (kin) VELOCITY

187.3 185.2 7793.5

SPACE-FIXED

(m/s )
PATH ANGLE PERIOD (deg) -0.002 88.21 443.35 -0.009 0.05 -2.90 -0.019 88.42 5,671.0 -0.005 0.05 0.0 0.001 88.56 I_395.0 0.001 0,03 0.0 -0.002 88.70 16,981. -0.019 0.08 0.0

(min)

EPOCH TIME (sec from Range Zero)

NOTE:

RANGE

ZERO :

1453:17

U.T.

51

TABLE

7-VIII

AS-203 ORBITAL TRACKING DATA UTILIZATION Time of Track (Universal Time) 1501:12 1503:54 Data Type* AZ EL RA AZ EZ RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL NA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA AZ EL RA Valid Observations 20 22 21 25 26 26 8 9 9 I0 9 i0 58 57 55 56 51 59 52 49 55 58 49 59 41 35 41 36 37 33 66 51 63 50 46 52 32 38 31 22 15 18 49 40 46 51 38 43 RM_ Error Residuals of

Station Bermuda Island (FPS-16)

0.006 de E 0,030 de 8 7m (23 ft) 0.010 dee 0.012 deg 30m (tO0

Carnarvon, (FPQ-6)

Australia

1546:06 1548:54

ft)

Woomera, (FPS-16)

Australia

1553:30 1554:18

0.020 deg 0.008 de E 41m (135 ft) 0.007 dee 0.033 dee 24m (80 ft) 0.020 deg 0.033 deg 80m (265

White Sands, New Mexico (FPS-16) Merrltt Island, Florida (TPQ-18) Bermuda Is land (FPS-16)

1626:54 1627:48

1627:48 1633:18

ft)

1631:12 1637:00

0.011 dee 0.008 dee 12m (40 ft) 0.003 dee 0.024 dee 17m (52 ft) 0.025 deg 0.010 deg 35m (i15

Carnarvon, (FPQ-6)

Australia

1717:48 1723:48

White Sands_ New Mexico (FPS-16) Merrltt Island, Florida (TPQ-18) Bermuda Island (FPS-16)

1755:48 1801:42

ft)

1803:12 1807:18

0.009 deg 0.043 de E 25m (83 ft) 0.015 dee 0.034 dee 5m (18 ft) 0.010 deg 0.012 dee 16m (53 ft) 0.037 deg 0.021 dee 9m (30 ft) 0.006 dee 0.023 deg 15m (50 ft) 0.016 de E 0.009 dee 9m (30 ft) 0.011 deg 0'.007 dee 4m (13 ft) 0.015 deg 0.013 dee 75m (250

1804:42 1809:48

Carnarvon, (FPQ-6)

Austral_a

1851:06 1857:48

White Sands, New Mexico (FPS-16) Merrltt Island, Florida (TPQ-18) AntiEu_ (FPQ-6) Islasd

1929:00 1934:30

1936:18 1940:12

1939:48 1942:00

A_cen_ion (TPQ-18)

Island

1953:54 1959:12

Hawaii (FPS-16)

2050:24 2055:30

ft)

*DATA

TYPE:

AZ EL

= Azimuth a Elevation

RA , Range

52

8.0 8. i SUMMARY

(U)

S-IB

PROPULSION

The flight.

S-IB

propulsion

system

performed

satisfactorily

throughout

On the basis of flight simulation: stage thrust, specific impulse, and propellant flowrate were 1.55%, 0.98%, and 0.56% higher than predicted, respectively. Based on engine analysis,these deviations were 1.13%, 0.41%,and 0.71% higher than predicted, respectively. Inboard Engine Cutoff (IECO) occurred dicted. Outboard Engine Cutoff (OECO) was IECO by the actuation of the fuel depletion tank F4. 1.20 sec earlier than preinitiated 3.44 sec after sensor in the sump of fuel

The the

The fuel and LOX pressurization helium blowdown system was used fuel pressurization systems. utilization was

systems operated successfully for

satisfactorily. the second time

in

Propellant predicted. All

satisfactory

and

was

within

0.15%

of

mechanical

systems

functioned

satisfactorily. stage were ejected

The two movie successfully after 8.2 S-IB PROPULSION

cameras at the top of the S-IB recording S-IB/S-IVB separation. PERFORMANCE

Two separate analyses were used to determine the S-IB engine performance. The first method of determining the S-IB propulsion system flight performance was reconstruction of the telemetered flight data with the Mark IV computer program. Calculated propellant residuals are also used as inputs to the program. The Mark IV program is a mathematical model of the Saturn first stage propulsion system utilizing a table of influence coefficients to determine engine performance. The second method utilized a trajectory simulation to generate multipliers that were enforced on _e results of engine calculated trajectory fit the observed 8.2.1 STAGE ENGINE PERFORMANCE analysis so trajectory. that the resulting

All eight H-I engines ignited satisfactorily. The automatic ignition sequence, which schedules the engines to start in pairs with a i00 millisecond (ms) delay between each pair, began with ignition command at -2.487 seconds. The recorded individual engine ignition signals are shown in the top portion of Table 8-1. The bottom portion of Table 8-1 presents thrust chamber ignition, main propellant ignition (Pc prime),

53

and Thrust OK Pressure Switch (TOPS) pickup times referenced to dividual engine's ignition signal. The times presented indicate satisfactory transition to mainstage on each engine.

the a

in-

sented engine

Individual engine thrust buildup and stage thrust buildup are prein Figure 8-1. The stage thrust shown is the sum of the individual thrusts and does not account for engine cant angles.

S-IB stage performance throughout flight was satisfactory. Figure 8-2 shows inflight stage longitudinal thrust and specific impulse determined from analysis of engine measurements. Stage longitudinal thrust averaged 80,513 N (18,100 ibf) or 1.02% higher than predicted. The stage specific impulse was 0.81 sec or 0.29% higher than predicted. S-IB stage propellant flow characteristics are shown in Figure 8-3. Stage mixture ratio was 0.0007 (0.03%) higher than predicted. The predicted mixture ratio was 2.2275 to one.. Total propellant flowrate was 20.4 kg/s (45.0_m/s) or 0.73% higher than predicted. Stage LOX and fuel flowrates are shown in Figure 8-4. LOX flowrate averaged 14.5 kg/s (32.0 ibm/s) or 0.74% higher than predicted and the fuel flowrate averaged 5.9 kg/s (13.0 ibm/s) or 0.71% higher than predicted. The above average deviations were taken between first motion and IECO. The quoted performance parameters and referenced figures are not reduced to sea level conditions. If the parameters in the preceding paragraph are reduced to sea level conditions, the following values result: Stage longitudinal thrust averaged 81,920 N (18,416 Ibf) or 1.13% higher than predicted. Stage specific impulse was 1.08 sec or 0.41% higher than predicted. Total propellant flowrate was 20.1 kg/s (44.4 ibm/s) or 0.71% higher than predicted. The higher than predicted performance cannot be attributed to deviations from predicted propellant densities or pump inlet pressures. The average LOX pump inlet density (lower portion of Figure 8-4) throughout flight was 3.04 kg/m 3 (0.19 Ibm/ft3) or 0.27% lower than predicted. The fuel density was 1.92 kg/m 3 (0.12 ibm/ft3) or 0.23% lower than predicted. The combined effect of these two vibrations, in conjunction with slightly higher than predicted tially no change from shortened slightly. pump inlet pressures, should have resulted in essenpredicted thrust; however, the burn time was

Predicted propulsion performance values for S-IB-3 were based on an average of engine data obtained during engine acceptance testing and during the long duration stage static test. Influence coefficients were used to calculate the effects of propellant densities, temperatures, and pump inlet pressures on engine performance during flight. Prior to the flight of S-IB-3, the influence coefficients were revised to reflect the results of recent testing and to include an ambient pressure effect on engine performance. The revised influence coefficients, however, were not received in time to be used in the S-IB-3 flight prediction. A re-prediction of the S-IB-3 performance influence coefficients showed an average sea (10,6411bf) or 0.65% higher than the original parameters level thrust S-IB-3 using the of 47,332 new N The

prediction.

54

TABLE ENGINE ENGINE POSITION START

8-I

CHARACTERISTICS TIME FROM IGNITION COMMAND (MS)

ENGINE ACTUAL 5 and 7 6 and 8 2 and 4 i and 3 12 112 212 312

IGNITION

SIGNAL

PROGRAMMED i0 ii0 210 310

ENGINE POSITION

TIME FROM THRUST CHAMBER IGNITION

INDIVIDUAL

ENGINE

IGNITION

SIGNAL

(MS)

Pc PRIME

*TOPS 4#1

(THREE SWITCHES) #2 1057 1002 1082 1022 1077 1187 1218 1076 #3 1066 996 i082 1043"* 1077 1177 1229 1077

5 7 6 8 2 4 3 I *THRUST OK

557 521 510 535 576 525 556 566 PRESSURE SWITCH

876 865 841 844 865 868 888 865

1059 994 1082 1051 1078 1179 1203 1077

**ToPs SWITCH 3 OF ENGINE AFTER ENGINE 8 IGNITION OCCURRED AT 1043 MS AND

8 FIRST ACTUATED FOR i MS AT 1031 MS SIGNAL. THE SECOND AND FINAL ACTUATION IS CONSIDERED THE CORRECT ACTUATION TIME.

55

Thrust I000

(I000 N)

Thrust

(i000

ib)

800

_ 160

6O0 120

400

80

I
200 7115 I 40

o
-2.0

_---1.8

X2/
-1.6 -1.4 Range -1.2 Time -I.0 (sec) Thrust (i000 ib) -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 1600 .f

Thrust 8000

(i000 N)

6000

4000

800 1200

2000 0 -2.0

400

J
-1.8 -1.6 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0 Range Time (sec) ENGINE AND -0.8 -0.6 -0,4 FIGURE 8-1 S-IB INDIVIDUAL STAGE THRUST BUILDUP

56

Thrust 9000

(i000 N

Thrust

(i000

ib) 2000

8000

i
7000 1 1 1600

1400 6000

i
1200 5000 Actual I000 Predicted

4000

II

80O

3000

L 0

20

40

60

80 Range Time

i00 (sec)

120

140

160

Specific 300

Impulse

(sec)

290

280

/
! _/ 20 40 FIGUP_I 8-2

///

S'_"_'-Z_------

....

--

Actual

------ Predicted

270

260

60

"80 Range Time

lO0 (sec) THRUST

120

140

160

S-IB STAGE LONGITUDINAL

AND SPECIFIC

IMPULSE

57 Actusl Mixture 2.35 Ratio LOX/Fuel) ------Predicted

2.30

--'---'_

____

--

_"

2.25

\
2.20 0 20 40 60 80 Range Time i00 (sec) 120 140 160 Flowrate 3200 (kg/s) Flowrate (Ib/s) 7000

2800

6000

2400 5000

2000 4000

1600 3000 1200

2000 800

i000 40O 0 20 40 60 80 Range Time i00 (sec) MIXTURE RATIO AND FLOWRATE 120 140 160

FIGURE

8-3

S-IB STAGE PROPELLANT

58

LOX F_owrace

(k_ls)

LOX Flowrate ([b/s)

2200

_ _
L8_ ....... 1600

.........

_---+__.__.._. ,
I i 3_00

'
12OO !

_ 26_

I
20 40 bo 80 boo Range Ttme (see)

! 1
L20 L40

i '
160

_uel Iooo

Flo_rate

(kg/a) i

_el

Flo_rare ] i

(tb,'l) ZZ00

1
,

90o

2_o

8oo

i I

I !

lgoo

1 i
i 1600

7_

1
i

i i

r i
1

!
14_
12oo

,_
20 ao

!
i
1
60

i
I
!
80 1oo Renge TLme (see)

i
120 l&O

i
i

'

_ tooo
160

_X

F_

Inlet Density (kElm3)

LOX ?_p

Inter DenaLgy (iblfft) 3

115.0

f_

----_

-l_, l 70,_

It2,0

"

70.0

i I

\\_

!
20 _0 60 8C Range Tin _x & m_L I_ (see) FtO_T_S *_ _X mcm_ 8-_ $=Is _AOE

\_
120 1_O 160 D_SI_

69,6

59

repredicted average specific impulse was 0.98 sec (0.37%) higher than originally predicted. It can be concluded that approximately 60% of the thrust difference and essentially all of the specific impulse difference between predicted and reconstructed would have been eliminated, had the revised influence coefficients been available for use in the first prediction. The remaining portion of the thrust deviation between predicted and flight, approximately 4448 N (i000 ibm) per engine, can be attributed to the rather large variations between engine and stage static tests. Table 8-II presents a summary of sea level thrust, flowrate, sea weight at liftoff and IECO. Values are compared with dicted values. of the average values and deviations level specific impulse, and vehicle from the flight simulation method

."

the postflight engine analysis, predicted and re-preFlight simulation increased engine analysis thrust

by 0.42% and reduced flo_rate by 0.15%. This resulted in an Isp increase of 0.57%. The axial force coefficient resulting from this solution, along with the predicted axial force coefficient for AS-203, is presented in Section 19.0. The upper curve of Figure 8-5 depicts the different levels of total

longitudinal engine thrust, including turbine exhaust thrust. The curves presented are the official trajectory prediction thrust, repredicted thrust using an updated engine model, postflight engine thrust as derived through an engine analysis which incorporates telemetered propulsion measurements, and the thrust derived through flight simulation. The lower curve of Figure 8-5 depicts the total longitudinal effective force for the same calculations and includes aerodynamic and buoyant forces as well as the propulsion forces shown in the upper curve. The S-IB stage received inboard engine cutoff signal 1.20 sec earlier than predicted. The cutoff velocity was 11.79 m/s higher than the predicted. The flight simulation results were used in an attempt to explain the time and velocity deviations_ To explain the velocity deviation, an error analysis was made to determine the contributing parameters and the magnitude of the velocity deviation caused by each of these parameters. Table 8-III lists the various error contributors and the cutoff velocity deviations TABLE associated 8-111 with VELOCITY each. DEVIATION ANALYSIS Dev (Act-Pred) AV (m/s) 1.03 51.81 22.91 1.40 -0.89 -64.8 11.46 11.79 0.33

Error

Contribution

Liftoff Weight(-O.02% ) Total Sea Level Longitudinal Total Propellant Flowrate Axial Force Coefficient Meteorological Data Change in Burn Time Total Contribution Observed Difference

0.56%

TABLE

8-II

AVERAGE

S-IB

STAGE

PROPULSION

PARAMETERS

Parameter

Units

Predicted

Repredi_ted

Percentage Dev. From Predicted

Engine Analysis 7,355,527

Percentage Dev. From Predicted

Flight Simulation 7,386,143

Percentage Dev. F_om Predicted

Sea

Level

Thrust

N lhf

7,273,607 1,635,172 2,835.05 6,250,2 261.62 538,247 1,186,632 141,433 311,802

7,320,939 1,645,813 2,842.81 6,267.32 262.60 538,247 1,186,632 141,560 312,086 0.65

1,653,588 2,855.18 6,294.59 262.70 538,165 1,186,451 141,913 312,865

J.13

1,660,471 2,850.91 6,285.18 264.19 538,165 1,186,451 142,505 314,170

1.55

Flow

Rate

kg/s Ibm/s Specific Impulse see kg Ibm kg ibm

0.27 0.37

0.71 0.41

0.56 0.98

Sea

Level

Liftoff

Weight

-0.02

-0.02

IECO

Weight

0.09

0.34

0.76

--_Fli_ht Simulation ...... Engine AIlalysis .............. Reprediction _Prediction Total LonKitudinal Engine Thrust (I000 N)

8400 8200

8000

7800

7400 7600

7200 7000 0 20 40 60 Range Time 80 (see) 100 120 140

Total 8400

Longitudinal

Effective

Force

(1000

N)

8200
8000

/,.<..... _/:_
_/._'" I

/.727.71 C.m':'%,

7600

--

7goo
7200 t"..-_ _f

NF I .

7000 68OO 0 20 40

_ 60 Range Time

1 80 (see) THRUST i00 120 140

FIGURE

8-5

S-IB

LONGITUDINAL

ENGINE

AND

EFFECTIVE

FORCE

62

Since inboard engine cutoff signal was given by a fuel level switch, the only quantities which affected the cutoff time are those which alter the level of fuel in the tanks. Table 8-1V lists the parameters which contributed to the deviation between the predicted and actual cutoff time and the '_t" contributions made by each. TABLE 8-1V TIME DEVIATION ANALYSIS Dev (Act-Pred) _ t (sec) -0.64 -0.71 0.17 -i.18 -1.20 0.02

Error Initial Fuel

Contributors Fuel Load

Flowrate

Lower Fuel Density Total Contribution Observed Difference

The cutoff sequence on the S-IB stage began at 136.27 sec with the actuation of a fuel level cutoff probe. Inboard engine cutoff (IECO) was initiated, as programmed, 3.0 sec later by the Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC) at 139.24 seconds. IECO occurred earlier than predicted. The shorter than predicted burn was the result of the higher than predicted fuel flowrate what lower than required fuel load. 1.20 sec time to IECO and a some-

The actuation of a fuel level cutoff probe, instead of a LOX level cutoff probe as predicted, resulted from the effect of the lower than predicted LOX density. Although the combined effects of the lower than predicted fuel and IX)X densities produced essentially the predicted flight mixture ratio (0.03% difference), the propellant loading tables required a 0.30% higher than predicted load mixture ratio for the flight fuel density. The 253 kg (559 ibm) fuel offload increases the 0.30% to 0.50%. The difference in load mixture ratio over predicted, with no difference between actual and predicted flight mixture ratio, led to the unexpected fuel cutoff. This condition cannot be considered abnormal, since the propellant loading tables are not designed to compensate for variations in LOX density. Thrust decay on each inboard engine was normal. The total inboard engine cutoff impulse was 1,199,934 N-s (269,756 Ibf-s). Inboard and outboard engine total thrust decay is shown in Figure 8-6. Outboard engine cutoff (OECO) was initiated at 142.68 sec by actuation of the fuel depletion sensor located in the sump of fuel tank F4. It was expected that outboard engine cutoff would be initiated by TOPS de-actuation when LOX starvation occurred. The expected time differential between IECO and OECO was 3.0 seconds. The actual time differential was 3.44 fuel fuel seconds. depletion depletion A detailed discussion of the conditions leading to the probe cutof is contained in Section 8.3. The unexpected cutoff produced no adverse effects, and thrust decay was

63

Thrust 4600

(I000

N)

Thrust

(1000

Ibf)

IECO

at 139.2"48ec

1000

I
4000

t
I I

"

t
800 60O

3200

2400

-. Cutoff Impulse = 1,199,934 N-s 400

1600

2O0 800

0 139.2

0 139.4 139.6 139.8 140.0 Range 140.2 Time (sec), 140.4 140,6 140.8 141.0 141.2

Thrust 4800

(I000

N) OECO at 142.68 see

Thrust

(I000

Ibf)

L, ooo

I I t
I

1ooo
800

32 O0

6OO 2400

_00 1600 .....

Cutoff 800 -[

lmpulse=

1,095,121

N-s 200

0 142.4

0 142.6 142,8 143.0 143,2 143.4 Ramge Time AND 143.6 (sec) ENGINE 143.8 144.0 144.2 144.4

FIGURE

8-6

S-IB

INBOARD

OUTBOARD

THRUST

DECAY

64

satisfactory the outboard 8.2.2

on each engines

of the outboard engines. was 1,095,121 N-s (246,193 CHARACTERISTICS

Total cutoff Ibf-s).

impulse

for

INDIVIDUAL

ENGINE

Individual engine flight performance data from the Mark IV reconstruction program were reduced to Sea Level Standard turbopump inlet conditions to permit comparison of flight performance with predicted and preflight test performance. The reduction of engine data to Sea Level Standard conditions isolates performance variations due to engine characteristics from those attributable to engine inlet and environmental conditions and allow an engine to engine comparison. This is accomplished by using the revised influence coefficients, discussed previously. The reduction to sea level performance quoted in the Table 8-II do reflect the flight environment but are reduced to zero altitude conditions. The performance conditions was of all eight satisfactory. engines Thrust when reduced to Sea Level Stanlevels for all engines were

dard

higher than predicted, with an average deviation per engine of 10,097 N (2,270 ibf) or 1.02%. The average deviation from predicted of specific impulse wasO.80 sec or 0.28% higher than predicted. Figure 8-7 shows the average devotion from predicted thrust and specific impulses for engines 1 through 8. The difference in percentage deviations from predicted between total

stage specific (0.28%) is due each case. In

impulse (0.29%) and individual engine specific impulse to the difference in definitions of specific impulse in the derivation of stage specific impulse, the total pro-

pellants leaving the stage and the longitudinal thrust are considered; while in the individual engine specific impulse calculations, only the propellants burned by the engine and engine thrust are considered. The total propellants leaving the stage are as some propellants are used for gearbox not all burned lubrication. by the engine,

The following discussion applies to the sea level performance at 30 seconds. This is the time period for which sea level performance is normally presented, and the flight prediction is based on test data obtained during this time period_ Analysis of past flight data along with static test data, indicated a pronounced increase in sea level performance occurring during the first 30 sec of flight. A less pronounced increase was also noted from 30 sec until cutoff. The increase in sea level performance during non-equilibrium engine operation for in the prediction. the first 30 sec has been attributed to and has been satisfactorily accounted

see

Average sea level engine thrust along the engine was 896,979 N (201,649 ibf) which is 4,083 N (918

centerline at ibf) or 0.46%

30

Average 2

Deviation 4,061

From Predicted 14,968 2,580

Thrust

(%) 8,340

17,917 4 028 10,596 11,619 N

10,578

i 0 -I -2

4 5 Engine Number

' 6

ib 7 8

Average

Deviation

From Predicted

Specific

Impulse

(%)

IT I 0 1

_ iI

_ 2

0.73 3

0.83 4

0.78 5

L00 6

0.82 7

0.76 8^

sec

Engine Number

FIGURE

8-7

INDIVIDUAL

ENGINE PERFORMANCE

PARAMETERS

66

higher than predicted. At this time the sea level thrust for engines I through 8 differed from predicted by -0.i0, +1.07, -0.i0, +0.47, +0.24, +1.29, +0.60, and +0.17 percent, respectively. The average sea level engine mixture ratio was 2.234 to one, which was 0.003 (0.13%) higher than predicted. The average sea level engine specific impulse was 262.63 sec, which is only 0.02 sec (0.008%) greater than predicted. Comparing the flight sea level performance at 30 sec with the sea level performance derived from engine acceptance testing shows the average flight sea level thrust to be 8,042 N (1,808 ibf) or 0.90% higher than the engine test average. The average flight sea level engine mixture ratio was 0.016 (0.72%) higher than the engine test average. Average flight sea level engine specific impulse was 0.34 sec (0.13%) lower than the engine test average. As noted previously, the average flight sea level engine thrust was

0.46% above predicted at 30 The small change in the sea IECO indicates that the sea factorily. 8.3 S-IB PROPELLANT

seconds. At level thrust level thrust

IECO the difference was 0.60%. difference between 30 sec and buildup was characterized satis-

UTILIZATION

Propellant usage is the ratio of propellant consumed to propellant loaded, and is an indication of the propulsion system performance and _e capability of the propellant loading system to load the proper propellant weights. Propellant usage for the S-IB stage was satisfactory and within 0.15% of the predicted value. The predicted and actual (reconstructed) percentages of lo_ded propellants utilized during the flight are shown in Table 8-V. TABLE Propellant Total Fuel LOX 8-V PROPELLANT Predicted 99.15 98.25 99.55 (%) UTILIZATION Actual 99.30 98.72 99.55 (%)

The planned mode of Outboard Engine Cutoff (OECO) was by LOX starvation. The LOX and fuel level cutoff probe heights and flight sequence settings were set to yield a 3.0 sec time interval between any cutoff probe actuation and Inboard Engine Cutoff (IECO), and a planned time interval between IECO and OECO of 3.0 seconds. OECO was to be initiated by the deactuation of two of the three thrust OK pressure switches on any outboard engine as a result of LOX starvation. It was assumed that approximately 0.283 m 3 (75 gallons) of LOX in the outboard suction lines was usable. The backup timer (flight sequencer) was set to initiate

67

OECO i0 sec after level sensor actuation; this essentially eliminated the backup timer as a mode of OECO. To prevent fuel starvation, fuel depletion cutoff probes were located in the F2 and F4 container sumps. The center LOX tank sump orifice was 48.3 + 0.013 cm (19.0 + 0.005 in) in diameter, and a liquid level height differential of approximately 4.3 cm (1.7 in) between the center and outboard LOX tanks was predicted at IECO (center tank level higher). On this flight, the fuel-empty reference was redefined as theoretical tank bottom rather than at fuel depletion probe actuation. This was done due to the early depletion probe actuation phenomenon on AS-201. The fuel bias was maintained at 453.6 kg (i000 ibm) as on AS-201. If the curved bottom portion of the tank is extended to form a complete hemisphere, the lowest point on this extended surface is defined as the theoretical tank bottom. This is 28.087 cm(11.058 in) above the fill and drain line in the sump of the tank. Data used in evaluating S-IB propellant usage was obtained by five discrete probe racks of 15 probes each in tanks 0C, 01, 03, FI, and F3; a continuous level probe in the bottom of each tank; cutoff level sensors in tanks sumps. 02, 04, F2, and F4; and fuel depletion probes in the F2 and F4

The cutoff sequence on the S-IB stage was initiated by a signal from the fuel level cutoff probe in either tank F2 or F4 at 136.27 seconds. Due to the 83 ms sampling rate, the probes appeared to uncover simultaneously. The IECO signal was received 2.97 sec later at 139.24 seconds. OECO was initiated 3.44 sec after IECO, at 142.68 sec, by a signal from the fuel depletion probe in tank F4. A second signal was sent by the fuel depletion probe in tank F2, 0.90 see later, at 143.58 seconds. This signal is believed to have been caused by sudden deceleration of the S-IB stage resulting from retro rocket ignition. The fuel depletion probe actuation times and retro rocket ignition time are shown in _igure 8-8. There _as no indication that LOX starvation had been achieved at OECO. Based on continuous and discrete probe data,the propellant levels in the fuel tanks were nearly equal and were approximately 10.2 cm (4 in) below theoretical tank bottom when the depletion probe in tank F4 actuated (Figure 8-8). At that time 1,533 kg (3,379 ibm) of LOX remained above the main valves,which would require an additional 0. i sec burn time to achieve LOX starvation. The propellants remaining above the main valves after outboard engine decay were 1,280 kg (2,822 ibm) of LOX and 1,615 kg (3,561 ibm) of fuel. The predicted values were 1,304 kg (2,875 ibm) of LOX and 2,216 kg (4,885 ibm) of fuel. As can be seen, the fuel weight at OEC0 was 600.6 kg (1,324 ibm) less than predicted. This _as caused primarily by an increase in the ratio of LOX to fuel mass loaded compared to predicted. This increase was caused by the warmer than predicted LOX and a 254 kg (559 Ibm) fuel offload.

68

Retro Rocket Ignition

MaximLLmStaRe Deoelerat_on OECO 142.68

I
{ F2 J J Dry wet

I i I f I ]
i
Wet I 1_2.8 I 141,0 I I 143.2 143,_ Range Time (sec) _ 143.8 I [44.0

I
142,6 la3.6

Propellant Level Above Theoretical Tank Bottom (am) 90

(in)

.0 \
60

12
24

50

k_ _

tN_

----

-20

40

, 16

30

" 12

20

o ....

LOXTanks

-i0 IO

_ OEQO 142.68

-4

I
136 137 138 F_GURE 8-8

J
139 140 Range Time (sec) 141 I_2 143 AND PROPELLANTLEVELS

FUEL DEPLETION TI_ES

69

Based on tbe fuel level that existed when the fuel depletion probe in the F4 sump actuated, it would appear that a stage fuel-empty reference of theoretical tank bottom is reasonable for AS-203 type flights. One possible explanation for the dry indication of the fuel depletion sensor at higher fuel levels on AS-201 is the 50% lower vehicle longitudinal acceleration on that flight as compared to AS-203. The cutoff bottom are TABLE probe shown 8-VI signal times and in Table 8-VI. CUTOFF PROBE setting heights from theoretical

tank

ACTIVATION

CHARACTERISTICS Activation (sec) 136.43 136.60 136.27 136.27 Time

Container

Height (cm) 69.72 69.72 84.77 84.77 SYSTEMS SYSTEM

(in) 27.45 27.45 33.375 33.375

02 04 F2 F4 8.4 8.4.1 S-IB PRESSURIZATION PRESSURIZATION

FUEL

The fuel tank pressurization system the entire flight. This was the second system which was introduced on A8-201. system can be found in Appendix A.

operated satisfactorily during flight of the new helium blowdown Configuration changes for this

The measured absolute ullage pressure is compared with the predicted pressure in the upper portion of Figure 8-9. There is generally good agreement between the two curves. The higher than predicted ullage pressure is a direct result of a higher than predicted initial sphere pressure. The blockhouse record of ullage pressure and the digital event evaluator show that the fuel pressurizing valves opened twice rather than once as predicted. This has occurred during static test and is not unusual. This accounts for the different shape of the curve during the first few seconds of flight. The blockhouse data also shows that the 3.7% or 5.92 m 3 (209 ft 3) ullage was prepressurized to 21.4 N/cm 2 (31.1 psi) in approximately 3 seconds. The initial sphere pressure, which can vary from 1,941N/cm 2 (2,815 psi)

to 2,137 N/cm 2 (3,100 psi), is the most significant factor affecting ullage pressure. This pressure was 2,096 N/cm 2 (3,040 psi) as compared to a predicted nominal value of 2,068 N/cm 2 (3,000 psi). This is shown in the bottom portion of Figure 8-9. The fact that the pressurizing valves closed during the ignition transient caused the'sphere pressure to be higher at liftoff than it would otherwise have been. This is equivalent to a greater initial sphere pressure at ignition.

7O Actual Ullage 3O Pressure (N/cm 2 Predicted 'ressure (psi)

40

2ol

t"

30

"_ lO

20

10

0 -20 0 20 40 60 Range Time 80 (see) I00 120 140 160

Helium 2500

Sphere

Pressure

(N/cm 2)

Pressure

(psi) .3500

\%

3000

2000

1500

\\_

2500

\ \ _
lO0O ". _ ,.

2000
1500

I000

5oo
0 -20 0 20 40 60 Ran$e TANK Time 80 (see) i00 120 140 160

50
0

FIGURE

8- 9

FUEL

ULLAGE

AND HELIUM

SPHERE PRESSURES

71

The measured ullage pressure compares well with the AS-201 ullage pressure, being almost identical for the first 70 sec and then gradually diverging to a difference of 1,0 N/cm 2 (1.5 psi) at 140 seconds. The lower pressure on AS-203 can be accounted for by the 0.041 m 3 (1.44 ft 3) smaller helium storage volume. This _ould result in a lower sphere pressure near the end of flight and subsequently a lower helium flo_rate. The discrete probe data revealed levels during flight was very that the behavior of the fuel similar to that seen on AS-201. tank

liquid

The discrete probes were eliminated in tanks F2 and F4 on AS-201 end on all the static tests of stages S-IB-I and S-IB-2. The levels in these two tanks _ere always between the levels in tanks FI and F3. The maximum recorded difference between F1 and F3 was 19.8 cm (7.8 in) at ii seconds. The levels converged to _ difference of 3.0 cm (1.2 in) at 75 sec,and at 138 sec the difference was 2.8 cm (i.i in). 8.4.2 LOX PRESSURIZATION SYSTEM

The LOX tank pressurization system performed satisfactorily during the flight of AS-203. Pressurization of the LOX tanks provides increased structural rigidity and adequate LOX pump inlet pressures. Helium from a ground source is used to provide prelaunch pressurization. From vehicle ignition command to liftoff, an increased helium flow is used to maintain adequate LOX tank pressure during engine start. The GOX vent and interconnect system was redesigned for S-IB-3 and subsequent stages. A 17.8 cm (7 in) vent valve was placed on each outboard tank and a new 10.2 em (4 in) vent and relief valve was incorporated on the center tank. This valve was designed to protect the thinner, lightweight tanks used protection for the LOX 41.4 N/cm 2 (60 psi). on the S-IB stage. It is the primary over-pressure tanks and will start to relieve mechanically at

A LOX tank pressure switch with a new design having an actuation range of 39.8 + 0.6 N/cm 2 (57.7 + 0.8 psi) was incorporated on this stage. This switch, t_gether with the p_eumatic vent mode of the LOX relief valve, provides backup protection for the tanks in flight after 30 seconds. Another new switch replaces the old emergency vent pressure switch and provides this same backup protection on the ground. This switch, which has no flight function, has an actuation band of 46.5 + 1.4 N/cm 2 (67.5 + 2.0 psi). The prepressurization level of the LOX tanks is controlled by the

previousl_ mentioned switch to 39.8 N/cm 2 (57.7 psi) actuation and 38.1 N/cm z (55.3 psi) minimum deactuation. This prepressurization level satisfies the requirement of a minimum pressure of 55.2 N/cm 2 (80 psi) at the LOX pump inlet for engine start. The system is designed to achieve a minimum tank pressure of 34.5 _ 1.7 N/cm 2 (50 _ 2.5 psi) at OECO.

72

The

1.3%

or

3.31

m3

(117

ft 3) ullage

was

pressurized

to

39.7

N/cm 2

(57.6 psi) in 52 seconds. The tank pressure at ignition was also 39.7 N/cm 2 (57.6 psi). Center LOX tank pressure during flight is compared with the center LOX tank pressure during S-IB long duration static test (SA-31) in the upper portion of Figure 8-10. The pressure during flight was higher than the static test pressure; however, the differences are well within the measuring accuracy. Several different sources of reduced data were consulted and all read different pressures. One source of error was a telemetry calibration shift during flight of approximately 2% of the measurin$ range,which is directly equivalent for this measurement to 1.4 N/cm z (2 psi). The largest difference between actual and predicted values is also 1.4 N/cm 2 (2 psi). The GOX Flow Control Valve (GFCV) started two slight oscillations, it reached the to close at ignition;and, fully closed position at

after

20 sec (Figure 8-10). It remained in closed position until approximately 80 sec, when it began to open to compensate for decreasing tank pressure. The operation of the valve during static test is also shown. This position trace is shifted upward approximately 3% due to the calibration procedure of the static test measurement. The pressure and temperature upstream of and indicated a GOX flowrate of approximately when the valve was 100% closed. 8.4.3 CONTROL PRESSURIZATION SYSTEM the GFCV were as expected 8.44 kg/s (18.6 ibm/s)

The S-IB stage control pressure system supplied GN 2 at a regulated pressure of 531 to 534 N/cm 2 (770 to 775 psi) to pressurize the H-I engine turbopump gear boxes and to purge the LOX seals, five radiation calorimeters,and an infrared spectrometer. Regulated pressure was utilized to close the LOX and fuel prevalves at inboard and outboard engine cutoff. Pressure was also available to operate the LOX vent and relief valve. The S-IB-3 but an additonal accommodate the and the infrared control pressure system was similar to the S-IB-I system 0.028 m (I ft 3) fiberglass sphere (2 total) was used to additional flowrates required for the fifth calorimeter spectrometer.

System performance was satisfactory both during _relaunch and flight. The spheres were pressurized from 1,034 to 2,086 N/cm2 (1,500 to 3,025 psi) at approximately T-6 hours and 42 minutes. Between power transfer and ignition,the sphere pressure decrease was reduced from 69 N/cm 2 (I00 psi) on AS-201 to 6.9 N/cm 2 (i0 psi) for AS-203 due to the by-pass system installed in the launch complex. Flight sphere pressure at T-10 see was 2,096 N/cm 2 (3,040 psi) and this declined steadily to 1,255 N/cm 2 (1,820 psi) at OECO. The final sphere pressure was within 34.5 N/cm 2 (50 psi) of the predicted value. At approximately 140 sec, a change in slope of the supply pressure curve was noted. This was caused by the pneumatic requirement of closing the prevalves. The regulated

73

Center LOX Tank Pressure (N/cm2 45,

Pressure (psi)

60

40 35 30

'I

_
_.

_
I

_I_--_

'_ :'_'__ -Z-----.._L

_-_ I

""-----'_ L--_-50 '" 40

25 -20 0 20 40 60 80 Range Time (sec) I00 120 140 160

GOX Flow Control Valve Position (%) I00

Actual Static Test (SA-31)

8O

/
I

60
40

/
160

I 1
0 -20 0 20 40 60 80 Range Time (sec) LOX PRESSURIZATION SYST_ I00 120 FIGURE 8-10 CHARACTERISTICS

J J

140

74

pressure during flight was 531 N/cm 2 (770 psi) at i0 sec prior to liftoff and increased to 534 N/cm 2 (775 psi) by 150 seconds. The regulated pressure remained well within 562 N/cm 2 (710 to 815 psi). 8.5 CAMERA EJECTION SYSTEM the required operating range of 490 to

The operation of the camera ejection system was satisfactory. Two movie camera capsules were incorporated on the S-IB stage to provide a permanent visual record of the S-IB/S-IVB separation, S-IVB ullage rocket operation,and J-2 engine ignition. The movie cameras were ejected from the S-IB stage 25 sec following the S-IB/S-IVB separation command. The predicted supply pressure drop at camera ejection was 86.2 to 172 N/c_ 2 L (125 to 250 psi). The actual pressure drop at ejection was 96.5 N/cm (140 _si) at approximately 170 seconds. The supply source was a 0.028 m 3 (i ft_) nitrogen storage sphere. Initial sphere pressure at liftoff was approximately 2,137 N/cm 2 (3,100 psi) and remained at this value until ejection.

75

9.0 9.1 SUMMARY

(U)

S-IVB

PROPULSION

AND

ASSOCIATED

SYSTEMS

The performance of the S-IVB stage propulsion system was nominal throughout flight. The only exception was the fuel recirculation shutoff valve pot closing as expected, prior to engine start command. On the basis of flight simulation, overall average S-IVB thrust was 0.37% higher than predicted; weight loss rate was 0.50% higher than predicted; and specific impulse was 0.12% lower than predicted. Maximum thrust fluctuation was + 4,448 at 433.35 sec, 2.90 sec _arlier The PU system operated in N (_ l,O00 Ib). than predicted. the open loop Engine cutoff occurred

configuration

and

provided

an average mixture ratio of 4.95 to 1 throughout flight. Propellant loading and utilization control was satisfactory. The statistically weighted average propellant load indicated a load within 0.2% LOX and -0.2Z LH 2 of desired. the propellant and auxiliary pressurization systems

was 9.2 9.2.1

Operation of satisfactory. S-IVB

PROPULSION CHILLDOWN

PERFORMANCE

ENGINE

During chilldown, the thrust chamber skin temperature decreased quickly and then leveled off at approximately 126K until liftoff, when chilldown was terminated. At S-IVB engine start command (144.89 sec), the temperature was 142K (upper portion of Figure 9-1), within the requirement of 144 + 50K. As sho_n in the lower portion of Figure 9-1, the thrust chamber tube temperatures and the lower engine manifold temperatures followed the same trend and were similar to the thrust chamber skin temperature. The chilldown and loading of the engine GH 2 start sphere were accomplished satisfactorily. Prior to liftoff,the warmup rate of the sphere was 0.67K/min after being pressurized. At engine start command, the temperature was 154K and the pressure was 901 N/cm 2 (1,307 psi); these values were well within the temperature and pressure requirements of 162 + 30K and 914 + 52 N/cm 2 (1,325 + 75 psi), respectively. GH 2 mass in t_e sphere at liTtoff was 1.58 kg _3.49 ibm). The mass diminished to 0.24 kg (0.54 Ibm) after start sphere blo_down; the total mass consumed was 1.34 kg (2.95 ibm). The warmup rate and mass consumption were satisfactory. The start sphere refill system demonstrated the capacity to recharge the start sphere to 758 N/em 2 (I,I00 psi) within i00 sec after engine start command (ESC). The mass in the sphere at engine cutoff command (ECC) was 2.04 kg (4.5l ibm).

76 O Tube _Tube DTube 504j 504, 234, Inlet Inlet Inlet 2 1 1

Engine Thrust Chamber Skin Temperature (*K) 200

_Fin AFin

Plane IV Plane.I

15C

10C

-1S0 En ine Return Temperature 20t

-100 Manifold *K)

-SO Range Time (see)

50

100

1S0

-150

-100

-St

0 Range Time (sec)

SO

100

SO

Thrust Chamber Tube Temperature (OK) 200

150

I0(]

......

S-IVB Engine Start Command t

O ....

-ISO

-I00

-50

0 Range Time (sec)

50

I00

FIGURE

9-I

ENGINE CrlILLDOh'N-TIIRUST CHAMBER AND HANIFOLD TEHPERATURES

77

The engine pneumatic control sphere conditioning was satisfactory. At S-IVB ESC, the sphere pressure was 2,299 N/cm 2 (3,335 psi), the temperature was 154K, and the mass was 0.98 kg (2.15 Ibm). The mass remaining after ECC was 0.85 kg (1.87 ibm); 0.13 kg (0.28 ibm) was consumed. The fuel chilldown shutoff valve failed to close prior to ESC. The

valve was the type employing a bellows assembly. The four deficiencies of this bellows assembly are: (i) tendency to take permanent set after cycling, (2) possible possibility of failure outer b_llows. distortion connected with such permanent set, (3) due to vibration, and (4) N 2 solidification on

Qualification tests have shown that the poppet guide of this valve is rendered permanently distorted, in some cases, after vibration tests. Out-of-roundness of the poppet guide can lead to metal-to-metal interference. This interference in turn leads to scuffing of the _alls of the bore which is guiding the poppet. Failure of the valve to close may be attributed to this interference, since the force due to interference resists the closing of the valve. It also has been noted, in a single case only, that an out-of-tolerance condition existed allo_ing only 0.0015 to 0.0018 cm (0.0006 to 0.0007 in) diametrical clearance at low temperature. The 0.0033 cm (0.0013 minimum in) at clearance cryogenic specified by temperature. the manufacturer is

and

The vibration failure results in leakage connected with such cracks. the size the valve of to

fatigue-cracking of the bellows A crack constituting a leakage in) the diameter inlet to helium should be the

approximately valve causes

the 0.102 cm (0.040 stay open. Loss of

noticeable in this type of failure mode. Failure of the LH 2 chilldown shutoff valve can be attributed to any of the 3 listed causes or any combination thereof. A new strengthened poppet guide and improved bellows are to be installed on AS-204. Another possibility for failure of nitrogen on actuator bellows solidifying. 9.2.2 START CHARACTERISTICS the valve to close is condensed

8-1VB ESC occurred at 144.89 sec, 0.83 sec earlier than predicted. The start thrust transient was faster than during the acceptance testing, as expected, and was primarily the result of the effect of altitude on LOX pump buildup. The start transient was more consistent with original specifications than S-IVB-201. Thrust buildup to the 90% level, as indicated by 426 N/cm 2 (618 psi) chamber pressure, was achieved 3.15 sec after ESC, as compared to 3.500 sec during stage acceptance testing and 3.810 sec predicted. Figure 9-2 sbows the thrust buildup and the upper portion of Figure 9-3 shows the engine chamber pressure during the start transient as compared to stage acceptance testing. No thrust overshoot occurred. The total start impulse to 90% thrust was 674,995 N-s (151,745 ibf-s), as compared to the predicted value of 840,714 N-s (189,000 ibf-s).

78

Thrust (I000 N)

Thrust (I000 lh)

9oo

I
LJ (

2o0

_----------S-IVBESC 144.89 sec

_oo

._.F--

18o

700

160

140

600 500 ......

/
3 (D

(9

120

4oo loo

300

(D

80
60

200

@El

40

i00

Actual

20 _)

Q o
.4 0.8

C)

Acceptan ze Data

,qmnO, _i
.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.1 3.2 3,6 4. Time From Engine FIGURE 9-2 Start Cormnand (sec) BUILDUP

S-IVB THRUST

79 --Actual <_ Engine Chamber Pressure (N/cm2) 600 ...... Accepta,ce Pressure (psi)

8O0

50O 7O0

/r
/ 300 e----S-IVB ESC [44.89 see 200 / ,-(_)

. oo
,500

/
2.5

4oo

300

I00

0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.O

Time From Engine Start Co_'qand (see)

Main Oxidizer Valve Position iO0

(%)

go

60 70 -/

,_-----4U

g_I VB ESC _-l_4 _8S sec /

so

//
0 0 0.5 1.0 t'l 5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 T_me From Engine S_srt Command _see) 4.0 , , 4,5 5,0

FIGURE 9-3

S-IVB START TRAN$1ENT-CHA_ER

pRESSURE AND MOV POSITION

80

The impulse difference was due to the faster start transient resulted primarily from the installation of a larger poppet the main oxidizer valve (MOV) actuation assembly.

time, which orifice in

The MOV position during the start transient is compared to stage acceptance testing data and is presented in the lower portion of Figure 9-3. To make a valid comparison, the stage acceptance firing values in both curves of Figures 9-2 and 9-3 were adjusted to account for the start time difference between stage acceptance testing and flight. The time between ESC and the start tank discharge valve signal wss 360 ms longer during flight. The actual, sequence*, and acceptance testing MOV plateau and travel times are listed in Table 9-I. The MOV opening time was faster than during acceptance testing. The MOV was reorificed after AS-201 to compensate for the environment expected to be encountered in flight. TABLE 9-1 MOV OPENING TIMES (ms) Acceptance 80 515 2135 runs, without the engine

Time First

Period Travel

Actual 80 435

Time Sequence* 50 + 415 1340 from + 20 95

Firing

Plateau Second *Sequence burning Travel

1975 determined

+ 40 test

times are propellant.

"cold"

The upper portion of Figure 9-4 shows encountered on AS-203 during powered flight, 9-4 shows the fuel turbine inlet temperature

the MOV environment that was The lower portion of Figure during the start transient.

The maximum inlet temperature (939K) encountered in flight was close to the maxim_ temperature encountered during engine acceptance testing, but was considerably higher than during stage acceptance testing. The fuel turbine inlet temperature from flight was determined by flight reconstruction. The inlet temperature derived from engine acceptance testing was acquired testing 9.2.3 by was using a acquired thermocouple by using a ANALYSIS S-IVB stage propulsion exception was the fuel system was nominal recirculation shutoff and that derived from flight instrumentation stage acceptance temperature bulb.

MAINSTAGE

ENGINE

The throughout

performance of the flight. The only

valve not closing as expected,prior to ERC. The probable cause for the fuel chilldown recirculstion valve failing to close is discussed in Section 9.2.1. The failure of the valve to close did not adversely affect the stage performance. The primary purpose of the valve is for ground test and safety purposes. On future flights with an open valve, problems might occur, only if the propellants depleted to a level near that where the recirculation line and propellant tank interface. Depletion to this level is not currently expected.

81 S-In CO

Temperature

250
_

(OK) ....___.._._MOV

___. Closing .... _ Engine ....... Control Line _ J"'_" Area Ambient I 1 Actuator Housing ---"

i '

I
" MOV Location Closing Cont Llne Temp

] Temperature
Eng Start At J-2 241,i

((K___ Eng CO At J-2 240.6

.... I _ \

200

I ___

MOV

iMOV -200 I_ 300 Range Time ,. _ 400 (sec)

Act remp

186.1 .222"2 600

175.6 1 216.7 700

150

g,_m
O lO0

Engine Area Amb 500

Fuel

'urbine Inlet

Temperature

(OK)

10o0_
I Flight

_Engine

Reconstruction

Acceptance

+o
700

/ /

_......

__

+oo
500

f"" "L/
|

<C/
'

_,;::+:)y ....

X_St _ ge

Act

ept

!
I

nee

' -----b300
/

fj
t , -Time 0.8 1.2 Time FIGURE 1.6 From Start

I
} i 4.0 -4.4

--

'

I
J _ 1 2,g Signal 3,2 (sec)

r _-------145._9 ange R 200 0.4

1
3.6

2,0 2,4 Tank Discharge Valve

9- & MOV

ENVlRO_ENT

AND FUEL TURBINE

INLET T;_4PERATI[RE

82

Two separate types of analysis were employed in reconstructing the S-IVB engine performance. The first method, engine analysis, used the telemetered engine and stage data to compute longitudinal thrust, specific impulse, and stage mass flo_rates. The second method, a five degree-offreedom trajectory simulation (flight simulation), utilized a differential correction procedure to generate multipliers that _ere enforced on the results of the engine analysis. This permitted the generation of a trajectory simulation which fitted the final observed trajectory closely. The S-IVB engine performance was reconstructed from engine start command to engine cutoff command. The results of two computer programs were averaged to produce the final engine performance results. Deviations-from-predicted of the reconstructed performance values are presented in Table 9-11. Reconstructed performance values were based upon analysis of telemetered engine parameters. The values of additional flight variables are presented in Table 9-111. Steady state performance of the J-2 engine was satisfactory. S-IVB steady state performance parameters are compared to predicted in Figure 9-5. The average mixture ratio during flight was 4.95 to 1 and varied from (4.88 to i) to (5.04 to i). The PU system was operated in the openloop mode with the PU valve in the null position during the entire flight. Thrust fluctuations were minimal. The maximum fluctuation was

approximately + 4,448 N (_ 1,000 variations in _ngine performance

Ibf) during S-IVB powered flight. These _ere directly attributable to cycling

of the LH 2 and LOX tank pressurization systems. Engine performance changes as a direct result of the pressurization flowrate changes and as an indirect effect of the variations in turbo-pump inlet conditions. A trajectory simulation program utilizing five degrees-of-freedom was employed to adjust the S-IVB propulsion system results generated by the engine analysis. The roll axis in the flight simulation program is not free, but is fixed by values derived from flight data. Using a differential correction method, this simulation program determined the adjustments to the engine analysis thrust and weight flow histories to yield a simulation trajectory which closely matches the observed trajectory. The cutoff weight was constrained to 26,722 kg (58,912 ibm) and the ignition weight to 88,710 kg (195,571 ibm). A thrust multiplier of 0.9964 and a weight flow multiplier of 0.9999 were enforced on the propulsion engine analysis results for the "best fit" trajectory. This simulated trajectory, when compared to the observed trajectory, resulted in the following average (root-sl_-squared) and maximum differences of those parameters util_ed in the hunting procedure (see Table 9-1V):

TABLE S-IVB PROPULSION

9-II SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

Units Parameters Longitudinal Vehicle Thrust Vehicle Mass Loss Rate Longitudinal Vehicle Specific Impulse N ibf kg/s ibm/s

Predicted I

Engine

Analysis I

% De_.

Fm. Pred 2

Flight

Simulation

% Dev.

Fm.

Pred 3

901,869 202,748 215.21 474.46

90B, 531 204,246 216.30 476._5

0.74

905,231 203,504 216.28 476.82

0.37

0.50

0.50

sec

42732

428.32

O.23
..... ,

426.79

-0.12

i. 2. 3.

From 90% thrust to J-2 engine cutoff signal. Engine analysis minus predicted in percent of predicted. Flight simulation minus predicted in percent of predicted.

%0

TABLE S-IVB MAINSTAGE

9-111 - FLIGHT VARIABLES

PERFORMANCE

Parameter* Total Pressure, Fuel Inlet

Units (N/cm 2) (psi) (OK) (kg/m 3) (Ibm/ft 3) Inlet (N/cm 2) (psi) (OK) (kg/m 3) (Ibm/ft 3)

Engine Acceptance 23.2 33.7 20.9 70.16 4.38 30.8 44.6 92.5 -1127.86 70.41 0 0 0.94 2.08 0.42 0.93

Vehicle Acceptance 19.9 28.9 20.9 70.16 4.38 27.7 40.2 91.1 1135.39 70.88 4.49 4.0 0.0 O.O 0.31 0.69

Flight 30.5 44.3 21.3 69.84 4.36 30.1 43.6 91.2 1134.75 70.84 3.36 3.00 0.0 0.0 0.86 1.90

Standard Altitude 20.7 30.0 20.6 70.48 4.40 26.9 39.0 91.4 1133.95 70.79 16.82 15.00 0.82 1.8 0.36 0.8

Temperature, Density,

Fuel Inlet

Fuel Inlet

Total

Pressure,

Oxidizer

Temperature,

Oxidizer

Inlet

Density, Oxidizer

Inlet

Oxidizer

Pump Auxiliary,

Brake KP

(metric HP) (P_) (kg/s) (Ibm/s) (kg/s) (ibm/s)

Heat

Exchanger

Oxidizer

Flowrate

Fuel Tapoff

Flowrate

*These are independent parameters affecting performance which may vary from test to test and during a test. These variables are standardized (standard altitude) and the performance is adjusted to normalize test results. Engine acceptance performance requirements are demonstrated and corrected to standard altitude conditions.

Total (kg/s 240

Flowrate

Average r_Thrust & Pc Program Olnfluemce Coefficient AFlow Meter program

--Actual .... Predicted Program Total Flowrate (Ibm/s)

85

500 220

200

450

400 180 Time Thrust I000 (i000 N) I0 1!_0 From Engine Start 2' Command 250 (see) Thrust (i000 ib) 220 .... 300 350

950

210

900

--il_r'.._ :____-

200

[
850 190 800 50 specific 435 Impulse i00 Time (sec) From 150 Engine Start 200 Command 250 (sec) 300 350 iBO

420

415 50 Engine 5.2 Mixture Ratio I00 Time From 150 Engine Start 20( Command 250 (sec) 300 350

I
[] Q _ O !

5.0

_,

4.6

50

l"
i00 FIGURE 9- 5

150 Start

200 Command

250 (sec)

300

350

1_----Range Time

Time From Engine 144.89 sec S-IVB

STEAM

STATE OPERATION

86

TABLE Parameter Slant Range Earth-Fixed Altitude Earth-Fixed

9-1V

FLIGHT

SIMULATION Average

PARAMETER

DIFFERENCES Maximum

10.24 m (33.6 Velocity

ft) fps)

16.1 m (53 ft) at 440 sec 0.23 m/s (0.749 fps) at 440 sec sec

0.093 m/s (0.304 32.0 m (105 ft)

139 m (456 ft) at 440 0.0051 deg at 220 sec

Azimuth

0.00237

deg

The flight simulation results of the average performance values from 90% thrust to J-2 engine cutoff are presented in Table 9-II. The maximum inaccuracies in the simulated propulsion parameters due to the observed trajectory and simulation uncertainties are estimated to be 0.2% for thrust and weight flow and 0.3% for specific impulse. An additional inaccuracy is added by the uncertainty in the ignition and cutoff weight. As a result the total inaccuracy in thrust, weight flow, and specific impulse is 0.3% in each case. The mass flowrate determined by flight simulation, combined with the vehicle mass at any point in time on the trajectory, allows an accurate determination of the vehicle mass history. The best estimate of vehicle mass at S-IVB engine start command and engine cutoff command as determined from engine PU, point level sensors, and trajectory simulation was 88,712 kg (195,573 ibm) and 26,723 kg (58,913 ibm), respectively. The flight simulation solution which came closest to yielding the best estimated weights indicated that the weights at S-IVB ESC and ECC were 88,701 kg (195,553 ibm) and 26,750 kg (58,975 Ibm), respectively. 9.2.4 CUTOFF CHARACTERISTICS

Figure 9-6 shows that the cutoff transient was smooth and close to that exhibited during acceptance testing. Five percent of steady-state thrust 50,042 N (11,250 ibf), was reached 0.774 sec after the initiation of guidance cutoff signal; and, after 1.629 see, there was no significant thrust. The cutoff impulse was determined from two sources, the propulsion parameters and the platform accelerometers. As determined from the propulsion parameters, the cutoff impulse was 230,458 N-s (51,809 Ibf-s); from the platform accelerometers, the cutoff impulse was 242,428 N-s (54,500 Ibf-s). This impulse covers the time period from receipt of the guidance cutoff signal by the S-IVB switch selector at 433.35 sec (ESC + 288.46 sec) to zero chamber pressure. The predicted cutoff impulse was 181,808 N-S (40,875 Ibfls). Based upon stage acceptance testing, the predicted cutoff impulse was 212,220 N-s (47,709 ibf-s). Both the

Engine Pressure

Chamber) (,'_/cm')

_ (_

Actual Acceptance

Data

Pressure (ps)

600 --T-43335 _----_ 500 S- IV_

I
sec CO

l I
!
1

800

;0(I

4U(J

,
4 I ;

. e 00

- 500

300 . a O0

200

300

. 2O0

loo
0 0,2 0.4 0.6 0.8 l.O Eutoff 1.2 Command l.a (_ec) 1,6 1.8 "lime Frc_:rEngine [hrus_ (tO00 1000 N) I q_------- S -IVB CO 433.35 see ( _" ' I

.:oo
2.1) Ti_ru_: (IuO0 Ibt 220

900

%
_

2:3,J

8o0

18 D luC_

4
700

. I-_C; 6OO (

. 12_! 500 lo0

600

3OO

200

_c}

tO0

21

20

0 0 0.2 0.4 Time 0.6 From Englne 0.8 Cutoff 1.0 Command 1.2 (see) 1.4 1.6

FIGURE

9- 6

S-IVB

THRUST

AND

CHJKMBER PRESSURE

CL'0FF TRANSIENT

88

acceptance

testing

and

the

actual

impulse

were

determined

from

propulsion

parameters derived from thrust calculations based on the chamber pressure data. There was no variation in the PU valve position at cutoff. The velocity increase resulting mined from guidance parameters, was increase was 7.69 m/s. 9.3 S-IVB PROPELLANT UTILIZATION operated in an open-loop mode, and propellants were st a 4.95 to i mass ratio. The PU valve remained throughout mass was flight, history 53,753 kg as is planned. presented in Table LOX and 9-V. 19,188 The kg load, indicated from the 9.04 m/s. cutoff impulse, The predicted as detervelocity

loaded in

The PU system and consumed null position

the

The predicted

S-IVB

propellant load

propellant

(118,504

ibm)

(42,302 ibm) LH 2. The statistically weighted average propellant resulting from total stage mass weighted averaging (Figure 9-7), a load within +0.2% L0X and -0.2% LH 2 of the desired.

tance

The PU system relationship

was calibrated established by

in accordance with the mass-to-capacithe engine influence coefficient com-

puter program, using acceptance testing data. Comparing the repeatability of the indicated PU flight masses, corrected from flight environment to acceptance firing conditions, resulted in repeatability factors of 99.89% LOX and 99.96% LH 2 of full load in each tank. These repeatability factors are approximate because the computer program used for flight is being updated constantly. The error of the PU system obtained from s comparison of the statistically weighted average masses shown in Table 9-V and the PU system masses corrected for non-linearities at ESC, yielded errors of 0.24% LOX and 0.20% LH 2. curves Nonthe actual

Figure 9-8 presents the LOX and LH 2 overall non-linearity derived from flight analysis and manufacturing specifications. linearities existed between the mass sensor specifications and mass sensor outputs because of changes relationship subsequent to the design non-linearities are in close agreement

in tank volume versus height of PU mass sensors. The flight _ith the manufacturing non-lineari-

ties, which are corrected to flight environment. Correction factors are included in the manufacturing non-linearity curves to counteract the sensor errors caused by center of gravity offset and the changing tank shape in flight. The changes acceleration, temperature, and in tank pressure shape are caused during flight. by changes in

TABLE S-IVB PROPELLANT

9-V MASS HISTORY

Event inits S-IVB ESC* kg Ibm kg ibm

Predicted LOX 53,753 118,504 2,364 5,211 LH 2 19,188 42,302 8,684 19,144 LOX 53,972 118,987 2,283 5,033

PU System % Dev

(i) LH 2 19,188 42,302 8,502 18,744 % Dev. LOX 53,910 118,851 2,411 5,315

Engine Flow Integral (2) % Dev. LH 2 19,181 42,286 8,668 19,109 % Dev. LOX 53,844 118,705 2,424 5,345

Statistically Average (3) % Dev.

Wtd.

LH 2 19,149 42,216 8,672 19,119

% Dev.

0.41

-0.29

-0.04

0.17

-0.20

Residual at S-IVB ECC*_(4

-3.44

-2,09

2.00

-0.18

2.57

-0.13

(I) (2) (3) (4)

PU system Composite Composite Weighted 8633 kg

indicated mass corrected for flight. of engine analysis programs of PU system, engine flow integral, reconstruction, average (19033 residuals Ibm) LH 2. include level sensor residuals

_3nd level kg

sensor ibm)

residuals LOX and

of 2368

(5221

Note: *These predicted and actual weights *'_ECC is Engine Cutoff Comm_and at S-IVB engine start command (ESC) are identical to those at liftoff.

90 Ignition 89. i Mass (i000 T" I I ! 89.0 I ,, AS-203Estimate: _+_ Best Ignition AS-203 Cutoff kg) _ Weight 88,712 r + 313 kg (195,573 Ignition -r + 689 ibm) Mass 1000 Ibm)

196.4

Weight

26,723 _+T14

kg (58,913 _+ 271 Ibm)

_ Sensors Level (ECC) _ / --PU System ,--.

196.2

i
88.9 ----_ _

196.0

1%___

---- PU System 88.8 I (ECC)

195,8

i 1

195.4

88.6

/ ipse: Integral Semi-Minor Axis: 70 kg 195.6

from Horizontal 88.5

-F ow
__

S+mi-Major Axis: 325

195.O Major Axis 73.595 deg 194.8 26.9 27.0

-Trajectory 88.4 26.4 [ 26.5 26,6 Cutoff 26.7 Mass ReconstructionI 26.8 (kg)

58_2 I

58.4 I

58.6 I Cutoff 9-7 AS-203

58.8 t Mass (ibm) IGNITION

59.0 I

59.2 I

591.4

FIGURE

AND CUTOFF

MASS

L_ 400

_o_-Linearity --

(kg) ' [ Calculated from

LOX Non-Linearit

(ibm)

800

300

_._-'----__._____

__

Manufacturing

Spec*

200

light

400

too

,_,

......

o
-i00 0 LH 2 Non-Linearit 60 I0 (ks) calculated from , 40 ...... i00 *Includes offset 20 LOX Mass 30 in Tank (i,000 kg) LH2 Non-Linearit (ibm) 40 50 60

-o

flight no_alized

200

..... _'__

_F1ight

50 nn[i_eari-o ties. errr

-20

i -50

-40

I0

12 LH2 Mass FIG_E 9-8

14 _n Tank _X (I,0OO AND

16 ks)

18

20

OVERALL

LH2 S_SOR

NON-LIN_RITIES

92

Engine

cutoff

command

occurred

at

433.35

sec,

2.90

sec

earlier

than predicted. The predicted propellant depletion time was 440.79 sec, based on acceptance testing and engine history data. The total propellant residuals at ECC (calculated by flow integral method) were 2,411 kg (5,315 ibm) LOX and 8,668 kg (19,109 ibm) LH 2 as compared to a predicted value of 2,364 kg (5,211 ibm) LOX and 8,684 kg (19,144 ibm) LH 2. uals at the end of thrust decay were 2,347 kg (5,175 ibm) LOX and (19,081 ibm) LH 2. 9.4 9.4.1 S-IVB FUEL PRESSL_IZATION PRESSURIZATION SYSTEMS SYST_I Resid8,655 kg

The fuel pressurization system performance was satisfactory throughout flight, and supplied LH 2 to the engine pump inlet within the specified operating limits. The NPSP at the engine LH 2 pump inlet was mainrained above the allowable minimum throughout the S-IVB powered flight. The minimum NPSP was 6.9 N/cm 2 (i0 psi) at S-IVB engine cutoff (433.35 sec), which was at least 2.96 N/cm 2 (4.3 psi) above the allowable minimum. Fuel tank pressurization system configuration and sequencing were

characterized by precautions taken to prevent a sharply decreasing ullage pressure profile following engine start as was noted during S-IVB-201 flight and S-IVB-203 acceptance testing. The sharp pressure decrease in the former case was caused by high amplitude LH 2 sloshing and consequent excessive ullage cooling. In the latter case, incoming GH 2 pressurant impingement on the LH 2 surface caused unusually high LH 2 boiloff and consequent ullage cooling. The pressurant impingement effect was avoided during bag diffuser. this flight The diffuser as the result expands the of the incoming installation pressurant of a nylon evenly into

the ullage. In the event that slosh amplitude was ullage pressure to provide adequate fuel pump NPSP porating an 80 sec period of step pressurization. was included in the automatic sequence immediately Pressurization conditions from prepressurization

high on S-IVB-203, was assured by incorThis 80 sec period after S-IVB ESC. through S-IVB

powered flight conformed closely to predictions. The LH 2 prepressurization command was received approximately 113 sec before liftoff. The LH 2 tank-pressurized signal was received 22 sec later when the LH 2 tank ullage pressure reached 25.3 N/cm 2 (36.7 psi). The upper portion of Figure 9-9 shows that the ullage pressure decreased slightly to 24.7 N/cm 2 (35.8 psi) at 0 sec, and then to a minimum of 23.9 N/cm 2 (34.7 psi) at I00 seconds. The LH 2 tank ullage temperature measurement indicated slight ullage cooling during this period. The ullage pressure increased slightly during the remainder of S-IB powered flight. The pressure lower portion of Figure 9-9 shows that the LH 2 tank ullage was 25.2 N/cm 2 (36.6 psi) at S-IVB engine start command

93 _Actual ----LH2 Tank 26 Ullage Pressure(N/cm 2)

Predicted (psi)

Pressure

22

32

28 18 .... 24

14 j I0 -120

20 16 -80 -40 Range 0 Time 40 (see) 80 120 160

LH 2 Tank Ullage 30

Pressure

(N/em 2)

Pressure

(psi)

28

-, "40

26

.42 "38
_ _6

24

___-

22

'
433 35 sec

-n

,00

150

200 Range

250 Time (see)

300

3S0

400

450

FIGURE

9- 9

Lil2 TANK PRESSURIZATION

SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

94

(144.89 sec). Between 144.89 sec and 224.89 sec, GH 2 bleed from the engine flowed into the LH 2 tank through the normal pressurization orifice, the control pressurization orifice, and the step pressurization orifice. On S-IVB-201, the control and step pressurization orifices were in the normally open configuration at S-IVB engine start command and were closed 2.8 sec later. During the S-IVB-203 flight, however, the automatic sequence was changed to extend the relay engagement duration from 2.8 sec to 80.0 seconds. The the fuel tank caused from 151.09 sec until S-IVB powered flight. were closed at 224.89 and reached _ minimum (433.35 sec). resulting 80 sec of step GH 2 pressurant flow into relieving of the tank at about 28.6 N/cm 2 (41.5 psi) 227.19 sec, thus assuring acceptable NPSP during When the control and step pressurization orifices sec, the ullage pressure began a normal decline of 20.6 N/cm 2 (29.9 psi) at S-IVB engine cutoff

The GH 2 pressurization flowrates were 0.77 to 0.82 kg/s (1.7 to 1.8 ibm/s) until 224.89 sec, and about 0.236 kg/s (0.52 ibm/z) for the remainder of S-IVB powered flight. These values were approximately equal to predicted and indicated that 110.3 kg (243 ibm) of GH 2 was added to the ullage between 144.89 sec and 433.35 seconds. Low LH 2 slosh amplitude throughout S-IVB powered by both television observation and by data from other It appears that the anti-slosh baffle installed is an adequate precaution against excessive LH 2 incoming pressurant flow immediately after S-IVB unnecessary during flight of S-IVB/V stages. On flight was indicated instrumentation.

for the LH 2 experiment slosh. A period of high ESC will apparently be S-IVB/IB missions

similar to the S-IVB-201 flight, minimum LH 2 pump NPSP requirements will not be endangered by slosh because of the smaller LH 2 load and larger 42.5 to 56.6 m3 (1,500 to 2,000 ft 3) ullage. Calculations based on the LH 2 tank ullage pressure and temperature conditions at the termination of LH 2 tank relief and S-IVB engine cutoff indicated a LH 2 boiloff of approximately 4 kg (9 ibm) during the last 205 sec of! S-IVB powered flight. This calculation involves a mass balance in the fuel tank ul_ge. From 151.09 sec until 224.19 sec, this balance included the amount of mass vented overboard during tank relief. Nonpropulsive vent exit instrumentation indicated that about 18.6 kg (41 ibm) were vented during th_ time, and about 1.32 kg (2.9 ibm) GH 2 condensation was calculated. However, the small absolute value of the result indicates negligible boiloff or condensation during the relief period. In view of the low slosh amplitude, the low boiloff is reasonable, as data from acceptance tests in which the nylon bag diffuser configuration was employed also indicated negligible boiloff.

95

Supply The

Conditions LH 2 NPSP was 9.3 N/cm 2 (13.5 psi) at S-IVB ESC (lower portion

of Figure 9-10). It increased with ing 16.3 N/cm 2 (23.7 psi) at 149.89 predicted range until engine cutoff, (I0 psi). The LH 2 pump flight; therefore, the the pump inlet pressure.

the LH 2 tank ullage pressure, reachseconds. It remained within the when it decreased to 6.9 N/cm 2 invalid during powered was used to determine

inlet pressure data was LH 2 tank ullage pressure

The LH2 system chilldown circulation system was adequate. Chilldown ceased 4.36 sec before S-IVB ESC when the engine LH 2 prevalve was commanded open. At S-IVB ESC the LH 2 pump inlet static pressure and temperature was 22.9 N/cm 2 (33.2 psi) and 21.3K, respectively, well within the engine start requirements (upper portion of Figure 9-11). The pump inlet temperature and static pressure indicated that the inlet conditions were satisfactory file was flight. 9.4.2 throughout satisfactory, the flight. increasing The less LH 2 pump than 0.5K inlet during temperature proS-IVB powered

LOX

PRESSURIZATION

SYSTEM

The oxidizer pressurization system performance was satisfactory throughout the flight, supplying LOX to the engine pump inlet within the specified operating limits. The NPSP at the engine pump inlet was maintained above the allowable minimum. The minimum NPSP _as 16.1 N/cm 2 (23.3 psi) and occurred at ESC; the NPSP was 17.4 N/cm 2 (25.3 psi) st engine cutoff command. Both values were well above the allowable minimum throughout S-IVB powered flight. The overall sys_m performance was close to predicted. Prepressurization and pressurization control were normal and within predicted limits. LOX tank prepressurization was initiated 263 see prior to liftoff and increased the IOX tank ullage pressure from 10.5 to 27.0 N/cm 2 (15.2 to 39.2 psi) within 68 sec (upper portion of Figure 9-12). Two makeup cycles were required to maintain the ullage pressure prior to liftoff. During S-IB boost, pressu_ant from the cold helium spheres was required three times to maintain the LOX ullage pressure. The control pressure switch maintained the pressure between 25.5 and 26.9 N/cm 2 (37.0 and 39.2 psi). The LOX tank ullage pressure was 26.7 N/cm 2 (38.7 psi) at S-IVB ESC.

During S-IVB powered flight (lower portion of Figure 9-12) the pressurization system cycled three times as it maintained the ullage pressure between 25.5 and 27.0 N/cm 2 (37.0 and 39.1 psi). The pressurization system cycled one more time than predicted; this occurred because the prediction was based upon acceptance data where the heat input to the LOX tank was much greater. The characteristic decrease of the ullage

96 *Since the LH 2 pump total inlet data was invalid, LH 2 ullage pressure _,as used to determine this pressure. LH 2 Pump Inl_t Temperature (OK) 23 --Actual -----Predicted

20 I00

150

200

2S0

300

3S0

400 Pressure

4S0 (psi) 45

*LH 2 Pump Total Inlet Pressure -(N/cm2) 32

Range Time (see)

30

28

"_
40

__S-lWEsc _426 iI
144.89 sec

S-lVB ECC _
433.35 sec

-4 I ,I

35

20 100 1SO 200 250 300 Range Time (sec) 350

"_'" _ 400

_. 4S(

30

LH 2 NPSP -(N/cm2) - " 20

Pressure (psi)

1S

__

--_
"_ -20

0 1O0 1SO 200 250 Range Time 300 {sec} 550 400 4S0

FIGURE 9-10

LH 2 PUMP CONDITIONS

LH2 _mp Inlet 26 Item I 2 3 24 4 S 7 6

Temperature

{K)

97

Time Fm E_ sec) -144 (Liftoff) 0 S I00 lSO 289 (Cutoff) 200 ///_/ /

20--J

_--Engine

Stare

Limits-_

18
i0

.
14 18

J
22 26 30 34 Lll2 Pump Inlet Static Pressure (N/cm2)

is

20

2's

_
Pressure (psi)

_s

_b

_s

sb

Note: Operating Range Pot Mixture Ratio of 5,0:I and Lower LOX Pump Inlet Temperature (K) i00 I 2 3 4 5 6 Item -144 (Liftoff) 0 20 95 180 Time 289 ESC (see) Fm {Cutoff) /

98

' / /_/

/ !

94

"

j
I
22

/
/

J
_ l

i' --I

'
90 88 16

J
/
18 20

/
S

'
t
,

Engine Start Limits

'

_
24 26 28 30 32 LOX Pump Inlet Static Pressure (N/cm2)

t
.34 36

2_

2_

3;

;2

;4

3;
Pressure

;8

4;

22

.;

_o

s?

(psi)

FIGURE 9- tl

PROPELLANT PUMPS INLET START REQUIR_(ENTS

98

LOX Tank 3O

Ullage

Pressure

(N/cm 2)

Pressure

(psi) 40

24

10

16

0 -300

Star I'Prepressurization | -225

'L
Ulla,

I -iS0 Range

-75 Time

0 (see)

75

150

LOX Tank 28

e Pressure

(N/cm2) I

Pressure

(psi)

__ 24 I

_""

_ factualict "vXk_" Pr e_d

ed

,,_

_-38 I 't

-40 -36

I
22 _^ S-IVB Start 1SO Engine Command 200 250 Range Time 300 (see)

s-IvB e.gine_t
Cutoff 350 Command I 400 45,

-34
-32

FIGURE

9- 12 i LOX TANK PRESSURIZATION r

SYSTE;,! PERFORMANCE

99

pressure below the switch setting, following engine start command, did not occur because the initial ullage volume was large, 32.565 m 3 (1,150 ft3), and the pressurant flow during S-IB boost had chilled the entire pressurization system by ESC. The ullage pressure decreased immediately after ECC, as the programmed GOX ullage thrusting was activated. The LOX tank pressurization flowratevariation was 0.18 to 0.20 kg/s (0.40 to 0.45 ibm/s) during the system overcontrol operation, and 0.14 to 0.18 kg (0.30 to 0.39 ibm) during the system undercontrol operation. This variation of the flowrate was caused by the decreasing temperature of the cold helium entering the module. The flowrate was 0.02 to 0.03 kg/s (0.05 to 0.07 Ibm) greater than the predicted value throughout the flight; this was the result of the pressurant being at a lower-than-expected temperature. During S-IVB powered flight, 50 kg (Ii0 Ibm) of helium was used. The cold helium mass at liftoff was 165 kg (364 ibm); this was higher than predicted because of the hi_her-than-predicted sphere pressure, 2,172 N/cm 2 instead of 2,068 N/cm _ (3,150 psi instead of 3,000 psi). The indicated cold helium sphere pressure of 2,310 N/cm2 (3,350 psi) is believed to be incorrect, based upon the ground support regulator setting and the other sphere pressures. The calculated collapse factor reached a maximum of 1.07 at 196.89 seconds. It then decreased to 1.03 during overcontrol operation, increased to 1.07 during undercontrol operation, and then gradually decreased to 1.05 at S-IVB engine cutoff. The J-2 heat exchanger outlet temperature increased to 467K during the first 50 sec of S-IVB powered flight. Throughout the remainder of the flight the temperature gradually increased, stabilizing only during overcontrol operation. A maximum temperature of 517K was reached during the last undercontrol operation prior to engine cutoff. Temperatures during the flight were llK to 25K higher than those experienced during acceptance testing. This difference was caused by the absence of convective heat transfer from the uninsulated part of the pressurization line, the gas generator exhaust line, and the associated hardware. The helium flowrate through the heat exchanger was 0.08 kg/s (0.17 ibm/s) during the system overcontrol operation. LOX Supply Conditions

The NPSP at the pump inlet was 16.1N/cm 2 (23.3 psi) at S-IVB ESC. The NPSP followed the ullage pressure and pump heat increase caused by acceleration, and was 17.4 N/cm (25.3 psi) at engine cutoff (lower portion of Figure 9-13). This was 7.6 N/cm 2 (ii.0 psi) above the NPSP required at engine cutoff. The predicted NPSP was higher than the actual because of a slightly lower-than-predicted pump inlet pressure and the higher-than-expected pump inlet temperature.

i00

LOX Pump Tem)erature 94

Inlet (*K)

--Actual ------Predicted

9C .00

150

200

250 Range

Time

300 (sec)

350

400

450

LOX Pump Total Inlet Pressure 34

(N/cm 2)

Pressure

{psi)

I
S-IVB ESC --144.89 sec I'"" / "---._ "

./__ 45 S-IVB ECC

3o
26 O0

,_
1SO

_._jz
250 Range Time

----_00 see) 350

433.35 s_c--_ ' I L I

450 (psi)

4o

200

400 Pressure

LOX NPSP (N/cm2) 24

-30 20

-25 16 100 .50 200 250 Range 9- 13 O0 sec) 350 z :)0 ,50

Time

FIGURE

LOX PUMP CONDITIONS

I01

The LOX chilldown system operation was satisfactory. The chilldown w_s terminated by commanding the LOX prevalve to open st 140.53 seconds. At the time of ESC the LOX pump inlet static pressure was 28.3 N/cm 2 (41.1 psi) and the temperature was 91.3K, both within the engine start requirements (lower portion of Figure 9-11). At engine cutoff the LOX pump inlet total pressure was 30.1 N/cm 2 (43.7 psi), slightly lower than expected (middle portion of Figure 9-13). The LOX pump inlet temperature was 91.3K at S-IVB ESC (upper portion of Figure 9-13). It agreed well _ith the predicted values until 55 sec before cutoff when it started to increase at a more rapid rate. This increase apparently was caused by a warmer layer of LOX that folmed on the surface because of the large surface area which was exposed to the ullage during the countdown. The same occurrence was noted during the S-IVB-203 stage acceptance test. The temperature rise caused by the layer was less severe during flight than it was during acceptance testing. The primary effect was a slight loss of NPSP, which had no noticeable effect on the engine operation. The pump inlet temperature and static pressure indicate that the inlet conditions were satisfactory throughout the flight as shown in the lower portion of Figure 9-11. 9.4.3 AUXILIARY PRESSURIZATION SYSTEMS

The pneumatic control and purge system performed satisfactorily throughout the flight. The helium supply to the system was adequate for both pneumatic valve control and purging. The regulated pressure was maintained within acceptable limits, and all components functioned normally. The stage pneumatic control helium sphere temperature, pressure, and mass history are presented in the middle portion of Figure 9-14. At liftoff, the control helium sphere pressure was approximately 2,148 N/cm 2 (3,115 psi). It decreased to 2,127 N/cm 2 (3,085 psi) at ESC. During S-IVB powered flight, the pressure dropped continuously until it reached 2,126 N/em 2 (3,083 psi) at engine cutoff. As expected, the amount of helium used was low. Sphere temperature was 273K at liftoff, and decreased to 272K at engine start command. By engine cutoff, the sphere temperature was 271K. The pneumatic helium sphere _as loaded at liftoff with 4.36 k_ (9.62 ibm) of helium; the mass in the sphere at ESC was 4.33 kg (9.54 ibm), and 4.30 kg (9.49 Ibm) of helium remained at engine cutoff (lower portion of Figure 9-14).

102

Control 350

lielium

Sphere

Temperature

(OK) 1

300
__ ,A

2S0 -200

- 100

100 Range Time (N/era 2)

200 (sec)

300

400

500

Control 2200

Ilelium

Sphere

Pressure

Pressure

(psi) 3200

2100 2000 -200

__W_

___

3100 3000 2900

-100

100 Range (kg)

Time

200 (sec)

30_

4Oq

500

Control 5

Itelium Sphere Mass

_lass _ibm) Ii 9

-7 3 -20( -.00 100 Range FIGURE 9-14 Time 200 (sec) PERFORb_NCE 300 400 50t

PNEUmaTIC CONTROL AND PURGE SYST_I

103

out

All engine and pneumatic the countdown and flight.

control valves The pneumatic

responded properly throughcontrol helium regulator

operated satisfactorily, and 369 to 372 N/cm 2 (535 to 540

generally maintained an output pressure of psi). During the period of high pneumatic command, the control pressure dropped Such drops have occurred during flight, drops flight, are all and were expected. Since the acceptable. purge functions were satisfac-

system use at S-IVB e_gine cutoff to as low as 283 N/cm (410 psi). acceptance pressure testing recovers the and S-IVB-201 the and rapdily, countdown

During "

torily accomplished. The LOX chilldown motor-container maintained at 35 to 36 N/cm 2 (51 to 52 psi), which was value of 34.0 to 37.2 N/cm 2 (49 to 54 psi).

pressure was within the design

104

I0.0 i0.i SUMMARY

(U)

S-IVB

AUXILIARY

PROPULSION

SYSTEM

(APS)

Approximately 1.0 sec after the APS was activated to provide

cutoff of the S-IB outboard engines, roll control during J-2 powered flight. was activated to this time, the two induced by venting

Following J-2 cutoff, APS pitch and yaw control maintain the vehicle in the desired attitude. After APS modules functioned to compensate for disturbances from the S-IVB stage. Each motor in the two APS modules performed as

expected.

The

APS

functioned properly and attitude control

to provide roll during orbital

control flight.

during S-IVB Approximately

powered i% of

flight the

available propellants was required for control during flight. Maximum usage for the total flight, including 55.3% of the fuel in module i. 10.2 10.2.1 APS PERFORMANCE AND shows PRESSURIZATION the mass SYSTEMS and percent

S-IVB powered orbital, was

PROPELLANT Table lO-I

remaining

of

total

APS

pro-

pellant powered Figure during Because

masses consumed during the major phases of both orbital and flight, together with the corresponding mass temperatures. i0-I shows the quantities of propellant remaining in each module powered and orbital flight and also the APS layout and nomenclature. of noise on the PAM data and the small quantities of propellant the values are approximate.

consumed,

APS helium pressurization systems functioned satisfactorily throughout the flight. Prior to APS activation, the module i helium sphere had a pressure of 2189 N/cm 2 (3175 psi) at a temperature of 307K. At 435 sec,the module i pressure _as 2186 N/cm 2 (3170 psi) and the temperature was 306K. Prior to APS activation, the module 2 helium sphere had a pressure 2 pressure was The module of 2186 N/cm2(3170 psi) at 302K. At 435 2182 N/cm 2 (3165 psi) and the temperature 1 regulator outlet pressure varied from sec, the module was 301K. 144 to 145 N/cm 2

(209 to 211 psi_. The module 2 regulator outlet pressure 143 to 145 N/cm L (208 to 211 psi_. These variations were desired range of 143 to 147 N/cm L (208 to 214 psi). No difficulties were encountered on either module

varied within

from the

during

flight. was module The

However, the signal from motor Ip chamber pressure transducer lost prior to liftoff. The overall motor mixture ratio (_R) of i was 1.62, which is the nominal value for minimum pulse widths. overall _R of module 2 was 1.49, which is lower than expected.

TABLE

i0-I

APS PROPELLANT

CONSUMPTION

Oxidizer Time Module Temp (OK) Mass (kg) (Ibm) % Mass Used Temp (OK)

Fuel Mass (kg) (lbm) % Mass Used

Prior to Activation

306

17.79 39.23 17.57 38.73 17.55 38.69 17.29 38.12 13.60 30.0 15.55 34.3 11.65 25.7 14.96 33.0 9.97 22.0 13.33 29.4 8.24 18.2 12.61 27.8 1.3

305

i0.82 23.85 i0.87 23.97 i0.70 23,60 I0.76 23.73 8.30 18.8 9.61 21.2 7.03 15.5 9.07 20.0 5.44 12.0 7.98 17.6 4.85 10.7 7.48 16.5 i. 1

301

300

i $-IVB Cutoff sec) 2 (at 433.35

308

305

304

i. 6

300

i.I

I ist Orbit (5,739 sec end of orbit) 2

306

23.5

305

23.6

302

11.4

300

10.2

i 2nd Orbit (11,033 sec end of orbit) 2

302 .... 298

34.4

304

35.3

14.7

299

16.1

i 3rd Orbit (16,327 sec end of orbit) 2

298

43.9

303

49.9

294

2&.O

298

26.2

1 4th Orbit (21,621 sec end of orbit) 2

295

53.6

301

55.3

293

28.2

297

30.8

_" 0 u.

106 III Module IIIp 2

II

IV

III_IIv Ip Nodule I Propellant 2O Remaining (kg) i Propellant Remaining (ibm)

18 _st Orbit

I
1 2nd Orbit

I
3rd Orbit

I
4th Orbit

- 4o

16 ""_""--J
14

b-Hodule

'

2 Oxidizer

-3s
.30

I 8
6

1 ModuleI,_ 2 Fuel '

I -I I _Is I ___ I i-l -lO

I I I
I

-"_

I I I I I

4
0 2 4

I I
6 8 10 Range I 0 I 1 I 2 Range FIGURE i0-i APS

_Nodule 1 Fuel _L I _"", J_ I_ I

12 14 (lO00 I 4 (hr) AND FUEL CONSUMPTION 16 sec) I 5 18 20

22

24

Time I 3 Time

I 6

OXIDIZER

107

10.2.2

APS

MOTOR

PERFORMANCE

APS motor performance was satisfactory throughout flight. Individual motor performance agreed well with the manufacturer's test data obtained from simulated flight conditions. The total impulse required throughout the flight was less than predicted. However, it is evident from the coincidence of APS pulse sequences and flight events that the modules were functioning as required to perform the attitude corrections desired. All pulses during powered flight were of minimum duration. The total impulse provided by the APS during S-IVB powered flight 2.

was 578 N-s (130 ibis) Module 1 total impulse pulse was used on motor

for module 1 and is approximate, Ip.

605 N-s (1361bf_) since an assumed

for module impulse per

Since the minimum impulse bit duration of the APS motors is 0.065 sec, data used in the evaluation of motor performance must be recorded continuously. The only APS motor data, from the AS-203 flight, meeting this requirement were the motor chamber pressures. Therefore, the total impulse was calculated. Figure 10-2 shows the _ccumulative total impulse of each module as a function of mission time. The larger impulse demands of module control a periods. i are due to the repeated tendency of the vehicle's firings nose to of motor Ip, required rise during continuous to vent

The APS module 1 and module 2 total impulse for various throughout the flight is presented in Table 12-II (APS Event in Section 12.0).

events Summary

108

Total 35

Impulse

(I000

N-s)

Total

Impulse

(I000

ib-s)

_0
25 /N_odule I---

_/

0
5

20 4

15

'"

i0
J

Modu_

0 0

..f-2500

.._--

0 5000 7500 10000 Range FIGURE 10-2 t2500 Time APS 15000 (sec) TOTAL IMPULSE 17500 20000 22500

109

11.0 ii.i SUMMARY Performance of the

(U)

HYDRAULIC

SYSTEMS

S-IB-3

hydraulic on each

system engine

was during

satisfactory. flight

The

system's pressure _nd oil levels within their _cceptable limits. S-IVB hydraulic system

performed

performance

was

within

predicted the

limits flight,

and the entire system operated including simulated restart. 11.2 S-IB HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS

satisfactorily

throughout

The system pressure levels _ere satisfactory during the flight and were similar to those of the S-IB-I flight. At 0 sec, the system pressures ranged from 2237 to 2285 N/cm 2 gauge (3245 to 3315 psig). The pressure 8ecreased about 27.58 N/cm 2 (40 psi) on each engine during the flight (Figure is due to the main Reservoir oil ii-I, upper portion). This normal pressure pump temperature increase during flight. levels _ere also similar to those of the decrease

S-IB-I

flight. There was an approximate 3% rise in each level from 0 to 142 sac (Figure ll-l,center portion), which indicates a temperature r_se of nearly llK in each hydraulic system average oil temperature. This rise in average oil temperature is not reflected in the measured reservoir oil temperatures. The reservoir oil temperatures were satisfactory during flight. Liftoff temperatures for S-IB-3 averaged 326K as compared to an average of 314K for the four S-IB-I hydraulic systems. The average temperature decrease during the flight was 8.9K for S-IB-3, compared to an average of 7.8K for the four S-IB-I hydraulic systems. The reservoir oil temperature increase phenomenon, seen at 65 to

75 sac of flight lower portion). S-I stages.

on the S-IB-I, This phenomenon

did not occur on S-IB-3 (Figure ll-l, was not noted on any of the Block II

11.3

S-IVB

HYDRAULIC system

SYSTEMS fluid pressure, simulated level, restart and temperature presented at iiftoff,

Hydraulic S-IVB ii-I. start,

S~IVB

cutoff,and

are

in Table

ii0

Pressure 2400

(N/cm 2 gauge)

Pressure

(psig) 3400

3000 2000 0 20 40 60 80 Range Time I00 (sec) 120 140 160

Reservoir Oil Level (%) 60

_!',_';':'.

::171"_:'_]

..:,11:;:.,.

'_..#: !1_.!_::_,1"_:

"ii";

({","_i,

_''

:_'"l:;'_'::';"\':'}_i'=i:_;:-'!

40

20 0 20 40 60 Range Reservoir Temperature 330 Oil (OK) 80 Time i00 (sec) 120 140 160

325

.?:_'w_?:$.';_.:e,.v

320

" ";:_-"_ '?"; '_:

t_': _: ':"_ ' !:'_;:'_" ii.i :'_ 310 0 20 40 60 8_ Range Time i00 (sec) LEVEL,AND T_'_WERATURES (S-IB STAGE) 120 140 160

FIGURE

Ii-I

HYDRAULIC

OIL PRESSURE,

111

TABLE HYDRAULIC

ii-I PARAMETERS

SYSTEM

Fli_ht Hydraulic System Fluid Liftoff Auxiliary Pump Press. (N/cm 2) (psi) Press. (N/cm 2) (psi) 2487 3605 (OK) 296 288 274 278 27 2465 3575 2465 3575 2545 3690 296 290 276 278 27 Start

Period Cutoff Simulated Restart 2475 3590 2480 3595 2517/1552" 3650/2250* 316 301 281 283 31/90" 1552/2483" 2250/3600* 342 295 278 279 89/45*

Engine

Driven

Pump

Outlet

Accumulator

GN 2 Press.

(N/cm 2) (psi) Temp.

Engine

Driven

Pump

Inlet

Reservoir Yaw

Temp.

(OK) (OK) (OK)

Actuator Actuator

Temp. Temp. (%)

Pitch

Reservoir

Level

*Dual

numbers

show

stable

values

at the

beginning

and

end

of

the event.

112

Continuous to S-IVB cutoff, presented S-IVB

fluid level snd system 11-2. system

and tempersture values from before liftoff temperstures during the orbital period are

in Figure hydraulic

temperature for venting during the

wss

not

great

enough thermal

to

cause

fluid expansion sufficient of the system was required

to occur. No orbital period.

conditioning

Engine Driven _mp Inlet and Reservoir Fluid Temperatures

(*K)

Reservoir Fluid Level (%)

[ ]

I l

0 _

Engine Pitch

Driven Actuator

Pump Inlet Fluid

30

.....

330

_ I [ _ /_

0 IStart -200 Hydraulic System Temperature During Orbital Peri_ ('K)

Com_and_ I O 200 Range Time (see)

400

600

I I
230

L I
I
400 600

325

I!"
-200 O 200 Range Time (sec) and Yaw Act_tor Temperatures (K) Pitch Fluid Minimum_ __]__ _

300

1 m 400

_e_al

Switch

%erati_nkLevel

--

I S-IVB Engine_ -200 D 200 Range Time (see) FIGURE

600

SO00 R_ge

I0,000 Time (sec)

IS,

20,000

ll-2

S-IVB I{YD_ULIC FLUID TEHPE_RE

AND LEVEL

114

C_"

Ir _--'_ _T:ALi:

12.0 12.1 SUMMARY

_GUIDANCE

AND

CONTROL

In general, the performance of the guidance and control system was satisfactory. The performance of the computer flight program was nominal. The boost navigation and guidance schemes were executed properly and terminal conditions were within expected tolerances. All orbital guidance operations were as expected. The control system functioned properly. The maximum values for the parameters of attitude error and angle-of-attack that were observed near the maximum dynamic region, were attitude errors of I.i deg in pitch, -0.9 deg in yaw,and 0.6 deg in roll; and angle-of-attack of -1.3 deg in pitch and 1.3 deg in yaw. The most significant deviations from predicted control transients occurred during S-IB/S-IVB separation and guidance initiation. The actual transients, though larger than predicted,were within maximum control capabilities of the control system and were well damped. The APS performed satisfactorily in maintaining the required pitch, yaw, and roll attitudes during orbital flight. 12.2 12.2.1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION FOR SATURN IB AS-203

CHANGES

The Guidance and Control (G&C) system for the AS-203 vehicle was identical to that flown on AS-201. However, a Digital Command System (DCS) was added in the Instrument Unit (IU) and several design changes were implemented at the component level to improve subsystem operation. The most significant of these changes were: (i) the memory capacity of the Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC) was increased, (2) logic improvements were made in the LVDC and the Launch Vehicle Data Adapter (LVDA), (3) the middle gimbal of the ST-124M3 Stabilized Platform System (SPS) was modified to reduce weight, (4) the wiring on the ST-124M3 SPS was changed from silver-plated teflon-coated copper to nickel-plated teflon-coated copper, (5) a spatial synchronizer module was added to the Flight Control Computer (FCC), (6) capacitors were added to the FCC spatial amplifiers and to the FCC filter modules, (7) a dual rate switch and power line filters were added to the Control Signal Processor (CSP), and (8) the CSP Emergency Detection System (EDS) rate switch function was modified to attenuate input frequencies above 16 Hz by the addition of filter circuits. Noisy measurements and noisy EDS rate gyro signals encountered on AS-201 were corrected for AS-203 by the filtering of signals in the measuring amplifiers and the input signals to the EDS excessive rate switches. Loss of orbital navigational accuracy on AS-201 was corrected for AS-203 by revised scaling of the orbital navigation program. The

u _ m

nuraP'h|

I[dr_lkUmm

115

reasonableness to correct for tered on AS-201.

test constants were the Z accelerometer

changed from reasonablenes_

I m/s 2 to + 5 m/s 2 test failures encoun-

The spatial synchronizer module was added to the FCC to provide synchronous operation of the roll-yaw spatial amplifiers, resulting in balanced utilization of the Auxiliary Propulsion System (APS) fuel for roll maneuvers. The dual rate switch was added to the CSP, to provide the capability of switching from one abort limit by the Crew Safety Panel; however, an additional included for AS-203, is required to achieve this 12.2.2 FUNCTION AND HARDWARE DESCRIPTION navigation, guidance_and control system to another, as timer, which capability. requested was not

is

A block diagram of the shown in Figure 12-1.

The stabilized platform (ST-124M3) is a three gimbal configuration with gas bearing gyros and accelerometers mounted on the stable element to provide a space-fixed coordinate reference frame for attitude control and for navigation measurements. Vehicle accelerations and rotations are sensed relative to this stable element. Gimbal angles are measured by redundant resolvers, and inertial velocity is obtained from accelerometer head rotation in the form of encoder outputs (also redundant). The LVDA is an input-output device for the LVDC. These two components are digital devices which operate in conjunction to carry out the flight program. This program performs the following functions: (i) processes the inputs from the ST-124M3, (2) performs navigation calculations, (3) provides first stage tilt program, (4) calculates IGM steering commands, (5) resolves gimbal angles and steering commands into the vehicle system for attitude error commands, (6) issues cutoff and sequencing signals.

The Control/EDS rate gyro package contains 9 gyros (triple redundant in 3 axes). Their outputs go to the CSP, where they are voted and sent to the control computer for damping angular motion. These outputs are also processed in the CSP for use as an abort parameter. The switch selectors are used to relay discrete commands from the LVDC to other locations in the vehicle. The cutoff signal and time based events are issued through the switch selectors. The Digital Command System (DCS)_installed in the IU,is a phaseshift-keyed, frequency modulated (PSK/FM) system. The LVDC is programmed to receive two types of command from the Command Decoder: Mode Commands and Data Corm_ands. Mode Commands are decoded to determine the routine or sub-routine to be executed by the LVDC. Data commands are used to

116

Located

on

top

of

Nose

Cone

.'st EDS D_ _ Tc IE

" ; rlb_tor

.NOSE CONE

INSTRUMENT

ENIT

IU Cf_ND

SYSTEm4

TT
t Divlde_ P_er

] 1t+....
_+;S i_
/ Signals, etc. Platform Gyros y R 3 Aecel, Accel. Signal Conditioner Range Active 30 to + [0 m/s 2

Co0p,or
Da

Vl

Discrete

,, + 15 deg

--Control Steering + _ P,Y,R

and Signals

from 110 see _

Control AeceI. Pitch Control yaw Accel

> P Control Computer + I----------_ (Filters, I

_
_ P

I s_+t......
and dist. inptJt

t
to IE Systems

Rate

Gyro

Range + L0 deg/s Active_Prior Eo

Cont rol/EDS

G+eM2
to EDS to EDS

I1
I [ _

'
I I

S-IV :_B _T_G_ Liftoff

To

Auxiliary (APS) on-off

System Provides during flLght and

Propu lsion roll control S-IVB and powered yat,, coast To pitch and yaw corottel actuators pitch,

] Actuator Command Signals _ Discrete _ (,;.l) D e + ? deg To Signsls L s-Ig_B Systems

roll

during

S-IB

STAGE To Control Actuators [or engines 1,2,3 & A"_-8 des 6 des Inboard swivel angle can angle engines angle Electr_cal # F Discrete to S-IB Signals Systems Feedback A i

----

3 de s can_

FIGL_

12-|

GUIDANCE

AND

CONTROL

$YSTE24 BLOCK

DIAGRAM

117

satisfy the data requirements of the commanded routine. The principal functions of the DCS are: to initiate alternate LH 2 experiment sequences, to update the time sequence, to command single switch selector functions, to control the TV systems, and to initiate other system functions on a test basis (navigation update, systems checkout). 12.2.3 GUIDANCE AND NAVIGATION SCHEME DESCRIPTION by programs stored

Guidance during S-IB powered flight was provided in the LVDC and may be broken into three segments: i. 2. 3. Guidance Reference Release (GRR)

to I0 sec after

liftoff

(LO + i0).

LO + i0 to LO + 138 L0 + 138 to IGM initiation

During segment i, all steering commands were zero except in roll. The roll steering command was set to -18 deg to inhibit the removal of the initial -18 deg roll attitude. In segment 2, the yaw command remained zero, roll was set to zero (rate limiting prevents the command from exceeding 1 deg/s), and the pitch command was computed from one of three third degree time polynomials. Each of these polynomials is a least square curve fit. During the third segment, the steering commands were arrested.

The S-IVB stage was guided by a modification three-dimensional form of the Iterative Guidance

of the multistage Mode (IGM). IGM is an

optimal scheme based on the optimum steering function derived from the Calculus of Variations. This approximate thrust vector steering function was implemented in both pitch and yaw planes of motion. The IGM segment was started in AS-203 approximately 13.6 sec after S-IVB ignition, or 3.1 sec after the jettison of the ullage cases. No engine mixture ratio change was employed on AS-203, hence only one thrust level was required for IGM. The sensitivity of the scheme to F/M changes increases as the terminal conditions are approached, requiring the use of a terminal scheme utilizing only the velocity constraint terms. This mode is the chi tilde steering mode. During this mode, the altitude constraint terms in pitch are set to zero and the yaw terms are frozen at their last values.

118

A test was used for the second time on AS-203, to determine the reasonableness of sensed velocity changes in order to prevent platform accelerometer failures from having an adverse affect on the vehicle flight. To accomplish this, the sensed values were compared to a band of values inserted into the computer. Accelerometer failures would be characterized by either zero or extremely high values. The band of values, computed to be reasonable for the particular flight conditions, were inserted into the computer so that accelerometer input signals that were within the band would be accepted and signals outside the band would be rejected as accelerometer failures. The orbital guidance routine controlled the computations of the commanded platform gimbal angles. This routine was initiated at 5 sec after the beginning of time base 4 (S-IVB cutoff interrupt). The longitudinal axis of the S-IVB/IU was commanded to be aligned with the local horizontal. The guidance routine was entered at one second intervals on exit from the minor loop. Ground command processing was accomplished via the Command Receiver interrupt with the Digital Command System (DCS) routine. The DCS routine processed all ground commands, provided data and mode verification, and supplied the necessary information to the various affected routines. 12.3 12.3.1 LAUNCH VEHICLE FLIGHT CONTROL ANALYSIS

S-IB STAGE CONTROL

The performance of the control system was satisfactory in the pitch, yaw, and roll planes. Attitude errors, attitude rates and average actuator positions are shown in Figures 12-2, 12-3, and 12_4, respectively. The maximum control parameter values observed (near the maximum dynamic pressure region) for the S-IB stage powered flight are presented in Table 12-1. The table also includes the maximum roll plane parameter values during the roll maneuver. The maximum vector sum values of total average actuator deflection, angle-of-attack,and dynamic pressure angleof-attack product were: 2.7 deg at 73.9 sec, 1.6 deg at 73.7 sec, and 6.61 deg-N/cm 2 at 73.7 sec_respectively. These maximum values were significantly below design criteria. In the pitch plane, the magnitudes of the control parameters were nominal throughout S-IB stage powered flight. The pitch program (Xz) began at 12.2 sec and was arrested at 133.9 sec at an angle of 69.1 deg from the launch vertical (see Figure 12-5). This tilt program was not biased for July winds. A comparison of the (T = 0) wind and angle-of-attack wind (calculated from Q-ball angle-of-attack, attitude angle, trajectory angle, and spacefixed velocity) is shown in Figure 12-6. The winds are Jimsphere/FPS-16

119 --Telemetry ------Flight Simulation Arrest Pitch Attitude (+ Nose Up) Error (deg) Pitch _ I Program IECO )ECO

_----gegin

Pitch

Program

Accelerometer -20 20 40 60 Range Yaw Attitude Error (+ Nose Right) I (deg)

Control 80 Time

Active--_ i00 (sec) 120

i 140 160

0 -,_.r/>_-

- _ _%_"_-

---

-2 _---3 -4 0 20 40 60 Range Roll Attitude Error (deg) (+CW Viewed from Rear 80 Time (sec) I00 120 140 160 Accelerometer Control Active--_

0_v_ ' I

v_._

-2 0 20

i
40 60 Range FIGURE 12-2 ATTITUDE 80 Time ERROR (sec) S-IB POWERED FLIGHT I00 120

I
140 160

120 Telemetry Flight Simulation Arrest Pitch Angular Rate (deg/s) (IU Control Rate Gyro) Pitch Program _" IECO . ! OECO |

o.5

,
Pitch Program

_ .; ;

_-Begin

-1.O -1.5 0 Yaw Angular (IU Control

I 20 Rate Rate 40 (deg/s) Gyro) 60 Range

i 80 Time I00 (sec) 120 140 160

o._

ii I

!I
160

o _,_._,..,._,. ,_ _ i' i'_/'"_" .....__ __,_.,._,_ _._ t_ "_"'"_'_"_-_I!

-l.O

I
0 20 40 60 Range 80 Time (sec) I00 120

140

i! il
| I" 'tl I_

Roll Angular Rate (deg/s) (IU Control Rate Gyro) 2 i I I _ Roll Maneuver

_.
-1

I_, _

_._

0 20 40 FIGURE

' V _"l_ V , r
60 Range 12-3 ANGULAR 80 Time RATE GYROS S-IB

'""" ..... _';"

I'00 (sec) POWERED 120 140 160 FLIGHT

--Telemetry .... Flight Simulation ........Reconstructed Arrest Pitch Program IECO | OECO ,, R

121

Average Pitch Actuator (+ teer Nose Down) 2

Position

(deg)

J
Program

_ u" ,l
: |I
i"

._--- Begin
u

Pitch

_lL
0

i 20

II 'b

,
40

i _

"
80 Time (sec) 100 120

li
140 160

60 f Range

Average yaw Actuator (+ ;teer Nose Left)

Position

(deg)

1.5

II

-1.5
-3.0 0 Avera 20 40

_
60 80 Range Time (sec) (deg) I00 120

ii i
140 160

;e Roll Actuator Position + CCW Viewed from Rear)

0.50
_---_

_--

Roll Maneuver

0.25

: I -.. I I I

o i__7.._ -o.25
-0.50 0 20 40 60 Range FIGURE 12-4 80 100 Time (sec) ACTUATOR 120

140

160

S-IB AVERAGE

POSITIONS

TABLE MAXIMUM (Near the maximum dynamic

12-I PARAMETERS region and during Roll Maneuver)

CONTROL pressure

Pitch Parameters Units Magnitude Attitude Error (deg) 1.06

Plane Time 73.7 (sec) Magnitude -0.90

Yaw

Plane Range Time 72.2 (sec)

Range

Angle-of-Attack (free stream) Angular Normal Actuator Rate Acceleration Position

(deg) (deg/s) (m/s 2) (deg)

1.32 -1.27 0.36 2.10

73.8 61.7 73.8 73.9

1.30 -0.86 O.41 2.62

69.7 71.3 68.6 69.9

Angle-of-Attack Dynamic Pressure Product

(deg-N/cm 2)

5.22

73.8 Roll Plane

5.32

69.7

During Magnitude Attitude Angular Engine Error Rate Deflection Roll (deg) (deg/s) (deg) -1.22 1.34 -0.16

Roll Maneuver Range Time 14.1 14.9 13.2 (sec)

After Magnitude 0.65 0.41 0.21

Roll

Maneuver Time 54.5 69.1 54.1 (sec)

Range

123

Roll Program and Roll Attitude (deg) (Space-Fixed) (+ CW Viewed From Rear) -20

-15 -i0 -5

_-18o0 Xy

Pr o

Roll

deg ST-124M Platform Roll Attitude

0
5

i
i0

i
20 Range Time

...... _ ......1
30 (sec) 40 50 Arrest Program Pitch (133.9 sec)

Pitch Program (Space-Fixed) 70

and Pitch Attitude (deg) (+ Nose Down from Vertical) .D--- 69.11 deg

60 IECO XZ Pitch Program 50 OECO

40

30

_p Pitch

Attitude

20

i0

0 0

-f', 20

I 40

I 60 Range 12-5

i 80 Time

I i00 (sec) COMMAND

I 120

, I 140

160

FIGURE

S-IB STAGE

ANGLES

124

Pitch Angle-of-Attack, (+ Nose Above Relative 4

Free Stream (deg) Velocity Vector)

/--

Calculated

from FPS-16

Wind

-4 20 40 Range Pitch Plane Wind Velocity (+ Downrange) 20 (m/s) 60 Time (sec) 80 100 120

i0

__----

FPS-16

Wind

%_M2M % -10

Angle-of-Attack

_4ind _/'I_IA

,t'_, '_

-40 0 20 40 Range FIGURE 12-6 PITCH PLANE WIND 60 Time 80 (see) AND FREE STREAM ANGLE-OF-ATTACK I00 120

VELOCITY

125

measured winds up to 76 sac and rawinsonde measured winds at later times, sampled at 250 meter increments. The highest pitch wind magnitude near max Q was II.i m/s at 68.4 sac, with a high shear near 72 sec producing maximum pitch responses. Also shown in Figure 12-6 is a comparison of the angle-of-attack determined from Q-ball measurements and the angleof-attack obtained from a digital flight simulation using the Jimsphere/ FPS-16 measured wind. In the yaw plane, the magnitudes of the control parameters were nominal throughout S-IB stage powered flight. A comparison of the Jimsphere/FPS-16 measured wind and angle-of-attack wind is presented Figure 12-7. The highest yaw wind magnitude near max Q was 16.6 m/s 70.2 sec, which produced maximum yaw responses. Also shown in Figure 12-7 is a comparison of calculated from winds. the Q-ball angle-of-attack and angle-of-attack also in at

In the roll plane, the programmed roll maneuver was initiated at 12.2 sac and was completed at 30.1 seconds. The vehicle attitude compared to the programmed attitude is shown in Figure 12-5. However, as may also be seen from the roll attitude errors (Figure 12-2), the vehicle rolled approximately 18.5 deg, slightly in excess of the desired 18 degrees. The roll attitude errors are attributed to aerodynamic moments and engine misalignments. However, the peculiar roll at the end of booster powered flight appears to have been caused by inboard engine shutdown. Center of gravity effects and an impulse created by inboard engine shutdown sequence are possible causes of this roll. S-IB stage tanks were not monitored for sloshing; however, both tanks were instrumented with a continuous mass level sensor for

S-IVB

the S-IVB propellant utilization systems. Figure 12-8 shows surface angle peak-to-peak amplitudes (assuming a sine wave liquid surface) at the PU probes in both tanks during S-IB powered flight. The surface angles at the PU probes obtained from the spring-mass sloshing model in the flight simulation are also presented. The simulation results are in fair agreement with the LOX probe but show higher values for the LH 2 probe in the max Q region (45 to 70 seconds). Since the fuel level in the LH 2 tank was higher than for previous flight, it is possible that insufficient LH 2 damping was used in the simulation, causing higher amplitudes. The simulation results in the early part of flight are also too low, probably because the simulation is planar and does not have coupling between the roll and pitch vehicle motion to excite sloshing. Also in both The shown tanks as sloshing in Figure compared amplitudes 12-8 to are their are the small slosh during booster flight. the probes

frequencies coupled

from slosh

predicted

frequencies.

126

Yaw Angle-of-Attack (deg) (Free Stream) (+ Nose Right of Relative Velocity Vector) 2

Q-Ball

Angle-of-Attack

, 't_.f'-,_ .t_

\
t_

'
from FPS-16 80 (sec)

" ' ,fk, "_'

Wind i00 120

CaIculated

-2 20 Yaw Plane (+ Toward 20 40 60 Range Time

Wind Velocity (m/s) Right of Flight Plane)

i0

Angle-of-AttaCkFPs -_Wind

0
-10

_ ,

-20 20 40 60 Range Time WIND VELOCITY 80 (sec) AND FREE STREAM ANGLE-OF-A_ACK I00 120

FIGURE

12- 7

YAW P_NE

ObserVed Sl_sh Froque_<'les fro_z"_giae De[_ection (H_)

, o_,,,,..,_,..._,.,._ ,_

_,,,__

0.9 .._.__a""-; :J
_ _ ,

i/i.-"
I -_

_. /"
PIIEDICTED LST i_)l)K

'-_-_ --

---

s-zw _

1 k_

J- _
0.4 iO _,_ A

,,
1 (de8) i_

PL_ch Engine Deflection Response to Slo_,,peak-to-_e_k

0.5

2o

_o

6o

u_

_
0./*

-....

s-I_ _2
S-IVB LOX II

J
i

!
'_

Range Time (sec)

0.2 -Observed Slosh

2.0 FrequencSes from PU Probe (Hz) " 0.i 0 .... _r_.e_ Pr_L%_-._l Observed S-ll_ bOX _-I_B _ 20 AO _.__

I
.----

i*_

_o _0 Range Tme (see)

1(30

120

lAD

s-zve _ox
S-IVB LR2 ,.._. _ yaw Engine Deflection I Response 1 t'o Slosh, Pe_k-to-P_k { (deg)

_.o

...__

o._ ..

. _-_,_ _

H-tt,li -- ........ ! ..........

60 8o lOO 12o t4o ,T,
Range Time (sec)

I ,,-, ng

_o

to

60

go

loo

0.i

1_

_o

o ,, o

_u

4u

Range Time (sec)

FIGURE 12-8

SLOSH DURING S-IB POWERED FLIGHT

128

Sloshing

information

was

also

obtained

by

passing

engine

deflection

data through a series of band pass filters. The S-IVB LOX and L}l2 slosh contributions to engine deflection in the pitch and yaw plane are shown in Figure 12-8. A comparison between predicted and observed first mode coupled slosh frequencies for the S-IB center LOX, outer LOX and fuel, and the S-IVB S-IVB LOX LOX and LH 2 tanks is also presented in tank has the lowest frequency; but lowest frequency. (slosh frequency This being the for figure. AS-2Ol, For AS-203, the S-IVB

LH 2 tank had the loading on AS-203

is due to s different propellant a function of fuel height, tank

radius, and longitudinal acceleration). other flights where S-IVB LOX was the

This plot shows that,unlike all major sloshing contributor to

engine deflections, S-IVB LOX and S-IVB LH 2 alternated as the chief source of deflection throughout booster flight. S-IB outer tank sloshing appears to contribute S-IVB negligibly STAGE to engine ANALYSIS deflection.

12.3.2

CONTROL

The performance of the S-IVB J-2 engine control system in the pitch and yaw planes and the APS in the roll plane during powered flight was satisfactory. All transients were within the capabilities of the system. Attitude errors, attitude rates, and actuator positions are shown in Figure 12-9, 12-10, and 12-11, respectively. Steady state attitude control performance was satisfactory. The most significant deviations from predicted control transients

occurred during the separation and guidance initiation transients. The actual transients,though larger than predicted, were within maximum control capabilities of the control system and were well damped. Small ullage motor misalignments, engine misalignment, and larger than predicted initial conditions ofattitude error and angular velocity produced the larger than predicted control transient at separation. The larger than predicted change in pitch guidance command caused the larger than predicted guidance initiation transients. The transient caused by start of the guidance mode was very near predicted; however, there was significant sloshing produced by the guidance command as indicated by the body attitudes and angular velocities. This transient was well damped prior to S-IVB cutoff. In the pitch plane, the predicted steady state attitude error which assumed zero engine misaligument was approximately -0.05 deg (nose down) early in flight, increasing to -0.4 deg (nose down) near the end of flight. The prediction included the effects of center of gravity offset and rate feedback. The actual steady state attitude error was ioi deg (nose up) early in flight, decreasing to 0.8 deg (nose up) late in flight. The actual center of gravity offset and pitch rate were as predicted. The difference between the predicted and actual steady state errors was due to a 0.72 deg engine misalignment. cated a 1.0 deg engine misalignment. The trajectory simulation indi-

129 Pitch Attitude (+ Nose Up) iGuidance 2 158.5 I Error (deg) S-IV8 Engine Cutoff 433.35 ._i Tilde] Mdel . ]

Initiation

Guidance

k[
0 I ' "_

,4211.o'
_

-1

-2 -3 140
180 22G [deg) 260 300 Range Time 340 (see) 381 4

i i
460 500

a_ Attitude Error (* Nose Right) 2

,
.1L i ..... --

-3

-4
140 Roll 180 Attitude Error from 220 (deg) 260 300 Range Time 340 (sec) 380 420

i
i I 460 500

_*CW Viewed

Rear)

:\ ^ '
140 '80 220 260 FIGURE 12-9

300 Range

Time

340 (sec)

380

420

460

500

ATTITUDE

ERRORS DURING S-IVB

POWERED FLIGHT

Guidance Initiation

?
158, Pitch Angular 2 Rate (deg/s)

Chi Tilde Guidance Mode 421,0

I I

S-In Engine 433.35

CO o

I
I_

""

I
-2140 180 220 260 300 Range Time 340 (sec) 380 420

!
I 460 500

Yaw

ngular

Rate

(deg/s)

i
0 .............. _....... .- _ T - ^T----_

i
_ .

I !
-2 I i

i
140 180 220 260 300 Range Roll Angular Rate (deg/s) Time 340 (sec) 380 420

I
" 460 500

_
I
0 t --_ __A

i l. !

140

180

220

260

300 Range Time

340 (sec) S-In

380

420

_vv /,_n

Jvv _nn

FIGU_

12-i0

ANGLrLAR

_TE

GY_S

POWERED

_IG_

Guidance Initiation 158.5 : | Pitch Actuator Position (deg) (+ Steer Nose _wn - Actuator Retract) Chi Tilde Guidance 421.0 Mode S-IVB _ Engine CO _ 433.35

'_"

i
-2 14_ _ 180 220 (deg) Extend) 260 300 341 Range Time (sec) 380 420 Yaw Actuator Position (+ Steer Nose Left 4 ! - Actuator

i
I 46 500

i
! I I

i
! I" II
'

i
-2
140

i
i
180 220 260 300 Range 12-11 Time 340 (sec) POSITION 380 420 " 460 500

FIGU_

ACTUATOR

S-l_

132

The vehicle pitch attitude compared to the pitch during S-IVB powered flight is shown in Figure 12-12.

steering

commands

In the yaw plane, the predicted steady state attitude error which assumed zero engine misalignment was approximately -0.2 deg (nose left) early in flight, increasing to -0.6 deg (nose left) near the end of flight. The effects of center of gravity offset and rate feedback were included in these predictions. The actual steady state attitude error was -0.3 deg (nose left) early in flight, increasing to -0.5 deg (nose left) late in flight. An engine misalignment of 0.06 deg accounts for the differences between predicted and actual. An engine misalignment of 0.08 deg was indicated by the trajectory simulation. The vehicle yaw attitude during S-IVB powered Figure 12-12, compared to the steering commands. flight is shown in

In the roll plane, the disturbances at separation and guidance initiation were in the same direction as on AS-201, but were smaller magnitude. The steady state roll torque was in a direction opposite to that of AS-201 and was smaller in magnitude.

in

The total impulse used for roll control during powered flight was 577.9 N-s (].29.9 ibf-s) for module i and 604.11 N-s (135.8 ibf-s) for module 2. The total impulse for module I included a nominal 34.3 N-s (7.7 ibis) for each minimum thrust, because the chamber pulse of motor IIV , based on 622.8 N (140 lhf) pressure measurement for this motor was lost.

A comparison of total impulse usage for the AS-201 and AS-203 powered flight is shown in Table 12-11. The small impulse usage for AS-203 can be attributed to four primary differences: i. no Launch Escape System (LES) jettison utilization system engine

2. no guidance staging mixture ratio change) 3. approximately

(propulsion

170 sec shorter

burn

time to a

4. a 8.1N-m (6 ib_ft) steady state roll torque as compared 21.7 N-m (16 ib_ft) steady state roll torque on AS-201

The APS motors, during powered flight, fired as a pair as was expected because of the addition of the spatial synchronizer module. Each module fired 17 pulses during powered flight - all minimum. Motors IIV and IIIii fired 15 pulses, beginning with a series of 5 pulses required to control a counterclockwise transient due to separation and engine ignition, then i pulse required to counteract a counterclockwise disturbance occurring at guidance initiation. Each of the remaining 9 pulses were

TABLE APS EVENT SUMMARY

12-II - POWERED FLIGHT

S-IVB-203 Module Event No. of Pulses Separation and Ullage Disturbances LES Jettison Limit After Cycle Operation Guidance Initiation and 5 166.8 37.5 5 176.6 39..7 5 Impulse N-s ibf-s 171.3 38.5 No. of Pulses 5 Impulse - N-s Ibf-s 177.9 40.0 I Module 2 Module

S-IVB-201 I Module 2

Impulse N-s ibf-s 292.7 65.8

Impulse N-s ibf-s 265.6 59.7

396.4 222.8

89.1 50.1

398.1 290.9

89.5 65.4

Guidance Staging PU _ Change Limit Until Total

155.7

35.0

227.3

51.1

Cycle Operation Engine Cutoff Powered Flight

239.8

53.9

249.6

56.1

593.4

133.4

774.9

174.2

17

577.9

129.9

17

604.1

135.8

1661.0

373.4

1956.8

439.9

135

spaced separately throughout the remainder of powered flight fired to counteract a counterclockwise roll torque which was throughout powered approximately 164 demands. flight. Motors sec and 208 sec Iii and IIIIV fired in response to normal single limit

and were present pulses cycle at

Attitude error transients, during the S-IVB were caused by propellant sloshing. A simulation model, nominal LOX ullage vent angles, and ullage 66.7 N (151b_ per nozzle confirmed the cause of slosh and provided requirements. LOX sloshing correlation of the transients

engine cutoff transient, using a linear slosh thrust of approximately the transients as being with the APS impulse

conditions

were

satisfactory

and

adequate

damping

was

provided. The initial LOX slosh wave after S-IB/S-IVB separation was immediately damped out by the baffle. This initial LOX slosh wave was excited by a combination of thrust induced by fuel lead and the engine being positioned to correct for separation excursions. Figure 12-13 presents LH 2 slosh heights and from the LH 2 probe data. The figure shows stage separation directly from the probe; frequencies as deterslosh heights at S-IB/ slosh heights at the

mined S-IVB

probe, from probe data corrected for hydrodynamic attenuation; and slosh height at the wall, extrapolated from the "corrected" probe data. The slosh height at the wall is not in agreement with the maximum possible height indicated by the temperature sensors in the tank. The discrepancy, between slosh height as indicated by to sloshing excitation. The the maximum possible slosh height and the the temperature sensors, has been attributed sloshing excitation includes a combination

of the effects of engine, thrpst structure relaxation during J-2 engine thrust decay, and APS firings required to control the cutoff transient. The result of these sequential excitations was a large slosh wave which broke up at the wall of the tank and was deflected (in part by the baffle or deflector) across the tank,where it splashed against the opposite wall. PU system and television diately prior to S-IVB engine plane. After cutoff, sloshing slosh wave at the wall wetted data indicated the LH 2 slosh motion immecutoff was predominantly in the PU probe was induced such that the peak of the the baffle several seconds after cutoff.

The time from cutoff to start of wetting of the baffle was 2.25 seconds. Slosh deflection then abruptly started decreasing, at 5.75 sec from cutoff. This time coincides with the large APS impulse required to control transients after S-IVB engine cutoff. Twenty-one sec after cutoff, large globules of LH 2 were seen on the left side of the television screen (center of the tank) and appeared to be climbing up towards the wall of the tank between fin planes I and IV. Some of the liquid went under the deflector, some hit the wall above it, and some hit the deflector.

136 Slosh Height (cm)

s0
*Assumes caused 70

I
by amplitude

i
effect variation

no attenuation

**Initial sloshing is in plane of PU probe as determined from data I

60

t
50 1
T

b_,Temperature

Sensors

C-328 and

C329

ao

30

"" --Slosh Height at the Wall Extrapolsted probe (Corrected for Attenuation) _ from

20

-"

i0

IECO

_\%

Slosh Beight

Indicated

By PU probe

0
50 LII2 Slosh 1.O

100

I
(Hz)

150

200 Range Time

250 (see)

300

350

400

Frequency

o.8

O
Actual-(_

0.6

o
0.4

o....em I

0.2

0 I00

IS0

200

2S0 Range Time FIGURE 12-13

300 (sec)

SSO

400

450

S-IVB LH 2 SLOSH

137

Temperature sensor data shows that sensors in observed globules were wetted shortly after cutoff verifies the LH 2 behavior discussed above.

the area of in a pattern

the which

Figure 12-14 illustrates the LH 2 motion after S-IVB engine cutoff as determined from television and temperature sensor data. Simulations have indicated that the sequence of excitations described would cause LH 2 behavior, 12.3.3 The CONTROL APS as discussed. DURING ORBIT satisfactory in maintaining The transient control during earth orbit and per-

exhibited

formed satisfactorily the guidance computer.

the required attitudes issued by after J-2 engine cutoff and the vent, LH 2 non-propulcontrolled. over Figure ground 10-2. sta-

disturbances due to LH 2 continuous vent, LOX ullage sive vent, and simulated restart were satisfactorily APS impulse consumption during orbit was tions. For total impulse recorded,see Section

recorded I0 and

The APS operation during portions of orbital flight is Figure 12-15. The attitude errors and APS firing sequences the figure are typical for the correlated events throughout flight.

shown in shown in orbital

Propellant sloshing frequencies, during orbit, under LOX ullage conditions were obtained for two periods during the fourth orbit. Over Ascension at the start of the fourth orbit, the slosh frequency from temperature sensors was determined to be approximately 0.476 x 10 -2 Hz. Over Guaymas near the end of the fourth orbit, the sensors indicated a slosh frequency of approximately 0.333 x 10 -2 Hz. These frequencies were close to the frequencies predicted as shown in Figure 12-16. The natural period is based upon low-g theory but the coupled period was obtained using a slosh model extrapolated from high-g theory. No sloshing temperature fluctuations have been detected while the vehicle was under continuous hydrogen vent thrust. This may be attributed to the much longer periods experienced under the lower acceleration. Detection of these fluctuations would require a continuous sec during which the vehicle acceleration Since this type any conclusions scatter in is probably Due clusions From the of record regarding record for was held approximately more or less i000 constant.

is not available, it is impossible to draw sloshing under continuous vent thrust. The under an effects. acceleration of g/go = 40 x 10 -5

the data obtained due to transitory

to the to the vehicle

insufficient sloshing data available, no definite conamount and effect of sloshing on AS-203 can be drawn. performance it is concluded that for configurations like hydrogen propellant) the vehicle control

AS-203 (small the influence was small.

LOX propellant in proportion to liquid of sloshing in a low g environment on

138

T'V CAMERA . LH2 TANK INSTALLATION II ' p

i
PU PROBE

IV

II

CAMERA VIEW

I'_XI_

SLOSH _

HI'. AT AMPL. UP SWING

0 0 0 f

o 0

-_0_

"

30

o O0 WA_ BREA_P

- .....--_r

STA 36.31 m (1429.7 in)

BACK SWING

\ \ __I

_IESCENT FLUID LEVEL @ J-2 CUTOFF

VIEW P-P FIGURE 12-14 LH 2 SLOSH AT S-IVB ENGINE CUTOFF

"

U ]i

II

Ill

"i

II I i

11

RZvlll_ z?

wI 12 j

m2 F
L

n,21
i

I i

ttt,+'

I
B_

I
s_l_

I
pASS

t++,,

I'

I I I
_

I
"P_I_ PXSS

II

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

,+i_l I

I I I

I I I

II

II

,,+,t'ii

Ill

I I II

I I

IIIItll

_Z _-Propulllv_

Vea_

t_ i =,,_'

III IIII III IIII II I I1 I_I_;II HI _I I _ I II

II I _

_ _,_ !

i +iii} ki LitJ_I 151

_ .... ,_

_, _,,,I, lill

' I } I I

.,
'+ I [ II I _

2_

FIGURE

12-15

APS

OPERATION

IN ORBIT

Longitudinal 60 x 10-5

Acceleration

(g/go)

First Mode Natural

_------FirstMode Coupled

--Theoretical 0 Experlmental

50

i
40 0)

30

GO

,o
0 0 50 i00 150 200 250 Slosh Period (sec) 12-16

-"__c____-_
300 350 400 450

FIGURE

LH2 SLOSH DURING ORBIT

141

12.3.4 12.3.4.1

CONTROL

COMPONENT

ANALYSIS

CONTROL

ACCELEROMETERS

The two body-fixed control accelerometers located in the Instrument Unit (to provide load relief in the pitch and yaw planes from 30 to ii0 sec) functioned properly. Figure 12-17 shows the measured lateral accelerations (translated to the vehicle CG). Normal accelerations of -0.3 m/s2 in pitch and 0.3 m/s 2 in yaw were observed around 40 sec of flight. These accelerations correlate with the wind speed and shear noted at an altitude of approximately 4 km. Peak accelerations of 0.36 m/s 2 in pitch and 0.41 m/s2 in yaw occurred near max Q, and are approximately one-half the value observed on AS-201. The vibration noises riding on the accelerometer signals were much lower in amplitude than those seen on AS-201. The lower vibration noises are attributed to the fact that vehicle vibration levels for AS-203 were lower than those seen on AS-201. 12.3.4.2 ANGLE-OF-ATTACK SENSOR

Pitch and yaw angle-of-attack components were measured by a Model F-16 Q-ball angle-of-attack transducer mounted on the tip of the Nose Cone Assembly. Figure 12-18 shows a comparison of Q-ball angles-ofattack and a flexible body planar simulation in the pitch and yaw planes. The flight simulation shows good agreement; differences in the 50 to 65 sec region are attributed to small deviations in the actual flight winds. Maximum angles-of-attack of 1.3 deg in pitch and 1.3 deg in yaw _ere measured near the max Q region. These values reduced to 1.2 deg in pitch and ya_ when the Q-bali data was corrected for attitude rate and flexible body effects. 12.3.4.3 RATE GYROS

A triple redundant, + i0 deg/s range, 3 axis, rate gyro package located in the Instrument Unit was used to provide pitch, yaw,and roll angular rate information for vehicle control throughout flight (Figures 12-3 and 12-i0). Analyses of the data indicate that the performance was nominal. Generally, the angular velocities were only slightly less than those seen on AS-201. There was a significant reduction in the amplitude of high frequency vibration noise, during the time periods encompassing Mach 1 and max Q, which was directly related to the lower vibration levels on AS-203. The roll maneuver was performed smoothly from approximately 12 to 30 sec,during which time the maximum rate observed was 1.3 deg/s. Near max Q, the maximum pitch and yaw angular rates were -1.3 deg/s and -0.9 deg/s, respectively.

142

_Telemetry Fllght Pitch Control Fin Acceleration fiX) _----Accelerometer 0.4 0.2 _P_ Control Actlve---_ (m/s 2)

Simulation

(+ Toward 0.6

-0.2 -0.4 -0.6

o_..
0 20

/>___, __._ _ = v ....

40 60 Range 80 Time I00 (sec) 120 140 160

Yaw

Control

Acceleration Fin IV)

(m/s 2)

(+ Toward 0.6 0.4

.o,_
-0.4 -0.6 0

o ,,,'- '
20

'
40

'- .i',.,,,:.'___..f.---a-----V ' /

LT_"'Active--_ I00 (sec) 80 Time AND YAW cONTROL

t_--Accelerometer 60

Control

120

140

160

Range

FIGURE

12-17

PITCH

ACCELEROMETERS

143

Q-Ball ------Flight

Angles-of-Attack Simulation

Pitch Angle-of-Attack, (+ Nose Above Relative 4

Free Stream (deg) Velocity Vector)

-2 -4 0 20

/ 40 Range 60 Time 80 (sec) I00 120

Yaw Angle-of-Attack, Free Stream (deg) (+ Nose Right of Relative Velocity Vector) 4 l

'

'

'

_-

'

"

'

-2 0 20 40 60 Range Time 80 (sec) 100 120

FIGURE

12-18

Q-BALL AND FLIGHT

SIMULATION

FREE STREAM

ANGLES-OF-ATTACK

144

12.3.4.4 An

ACTUATOR oscillation

PERFORMANCE of the vehicle and control engines occurred between

ignition and liftoff. Since the dynamics of the constrained vehicle are considerably different from the free vehicle in flight, the closedloop stability should also be considerably different. The oscillation observed was of approximately constant amplitude witha frequency of 1.6 Hz as shown in Figure 12-19. It started abruptly at ignition_ persisted for about 3 complete cycles, and ended rather abruptly at liftoff. Engine amplitudes of approximately + 0.4 deg in pitch yaw were observed. Similar oscilla_ions were observed eter and rate gyros in the Instrument Unit. A similar condition occurred on AS-201. The and + 0.3 deg in on _he accelerom-

amplitude

was the

lower oscil-

and the frequency was different, but lation did not terminate so abruptly

in the same region, and on AS-201 as on AS-203.

A stability analysis of the contrained vehicle indicates a slightly divergent oscillation at 1.2 Hz. Another analysis, using different bending mode data and values for the launcher spring constants, showed a slightly convergent oscillation at approximately 1.4 He. The system is insensitive to changes in the rotational spring constant of the launcher, moderately sensitive to changes in the lateral spring constant of the launcher, and fairly sensitive to changes in control system gain. The i. 2. near following The observations appears and conclusions induced can by be stated engine at this tir_e:

oscillation

to be

the

ignition.

is

The dynamic response neutral stability in of the time

of the vehicle, this condition, interval

launcher and could no

and control system be mildly divergent. amplitudes are

However, because anticipated. 3. This

involved,

large

condition

will

place

an

upper

constraint but

on

the not

control appear to

gains which may be required for future be a problem with the systems released 4. eration 5. eration This when condition analyzing may produce

vehicles to date.

does

oscillations or

which

require loads will at be

considliftoff. a consid-

liftoff

dynamics

structural and

Analysis in future

of this control stage The

condition is continuing system designs. flight, angles

formed

During S-IB smoothly.

powered gimbal

all eight servo actuators perare presented in Figure 12-4, is

together with the noted, especially

results in the

of the maximum

flight simulation. Good agreement response area. Differences in the

Pitch Attitude (+ Nose Up) 0.4

Error

(deg)

Yaw Attitude Error (+ Nose Right) O.4

(deg)

I _I
1 _irst Motion

I
Motion

|_m"Firs t|

:_,--,--.--,'_,i-.-'-_,-0.4
-2 -i Range Time (sec)

,,lp- ,,r, .... I

i
2 (sec)

i
I

-0.4
-2 -i Range 0 Time

Engine 0.4

1 Pitch Actuator

(deg) , _--First Motion

Engine 0.4

1 Yaw Actuator

(deg) . _--First Motion

A
-0.4 V V I

I
_ -0.4

,
-0.8 -2 -i Range 0 Time 12-19 OSCILLATION A_ER IGNITION.

A
I I
" i (sec)

I
-0.8 -2 -i Range Time (sec) _

FIGURE

Ln

146

50 to 65 sec region are attributed to small wind changes. Engine deflections were relatively high for AS-203 (32.5% of design in yaw) for the low winds of July, the high deflection being attributed to the greater aerodynamic static instability of the AS-203 configurafion. Actuator activity was observed during the roll maneuver, at Mach 1 and max Q, and slowly diminished for the remainder of the flight. The maximum gimbal angle occurred on engine 4 yaw actuator, which was 2.7 deg at 69.9 seconds. The gimbal rates observed were slightly higher than those on AS-201, yet were well below the loaded velocity design limit of 18.3 deg/s. The actuator loads were comparable to those on AS-201. The largest torque observed was 15,000 N-m (ll,0631b_ft) at 76.1 sec on engine 2 yaw actuator. This load is 50% of design torque for the component and approximately 30% of the stall torque. The differential currents to the servo valves ranged from 7.2% to 15.7% of the rated current. The largest differential current observed, excluding liftoff transients, was -1.966 ma at 61.2 sec on engine 2 pitch actuator. The maximum value of each pitch and yaw performance parameter for any single actuator during liftoff, max Q, outboard engine cutoff, and S-IB stage flight are presented in Table 12-111. It should be noted that, due to the physical mounting of the servo actuators, the pola'rity of their position in degrees may not agree with the polarity of the average gimbal angle plots illustrated in Figure 12-4. Flight data revealed that unexpected signal biases from the IU were applied to the S-IVB pitch and yaw servo actuators in the S-IB burn mode and in the S-IVB coast mode. These erroneous signals, which were not present during S-IVB powered flight, resulted in consistent pitch and yaw actuator errors of 0.25 deg and -i.0 deg, respectively, in the non-S-IVB burn mode when S-IVB hydraulic pressure was available. Parameters HI and H2, which measure S-IVB pitch and yaw actuator command currents at the IU amplifiers after S-IB/S-IVB separation, both verified the erroneous signals. Investigation, to eliminate the cause of this problem, is being conducted. Both actuators of the S-IVB stage performed satisfactorily throughout the S-IVB stage powered flight. The engine positioning commands from the control computer were correct and well within the load, gimbal rate, and torque capabilities of the actuators. The maximum actuator deflection between S-IVB start command and cutoff was 3.3 deg at 147 sec on the yaw actuator, which also had the largest valve current, 21.5 ma, at that time. The maximum torque observed was 3,170 N-m (2,332 Ibf-ft) which is within the design torque for the component. Table 12-1V presents the maximum of each pitch and yaw parameter during ignition, cutoff, and S-IVB stage flight.

147

TABLE S-IB ACTUATOR

12-III PERFORMANCE DATA*

MAXIMUM

Parameters Gimbal Angle

Unit deg

Axis Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw

Liftoff 0.25 0.14 -3.66 2.67 -5,450 -10,800 4,020 7,966 2.07 1.27

Max

OECO 0.19 0.25 0.32 0.46 -8,400 -8,800 6,196 6,491 0.52 0.35

Flight 2.14 2.67 -4.08 3.56 -14,700 -15,000 10,842 11,063 2.07 1.75

2.14 2.67 2.44 3.56 -12,800 -14,200 9,441 10,473 1.20 1.75

Gimbal

Rate

deg/s

N-m Torque ibf-ft

Valve

Current

ma

*The values represent are not necessarily

the maximum from the 4 pitch and 4 yaw from the same actuator for any parameter

actuators and or event.

TABLE S-IVB ACTUATOR

12-1V PARAMETERS

MAXIMUM

Parameters Gimbal Angle

Unit deg

Actuator Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw

Ignition -1.95 -3.3 2.7 3.0 3,170 793 2,332 583 12 21.5

Cutoff 0.85 0.4 0.2 0.2 2,380 2,380 1,749 1,749 5.2 2.7

Flight 1.95 3.3 2.7 3.0 3,170 2,380 2,332 1,749 12 21.5

Gimbal

Rate

deg/s

N-m Torque Ib-ft

Valve

Current

ma

148

12.4

LAUNCH

VEHICLE

GUIDANCE

The overall performance of the ST-124M3 guidance system (ST-124M3 stabilized platform and electronic box, guidance signal processor, digital computer, and data adapter) was very satisfactory. of the telemetered guidance data is discussed in subsequent this section. 12.4.1 GUIDANCE INTELLIGENCE ERRORS are and within the accuracy the preflight estimates An analysis parts of

of of

The velocity errors shown in this report the established postflight trajectory data the guidance hardware errors.

With the exception of the platform orientation errors, preflight estimates of the component and system errors were obtained from a series of laboratory tests made several weeks prior to vehicle launch. Prelaunch telemetry was sampled for an indication of platform orientation errors. This telemetry, adjusted for preflight estimates of accelerometer bias and scale factor errors, indicated the ST-124M3 stabilized platform was aligned well within the 3 otolerance. The predicted AS-203 flight errors of the ST-124M3 inertial platform test were based on laboratory calibration effects of these system of the errors for

the

ST-124M3 shown as

stabilized platform system. The circled points in Figure 12-20.

are

Telemetered inertial guidance velocities at principal event times are shown in Table 12-V for comparisons with the corresponding values taken from the postflight and preflight reference trajectories. Telemetered values are shown for accelerometer pickoff (FM) and guidance computer telemetry (PCM). The only difference in the telemetered values was an eleven pulse (0.55 m/s) error in the range velocity shown by the guidance computer prior to liftoff. Due to rise during thrust buildup, it is extremely difficult to determine if the error was in the aecelerometer or the accumulator. The differences between the telemetered velocities and the postflight trajectory data of the data compared. The differences between the preflight trajectory vehicle and small errors reflect in the are within the noise level the telemetered data and performance performance. of the

the non-standard guidance hardware

The telemetered guidance velocities differenced against the reference trajectory are shown as solid lines in Figure 12-20. The reference trajectory data used has been smoothed through comparatively rough tracking data; therefore, the confidence of these postflight guidance error curves is not so great as is usually the case. The RSS values for 3 o errors at S-IVB cutoff are also shown. The velocity differences at S-IVBcutoffs are well within the 3 _ error band. However, the predicted velocity errors in the pitch plane are opposite in sign to the

Range Velocity 2

Difference

(_i)

(m/s) OECO S-IVB CO

I 0 .___

, ,
x_/v_ 50 -

,
_00

,r_

_
200

._
250

rD

_
300

r:'.

,_
350

_
Range

r_,
Time 400 (sec)

I +3 _"_-7"-,
t I -3 o

F'JI50 I

-1 I
-2
Altitude 2 . Velocity Difference

I I
(&Yi) (ml/s) I I I

I _
I l I I I +3 c_

1,,
-0 -i .
-2 '

- .....
, 50 _ i00 --

----_.,

tJ-, !150 rU t

'' '

_ "0'
' 6

i
t I

(_)

200 6

Io
250

OI O
300

(_ 350 0 (_ (_0 0 Range Time (sec)

b0450 -3_

Cross Range Velocity 2 i _

Difference

(f_i] (m/s) +3 o

o
-i -2

_-_I.50

---v --_ v'----_-.JI I ,_ ....... 'v

I

6--i_!
200

I_--_::1___ I r7
....

r_ Ir_
350

_
"

_1/',
(_

_'--1
O C7"-')

i00 - Guid. Error Q(_)

1150

250

300

Range

400 Time (sec)

I _50 -30

Ref. Pred.

_) _)

FIGURE

12-20

(C)

GUIDANCE

VELOCITY

COMPARISONS

(REFERENCE

TRAJECTORY-GUIDANCE)

150 I II'% L 12-V VELOCITY COMPARISON

_._I

i_I_l_

TABLE (C) GUIDANCE INERTIAL

Event Range Time (sec) *

Telemetered Accelerometer 2434.15 Computer 2434.70 2399.20 -2.05 2534.65 2437.40 -2.35 2645.50 2481.25 -4.10 7486.80 2311.80 206.40 7495.65 2309.85 206.70

Trajectory Postflight 2433.74 2399.08 -2.22 2533.60 2437.39 -2.29 2644.62 2481.23 -4.18 7486.16 2312.76 206.40 7494.95 2310.88 206.71 Preflight 2437.42 2369.61 -4.47 2523.51 2402.25 -4.73 2619.33 2438.33 -5.73 7488.64 2333.51 206.10 7496.10 2331.56 206.37

IECO 139.24

2399.20 -2.05 2534.10

OECO 142.68

2437'.40 -2.35 2644.95

Guidance Initiation 158.5

2481.25 -4.10 7486.25

S-IVB CO 433.35

2311.80 206.40 7495.10

Insertion 443.35

2309.85 206.70

_ - Range Velocity (m/s) - Altitude Velocity (m/s) Z - Cross Range Velocity (m/s)

",._,,iOl

II

UlOl.,l'q

I_'_

IL

_un_iL

I lmll

IF_. IIn-k

II._a..

,.,v._,m

n=o.-u_

u in'XL

151

observed differences. aid in error analysis.

GLOTRAC

data were not of sufficient

quality

to

The AS-203 vehicle was successfully guided to satisfactory end conditions as shown by the comparison of cutoff conditions presented in Table 12-VI. Only two differences shown are of significance, the total velocity difference and the thrust decay delta velocity difference. The total velocity difference for the postflight trajectory is mostly the result of the initial error (0.55 m/s) in range velocity sensed by the guidance computer. The actual velocity gain due to thrust decay after S-IVB cutoff was 1.33 m/s higher than indicated by the operational trajectory. However, a later prediction for the J-2 engine thrust decay was 8.6 m/s,which would be 0.44 m/s different from the actual value. In Table 12-Vll, the nominal and postflight trajectory parameters are compared with those from the guidance computer at orbital insertion. As in the case of the comparison made at S-IVB cutoff, the velocity differences are well within the 3a error band. The increase in vehicle total velocity between S-IVB cutoff command and orbital insertion was 9.04 m/s,which is somewhat higher than the predicted increase of 7.69 m/s. 12.4.2 GUIDANCE AND NAVIGATION SCHEME PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS

In general, the flight program functioned as expected. The S-IB roll maneuver was performed correctly. The initial -18 deg roll setting was reduced to zero at approximately 30 sec as evidenced in Figure 12-5. Aerodynamic moments and engine misalignments caused the roll gimbal angle to proceed through zero to 0.5 deg and then to oscillate about this value. The LVDC attempted to correct this by issuing roll ladder commands which "follow" the roll attitude. Since the flight program only checks for completion of the roll program once per computation cycle by comparing the absolute value of the roll attitude to less than 0.i deg, the program did not detect the crossing for setting the sequence indicator bit in the mode code (MC25) until 66.95 sec, when the roll attitude crossed zero the second time. This is not considered a problem. With the exception of the "stop roll" indication, MC25 behaved normally, MC24 indicated no platform errors, and no error telemetry was issued from the minor loop. The roll attitude error, shown in Figure 12-2, verifies that the flight program functioned properly in attempting to remove the non-zero roll attitude. No accelerometer reasonableness tests were failed during the flight. The X accelerometer accumulated eleven pulses between -1.8 and -0.7 seconds. The pulse accumulation is the equivalent to 0.550 m/s of velocity, which remained as a bias throughout flight. (See Section 12.4.3.1 for further discussion of this problem.)

TABLE (C) GUIDANCE

12-Vl AT S-IVB cUTOFF

COMPARISONS

Postflight Parameter Time Total Radial Altitude Path Cross Cross Thrust Angle Range Range Decay Velocity Displacement Delta Velocity From GRR Symbol TAS V s Rs h @ is Zs AV s Units sec m/s km km deg m/s km m/s Guidance Computer - Guidance 0 -0.64 0.158 0.156 -0.003 -1.84 -0.113 0

Traj.

Preflight

Traj.

- Guidance -2.8 -0.06 0.029 0.027 0.007 -0.51 0.304 -1.33

437.833 7785.12 6563.303 190.856 0.000 307.60 92.089 9.04

Velocity Distance

&

TABLE

12-VII

(C)

GUIDANCE

COMPARISON

AT

ORBITAL

INSERTION

Nominal Parameter Total Radius Velocity Vector Units m/s km Symbol Vs Rs Trajectory 7792,75 6563.340 Computer 7794.16 6563.360 190.941 i Altitude path Range Angle Displacement Displacement Displacement km deg km km km m/s m/s m/s h 0 Xs Ys Zs is Ys is 190.924

Postflight Trajectory 7793.52 6563.458 191.040

NominalComputer -1.41 -0.020

_ 0 _ 0 _ 7

PostflightComputer -0.58 0.098 0.099

,m

O.O01 1616.054 6360.557 95.461 7546.04 -1921.05 306.16

-0.005 1608o527 6362.433 95.161 7549.30 -1913.84 306.72

-0.002 1608.185 6362.680 95.034 7549.00 -1912.88 305.21

0.004 7.527 -i,876 0.300 -3.26 -7.21 -0.56

0.003 -0.342 0.147 -0.127 -0.30 0.96 -1.51

Altitude F I T Cross Range

Range

Velocity

Altitude Velocity Cross Range Velocity

154

pIL"_ilkll_ll_P_ _._ .......

"i"' ' . il IrllJi=.

The S-IB stage time tilt in pitch began at 12.2 sec and was arrested at 133.9 seconds. The pitch profile was executed properly by the program. The IGM commands in pitch and yaw began at 158.5 sec and steering misalignment correction commenced at 195.9 seconds. All commands were as expected and the S-IVB stage performance was nearly nominal. The vehicle was steered to within 19 m, -0.002 deg, and 0.143 m/s of the program estimate of the predicted radius, flight path angle, and velocity at S-IVB cutoff. All parameters are within system specifications. Accelerometer readings telemetered by the program indicate that the end of thrust decay occurred approximately 2.6 sec after the S-IVB cutoff switch selector was issued. The platform measured velocity change from thrust decay was 8.8 m/s in X, -1.9 m/s in Y, and 0.3 m/s in Z. The total space-fixed velocity change was 9.04 m/s. Orbital nagivation has not been evaluated; however, the guidance commands and the platform gimbal angles show that the local horizontal was maintained, indicating good performance of both the navigation and guidance schemes. The minor loop calculations were expected throughout the flight. No gimbal angle reasonableness tests were failed and no disagreement bits were found in the data. This analysis included the orbital data, approximately 25%, received prior to the time of the analysis. The Digital Command System (DCS) commands of change camera and time base update were processed properly. 12.4.3 12.4.3.1 GUIDANCE SYSTEM COMPONENTS ANALYSIS television

LVDC/LVDA

ANALYSIS

The Launch Vehicle Digital Computer (LVDC) and Launch Vehicle Data Adapter (LVDA) performed as predicted during the boost phase of flight. Analysis of available orbital data is indicative of satisfactory performance during orbit. No error monitor words were observed during the boost phase, and insufficient Data Output Multiplexer (DOM) telemetry data was available to validate the apparent error monitor words that were observed in the computer telemetry, from tracking stations, for orbital flight. One gimbal angle crossover detector error word occurred at 399.95 seconds. No gimbal angle processing errors were observed for the same relative time. Therefore, it is conclude@ that the failure was a nonrecurring transient or that the data is invalid.

--

The X-component of accumulated velocity indicates that the accelerometer processor in the data adapter accumulated a velocity change of 0.55 m/s between -1.8 and -0.7 seconds. Channels A and B of the accelerometer processor sensed the velocity change. The pulse accumulation coincided with first stage engine ignition_where considerable noise was seen on the oscillograph recordings of the X accelerometer pulse count outputs. The recording speed of the oscillograph traces of the X accelerometer pulse train is 1.6 cm/s (0.64 in/s), which is not sufficient to permit evaluation of the signal. Gimbal angles appear normal during the engine ignition period. The X accelerometer's accuracy was questioned and consequently an attemptwas made to determine from its telemetered encoder outputs what, if any, velocity the accelerometer sensed during the time of error accumulation. The attempt was futile as the necessary data from neither the normal nor the redundant encoder outputs were available for evaluation for the time in question. The Z-gimbal angle values show excursions of 0.05 deg average with a period of 0.4 sec during the time interval from -1.5 sec to i.I seconds. The maximum positive excursion was -0.0139 deg while the maximum negative excursion was -0.0920 degrees. Analysis of the data available indicates that the interrupt processor, the real time processor, the power supply and all analog telemetry buffers, the digital telemetry interface, and the switch-selector interface all functioned satisfactorily. 12.4.3.2 ST-124M3 STABILIZED PLATFORM ANALYSIS

An analysis of the ST-124M3 stabilized platform was performe_based on the available data which was from the boost phase and first orbital pass. Functional performance data indicate satisfactory performance of the stable platform and associated electronics. There were no anomalies and the resolution of the boost phase data was of good quality. The orbital data was of poor qualit_ and consequently a thorough analysis was not possible. Analysis of the gyro-loop performance indicated that, at staging, the Y and Z gyro pickup signals oscillated for approximately 8 sec at a frequency of 0.5 Hz, indicating a yaw right and pitch up motion of the vehicle which was corroborated by EDS rate gyro information. After the separation, the vehicle assumed a yaw right bias until IGM initiation. The X, Y, and Z servos performed as predicted during boost phase. Fuel slosh perturbations were noted during the first few seconds of S-IVB burn.

156

were

Analysis of the no disturbances and Z

accelerometer or anomalies pickup

loop performance indicated present on the oscillogram signals.

that there traces of

the X,Y,

accelerometer

The Y and Z accelerometer aceelerometer encoder output dicted. The temperature effects

servo signals

output signals and the X, were normal and performed

Y, as

and Z pre-

on

the

platform

and

associated

electronics, coolant

the platform internal and gas flowrates were all as expected Vibration sec showed levels on a maximum

bearing and no

supply pressures, and the anomalies were observed. gimbals Grms at

1.0

the inertial level of 0.5

at a time slice of 0.0 225 Hz for the X axis,

to

0.4 Grms at for the Z axis. of that observed

55 Hz and 220 Hz for the Y axis, and 0.55 Grm s at 120 Hz The input vibration level on the AS-203 flight was 20% on the AS-201 flight for an equivalent time period in

flight. The conclusion from all the vibration information presently available definitely indicates that more vibration is experienced in the cross-axes than in roll (longitudinal direction) as would be suspected. The functional operation of accelerometer platform electronics assembly was normal signal conditioner and and without anomalies.

the

157

13.0 13.1 SUMMARY

(U)

SEPARATION

S-IB/S-IVB separation was accomplished as planned and the sequence was executed within the desired time period. First motion occurred approximately 0,ii sec after the separation command. The S-IVB engine cleared the interstage approximately 1.04 sec following separation command, 0.93 sec after first motion. Separation transients were small and within the design requirements. "' 13.2 13.2.1 S-IB/S-IVB SEPARATION PERFORMANCE

ULLAGE MOTOR

Ullage rocket performance was satisfactory and all motors were jettisoned properly. Ignition command was given at 143.23 sec and the jettison command occurred at 155.43 seconds. The thrust during Figure 13-1. Performance 13-1. the action time of each motor is presented in

parameters

of the S-IVB

ullage

rockets

are shown

in

Table

13.2.2

RETRO ROCKET

PERFORMANCE

The retro rockets are Thiokol TE-M-29-5 Recruit, solid propellant motors, replacing the TE-M-29-4 which was flown on AS-201. They are parallel-mounted on the interstage _ith a nominal nozzle cant angle of 9.5 degrees. The TE-M-29-5 motor has a larger expansion ratio and a higher thrust rating than the TE-M-29-4 motor. Nominal expansion ratios of the TE-M-29-5 and TE-M-29-4 motors are 7.03 and 4.26, respectively. At vacuum conditions and a grain temperature of 288.7K, the nominal thrust of the TE-M-29-5 motor is 169,170 N (38,031 lbf) compared to 154,842 N (34,810 ibf) for the TE-M-29-4 motor. The retro rockets were moved outboard 17.145 cm (6.75 in). The changes in retro rocket configuration were made to provide a one-retro-rocket-out capability for S-IB-3 and subsequent stages; however, simulation showed less than the 3 sigma required. Performance of the S-IB-3 was satisfactory. Performance Figure 13-2 shows both average retro rockets during the flight of AS-203 parameters are summarized in Table 13-11. thrust and predicted thrust, versus time.

TABLE ULLAGE ROCKET

13-I PERFORMANCE

Parameters 1

Rocket 2

Motor 3 5.55 3.80 710 1,030 751 1,090 537 780 701 1,018 15,969 3,590 16,823 3,782 12,041 2,707 15,711 3,532 66,821 15,022 59,708 13,423

Nominal Performance Limits at Altitude Maximum 6.80 4.10 841 1,220 1,013 1,470 606 880 758 i,I00 18,460 4,150 22,685 5,100 13,544 3,045 16,840 3,786 69,370 15,595 60,451 13,590
I

Minimum 5.01 3.54 620 900

,.

t Action

Time (sec) Burn Time (sec) Maximum Chamber Pressure

, .

(N/cm 2) (psi) Pressure (N/cm 2) (psi) (N/cm 2) (psi) (N/cm 2) (psi)

5.90 3.95 672 975 703 1,020 497 721 661 960 15,034 3,380

"

5.55 3.80 710 1,030 751 1,090 536 778 700 1,016 15,897 3,574 16,823 3,782 12,005 2,699 15,684 3,526 66,629 14,979 59,601 13,399

Maximum

Ignition

Chamber

Average

Action

Time

Chamber

Pressure

468 680 613 890 11,565 2,600

Average

Burn Time

Chamber

Pressure

Maximum

Thrust

(N) (Ib) Thrust (N) (ib) (N) (Ib)

Maximum

Ignition

15,746 3,540 11,129 2,502 14,812 3,330 65,664 14,762 58,511 13,154

Average

Action

Time Thrust

10,431 2,345 13,745 3,090 63,765 14,335 55,602 12,500

Average

Burn

Time Thrust

(N) (Ib) (N-s) (Ib-a)

Action

Time Total

Impulse

Burn Time

Total

Impulse

(N-s) (Ib-s)

TABLE RETRO ROCKET

13-11 PERFORMANCE

o_
O

Rocket Parameter i. 2. Burning Average Time (sec) (N/cm 2) (psi) (N) (ib) (N-s) (ib-s) i 1.48 1,213 1,760 170,514 38,333 252,361 56,733 2 1.49 1,224 1,775 171,746 38,610 255,906 57,530 3 1.49 1,227 1,780 171,950 38,656 256,209 57,598 4 1.51 1,182 1,715 165,821 37,278 250,390 56,290 Average 1.49 1,212 1,758 170,007 38,219 253,718 57,038 Nominal* 1.508 1,208 1,752 169,170 38,031 255,110 57,351

Pressure

3.

Average

Thrust

4.

Total

Impulse

i.

Burning Time - The interval between the time at which the pressure attains 10% of the maximum pressure during the buildup portion of the pressure curve, and the time at which the bisector of an angle (formed by the intersection of a line tangent to the pressure curve just prior to decay and a line tangent to the descending portion of the pressure curve) intersects the pressure curve. Average Average Total Pressure Thrust Impulse - Average - Average - Area of pressure of the the thrust thrust during during versus the burning the burning time curve time. time. during the burning time.

2. 3. 4. *

under

The results of one firing of the TE-M-29-5 solid motor with of 288.7K _ere extrapolated to vacuum conditions to obtain

s grain temperature the nominal values.

Thrust

(I000 N)

Thrust

(I000

ib)

25
m_ 20

[
Actual (Average Predicted (288.7K Grain

I
of Four Retro Rockets) 50 Temperature 610 km)

15

,,,

_-"

to-,

'
I

_r--

"

5 I

.....

I __

i0 20

0 .4 14].6 14].8 144.0 144.2 144.4 144.6 Range Time (sec) 13-2 TYPICAL RETRO ROCKET 144.8 145.0 145.2 145.4

FIGURE

THRUST

162

1.49

The retro seconds. was

rockets Average N-s

ignited at thrust was (57,038

143.53 170,006

sec range N (38,219

time and burned for ibf) and average

impulse 13.2.3

253,717

ibf-s).

SEPARATION

DYNAMICS the S-IVB The separaas planned of events

S-IB/S-IVB separation was completed at 144.48 sec when engine cleared the interstage, 0.93 sec after first motion. tion system functioned satisfactorily; all events occurred and within the desired time period. The separation sequence

is presented in Figure 13-3. Separation distance and motion were determined from extensometer data which closely followed the predicted separation distance as shown in Figure 13-4. The S-IB/S-IVB separation required 0.].5 m (6.0 in) of the 1.52 m (60 in) lateral clearance available. This required clearance corresponds to less than one sigma variation from nominal. Figure 13-5 shows the incremental velocities imparted between between the two S-IB/S-IVB stages. stages and the longitudinal accelerations

At separation command the S-IVB attitude errors and angular velocities were below the design values of i deg and i deg/s, respectively. During and immediately following separation, the attitude errors and velocities remained low and no problems were encountered in controlling the vehicle through The the transients S-IVB which angular accompanied velocities separation. measured during the separation

maximum

period were: 0.50 deg/s nose down in pitch, 0.90 deg/s nose left in yaw, and 0.i0 deg/s counterclockwise looking forward in roll. During these transients, the AACS did not fire to correct roll until 146 sec, 2.6 sec after separation. S-IVB attitude errors and S-IVB/S-IB angular velocities during separation are presented in Figures 13-6 and 13-7, respectively.

Enable Level Inboard Outboard Ullage

S-IB Sensors

Propellant Command Cutoff Cutoff Command 133.61 Comm 139.24 Co_ 142.68 143.23 143.44 143.55 0 90_ Thrust Clears Start Interstage Conunand 143.59 144.48 144.89 146.84 148.21 ._ A L\xxN_N_N_-N\\\_x_ A A_\\\x_x A

Engines Engines Ignition

Separation First Hotion

Command

Retrorocket J-2 J-2 J-2 J-2 Engine Engine Engine Engine

0 10_ Thrust @ 90% Thrust

135

137

139

141

143

145

147

149

Range Time (see) FIGURE 13-3 SEPARATION SEQUENCE OF EVENTS

164

Relative 9

Longitudinal

Translation

(m)

7
6 S-IVB 5 Eng, ine 4

Reconstructed Extensometer

Prom Data

I
I/ / _ Predicted '"

Clears

Interstage

"

l,

0 143

!j
FIGURE 13-4 S-IVB

14 _ Range Time (sec)

1_.5

SEPARATION

DISTANCE

165

Relative 3O

Velocity

(m/s)

I
I -Total

20
" 10

t I
i 0 S-IVB

I
-10

S-IB

-20
143

I
144 Range Time (sec) 14S

""
46

Longitudinal

Acceleration

(m/s 2)

i0

Separation ommand

Start Command _S-IVB Engine'

-to

o
143 FIGURE

I
I
I
144 Range Time (sec) S-IVB RELATIVE VELOCITY

'
I
I I
145 146 AND LONGITUDINAL ACCELERATION

-2o

13-5

166

Pitch Attitude (+ Nose Up)

Error

(deg)

-2-4_
140

_ I I
145

_ I
150 Range Time (see) 155 160

Yaw Attitude (+Nose Right)

Error

(deg)

4.

2.

_.--9o, Throst

-4-

140

145 Range

150 Time (sec)

I55

I60

Roll Attitude (+ CW Looking

Error (deg) Forward)

2 4 0 -2 -4 140

'_ Command _Separation ,-IVB

Engine Command

l l I I 11 I
145 150 FIGURE 13-6

I_ Aps Firig Motor T

155 (sec) DURING SEPARATION 160

Range Time

S-IVB ATTITUDE

Pitch

Angular

Velocity

(deg/s)

167

(+ Nose Up) 2

_First

Motion

II

S-[B
___

Co_andl _--_-Separation 1

I:
I!
ii

I
I

M"S-IVB

II
II

I
I_----Separation Complete

-2
143

II
144

I
145 (deg/s)

I
146 Range T_e

I
147 (see) 148 149 150

yaw Angular Velocity (+ Nose Right) 2 ii I

ii II
I II II

I ! I
i I

II
II -1 II

,' _E
-

;l_'-, ,
li
I I

II
-2 143 |1 Jl 144

, ,
I I I 145

_
146 Range Time (deg/s) 147

S-l_

148

149

150

(sec)

Roll Angular Velocit (+ CW Looking Forward

o li I _ ,"'T'-"
II -I 143 II 144 I I 145 146 Range FIGURE 13-7 T_e 147 (sec) ANGULAR 148

.__149 150

SEPA_TION

VE_CITIES

168

14.0 14.1 SUMMARY

(U)

VEHICLE

ELECTRICAL

SYST_S

The performance of all launch-vehicle stage electrical systems equalled or exceeded expectations throughout their normal flight periods. Battery performance--including voltages, currents, and temperatures--was satisfactory and remained within predicted tolerances. The electrical portions of each individual stage control system responded normally. The Secure Range Safety Command System (with Range Safety Decoder) was operable during flight. All Exploding Bridge Wire (EBW) firing units responded correctly. 14.2 S-IB STAGE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

Inflight power for the S-IB stage is supplied by two 28-volt, zinc-silver-oxide batteries (designated IDI0 and ID20). Each battery is rated at 2175 ampere-minutes. The power and distribution system consists of batteries, measurement voltage supplies, distributors, plug J-boxes, and interconnecting circuitry. Three master measuring voltage supplies are utilized to furnish a precisely regulated reference voltage to the telemetry system. Each power supply converts 28 v_c to a regulated 5-vdc reference voltage for use in the instrumentation measuring system. Transition from the S-IB-I configuration to the S-IB-3 configuration involved minor changes in the electrical networks. These changes included incorporation of a second propulsion system distributor (9A2) to provide for a third TOP switch, replacement of the MOD I Switch Selector with a MOD II-5 Switch Selector, and replacement of the range safety command system (DRW-13) with a secure range safety command system utilizing a command receiver (MCR-503) and a range safety decoder. The S-IB stage electrical system of the AS-203 vehicle operated satisfactorily during the entire flight, and all mission requirements were met. The voltage for each battery averaged 28 vdc throughout the normal flight period. Battery voltage drops correlated with significant vehicle events. The current on batteries IDI0 and ID20 averaged approximately profiles for 35 the amps throughout powered batteries are presented flight. The voltage in Figure 14-1. power and current

The following tabulation indicates battery amp-min and as a percent of rated capacity: Battery Capacity [amp-min) 2175 2175 Consumption (amp-min) (to separation) 85 105 (4.3%) (5.3%)

consumption

in

and Percent Consumed (thru playback) 105 153 (5.3%) (7.7%)

IDI0 in20

170

The master measuring voltage supplies performed satisfactorily. All thrust OK pressure switches and EBW units functioned properly. The average charge time for the retro-rocket EBW units was 0.8 second. The charge time for the separation EBW was 0.8 second. The destruct EBW units indicated no charge. The S-IB stage switch selector MOD 11-5, used to determine event times, performed satisfactorily. 14.3 S-IVB STAGE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

The S-IVB stage electrical system consisted of five batteries, one LOX chilldown inverter, one LH 2 chilldown inverter, a static inverterconverter, two 5-vdc excitation modules, seventeen 20-vdc excitation modules, and power switching and distribution equipment. The batteries designated forward i, 2 and 3 were rated at 18000, 300, and 4800 amp-min, respectively. The batteries designated aft i and 2 were rated at 4800 and 1500 amp-min, respectively. The battery current and voltage profiles for powered flight are presented in Figure 14-2 and, for the orbital period, in Figure 14-3. The following tabulation indicates battery power consumption in amp-min and as a percent of rated capacity: Capacity (amp-min) Fwd. Fwd. Fwd. Aft Aft I 2 3 i 2 18,000 300 4,800 4,800 1,500 Consumption (amp-min) 13,200 348 3,000 900 600 Percent Consumed

73 I00 63 19 40

Transition from the S-IVB-201 to the S-IVB-203 configuration involved certain changes in electrical power requirements, as indicated by the following array of differences in battery ratings: Batter_ AS-201 (amp-min) 4,800 3,480 (not used) AS-203 (amp-min) 18,000 4,800 4,800

Fwd. Aft Fwd.

i I 3

Forward battery 2 and aft battery 2 were rated identically on AS-201 and AS-203_ Forward battery i was a two-unit battery on AS-203. Forward battery 3, not used on AS-201, ment only. was present on AS-203 for the LH 2 experi-

When nternal power was switched on, the batteries had an average temperature of 308.9K which, by S-IVB cutoff, had gradually increased to an average 313.9K for all batteries. The average temperature for

_71

Forward

Battery

[ Voltage

(dc)

__

Voltage

___Current

Current

(ampg)

3_

_ -.....

-SO Forward

II Battery

50 2 Voltage (de)

100

_
[5() Range lSO Range

60

200 Time

2S0 (see)

3 0

35,

400

gSO Current

g00 {amps}

,U _--

[_,-S-IVB F_gine

--

10

32

--

--

24

-50

SO

[00

200 lime (see)

250

300

350

400

45C)

SOu

Forw&rd Mtlery

3 Vultage

[de)

C_rrent

(_,ips)

"7 _.,',o_e,, toI t I'"" _"F

I '

"I i

[ :

F _

1': (

; ,-,--,--,--,--,---,---,
Range Time Aft Battery [ Voltage (de) (scc}

-!_urrent (amps)

i
i l
['--, ,

_I_,.

.......
'

i....
J

"[o

32

2o

ii I L H U

'"

It!
II, II

I(,

12

16
24/ ....

[k,
I]!

8 -so

........

i 50

_ 100

S-IVB Engine Start CoOmand }SO 200 Range Time (see)

250

300

5-1VB _ggae f f _'_ I Cut i 350 400 450

5 )_

Aft

Battery

2 Voltage

(de)

Current

(amps) 80

_- ............

_Chilld

[nverters

Off

_0] ___

'

'

-- " }t_*dr_.uli

6o

"

't --1

I'1
tched to Internal Power

I_

'_

P_mp

It,
3! 400

.o

"i-t
]_Sw

---r
i IOO
ISO Range ZOO Time [sec) 2_(J

I I 3( [0

-5,J

I
14-2

I 11

I SO
S-IVB

_,l 4SI!
POWERED

SOL'

I,,
FLIGHT

FIGURE

BATTERY

VOLTAGE

AND

CURRENT

DURING

17_

l-orward

Btittery

I Voltage

(de)

--Voltage

------_urront

Current

{_psl 180

'r
'

i
b-_ s_te_ _

I
I

[ <!_ I
......

I
I I

; :b

i i6o I
llo

_o Ts !-'
_ISI "

:1 _

sp

' -_'-';r# _<T"-zr--_'_;<%7_7 _:bit --Tbi.d ........ 't-_-_ird Orbi

I I ] _.ti_,.,,, _sco,,,
for_ar_ 32 f I_tler) 4 .... 7 _oltale (dcj

_.,i_.

hOrb,<-_
D.,. I
{amps] 18

Current

7
i
s i

,s

+
i I
44 ---J_ I rs I
Orbit_l_i_ThiTd Oc "

'-

,
I

, t ' ;

_estart --F

I is sis
_,._.,--_Thlrd

ts
Orbit---t.4.,,_Fo_rt], Orbit _i_ Current

P;rst _orwatd Batter>

Or0zt--,.-+-_--Second, 3 Voltage (de)

(_saps)

I _1_-

I fls--

I - --7 #

__

I I

i
" F_r_t Uata 1_5_ orbit aft Battery I Voltage _ i_ _econd 0 K_ Dlti i

L-_I
ir Antigua r i)ata"_

'
p

I
ir r s

_- -----I

K$C nat. I

g.ntigum

Dat._l I (alps)

[de) I

Current

l-J:

I I

I I

i
;/

[
I

I
I I

f
i I i.ss__ fl II II

i
I i n It

_
I_-- --_ I [ I X k \--_t

i
lf- - -_ I I I I ___i,
L_ ---i

I ,i _
o

I me+t:,+'t _--I'_-_-'_

FI

I 1

I !

i I it___ T i JIt L_ L-_-IS.-

_ il I IIL I II i.__ ilL II I ..._ ....srs...._ .-_

Aft

,I. 4. LI. ,o _First Orbit_ Second Orbit_T_ird Orbit --_-_-.---Third Orbit--_-J_ Fourth Orbit -_ _,_I 2<_ (d)l , <_ _a<, '" I Antigua I 1(5C I AntillU,(llps) Dai,_ Data Dat,i I_tter_ _oltatle Current
I
I

si_

I ', I
I r I
Isi..l_t_[

I
I

I
I

I
I

I.o
I

I I
I

I I
1 I

i
I I

I
f I

I
t'

_o --1-_ I

s_86,s

$90_.0

,o_

t
Orbit_-_---Thi!d Orbit _-l----Thi_d KSC [lit& Antxg_a Data I %_

I
Oxo't-_ FOUrth Orbit---J Data iA_tiiua Oita

_First Orbit+_:ond I K_C Data I

FIGURE

14-3

S-IVB BATTERY

VOLTAGE

AND CURRENT

DURING ORBITAL

PERIOD

173

all

batteries

throughout

the

orbital

period

was

313.1K.

These that

temperathe

ture levels and the batteries performed

current properly

and voltage throughout

profiles indicate the flight.

The static inverter-converter and the chilldown inverters performed well. At umbilical disconnect, tile static inverter-converter voltage was 121.65 vac; the voltage remained at this level to S-IVB engine cutoff. The LH 2 chilldown inverter supplied power effectively to the LH 2 chilldown pump; the voltage was a nominal 55.0 vac at 402.0 Hz, and operating temperature was 313.9K. The LOX chilldown inverter supplied power effectively to the LOX chilldown pump; the voltage was a nominal 55.0 vac at 398.8 Hz. All EBW firing units performed properly. The ullage rocket ignition EBW units were charged at 139.62 sec; normal ullage rocket ignition occurred, on command, at 140.23 seconds. The ullage rocket jettison EBW units were charged at 152.34 sec, and they discharged at 155.43 seconds. Data indicated that all three ullage rockets were jettisoned properly. The S-IVB stage switch selector (Mod II) and sequencer performed

as expected. The electrical portions of the S-IVB control system responded correctly to the commands generated in the Instrument Unit and relayed by the switch selector and the sequencer. 14.4 INSTRUMENT UNIT (IU) ELECTRICAL SYSTEM These hydroxide

Four batteries electrolyte,

batteries provided the 28 vdc power for S-IU-203. were 20-cell alkaline silver-zinc with potassium each rated at 18,000 ampere-minutes.

Two power supplies converted the unregulated 28 vdc from the batteries to regulated 56 vdc required for ST-124M platform electronics and to highly regulated 5 vdc used as excitation and reference voltage for transducers and signal conditioning equipment. Four types of distributor ponents. provided power/signal distribution and switching for IU com-

The Instrument Unit (as well as the stages of AS-203) was equipped with a switch selector, which consisted of electronic and electromechanical components that decoded the digital flight sequence commands issued by the LVDC/LVDA and that activated the proper circuits to execute the command. The switch selectors used on AS-203 differed from those used on AS-201 in that internal circuitry was quadruple-redundant, resulting in a significant increase in reliability. The commands formed by the AS-203 switch selectors and the time at which they executed are listed in Section 16.4, Table 16-11. perwere

174

The electrical system performed within tolerance as expected. The performance of thermally controlled multi-orbit mission was evaluated for the first time

and satisfactorily, batteries on s on AS-203. The

batteries functioned satisfactorily. The relation of battery voltages and currents to flight time is depicted in Figure 14-4. The relation of battery temperatures to flight time is depicted in Figure 14-5. The . O hlghest battery temperature recorded was approxlmately 311 K, for the battery (6D20) with the heaviest load. This was somewhat below the expected 322K and well below the maximum (over 338.7K) at which the batteries function properly. The following tabulation indicates the range of performsnce of the four batteries during the first 470 sec of AS-203 flight: Battery 6DI0 6D20 6D30 6D40 Voltage 28.2-28.0 27.4-27.2 27.8-27.6 27.5-27.2 Current 26-23 35-34 32-28 18-17 Temperature 291-292 292-293 291-292 291-292 power deg deg deg deg K K K K in

The following tabulation indicates battery amp-min and as a percent of rated capacity: Battery Capacity (amp-rain) 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 Consumption (amp-rain) 8,969 12,980 10,700 6,110

consumption

Percent

Consumed

6DI0 6D20 6D30 6D40

50 72 60 34

The 56-volt supply functioned well (as did the systems dependent on it for power). The voltage variations were similar to those witnessed during the AS-201 flight. The excursions in bus voltage were within the regulation limits at the estimated load of 3-4 amperes. Figure 14-6 depicts the envelope of 56-volt bus voltage vs flight time and the regulation requirements for bands of load current. The 5-volt supply performed properly and maintained voltage within

allowable limits (_ 0.005 volt), within the accuracy of the measuring telemetry system. There is no evidence of any discrepancy in distributor performance. The IU switch selector (Mod II), used to determine event times, performed satisfactorily, with no known significant discrepancies.

AMPS

VOLTS

AMPS

VOLTS

AMPS

VOLTS

AMPS

VOLTS

"='1
I_

I"
.

O O

Voltage 60.0

(dc) 'Upper Limit I _ I for Loads 8.1-I0 amp

59.0 59.5 58.5 ..... 58.0

Upper Limit" f[ r Loads 1 1.I-8 am)s

57.0 Upper Limit 56.5 56.0 55.5 55.0 1 I Lower Limit for Loads 0-1 amp i " ..... for Loads 0-i amp

54.0 ! 53.5 Lower Limit for Loads 1.1-8 amp i

53.0
Lower Limit 52.5 52"0-20 for Loads

I
8.1-10 amp 1 200

20

40

60

80

i00 R_nge

120 Time

140 (sec)

160

180

220

240

260

FIGURE

14-6

6D51 BUS VOLTAGE

ENVELOPE AND REGULATION

REQUIRF_Eh_S

178

15.0 15.1 SUMMARY

(U)

RANGE

SAFETY AND COMMAND

SYSTEMS

PERFORMANCE

Data indicated that the redundant Secure Range Safety Command Destruct Systems on both the S-IB and S-IVB stages were ready to perform their functions properly on command_ if flight conditions had required, and that the safe-disconnect system responded properly to command. The command system opereted satisfactorily. 15,2 COld, AND DESTRUCT SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE

Identical Secure Range Safety Command Destruct Systems (RSCDS) were operational on the S-IB-3 and S-IVB-203 stages, and replaced the nonsecure RSCDS, operational on AS-201. On AS-201, the secure RSCDS was flown as a passenger for developmental purposes. The primary difference between the secure and non-secure RSCDS is in the digital decoder. The new digital decoder provides a high degree of security (protection) against unfriendly intentional RF interrogation and against unintentional false alarms. The increased security is the result of the extremely large number of coding arrangements that are available on the new digital decoder. The primary purpose of the command destruct system is to provide a means of terminating the vehicle flight upon radio command from the ground. Three types of range safety command were required for this unmanned flight, as follows: i. Arm/Cutoff thrust termination. 2. Destruct - Arming of the Exploding Bridge Wire (EBW) and

- Firing

of the EBW. the command decoding equipment from its

power

3. Safe - Disconnecting supply.

During the AS-203 flight, telemetry indicated that the command antenna, receivers/decoders, destruct controllers, and EBW firing units would have performed satisfactorily if needed. EBW firing unit data indicated the units were in the required state of readiness. Because the flight was successful, no arm/cutoff or destruct commands were required; therefore, all data except receiver signal strength telemetry remained unchanged during the flight. At 483.2 sec, the safing command was initiated; and data (signal strength telemetry) dropped to the telemetry noise level that indicates system deactivation.

179

15.3

INSTRUMENT The command sent

UNIT system

COMMAND

SYSTEM

PERFORMANCE The on 41 different first trans-

operated all

satisfactorily. and accepted

commands mission.

by KSC

were

received

the

180

16.0 16.1 SUMMARY

(U)

EMERGENCY

DETECTION

SYSTEM

(EDS)

PERFORMANCE

The AS-203 EDS functioned properly in the open-loop configuration. (This success permits a closed-loop test flight on AS-202.) The three EDS buses were energized properly. The auto abort circuit was enabled at liftoff and was deactivated prior to S-IB cutoff arming. Manual/EDS cutoff was armed at the right time by the switch selector. The cutoff enable backup timer also functioned properly. Thrust indications were proper throughout powered flight, and two or more S-IB engines-out were indicated at S-IB inboard engines cutoff. The redundant Q-ball operated satisfactorily, the outputs followed simulations based on pre-launch winds, and there were no guidance failure indications. There were no overrate 16.2 switch closures, and the auto-abort bus was not energized

SYSTEM

DESCRIPTION

Emergency conditions of such a nature that vehicle breakup could occur before the Apollo crew could respond will allow the EDS to initiate an automatic abort. Emergency conditions to which the crew could respond by effective action are displayed by the EDS in the Spacecraft. Figure 16-1 presents the general relation of the EDS to vehicle stages and systems. Figure 16-2 is a funct:ona| diagram of the AS-203 EDS. The switch selector and the EDS timers control the portions of the EDS to be deactivated during certain segments of flight. The spacecraft also has the capability of deactivating the automatic abort mode. An automatic i. 2. abort An Two may be activated rate engines are of the out by either of the following in pitch, boost. and are as conditions: yaw or roll.

excessive or more

launch during in

vehicle f;rst the

stage

Manual abort follows: i 2 3 4 5 6

conditions

displayed

spacecraft

Vehicle S-IB S-IVB Vehicle Abort

angular out out

overrate

about

any

axis

engines engine

attitude request

reference ground Ap

failure control (Q-ball)

from

Angle-of-attack

sensor

181

FIGURE

16-I

_ERGENCY

DETECTION

SYSTE_

GENERAL

BLOCK

DIAGRAM

PAYLOAD

. Ill

TM (AUTO-ABORT)

_ _ (MANUAL ABORT INDICATIONS)

_ f, _ _ t_
SELECTOR IU CUT(_F ENABLE
,,,,,

VOTING LOGIC

_ LV ATTITUDE

S- I VB

S- IVB CUTOFF _'

ANGULAR OVERRATES ( P,Y, &R)

_ _

__J _]

s- IVB THI_J ST '

o
'IN

S-IB

S-IB CUTOFF

S-IB 2 ENGINES OUT

-t

S-IB THRUST

)
MCC

FIGURE

16-2

AS-203

EDS FUNCTIONAL DIAGRAM

183

7.

Attitude Sys tern Angular gation that EDS

error

indication

from

Spacecraft

Guidance

and

Navigation

8.

overrate System are used

indication

from

Spacecraft

Guidance

and

Navi-

Components i. 2. 3. 4.

primarily

for

the

EDS

are:

Distributor Timer angle-oi-aetaek Escape Tower sensor (not applicable to AS-203)

40-sec Q-Ball Launch

Other components are involved in the EDS but are primary functions of other systems. Most measurements applicable to the EDS are discrete on/off indications. The control-EDS rate gyro package provides analog signals to rate switches that are direct inputs to the EDS. The AS-203 EDS differed slightly from the AS-201 EDS configuration. Since there was no spacecraft on AS-203, EDS included only the launch vehicle portion. EDS signals from the launch vehicle crossed to LV/Payload interface and were returned to the IU and telemetered. This permitted verification of the interface. The redundant Q-ball was flown for the first time on AS-203, and the S-IB engines had three thrust-OK switches each. The on-pad automatic checkout of the LV EDS was as planned for manned flights. However, the ground computer interface problem encountered in the checkout of AS-201 was not present on AS-203 because no spacecraft was flown on the AS-203 mission. Although the overrate sensing system had the capability for inflight rate limit switching, this capability was not utilized on AS-203. The overrate sensing system also included filtering between the rate gyro outputs and the rate switches to reduce the noise problem witnessed on AS-201. 16.3 EDS Three BUS VOLTAGE supplied the EDS from IU batteries Bus as follows:

buses

Battery 6DIO 6D30 6D40

EDS

6D91 6D92 6D93

184

These buses were energized when the IU was powered and remained energized throughout flight. Characteristic voltage fluctuations are shown in Section 14.0 as battery voltages. 16.4 EDS EVENT TIMES Events associated with the EDS occurred properly. received from the rate switches. Automatic abort No overrates (in open loop

were

mode) was enabled at liftoff. Arming of the EDS Manual cutoff of S-IB and S-IVB engines occurred at approximately 40 seconds. Switch selector backup for this signal occurred at 60.82 see as planned. Angular overrate automatic abort was disabled at 135.01 sec, and two-engines-out automatic abort uas disabled at 135.43 seconds. Table 16-1 shows signals pertinent to the EDS that were telemetered. Table 16-11 gives switch selector event times associated with the EDS. The auto-abort bus +6D95, which initiates the abort sequence, did not energize during AS-203 flight. The engine discrete indications were proper; no EDS engine cutoff commands were issued. 16.5 THRUST OK PRESSURE SWITCHES

Engine thrust is used as an abort display on Saturn IB vehicles. There is an automatic abort on two or more engines-out from liftoff to 0.2 sec before S-IB stage cutoff arming. There is also provision for deactivation of automatic abort and simultaneous activation of manual abort capability at any time during powered flight. Switch-selector deactivation during boost is a backup for manual deactivation. The H-I engines on AS-203 utilized three calip-type thrust pressure (TOP) switches with 2-out-of-3 voting logic. The TOP sense fuel pump outlet pressure, which is a function of thrust pressure. The nominal H-I TOP operating pressures in terms of chamber pressure are as follows: Switches Switches close at 441 N/cm 2 (640 psi) open at 427 N/cm 2 (620 psi) OK switches chamber thrust

The J-2 engine utilizes two TOP switches (as on AS-201) with logic such that both switches must open to indicate loss of thrust in _he spacecraft. The TOP switches monitor the main oxidizer injector pressure. The nominal J-2 TOP operating pressures are as follows: Switches Switches close at 345 + 20.7 N/cm 2 (500 + 30 psi) open at 293 +__--17.2/cm 2 (425 +_-25 psi) N times and p_ssures be noted, however,

for

Table 16-111 gives the switch actuation the S-IB stage of AS-203. It should

185 TABLE TELEMETERED 16-1 EDS SIGNALS

Meas. K9-602

No. EDS S-IB (Engines

Title One Engine 1-8) Out

Range i]9.52

Time

(sec)

KI0-602

EDS S-IB One Engine (Engines 2-8) EDS S-IB Two Engine Signal A EDS S-IB Two Engine Signal B EDS +6D95

Out

139.52

KII-602

Out

139.52

K12-602

Out

139.52

K13_602 K14-602

Bus Energized Engine

0 Volts

Throughout

Mission

EDS S-IB or S-IVB Cutoff from SC EDS or Manual S-IB or S-IVB EDS or Manual S-IB or S-IVB EDS Manual or S-IVB

No Cutoffs Mission 0 Volts

Throughout

K15-602

Cutoff

of

Throughout

Mission

K16-602

Cutoff

of

0 Volts

Throughout

Mission

K17-602

Cutoff

of S-IB

60.82

Engine

Armed of S-IB or ON from 41.5

K18-602

EDS Manual

Cutoff

or S-IVB Engine (40 sec timer) K57-603 K58-603 R31-602 R32-602 Q-Ball Q-Ball EDS

Armed

on Indication on Indication

Bus 6D21 Bus 6D41

ON at -17.0, OFF ON at -17.0, OFF None

at at

140.3 140.3

Rate Gyro

Roll Activate Pitch and Yaw

EDS Rate Gyro Act ira te EDS EDS Liftoff Liftoff A B

None 0.92 0.92

KI15-602 KI16-602

186

TABLE SWITCH SELECTOR

16-11 PERTINENT TO EDS

FUNCTIONS

Parameters Liftoff Auto-Abort Multiple Enable Enable Engine Launch Rate Rate Relays Reset

Range

Time 0.86 5.83

(sec)

Cutoff

Enable EDS Cutoff Inhibit Inhibit Enable

10.87 60.82 134.83 135.01 135.21 135.43 139.24 140.23

Vehicle

Excessive Excessive

(Y, P or R) Auto-Abort (Y, P or R) Auto-Abort Inhibit Inhibit

S-IB Engine S-IB Engine Inboard Q-Ball S-IB

Out Auto Abort Out Auto Abort Cutoff

Enable

Engine

Power Off Engine Cutoff

Outboard

142.68 143.44 144.89 OK Pressure Switches 145.08 433.3.5

S-IB/S-IVB S-IVB

Separation Start

Engine

EDS Arming

of S-IVB Thrust Cutoff

S-IVB Engine

TABLE

16-III

SWITCH

ACTUATION

TIMES

AND

PRESSURES

FOR

S-IB

&

S-IVB

THRUST

OK

PRESSURE

SWITCHES

Actuation

Deactuation

Engine

TOPS

Time* (N/cm 2)

Pc (psi) 574 574 574 605 605 605 610 613 614 651 652 651 588 584 590 597 597 597 601 611 601 624 612 620

Time** (N/cm 2) 142.783 142.783 142.822 142.783 142.783 142.822 142.783 142.777 142.822 142.783 142.777 142.733 139.452 139.442 139.404 139.452 139.442 139.404 139.452 139.442 139.404 139.452 139.435 139._04 454.36 454.36 431.61 439.20 439.70 377.83 435.75 435.75 377.83 430.23 430.23 466.78 420.58 435.07 468.15 379.90 401.96 457.12 363.01 396.45 456.43 363.70 401.96 468.15

Pc (psi) 659 659 626 637 637 548 632 632 548 624 624 677 610 631 679 551 583 663 541 575 662 542 583 679

Time*** (N/cm 2) 142.866 142.866 142.905 142.866 142.866 142.905 142.866 142.860 142.905 142.866 142.860 142.816 139.535 139.525 139.487 139.535 139.525 139.487 139.535 139.525 139.487 139.535 139.518 139.487 363.35 363.35 257.17 266.83 266.83 170.30 268.21 282.69 143.41 270.96 280.62 369.56 199.26 413.69 335.09 121.69 159.27 269.59 122.04 151.00 258.55 iii.01 151.68 240.63

Pc (psi) 527 527 373 387 387 247 389 410 208 393 407 536 289 600 486 191 231 391 177 219 375 161 220 349

i 2 3 i 2 3 l 2 3 i 2 3

-1.098 -i.099 -I.098 -1.197 -I.198 -1.198 -0.972 -0.957 -0.946 -1.096 -1.088 -1.098 -1.415 -1.418 -1.409 -1.293 -1.293 -1.293 -1.481 -1.473 -1.479 -1.324 -1.353 -1.332

395.26 395.76 395.76 417.13 417.13 417.13 420.58 422.63 423.52 448.84 449.52 448.84 405.41 402.64 406.79 411.62 411.62 411.62 414.37 421.27 414.37 430.23 421.95 427.47

I 2 3 l 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

J-2

I 2

147.72 147,72

367 367

532 532

433.49 433.49

496 496

719 719

] 1

I
*Range **Range ***Range

times times times

obtained from the digital data. indicated by [light minus 83 milliseconds. as indicated by flight data.

188

that the TOP switch operations are telemetered at a sampling rate of 12 samples/sec, which can introduce some error in the indicated operating times especially during thrust decay at cutoff, when the pressures drop quite rapidly. 16.6 EDS RATE GYROS

The rate sensor system used on AS-203 utilized filters between the rate gyro outputs and the overrate switches. These filters were sdded to preclude overrate switch actuation due to noise or vibration such as occurred on AS-201. Figure 16-3 shows the pitch, yaw, and roll rate gyro outputs, filtered and unfiltered, during the liftoff period of flight. The greatest disturbance occurred in the pitch axis before liftoff, when the peak-to-peak angular rate was approximately 2 deg/s. This disturbance was attenuated to less than i deg/s peak-to-peak. The angular overrate settings on AS-203 were + 5 deg/s (10 deg peak-to-peak) in the pitch and yaw axes and + 20 deg/s _40 deg peak-to-peak) in the roll axis. 16.7 Q-BALL DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURES

There were three Q-ball pressure measurements, one of which was a vector sum of the other two measurements (pitch and yaw). The pitch and yak Q-ball measurements did not exceed 0.34 N/cm 2 differential (0.5 psid) from liftoff to approximately 140 sec of flight, when Q-ball power was turned off. The vector sum of the redundant measurements substantiated the pitch and yaw components. This measurement was red-lined at 1.7 N/cm 2 differential (2.5 psid). Both vector sum outputs were identical and followed simulations based on prelaunch winds. Figure 16-4 depicts the pitch and yaw Q-ball outputs, and their vector sum. (Vector sums below a threshold of 0.i are not reflected on the vector-sum curve because of inherent electronic limitations in the measuring system.) 16.8 LAIFNCH VEHICLE ATTITUDE REFERENCE MONITORING

The angular displacement of the launch vehicle is measured by the gimbal angles on the ST-124M platform. A reasonableness test is performed on the rates of change of gimbal angles before these are accepted by the LVDC. The stabilized platform has redundant pickoffs on the gimbals. If unreasonable angular rates are measured in the primary measuring mode (fine pickoff), the last valid reading is used and the system switches to the backup mode (coarse pickoff). Failure of the coarse pickoff measurement to pass the reasonableness test eventuates in an indication that the launch vehicle attitude reference has failed.

(%)
I0.... _ -I0.... t" ._-,: _-_: UNFILTERED ROLL :

(%)
I00 l I i|i Jill ...... , ,_' i ill'

-I0-

FILTERED ROLL O IO 20 . 30 RANGE TIME (SEC) 40 50 " 60

FIGURE 16-3

EDS RATE GYRO OUTPUT

Pressure 0.4

(N/cm 2)

Pitch

Pressure

(psi) 0.5

o
-0.4 0 i0 20 30 Pressure 0.4 (N/cm 2)

_/
40 50 60 70 80 (sec) APressure 90 i00 ii0 120 130 140 150 Range Time Yaw

0
0.5 (psi) _ 0.5

-0.4 0 i0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Range Time (sec) Vector S_ I00 ii0 120 130 140 150

0.5

Pressure 0.8

(N/_ 2)

_Pressure

(psi) 1.0

0.4 i 0 I0

_'__ 20 30 40 50

_ 60 Range FIGURE 16-4 Q-BALL

_ 70 Time 80 (sec) PRESSURES 90 i00 Ii0 120 130 140 150

0.5 Measurement Threshold

DIFFERENTIAL

191

The

reasonableness

limits

on

the AS-203

vehicle

were

set

such

that

an angular displacement in excess of 0.4 deg must occur in at least three 40 ms minor computation cycles of a major computation cycle (approximately i sec) before sensing is switched to the backup mode. Reasonableness test failures must then occur an additional 15 times during the to exist. next second before a guidance reference failure is considered

The maximum angular displacement that occurred during a single minor computation cycle on the AS-203 flight was 0.095 degree. Since this represents only 23% of the angular rate that must occur as stated above before a loss of launch vehicle guidance reference would result, no guidance reasonableness test failure was indicated on AS-203.

192

17.0 17.1 SUMMARY

(U)

STRUCTURES

The postflight predicted longitudinal load for the AS-203 vehicle compares favorably with the flight measured accelerometer and strain data. The postflight predicted bending moment and strain data values did not compare so well as those for AS-201. This was probably due to the low bending moment experienced by AS-203. Total vehicle loads, due to the combined longitudinal load and bending moment, were below limit design values and, therefore, the stress levels in key structural members were below their limit design value. Measured vehicle first and second bending mode data compares favorably with dynamic test data. There was no indication that Pogo occurred. The fin bending and torsion modes measured on AS-203 compare well with those from AS-201. The S-IB, S-IVB,and IU stage structure and component vibrations were as expected. H-I engine vibrations were as expected. During the start transient, the J-2 engine L0X turbopump vibration level was the highest recorded in flight or static testing; however, no apparent structural failure or degradation in pump performance occurred. 17.2 17.2.1 TOTAL VEHICLE LOADS LOADS AND MOMENTS

LONGITUDINAL

Vehicle postflight predicted longitudinal force distributions were computed using the mass characteristics of AS-203 and the applied forces from the trajectory data recorded during S-IB stage burn. The longitudinal accelerations obtained from the analysis agree with values measured of 56.9 during flight at all time points. The maximum m/s 2 occurred at 139.2 sec, the time of IECO. acceleration

and

Comparisons between values derived from 17-1 for the

the postflight predicted longitudinal strain measurements at Sta. 23.9 m are conditions of maximum bending and maximum

force presented com-

in Figure

pression. The strain values are 12% greater than the computed values for the conditions of maximum bending. The AS-201 and AS-203 vehicle longitudinal loads, determined from strain measurements at Sta. 23.9 m, are compared in Figure 17-2. 12.2.2 BENDING MOMENTS moment at Sta. 23.9 m peaked with a resultant of 1,148,058 shown in Figure 17-3. At 69.9 at two and sec the

time

The AS-203 vehicle bending points, 69.9 and 73.8 sec, N-m respectively, as

1,205,699

193

T = 139.3 sec M = 8.56 ax = 56.967 m/s 2 ['_ Strain Data

T = 73.8 see M = 2.01 Q = 40,093 N/m 2 ,_ = i.234 deg = 2.646 deg ax = 22.506 m/s 2 O Strain Data

T = 69.6 sec M = 1.79 a x = 21.526 m/s 2 _ Strain Data

Longitudinal i0000

Force (i000 N)

Longitudinal

Force (i000

ib)

2000 I I 8000 .... i '

I
6000 -_j I I | I_- -i 1600

1200

I
40O0 --

.1-; , 800

! I I I

400 !

I
0 60 50 40 Vehicle 30 Station 20 (m) I0 0 0

FIGURE

17-1

VEHICLE

LONGITUDINAL

FORCE DISTRIBUTION

Longitudinal

Load

(I000

N)

6000
AS-201

I
5720 max @ 141.5 sec f AS-203 5338 max @ 139 2 sec t f j
J

5000

.y
I _/

i/

"/

4000

3000

11

'

'

'

'

20

40

60 Range

80 Time (see) STRAIN

I00

120

140

160

FIGURE

17=2

LONGITUDINAL

LOAD

(FROM

DATA

AT

STA.

23.9

M)

[95

Vehicle 0 60 I

Station

(m) 0.5 l l.O I 1.5 I

Normal

load

Factor 2,0 , I

(m/s 2)

50 Pitch T = 73.3 Q M ,_ :: O" i 30 1 I O" = _ = = sec

40 I I

C0093 N,'m" 2.01 0,80 deg 2,06 deg Strain Data TM Acceleration

Moment

....

yav

I
i 20 ,_ A // 1 / / tO ++ // M T _ ?'I.B sec 2,0I
TM

i
O O I 200

Q = _ = _ = /k.

LOD93 deg 2 i_,<m (I.94 [.66 deg Strain Data

Moment

- TM

Acceleration

i _ 400 Sending

, 600 M[_ment

(1000

i 800 N=m)

10OO

' t200

vehicle 0 60

Station

(m) 0.5 I

Normal 1.0 [ L.5 I

Load

Factor 2,0 t

(mls 2)

50 -

\ *_ \ I T = 6g,9 H = _ : 1.79 1+079 deg sec

&O \

17- Strain Data Moment " = 2.627 deg O" 1)4 Acceleration

\ 30 _ I X %\ % _ \ A

"_. X_ N

.... T :

Resultant 73,8 sec

9

0 /

M = &O093 N,m Q = 2,CI ++ _ = 1,234 deg I_ = 2.646 deg A. Strain Data Moment O " TM Acceleration

20_

% \ 104 % \ % 0 O 200 400 Beading 600 Moment (i000 800 N-m) 1000 1200

FIGURE

17-3

VEHICLE

BENDING

MOMENT

196

bending moment resultant was

was primarily approximately

in the yaw 45 deg from

plane and the pitch

at 73.8 and yaw

sec the planes.

The

pitch and yaw components for the 73.8 sec resultant presented. The maximum bending moments experienced imately 19% of design limit. 17.2.3 The BODY BENDING OSCILLATIONS bending modes are compared

moment are also by AS-203 are approx-

AS-203

vehicle

to dynamic

test

bending modes for the pitch and yaw condition in Figure 17-4. The scatter of inflight data points is probably due to coupling of the tank cluster modes with the main bending modes. The vehicle response amplitudes at the first and second bending frequencies for the pitch and yaw conditions amplitudes pressure. 17.2.4 A are presented in in Figure the regions 17-5. These plots reflect peak occurring of Mach 1 and maximum dynamic

LONGITUDINAL total of

DYNAMIC

ANALYSIS was

(POGO) reviewed for longitudinal response.

26 measurements

Using measurements with suitable response, a PAVAN analysis was performed.to determine predominant frequencies and amplitudes. Table 17-I shows representative structural measurements and predominant frequencies for specific time points during first stage burn. Analysis for the transient periods of S-IVB ignition and cutoff and for S-IB transients periods shows no unusual trends. A stability evaluation was made to determine if a closed-loop

longitudinal instability occurred during first stage powered flight. This was accomplished by inspecting the pressure and vibration curve forms for corresponding buildups in amplitude. The liftoff transient recorded in the nose cone decayed from a maximum of 1 g variation at liftoff to approximately 0.3 g's by 6 seconds. The measurement indicated very little excitation throughout the rest of the first stage flight. Vibrations at the engine thrust pads were essentially sinusoidal in nature and had a maximum variation of 1.5 g's at 1 to 2 sec of flight time. This decayed to approximately 0.4 g's by 6 seconds. It remained at essentially this level for the remainder of the flight. While some vibration and pressure variations did seem to be periodic at times, there was no buildup in amplitudes due to coupling of the fluid and structural vibrations. This would seem to indicate the absence of a closed-loop phenomenon low during frequency any structural/propulsion of first stage longitudinal powered flight. instability portion

yrt-qu_y (HZ}

PITCH

Freque_{ {_z} v LO

YAW - ---

o.

JJ

,;
*

_o

60 gO Rsnge 71me {Qe]

IO0

L20

i _, J i
140 ACt pged [_ -_ .... Node t_t ge_dLng .}ndI_endLng

20

_C

6C Ra_e ll_e

_0 (se_)

tOC

120

l_C

Frequea_y (HZ)

Fr,'n.e_? (gz}

,o !
....

I 1i
/f :--: _

l'.,j
-_e i .... _-_i
o

-7

i- - --;--_---e}

o'o _a

I -R-_----_

! T_, _- ...... 1
2(; _C 6e 8_ R_n_e Ti_e {_e)

2B

_o

_o go I_ar_e Tz,_e (see')

1._

12o

1_o .!

1oo

',

i;,c

lac

'

--_,,- I i-

i ;--;_
_'_'

_ i i ! 0/ ....
--;)--_ !---i .... *

2O

cO

Bo Ra_Re TI_

80 (_ec)

Ioo

L2O

L 0

2C

_0

6O _am_" T_u

_ {se<)

IOC

I_0

l_O

FIGURE

17-4

VEHICLE

BENDING

MODES

pIZCH

Y_

_0

_0

_O

60

8n

lOO

l_N

1_o

_0

6C

t0C_

_C

I_

_c_e]e_._i<,_G_I (

S_o_

2_._ =

L_.

station 21.9

o I
0 2e 40 6o R_uge Ti_ _ (lee) i0c 120

!i
14 0 0 20

,
[ _0 _0 8o _angc ?ime (_f:?

L00

_20

l_o

a.o_

o.e_

i O.OL -i --

! '

\\ 0,0_

20

t*O

6O

80

tuo

1_0

L_O

20

_0

SO

100

_2C

14C

FIGURE

17-5

VEHICLE

BENDING

AMPLITUDES

199

TABLE LONGITUDINAL

17-1 FREQUENCIES

RESPONSE

Representative Time (sec) E385-I E386-5 Longitudinal -1.99 to 0 7.0 I0.5 17.0 19.0 24.0 5.5 I0.0 18.5 21.0 22.5 24.0 8.0 I0.0 18.5 21.5 23.5

Measurements Ell-If

(Structural) E534-I_I (Hz) 7.0 9.5 19.5 21.5 A13-900

E506-8

Predominant 5.5 i0.0 19.5 23.0

Frequencies

7.5 i0.0 20.5 21.5 24.0

6.5 i0.5 17.0 19.0 23.0

-0.09 to 1.40

7.0 9.0 i0.0 18.5 22.5 24.5 9.5 11.5 15.5 24.0 12.0 16.0 24.0

8.0 10.5 15.5 18.5 24.0

6.0 7.0 i0.0 19.0 22.5

6.O I0.0 18.5 22.5

5.5 7.0 I0.0 18.0 20.5

137.5 to 139.5

12.0 14.0 17.5 23.0 12.0 14.5 18.0 22.0 24.0

9.0 12.0 14.0 18.5 8.5 12.0 18.5 24.0

12.0 21.0 22.0

11.5 14.5 21.0

12.0 18.0 21o0

139.6 to 141.6

13.0 19.5 22.5

12.0 20.0 24.0

11.5 18.0 22.0

200

17.3 17.3.1

S-IB STAGE ANALYSIS S-IB FIN BENDING AND TORSION on the S-IB-3 fins to measure the

There

were six accelerometers

modal characteristics of the fins during powered flight. One measurement failed after 5 sec of flight and three measurements exceeded their range during liftoff, Mach i, and max Q portions of flight. The evaluation of the available data was limited to defining predominant frequencies only. The data in a frequency range of 0 to 80 Hz was analyzed for various time periods during S-IB burn. Figure 17-6 presents the predominant frequencies versus vehicle velocity for fin 5 and fin 7 compared to those recorded on AS-201 flight. The AS-203 values confirm the analysis results that no true flutter conditions existed during critical flight periods. The minimum spread between the first two frequencies occurred near the time corresponding to maximum dynamic pressure, but the coupling of the two modes was insufficient to produce flutter. The frequencies obtained agree with the first two natural frequencies obtained by analysis. The maximum amplitude response of the fins at these frequencies could not be determined due to the data being clipped. 17.3.2 S-IB STAGE VIBRATIONS

The S-IB-3 stage structure and component vibration environments were measured with accelerometers which gave valid data throughout first stage powered flight. The vibration envelopes for the stage structure and components are presented in Figures 17-7 and 17-8, respectively. A summary of the measurements is presented in Table 17-11. 17.3.3 H-I ENGINE VIBRATIONS

The H-I engine vibration envelopes are presented in Figure 17-9. The levels recorded in flight are considered to be within the usual scatter band for engine measurements. There _as no indication of engine instability or rough combustion. A summary of the engine measurements is included in Table 17-11. 17.4 17.4.1 S-IVB STAGE ANALYSIS S-IVB VIBRATIONS

The structural and component vibration measurements made on the S-IVB stage are summarized in Table 17-111. Of these measurements, two did not provide us&ble data. Measurements on basic structure included three at the field splice at position II; six on the LH 2 tank at Sta. 36.5 m, 45 deg apart; and three on the engine gimbal block. Component measurements included three at the telemetry antenna in the

201

AS-201 --_-Fin 5 :'i"_f::_:k"_! _----._-_ Fin 7

AS-203 OFin QFin 5 7

Predominant 6O

Frequencies

(Hz)

50

40

__

1st

Torsion

2O

10

0 0 200 400 600 800 Vehicle Velocity (m/s) 17-6 FIN BENDING i000 1200 1400

FIGURE

AND TORSION

MODES

202

Acceleration 10

(Gms)

Spider

Beam

.....

_--

, .2
_

!
2".:

-20 AO 60 Range B0 Time (see) AS-201 AS-20_ 100 120 140 160

Acceleration 5

(Gins)

Upper

Structure

....

1 ..... _/s[LLL]/_s

//'/Jl////

0 20 40 60 Range gO Time (see) i00 120 140 I00

Acceleration 8

(Grms)

Engine

Thrust

Be_

-_-_

7,lf_i/V]/i_',",,'"i

20

40

60 Range

80 Time (see)

I00

120

140

160

FIGURE

17-7

$-IB

STRUCTURE

VIBRATION

EI_/ELOPES

203 Acceleration 8 (Grms) Instrument Panel, F-2

....

i!t
0 20 40 60 80 Range Time (sec) Acceleration 6 (Grms) Distributor, 9A-3

I,
i00 120 140 AS-203 _ AS-201 160

13 0 20 40 60 80 Range Time (sec) FIGURE 17-8 S-IB COMPONENT VIBRATION ENVELOPES i00 120 140 160

]04 TABLE Are_ Monitorud 17-II Max S-IB VIBRATION Range SUMMARY Time Remarks

Level

(Crms)
Upper Structure E226-]!, L'227-II 3.5

(see)
0 Levels of 3.5 Grm s at liftoff and 1 to 2 Grins throughout flight are i Grin lover s values. than AS-201

Spider STRUCTURE E5OL-II,

Beam E50S-II 7.7 2.0 Level of 2 Grins throughout flight agrees _ith AS-201 level.

Engine E500-4, E502-9,

Thrust E501-4, E503-9

Beam 7.5 124-135 Liftoff and flight levels, except beyond ii0 sec, agree with AS-201 levels. Liftoff and flight enve-

Thrust

Chain. Dome

4.6

3.0

Longitudinal E33-I, E33-3, E33-5, E33-7 Lateral Eli-2, Eli-4, Eli-6, Ell-8 ENGINE 29.0 7.5

lope of 4 to 5 Crm s is 2 Grm s lo_,er than AS-2OI levels. Higher levels than recorded on AS-201 but lower than 34 Grms, max level, recorded on S-IB-3 static te_t.

Turbine Gear Boxes El2-1 thru E12-8 Engine E271-4, E273-4, E275-4, Actuators E272-4, E274-4, E276-4

22.5

64.0

Envelope is equal These last

of i0 to 22 Grm s to AS-201 levels. were SA-6. The

10.8

125.0

measurements recorded on

2 to 10.8 Grm s envelope is approximately 5 Grm s higher than SA-6 levels. F-If 3.4 1.0 Data very lou. Liftoff

Instrument EIOI-12, EI03-12 COMPON ENTS Distributor E521-9, E523-9

Panel EI02-12,

level is 4.4 Grm s lower than AS-201 liftoff level. 5.2 65.0 Max. level at max Q is

9A3

E522-9,

approximately than AS-201

i Grm s higher level.

(C_s)

A_ teleran/on

,/',','.
,,,, ,,, 6

,/,,,// /.,/i,.
.... ,,/sl,, , i1,' / I ,, ,<

2o +----.-,-- _._

,"7'

'..... ,," '" "" "{, i. ,,_.,'l/ '

r/; /11,/ / /

i 0 20 Acceler<_tion )[_ (en_s) AO 60 80 Rankle Tirol!(sec) 1OO 120 laO 160 01--_ 0 20 (G_s) .;O

r 6(I

I B0 R,InRe 'rime

AS 71)I IOO 120 lAD 160

( se( )

l'hrusc Ch,_mi_erOolge * l.accr,sl

Atc_'leration

TI1rtls[Chamber

[)ome - l.o:l_ittl_!Lna_

I_

as--'0._

25

/<

I:

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

20

,'.(I

t_(5

_IO

LOO

12f)

150

,
lf_(I

2fl

*(}

(_O

Nil

[OD

12D

I/.(1

lgfi

FIGI;RE {/-_

}I-[ _TNGI!;E \'[l$_'d['ID_: F;N_.'ETXIPES

2O6

TABLE

17-III

S-IVB

VIBRATION

StI_MARY

Area

Monitored

Max

Level

Range (see) 150 150 150

Time

Remarks

(Crms) Gimbal Gimhal Gimbal Block Block Block Thrust Pitch - yaw 3.7 4.4 3.5

Vibration powered flight during

negligible flight. levels flight, negligible flight. B-IVB decreased

during

S-IB

powered slightly

Tield Field Field STRUCTURE Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta

Splice, Splice, Splice, 36.5 36.5 36.5 36.5 36.5 36.5 m m Pos. Bet

Pos. Pos. Pos. I Pos. -

II II II

Thrust Tangential Radial

2.7 3.3 6.? 9.4

44 46 0 49 49 49 49

Vibratio_ powered

duri.g

S-IVB

Radial 1-IV Radial Radial

Vibration before Mach

reached i and

maximum dropped by

8.4 8.9 8.4 .....

then

m Pos. IV - Radial B_t Pos. IV-Ill m Pos. m Bet llI Pos. Radial

40% within a gradual Bad data

1.5 sec, decrease.

followed

III-II

- Radial

i0.0

49

LOX

Tu_bopump

Radial

62.8

150

Engine vibration

start

transient sec

level gradu_lly to 32.2 g

decreased g at 160 cutoff,

from 43,6 at engine

ENGINE

LR 2 Turbopump

Radial

17.7

150

Gradual decrease toward S-IVB powered flight,

end

of

Combustion Main

Chamber

Dome-Thrust

9.4 23.6

430 430

Hydrauli_

Pump-Thrust

Retro Retro

rocket rocket

Fwd

Attach

Pt

- Radial Pt -

3.7 3,2

67 0

Center Fwd

Attach Pt

Thrust Retro rocket

Attach

Tangential Auxiliary Hydraulic LB 2 LH 2 Feedlin_ Feedline at at

puunp - Lateral - Thrust

--3.8 4.4 5.0

--159 162 156

No

data

Engine Engine

Invalid 203 to

from 70 to 336 seconds.

145

sec

and

LH 2 LH 2 Lax COMPONENTS Lax Lax Lax Lax Lax APS APS APS (:old

Feedline Feedline Feedline Feedline Feedline Feedline Vent Vent Module Module Module Helium Valve

at at at at at at

LH 2 Tank

- Lateral

4.2 4.7 2.6 5,9 0,8 1.6 2.5 2.0 4.2 5.3 5.0 2.5 2.4 6.7 6,3 9.9 5.6 3.1

162 155 428 155 0 47 4.0 0 67 0 0 67 62 4 47 0 0 43 5.0 gag ]iftoff and max Q

LH 2 Tank - Long't Engine-Lateral Engine-Long't Lax Tank-Lateral Lax Tank-Thrust to to Flow Flow Ft-Radial Pt-Thrust Pt-Radia[ parallel Attach Attach Attach

Valve-Normal i Aft i Aft i Fwd

[:old Helium

Sphere-Normal Sphere-Thrust

LR 2 Vent Valve-Normal to Flo_ LH 2 Vent Valve-Parallel to Flow Forward Telemetry Antenna-Radial Forward Telemetry Antenna-Thrust Fwd Telemetry Antenna-Lateral

2O7

forward skirt, two at the LH 2 tank vent valve, two at the cold helium spheres, two at each end of the LH 2 feedline, two at each end of the LOX feedline, two at the LOX vent valve, three at APS module i, three at the retro rockets on the aft interstage, and one at the auxiliary hydraulic The and all pump. basic structuralvibrations measured during liftoff, Mach i,

max Q were measurements

comparable to S-IVB-201 on the S-IVB-203 were

as shown in Figure 17-10. Not located in the same positions measurevibrations approxi-

as those on S-IVB-201; only the field splice and gimbal block ments were similar enough for a valid comparison of data. The at the field splice reached a maximum at approximately 46 sec,

mately 6 sec before Mach i. The LH 2 tank vibrations were maximum at about 50 sec, also before Mach i. During S-IVB-203 powered flight, the basic structural vibrations agreed with S-IVB-201 powered flight levels and S-IVB-203 static firing levels. Compared lower at to S-IVB-201, liftoff, but S-IVB-203 component vibrations higher during Mach i due to the (Figure higher 17-10)

were

dynamic pressures and the fact that the measurements were located on lighter components on S-IVB-201. Vibration at the telemetry antenna in the forward skirt reached a maximum slightly before Mach i. S-IVB-203 vibration levels were low and comparable to S-IVB-201 levels during S-IVB powered flight levels. 17.4.2 The in Table J-2 flight. S-IVB-203 static firing levels were higher than

ENGINE

VIBRATIONS made was on the J-2 negligible engine during are summarized S-IB powered

four vibration measurements 17-III. J-2 engine vibration

flight. During S-IVB powered flight the vibration was vibration measured during the S-IVB-201 flight because tion on the LOX turbopump. All other vibration on the

higher than the of higher vibraengine was as

expected. The engine vibration history is shown in Figure 17-10. Due to the high vibration on the LOX turbopump, an investigation was conducted to determine if high vibration had been observed during previous S-IVB firings. This investigation disclosed that vibration during ignition transient was the highest observed to date, but vibration mainstage was comparable to previous S-IVB firings. the during

Table 17-IVpresents a summary of the composite vibration measured on the turbopump during previous stage firings. The table shows that the S-IVB-203 acceptance firing ignition transient levels were the highest recorded during any acceptance firing, indicating the S-IVB-203 engine may have had inherently higher vibration. The S-IVB-203 mainstage vibration levels were lower than those recorded during the S-IVB-204 acceptance vibration firing. During S-IVB-201 varied with variations in flight (see Table 17-V) the pump engine thrust during S-IVB powered

2O8

Basic Structures Vibration (Grms)

Aq-201

AS-203

lo
Field Splice 5 '":"' _/Z_ _ Measurement

I _--Levels--

Static Firing , --'-

-SO

SO

100

150 (see)

200

250

450

{)SO

Component Vibration Acceleration (Grms) 13

Range Time

10

Static Firing Levels_

,,'> ii"7'?,
o -SU 0

__K
50 OO P,ange J-2 Engine Vibration Acceleration (Grms)

-'.': _ '" "

150 Time (sec)

__i!iiii_i!__ . ..........
2UO 250

iiiT:;iT/:iii:::: ,
,150 ()50

b t)

3O

/
,/, ,, z / ,/,/ _ / ///rT'/_l

.... St}
/i "it/'l'i{i'/!

,, //./ / ,"i /
/il," ," , /i I1 r/ii///

iFiring _''///'//'/;"//////" S//////i "/ Iiii[i!i!i::iiii!iii il

%

_;;..';7/,'_-'"/'/'//'/'
/ l'//// '//<////_,,,

Levels

,%i//,",",.'//.;,/'////. /, 4%,;///,./////,,1.._./,,.. ,..WI//t;,/,/s/i/_f/ /////'/., _'_d/,'/..'. "//////'/

I _)i)

2(1()

300

,IOC)

5L)O

oOL)

Range Time FIGURE 17-i0

(see) ENVELOPES

S-IVB VIBRATION

TABLE LOX TURBOPUMP

r"

17-1V AND ACCEPTANCE FIRING

VIBRATION

DURING FLIGHT

S-IVBFlight Data 201 203 202 203 204 501 501 501 Acceptance Firing Data

Ignition Time From ESC (sec) 3 3 3 3 5 II 9 5

Early Mainstage Time From ESC (sec) i0 15

Late Mainstage Time From ESC (sec) 450 287 460 145 451 48 143 298

Grms 20.0 62.8 20.0 50.4 27.6 ii.0 13.0 35.3

Grms 9.8 43.6

Grms 17.1 33.2 19.3 37.7 38.4 10.8 13.1 31.9

TABLE

17-V

S-IVB-201 THRUST AND LOX TURBOPUMP SPEED VERSUS VIBRATION (FLT) Thrust (ib) 195,000 200,000 210,000 225,OO0 LOX Turbopump Speed (rpm) 8,000 8,200 8,500 8,800 Vibration (Grms) 20 17 15 I0
o

210

flight. Apparently low levels, and high thrust 17-11 shows both flight of engine ignition. levels were higher

engine thrust results in high pump vibration results in low pump vibration levels. Figure and acceptance firing vibration spectrum analyses ignition spikes

These analyses indicate that the S-IVB-203 than those of other stages except for a few

of about 150, 400, and 820 Hz during the S-IVB-201 flight and S-IVB-204 acceptsnce firings. Also shown in the figure is the vibration test specification for components mounted on the turbopump. The specification is well above the flight and acceptance firing data except for one spike at approximately 1600 Hz; the upper limit on the specification is 2000 Hz. A summary of spectrum analyses during mainstage is also presented in Figure 17-11. The figure shows that the S-IVB-203 flight vibration level was comparable to the vibration levels measured during the S-IVB-202, -203, -204, and -501 acceptance firings snd S-IVB-201 flight. The only exception is one spike at approximately 2500 Hz. The vibration test specification is well above the flight and acceptance firing data except at 1600 to 1800 Hz, where the vibration exceeds the specification slightly. Although the vibration measured on the LOX turbopump during the ignition transient was the highest recorded, no apparent structural failure or degradation in pump performance occurred. The mainstage vibration was comparable to that recorded during the S-IVB-203 and S-I_rB-204 17.4.3 acceptance S-IVB INTERNAL firings except for the indication at 2500 Hz.

ACOUSTICS near fin position levels. All measure-

II

Two microphones were located on the aft skirt to measure internal and external sound pressure Figure to 3000 17-11 Hz).

ments provided usable data. overall acoustic levels (50

shows a time history of the The highest levels occurred

during liftoff (153 db external and 144 db internal) and were about 3 db higher than those that occurred on the forward skirt during the S..IVB-201 flight. These levels were expected since the microphones were closer to the sound source. A comparison of the internal and external levels indicated a noise reduction in the aft skirt of about 9 db at liftoff and 15 db during flight, which compares with the noise reduction measured during the S-IVB-201 flight. indicated increased levels at 80 vibration measurements indicated because induced The external acoustic measurement to 90 seconds. None of the internal increased excitation at this time level was the range of the low and of this the resulting measurement system. measurements at

the internal sound pressure vibration levels were below the not increased levels yet available.

Explanation for 80 to 90 sec is

external

211

SPECTRUM

ANALYSIS AS-201 AS-501

OF LOX and AS-203 Acceptance

TURBOPUMP Flight Firing

VIBRATION Data, Data and

AT J-2 AS-202,

IGNITION AS-203,

AND A$-204

DURING and

MAINSTAGE

too

---- _

[o i

----_

J-2

Ignition

Aft

_k!rt

Soui_d Levels (db)

Pressure t_O

14015'_

_"_'_

J /

_ Internal

r//Eternal

120 -20 0 20

_ 40 60 Range FIGURE 17-I.] S-IVB ItffERNAL Time

_' 80 (see)

lO0

120

_ '_0

_t,

ACOUSTICS

^,ND TURP_3PEMP

VIP, PCFION

212

17.5 17.5.1

INSTRUMENT

UNIT ANALYSIS UNIT VIBRATION

INSTRUMENT

All vibration measurements in the AS-203 IU functioned properly and appeared to provide good data. Vibration transients occurring at 155.5 and 175 sec have been identified as caused by ullage jettison and by nose cone panel separation, respectively. In all cases, the vibration levels of the transients were less than the steady state vibration levels at liftoff. 17.5. i. 1 STRUCTURAL MEASUREMENTS

The eight measurements monitoring the S-IU-203 structure vibration at the upper and lower interface rings indicate a narrow spread of data between measurements as noted on AS-201. This verifies that there is no significant difference between vibration levels in the longitudinal and perpendicular axis at the IU interface rings. As shown in Figure 17-12, the maximum vibration levels for AS-203 generally occurred at liftoff, and lasted for approximately three seconds. The levels were approximately half the levels measured on AS-201, both at liftoff and maximum inflight vibration conditions. The maximum inflight levels occurred at approximately 45 sec due to approaching Mach i conditions rather than 90 sec as occurred during the AS-201 flight. The low vibration to the Instrument Unit 17.5. i.2 COMPONENT levels on AS-203 should have presented structure or its components. no problem

MEASUREMENTS

The eighteen IU component measurements indicate a much broader range of data than that of the structure measurements. This is due to the different response characteristics of the various components. The upper portion of the data envelope in Figure 17-12 was determined by the perpendicular measurement on the flight control computer and the gas bearing supply panel. The lower portion of the data envelope was determined by the three ST-124 inertial gimbal measurements.

213

Acceleration 8

(Grms) IU Structure

0 0

I 20

I 40

I 60 Range Time

I 80 (sec)

I I00 120 140

Acceleration

(Grms) IU Components

_ _

AS-203 A$-201

0
I I f I I |

20

40

60 Range 17-12 INSTRUMENT

Time

80 (sec) VIBRATION

lO0

120

140

FIGURE

UNIT

ENVELOPES

214

18.0 18.1 SUMMARY

(U)

PRESSURE

AND THENMAL

ENVIRONMENT

The measured S-IB stage pressure environment was in general agreement with predictions, with the exception of the flame shield area. The steady state flame shield pressure was 3.5 N/cm 2, approximately 1.4 N/cm 2 above the prediction, but below the design limit. The effect of the turbine exhaust reroute was quite noticeable in the flame shield area, where the temperatures were considerably lower than those of the Saturn I Block II vehicles and AS-201. Measured S-IVB stage temperatures and pressures during powered flight were generally as expected. Structural temperatures were within design limits, although higher than for AS-201 due to the hotter aerodynamic trajectory flown as well as the differences in vehicle configuration between AS-201 and AS-203. External acoustic levels were generally as expected at liftoff; however, levels due to aerodynamic noise were somewhat lower than expected. The IU environmental control systems appeared to operate satisfactorily during powered flight. During the orbital coast period, the methanol/water temperature dropped as expected below the 288.15K control point and continued a downward trend to 284.82K over Bermuda during the fourth orbit. This indicated that component heat dissipation was lower than expected and/or thermal losses from the environmental control system and components were greater than expected. 18.2 18.2.1 VEHICLE PRESSURE AND ACOUSTIC PRESSURES ENVIRONMENT

EXTERNAL

SURFACE

The AS-203 vehicle surface pressure environment (excluding the base region and fin surfaces) was determined by a total of 47 pressure gauges. Three were located on the S-IB stage, forty on the S-IVB stage, and four on the IU and nose shroud. The data generally agreed with wind tunnel and analytical predictions. Major discrepancies can be attributed to instrument inaccuracies and configurational differences between the wind tunnel model and the flight vehicle. An indication of the pressure environment on the outer tank forward and aft skirts on the S-IB stage was obtained on this flight. Pressure transducers were located on the LOX tank 03 forward skirt and fuel tank FI aft skirt. These data, expressed as pressure'coefficients, are compared with predicted values based on wind tunnel data and with AS-201 data in Figure 18-1. The LOX tank pressure appears to be lower than

2!5

...,
T_nk FI AlL S_irt

p_ ,....... p A:rcss 6O Fairing

2,( 2J

dr resig_ L_it

_EA_URED, _.s-2O_

-----._,3"J.R_T., AS-2GL External pressure Coe[flcient on 60 F_IrinK, o.i

Cp

-z

_.

.:

FI_URE 18-I

PP_SSURES ON TANKS AND 60 FAIRINg

216

either the AS-201 to be valid since

or wind tunnel data. The AS-203 the AS-201 data agreed with the

results do win8 tunnel

not appear data.

This difference could result from either telemetry bias or a faulty transducer; ho_ever, the Digital Data Acquisition System (DDAS) data indicate the same trend as the Pulse Amplitude Modulation (PAM) data on AS-203. Pressures on fuel tank F1 aft skirt agree with wind tunnel data up to Mach 1.3. Beyond Mach 1.3, the measured pressures are higher than the test data but in good agreement with AS-201 data. This tends to indicate that the wind tunnel data is lower than it should be. Part of the reason for the low wind tunnel pressure data is that the fill and drain pipe was not simulated on the wind tunnel model. This pipe was located about 15.2 cm aft of the pressure orifice and could cause the pressure in the sample region to be higher than it would be otherwise. The measured and expected pressure environment of the S-IB stage 60 deg tank fairing is shown in the lower portion of Figure 18-1. This figure shows the differential pressure across the fairing and the external pressure coefficient compared to AS-201. The external pressure _as derived by adding the thrust frame compartment absolute pressure (internal) to the differential pressure across the fairing. The differentia] pressure across the fairing was higher than on AS-201, but only about half the design limit. The pressure on the fairing exterior agrees with AS-201 at Mach numbers greater than 1.6 but was less than the pressure indicated by the wind tunnel test. The pressure tap on the 60 deg fairing was located behind and rotated 3 deg from the fill and drain pipe on fuel tank FI. This pipe was not simulated on the wind tunnel model and could be the reason for the higher wind tunnel pressures. Data at the lower Mach numbers is still under investigation since it appears to be low and could reflect a data reduction problem. However, the results obtained are well within the accuracy of the measurement, which is 5% of full scale and which would yield a Cp variation of 0.18 at Mach 1.5. Forty external pressure measurements were flown on S-IVB-203. The local external surface pressure coefficients, as derived from flight data, are shown in Figures 18-2 and 18-3. The derived pressure coefficients for the forward skirt compare well with wind tunnel data from a small scale model of the AS-203 vehicle configuration. The major except:ion in the comparison is at vehicle Sta 39.3 m (Figure 18-2, lower plot) where the flight results indicated the existence of a positive pressure coefficient, whereas the wind tunnel results indicated a negative pressure coefficient. Analysis has shown that the forward mating flange, which extends above the vehicle surface, alters the flow field at Sta 39.3 m from that determined from the smooth surfaced wind tunnel model. It is therefore concluded true environment. that the flight results are representative of the

The S-IVB aft skirt and aft interstage pressure coefficients show a good correlation with the wind tunnel data, but again the tunnel data are based on a smooth surfaced model. The aft skirt

do not wind and aft

Pressure (Sta 42.1 0

Coefficient m) Ill

217 II

IV

-_"_
-0,8 0,4 Pressure (Sta 40.3 0.2 0,6 Coefficient m) 0,8

,_"

_
@ 1.2 Number 1.4 1.6 1.

_
_ _ind Tunnel

_ \
Data

1. Math

III

II

o
-0,4 0 Q -0,6 0.4 Pressure (Sta 39.3 0.6 Coefficient m) 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 _ ind _nnel 1.81II_/II Data Mach Number 0 . I -0,2 ' 0.4 3 0.6 0.8 FIGURE 18-2 1.0 1.2 Mach Number S-IN FORWA_ SKI_ ,4 1 1.6 ] O_ind 1.8 Tunnel Data PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS

218

IV (Sta 0.2 31.1 m)

_O

/Ill

:.

.---_,_--_,
Pressure 0 Coefficient u _ " " _ ...... G 0 -0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 'lach 1.2 Number .4 1.6 1.8 _ Wind Tunnel Data II

IV (Sta O.2 29.9 m)

_(_

/III

Pressure

Coefficient o "-'"-""

_'_ _-"_ 0
f_i _Q

&_ I/

II

rn Wind "0"20.4 0.6 0.8 1.(1 ,_lach 1.2 Number 1.4 .6 1.8

Tunnel

Data

(Sta 0.2

25.2

m)

Pressure

Coefficient

. j'_.

_--

t I_"
=_=='_

I_I

(
-0.2 0.4 0,6 0.8 FIGURE 18-3

,_/.,,,._[ .....

D Wind Tunnel Data 1,6 1.8 COEFFICIENTS

II

1.0 Mach

I. Number

1,4

S-IVB

AFt

SKIRT

PRESSURE

219

interstage of the S-IVB have a number of major protuberances near the pressure taps. The effect of these protuberances on the local flow over the aft skirt and aft interstage is under investigation. are shown deter-

in

The local pressure the left hand portion

differentials across the APS fairings of Figure 18-4 along with analytically

mined design data. The fairing internal pressure was the same as the aft compartment's pressure, thus permitting a differential pressure to be calculated. The comparison with the A8-203 design data is quite good and expected. verifies that the design data are slightly conservative, as

The local pressure differentials across the LH 2 feedline are shown in the right hand portion of Figure 18-4 along with design data. Again the correlation with design data indicates servatism of the analytical criteria used for design analyses. Pressures were measured at vehicle Sta 47.09 m and 46.71

fairing the AS-203 the con-

on

the

nose shroud. These data are compared with wind tunnel data in the upper half of Figure 18-5. The differences noted between measured and test data are probably due to differences in local flow conditions of the model and flight vehicle or to improper location of the pressure tap on the model or vehicle. The surface environment at the IU was determined at vehicle Sta

42.90 m and 42.39 m. with wind tunnel data ment between measured ments.

Both flight pressure measurements in the lower half of Figure 18-5. and wind tunnel data was indicated

are compared Very good agreefor both measure-

Surface pressure differentials were obtained by subtracting the measured external surface pressures from the forward compartment internal pressure (IU internal ambient pressure) and are presented in Figure 18-6. These results indicated maximum nose shroud bursting loads of 2.7 N/cm 2 and 2.1 N/cm 2 at vehicle Sta 47.09 m and 46.71 m, respectively. Maximum bursting loads on the IU at vehicle Sta 42.90 m and 42.39 m were 3.1 N/cm 2 and 2.7 N/cm 2, respectively. A negligible crushing load was indicated at these stations during the first I0 sec of flight. 18.2.2 The EXTERNAL acoustic ACOUSTICS data indicates that the maximum acoustic levels on

the IU were due to ae_dynamic noise at about Mach 0.81 as expected, but were lower than predicted. All measured levels were maximum at liftoff except for the IU measurement at vehicle Sta 42.52 m, but some measurements were of limited usefulness due to the time sharing of telemetry channels. AS-203 for the levels on the IU at data were within design specifications, liftoff and at 45 seconds. except

r:

"

b{ :; :: TUH:. ]

_:,_,

gi:rl_,a

$_,:N,,

['r_'qF::lL

C,_,:{:

irlt, CI_

S(

-l.;l

--_ "

i I

b I I

H r':

: 4 :::".:

,,:,,J

l/
H:,ch "_: :"

222

IU Pressure

Differential

(N/cm 2)

3 I% ,& 2% & (Pinternal ------ Pexternal) Sta. 42.90 m

Sta. 42.3q m

_-.
0

,
20

,
40

,
60 Range

I
Time

I
80 (sec)

I
I00

,
120

,
140

Nose Shroud 3-

Pressure

Differential

(N/em 2)

(Pinternal 2 _ -----

- Pexternal ) Sta. Sta. 47.09 46,71 m m

-0 20 40 60 Range FIGURE 18-6 Time

I
80 (sec) PRESSURE

o
I00

I
120

I
i40

IU AND NOSE SHROUD

DIFFERENTIALS

223

Seven external acoustic measurements were flown on AS-203. Two measurements were on the S-IB stage, one on the S-IVB aft skirt, two on the IU, and two on the nose shroud. Both measurements on the S-IB stage yielded valid data while the acoustic levels were within the range of the instruments, with the exception of the measurement at vehicle Sta 1.60 m, which was questionable from approximately 57 to 75 seconds. The external acoustic measurement on the S-IVB aft skirt also produced valid data in the range of the instrument with the exception of some questionable trends from 23 to 36 sec and from approximately 75 to 90 seconds. Telemetry dropouts occurred at 47.5 to 48 sec and 85.5 to 86.3 seconds. The data obtained from the two external measurements on the IU are

of good quality; however, the more forward instrument was time shared, thus limiting its usefulness. Of the two time-shared measurements utilized on the nose shroud, only the measurement at vehicle Sta 47.09 m yielded valid data. Figure 18-7 presents the AS-203 acoustic environment at liftoff. The overall sound pressure level (OASPL) between i0 and 3000 Bz is presented as a function of vehicle station and compared to the AS-201S-IB stage liftoff values and the predicted curve. Agreement is considered acceptable between the AS-203, AS-201, and predicted values. Pressure spectra at or as near liftoff as possible on all valid measurements are also presented and compared to the acoustic design specifications. All data obtained at liftoff were within the design specifications with the exception of tbe values around 85 Hz at vehicle Sta 42.93 m. The values from i00 to 200 Hz at vehicle Sta 42.52 m approach the design specification. Figure 18-8 presents the OASPL as a function of range time for various locations on the AS-203 vehicle. The time history of the measurement at vehicle Sta 1.60 m exhibits some questionable trends around 60 seconds. The OASPL decreases and then builds up to an unexplainable peak at 113 sec (Mach 4.75 and 38.5 km altitude). The fin leading edge shocks or the engine plumes may be affecting this area at this time. No unusual trends were observed at vehicle Sta 23.52 m or on the aft skirt of the S-IVB stage (Sta 30.78 m).

The two measurements on the IU exhibit some unusual trends. The more aft measurement (Sta 42.52 m) indicates an unsteady shock at 45 sec, which was confirmed by wind tunnel flow pictures, and a sustained level of 150 db from 46 to 60 seconds. This sustained higher level after the unsteady shock was not observed on the AS-201 flight. The time-shared measurement at vehicle Sta 42.93 m indicates a very low level around 50 sec (about 139 db). The two IU measurements are only 0.40 m apart, but indicate a difference of approximately ii db at 50 seconds. The exact reason for this difference is unknown, but the following is one possible6explanation: The ReynoLds numbers at vehicle Sta 42.93 m is 2.7 x i0 at 50 sec and 7.5 x i0 _ at vehicle Sta 42.52 m based on the

PREDICTED

VALUES

NOTE:

OVERALL SOUND PRESS[;RE LEVEL REFERENCED TO .00002 N/M 2-

(DB) IS

s LIMITED DATA DUE TO TIME SHARING TEL_TER CHANh%i

DIGITAl, ANALYSIS cHECK POINT

OVERALL SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL CONTAINS THE ENERGY FROM i0 to 3000 Hz

------DATA _ TI_SHOLD OF INSTRT_ENT

QUESTIONABLE

DATA

SCm. 42.93 m

sra.

30.78

m I

Sta.

1.60

"

o Z

'
-s s _s 4s

o!
ss 61

_s

_
-s

\
I 44

-_
se
TJm,_.

"
ee Te .

Sta.

47.09

Ilea_t

Ttmo

14m

alLmlpe Time, s_c.

Ile_

FIGURE

18-8

OVERALL

SOUND PRESSURE

LEVELS AT VAKIOUS

VEHICLE

LOCATIONS

"

226

respective distances from the shoulder. The condition of the boundary layer is primarily determined by the Reynolds number. The lower Reynolds number indicates the possibility of a laminar boundary layer, while the higher Reynolds number indicates a turbulent boundary layer. A turbulent boundary layer has much higher fluctuating pressure levels than a laminar layer and this may be the reason for the lower levels at vehicle Sta 42.93 m. The valid time-shared measurement at vehicle Sta 47.09 m exhibits similar trends to the measurement at Sta 42.93 m for possibly the same reasons. Figure 18-8 also compares the predicted values with the flight data. Generally, the predictions are higher than the flight data. This is especially true in the unsteady shock area. The predictions in this area were based on wind tunnel static pressure distributions in and around the IU shoulder. Assumptions were than made as to the Mach number at which the shock became unsteady. Based on the static pressure distributions, this Mach number was thought to be slightly higher than the indicated Mach 0.81. Figure 18-9 presents the unsteady shock pressure spectrum on AS-203 and compares it to AS-201 and the acoustic specifications. As expected, the AS-203 levels below 300 Hz exceed the design specifications. However, the AS-203 unsteady shock contains less low frequency and more high frequency energy than did the AS-201 unsteady shock. Significant parameters are listed in Figure 18-9 at the time of the unsteady shock. All spectra presented were obtained by using the random vibration analysis (RAVAN) program. The speotra obtained from this program utilized a I0 Hz filter-bandwidth and are presented in terms of Hanned decibel (db/Hz). All data were corrected for sample length utilizing the method developed by Hann; hence, Hanned decibel. The Hann method obtains the spectrum from the Fourier transform of the auto correlation function. All flight data were digitized at 8000 samples per second, and sound pressure levels were referenced to 0.00002 N/m 2. The flight telemetry system response is from 50 to 3000 Hz with signals attenuated at 200 Hz by 0.4 db and at 50 Hz by 4.0 db. Data below 50 Hz should be disregarded. The measurement accuracy based on full scale was generally within 10%. 18.2.3 S-IB STAGE INTERNAL PRESSURES

The shear panel compartment pressures relative to free-stream pressure and the predicted range of variation are shown in the upper left portion of Figure 18-10. The measured pressures were generally within the band of expected pressures up to an altitude of 18 km. Thereafter, the pressure becomes lower than predicted, approaching a near zero pressure differential. However, the differences between the measured and predicted pressures were well within the accuracy of the measurement.

DB/Hz 150[ L T]I_ MACH NUMBER DYNAMIC FLIGHT 140 DISTANCE lOCAL AFT OF SHOULDER DATA SHOULDER PR_.SSURE ANGLE

AS-201 61.0 sec O. 87 2.36 9 35.6 cm =3.2 N/cm2 156.4 0.057 db N/cm 2

AS-203 /_5.A see O. 81 2.57 N/era 2 12.5 64.4 cm =3.10 N/cm2

STATIC PRESSURE

OVEFiALL SOUND PP_ESSUP_] 130 LEVEL, (i0 to 3000 Hz)

154.9 db 0.044 &Cprms

_Cprms

120 FLIGHT DAT_

N 110

.01

.1 Frequency, FIGURE 18-9 UNSTEADY KHz

10
P,J

SHOCK

WAVE PRESSURE

SPECTRUM

"_

.......

',j

i:Y;
r

'i
lmt'I u_ts,_l } | " / !

:I

E"
J

_____._. _
......... _I ujl'I \ u_! soO \

y'
J

..

j
(;':,*c_:' (z_o/N) :::: . pI,_qS _ _ _eI,_ , < : ;, <I' (.!) (..,_ .:,;,._x_d'.: (_turo/N) . 2) _so_g

,,.
._anss,n_ d lu_ul_:duuo

!
D [au_l .me_llS

229

18.2.4

S-IB

STAGE

BASE

PRESSURES

The measured pressure differential across the heat shield is compared with AS-201 data and the predicted range of values in the lower left portion of Figure 18-10. The AS-203 differential pressures were slightly greater than on AS-201, but nominal in comparison to the expected range of values. Differential center of the pressures across flame shield and the flame shield about midway out were from measured near the center of

the

the flame shield between engines (right hand portion The center measurement was referenced to the support other measurement was referenced to the forward side Both pressure differentials were less than the design

of Figure 18-10). can, while the of the heat shield. values_

There were three absolute pressure measurements on the heat shield at two separate locations. A redundant transducer was used to obtain more accurate pressures below 2.1N/cm 2. These data are compared with predicted and AS-201 results, where possible, in Figure 18-li. The low range transducer became active at an altitude of 13.2 km (70 see) and indicated the same a 0.2 N/cm 2 higher time. pressure than th_ high range transducer at

Absolute pressure was measured on the center of the aft side of the heat shield. This pressure, minus ambient pressure, is shown in the left hand portion of Figure 18-12. A new flame shield configuration with the turbine exhaust ducts routed to the inner side of the inboard engines and relocated at the nozzle exit plane was incorporated on this vehicle. As a result, the pressure on the flame shield was expected to be greater than that experienced on AS-201. The measured data exceeded the predicted value by 1.4 N/cm 2 and the AS-201 measured values by 1.9 N/em 2 above 30 km. This does not present a problem from either a design standpoint, as discussed earlier, or a base drag standpoint. 18.2.5 S-IB/S-IVB INTERSTAGE ENVIRONMENT

Absolute pressures were measured in the interstage at the seal plate as well as differential pressures across the seal plate. These data are compared with predicted data in the right hand portion of Figure 18-12. Measured pressures were well below predicted and do not present a problem. 18.2.6 S-IVB STAGE INTERNAL PRESSURE across the pressure

The forward and compartment sidewalls differentials_ comparison. ment sidewall predicted 18.2.1).

aft compartment pressure differentials are shown in Figure 18-13. The design design trajectory, experienced by the was a result of the at this location

based upon the AS-203 The crushing pressure at vehicle Sta 39.3 m pressure

are shown for forward comparthigher than (see Section

external

experienced

Base j._

[ressure

oefficier.t,

ffp

!'ase Pressure L,,i

('oeff!c!e:_t , "'[. o

-,_.? -It'30 0.5 1.O 1.f Hach ['[_'_TCTF, D MEASUPIED, AS-2_3% ..i.i N,_nber 2.5 a. _ 3.5 .b l,.( " 0.5 t.O 1.5 Hath _'_'-SATURN /9 I, BLOCK II DATA :._' !4_mLber ;.: 3.,3._ L..D

R_.g_ -r---x A
n IlIKh Range rl ---J ^ \ _\,_._

N
O_/_

,,

. c_ (Pba 0.4 r:/cm: psl

@ i _,

_lv (Pbase O.L F_m,bier,t)_'q/cm2 MY ASIq_'2 [ (Cbase - Faint:lent) psJ

"_i I

\'--" ,2.

"_

- __). g

-C.

) ' "

:_0 AItltude (km)

t3

I0

2[?

30 Altitude (km)

4; _

:_C

60

FIGUKE

18-11

S-IB

STAGE

BASE

PRESSUKES

F /-

O [3

.tP AcrOss

Seal

Pl_te

(N/cm 2) k_!.. :,a2 i_htr) ([5!)

(i!:tvr_;._r_

"

-6 ,5 i. ..a Maeh ;. Nt_m_er . ?., &.,,

-I ? _21]'.::e .:. (e;m)

n
\ " (I'ha_e Famhiei._ ) (N/cruZ) (?i,a-_( r ;ni:L:.:_it( g':_) ! 2 (['ir:te_:atage " Ir,ror_ta'e Pressure (Nlcm 2) _ _ 'ambled:t) ( psi )

<b

",

-2 A ]t it :!:),!Kin) (

,<,

#,(,

-I Iq_ :'(> _ &O A it it u'4_ (k;_ 50 t. _

FIGURE

18-12

S-IB

STAGE

BASE

AND

S-IB/S-IVB

INTERSTAGE

PRESSURES

Forward
3

Compartment

Pressure P'light Design_

Differential

(N/cm 2)
i

Pressure
i

(psi)
i_

--S'-IVB-203 ------S-IVB-203

Note:

Differentials Pint - l'ext

are

4 '_

:>#_,i I--A

,i-:,J "
i 4J ,-i

-I 0 :l t ; ! [ I Aft 2 Compartment

I0 Pressure

20

30 Differential

,_0 (N/cRa2; ge

5[) rime (sec)

oO

70

80

90 ,

I()0

II0

_ _ '.'_ f:." :4 ":,i_

Note:

Pressure, (psi) Differentials are Pint - Pext .2

, ' :il. ,_:,,,: ,._..;?;_ ';; .:12:2' '_,_-

I ......
O 10

_,--_ic__ C
20 30 40 Range FIGURE 1.8-L3 S-IVB 50 "rime o0 (sec) 70 s0

I-----90 100 llt;

FORi_ARD AND AFT CO_IPM_'FHEN'T PRESSURE I)II:FERENTI,\L

233

The pressure differentials across the aft compartment sidewall are similar to those experienced on S-IVB-201. The pressure differentials across the forward compartment are similar to the S-IVB-201 reconstructed pressure differentials with the exception of the crushing pressure that occurs between 53 and 66 seconds. The difference in the occurrence time of peak pressure between AS-203 design and flight was the result of the differences between the flight and design trajectories. The common bulkhead internal throughout powered flight. 18.2.7 INSTRUMENT UNIT PRESSURES pressure remained less than 1.0 N/cm 2

The IU and forward compartment pressure history was obtained from a total pressure gauge located in the IU and is presented in Figure 18-14 (upper plot). The pressure level falls within the preflight predicted band except for the period of from 50 to 54 seconds. This difference is attributed to differences in the actual trajectory and the design trajectory which was used for the _imulation. The maximum compartment pressure measured was 0.59 N/cm above free-stream ambient at approximately 77 seconds. This value is slightly lower than that measured on AS-201 (0.75 N/cm 2 differential). Representative component pressures are presented in the lower half of Figure 18-14. Ambient pressures in the flight control computer and control signal processor remained constant throughout powered and orbital flight. However, the ST-124Minternal ambient pressure dropped from 12.5 N/cm 2 to 7.9 N/cm 2 by the end of the first orbit. This level was maintained through the end of the third orbit (approximately 5 hrs from liftoff). The AS-201 ST-124Mambient pressure dropped below the design minimum of 7.6 N/cm 2 to 7.2 N/cm 2 at 1,600 seconds. 18.3 18.3.1 VEHICLE S-IB THERMAL ENVIRONMENT HEATING

STAGE AERODYNAMIC

The AS-203 aerothermodynamic environment was more severe than that of AS-201. The upper portion of Figure 18-15 presents a comparison of analytical aerodynamic heating rates for the two vehicles. These heating rate histories were computed for a 0.152 cm aluminum skin, assuming flat plate flow properties for the Reference Patrick Atmosphere. For the greater portion of S-IB stage powered flight, AS-203 exhibited high heating rates, and the total integrated heat load was approximately 50% greater than that experienced by AS-201. Upper and lower tail shroud temperatures were recorded by two internally mounted thermocouples. Data from similar instrumentation flown on AS-201 were available for comparison. Predictions were also

234

IU and Forward I.0

Compartment

Pressure

(N/cm 2) _ d<._-_ _

_ _

Pinternal-Pambient Predicted

0 20 -0.5 40 _ _"_'_;_"-' 80 :_ _i;.::_ _-" i00 120 140 Range Time (sec)

IU Component

Pressure

(N/cm 2)

15 , ^ 10

^ _"

^ 0

-9--/_ 5 X O

_
Flight

O
Control

-Computer

Control Signal Processor ST-124 Internal Ambient

,
200

,
400

,
600

$'

' ''
Ii000

'+
12000

'
17000

'
18000

5000 6000 Range Time (sec)

FIGURE

18-14

IU COMPARTMENT,

FORWARD

COMPARTMENT,AND

IU COMPONENT

PRESSURES

?35 _yplcal Aerodynamic He_ Flux {_ltcs,'_,_ 2

" LY-i
o._ I
0.4

I_ / .! ,
I, i'_,
/ /

\ \\
\
\

o.l
<

./I

I/ j,i
//

; 7
I SA-iOl 1

-C.21

1,
i Renge Tt_e {s_) (K)

Upper Tail 3hroud Temperature

i
' _IC_D i / ! .

! "

i /

!/

-_\i_--' --V -" f/

20 _+o 6O P._nge T_e 80 (see) Ioo i2o 140 Lo_r TaLL Shroud T_perature (K)

/ <,/
,
_00

YI
!

.--,z , ..J" b.-'!

I_ -70 40 60 80 Renle llme (_ec) LO0 120 I_O

FICU_E L8-[5

TYPICAL S-IB TH_I_L Eh_IRONME'NT AND TAIL SHROUDT_PERA_URES

236

made for each location Patrick Atmosphere. The upper plot of

using

the

preflight

trajectory

and

the

Reference

center

tail shroud skin temperature history, depicted in the Figure 18-15, showed good agreement with the pKeflight 120 final seconds. maximum After 120 temperature sec, the of 439K. s pe _his

prediction until approximately of the data increases,with a was 19UK above late in flight, exhaust plumes

the maximum prediction of 420K. The increase in slope, could be the result of radiation from the expanded or convective heating from recirculated gases. These for AS-203, such of the inb,_ard

effects might have been accentuated by design changes as elimination of the engine shrouds and the rerouting turbine exhaust gases. The lower tail shroud temperature history

presented

in Figure

18-15

(lower plot) exhibits the late heating effect also, reaching a final temperature of 445K. Due to thicker skin on the lower tail shroud (0.160 cm vs 0.102 cm for the upper tail shroud), the upper shroud temperature history should yield a better indication of aerodynamic heating. This was illustrated by the AS-203 data until 125 sec, after which time the lower tail shroud indicated slightly higher temperatures. These results can then be attributed to some form of heating emanating from the base region and having the greatest effect on the lower shroud, which was closest to the base. 18.3.2 S-IVB STAGE AERODYNAMIC HEATING

The S-IVB-20_ aerodynamic heating rates were higher than those experienced on S-IVIB-201 due to the higher aerodynamic heating rate of the AS-203 trajectory and the difference in vehicle configuration, as compared to AS-201. s a result of the higher aerodynamic heating rates, the structural temperatures experienced during ascent were higher than _hose on AS-201. The forward skirt skin sensor temperature history shown in Figure 18-16 was higher than that experienced on S-IVB-201, as expected. The comparison between the sensor temperature and the actual skin temperature indicates a peak temperature differential of 36K and a temperature time lag of 20 seconds. The actual skin temperatur_ was reconstructed using the same analytical techniques used to obtain the simulated sensor temperature, shown in Figure 18-16. The 36K differential was due to the mass increase associated with the sensor installation. The LH 2 tank temperatures measured by the temperature sensors are shown in Figure 18-16, along with the postflight simulation and the S-IV_B-201 tank temperatures. The temperature difference between S-IVB-203 and S-IVB-201 at liftoff was due to the existing ambient conditions which precluded the formation of a significant amount of ice/frost in this

Forward Skirt Temperature

Skin

Forward Skirt Temp,._rature

Skin

(K)

(OK)

38o I {
340

St,',2.0Tm4oc /_F" /
. 36(

i I

Ii
(Re e. )'=b"/ I/

\
_

Actual Skin Temperature

/
300 -_

__
32C _

/i _-s-_v_-2o3
,_SlmLIlatlon._

/_,-- sqvB-2Ol

260 0 LH2 Tank Temperature 40 80 120 Range Time (see) 160

2g( 40 LH 2 Tank Temperatore 80 Kanp, Time (sec) e 120 160

(OK)

("K)

--Sta / 3S.gm
I _ Sta 38.9

I I

,Z/ m Sta 35.8 m ._ /J_'

/__--_.

220 ./_Y'//z,._ //'._ I

280

._r

_- ,

sta

38.9

--Simulation t

.///j" "_ sivB2ol I,o77/_/),/ O_a.aoa ///Z _/ >,

140 0 40 Range FIGURE 80 Time 18-16 (sec) 120 160

260
240 0 40 Range 80 Time (sec) 120 160
r&

._

FORWARI) SKIRT SKIN Agl) LII2 TANK

TIIMPERATURES

238

area of the tank. The LH 2 tank temperatures experienced on S-IVB-203 were less than the design temperature. The reconstructed tank skin temperature was 6K higher than the peak temperature presented in Figure 18-16. The aft skirt sensor temperature is shown in Figure 18-17 along

with a postflight simulation and corresponding temperature difference between S-IVB-203 and exhibited on the forward skirt due primarily the aft skirt and the sensor.

data from S-IVB-201. The S-IVB-201 was less than to the insulation covering

The skin temperatures adjacent to the APS module for S-IVB-203 and S-IVB-201 are shown in Figure 18-17. The presence of the insulation precluded a determination of the extent of increased heating rates to the aft skirt that could result from flow disturbance created by the APS module. The APS module fairing temperature for S-IVB-203 is compared with the data from S-IVB-201 in Figure 18-17. The maximum temperature difference between the two sets of data was less than experienced elsewhere on the S-IVB. The measurement location for S-IVB-203 was near the APS forebody/constant section junction. The flow at this point was affected by the expansion corner, which could account for the lower temperature difference of this measurement relative to S-IVB-201. The orbital heating rates experienced at two locations on i;he forward skirt are shown in the upper portion of Figure 18-18 along with the postflight simulations. The data from the calorimeter having black paint optical properties falls well below its simulation and behaves very much like data from the ca]orimeter having the white paint located on the opposite side of the stage. Possible causes for the reduced heating rates are being investigated. The comparison between the flight data and the simulation based upon contaminated and non-contaminated fairing optical properties indicates that contamination of the fairing from retro-rocket exhaust product deposition did not occur. Structural temperatures experienced by APS module 2 during orbit are shown in the lower portion of Figure 18-18. The flight data are compared with the non-contaminated fairing temperature resulting from a minimum shadow orbit (maximum temperature simulation) and a maximum shadow orbit (minimum temperature simulation). The AS-203 fairing temperatures fail midway between the two extremes, as expected. The maximum and minimum temperatures experienced by the APS components shown in Table 18-1. These temperatures were well within the maximum minimum allowable temperatures for the denoted components. No detailed been made of the fourth orbit; howeve_ the within the allowable band. The temperatures temperatures experienced

are and

analysis has appear to be

239 Aft Skirt Skin (*K) 30.4 m

Temperature 360 Sta

36C

Sta'30.4'

/
S-IVB-203--_

/
" ' S-IVB-20

__I

Simulation

'

--"

240 0 40 80 120 Range Aft Skirt (Adjacent 380 Sta . 30.8 Skin Temperature to APS _todule . (K) II) 160

240 40 (sec} 80 120 t60

Timc

38( m Sta

. 30.8

. m ]

S-IVB-203-_/

Simulation

_ _/i//

,,o
260 0 40 80

//
s-zw-zoz
120 Range APS Forebody Temperatures 400 Fairing (*K) 160

3.
_
260 0 (sec) 40 80

5/
s2zvs-2o3
120 160

Time

340

.-----

"-'---

S- IVB-203 _ /

7 /

/_

S-IVB-201

280 0

.... 40

_" "_ 80 Range 120 Time SKIN (see) AND APS FAIRING TEMPERATURES 160 200 240

FIGURE

18-17

S-IVB

AFT

SKIRT

240

CAL. SURFACE PAINT: PAINT: Sk_r_ n = 0.5, a = 0,94, Absorbed (= E= 0.9 0.84 LOCATION _ 75 FROM 7S _ FRO_ DATA _ [] A SIt,EILATION ..... FINISH BLACK WHITE WHITI/

WHITE BLACK S-IVB Folward

I--II I_II HI--IV

H,,ar FlJx

(watts/era 2)

o. O_D

T
f%

!
_ I +

0,025

......

^ ; 1

'(

0
1 2 Time After Insertion : _ L_missi,,it,,.

e. _
4 (hr)

J .....
$ 6

FAIRING APS II -Fairing Temperature (OK)

OPTICAL a : ._!: 0.24 0.23

PROPERTIES

.....

,o,, _T _
,

I
I

....q
- MAX It-fUN N_// PRED[CTED _'_

kk

2hA

.....

MUM PREDICTED

2
Time From

to
l!',s_rtiol:

t2
(lOO0 see)

14 I
4 (hr) APS II FAIRING

I_,

18--- _o
5

i
I

I
2 Time FU;URE 18-i8 FORWARD SKIRT From NEAT

1
3 InserLion FI,I'EAND

T_IPERAI'URES

TABLE AS-203 APS

18-1 (MODULE 2)

COMPONENT TEMPERATURES FIRST THREE ORBITS

I Meas. C258 C259 C260 C261 C262 C263 C264 C265 C266 C267 No. APS Fuel Fuel Line Line Module at Tank between Line Line Tank on near Internal Outlet PCM and Engine 2 Bracket Engine 2 Component

Temperature

(OK)

Maximum 304 308 320 310 313 306

Minimum 299 292 293 297 297 297 297 297 297 297

Oxidize, Oxidizer Oxidizer Fuel Fuel Tank

Rear

Support

between on

F6l_ and

Forward

Hemisphere

Consta_,t Control

Section Module (PCM) Module 3 3 (PCM)

Propellant

307 314

Oxidizer, Fuel Line

Propellant between Line PCM

Control _nd PCM

Engine and

I
I

310 311

Oxidizer

between

Engine

NOTE:

Maximum Minimum

allowable allowable

temperature temperature

is 325K is 267K

242

by the AS-203 components were as expected and thermal control system operated satisfactorily. 18.3.3 S-IB STAGE BASE THERMAL ENVIRONMENT

indicate

the

passive

In general, the AS-203 stage base thermal environment was different from that experienced by the AS-201 base region. This was mainly clue to the inboard engine turbine exhaust design change. The observed differences are discussed below by regions of assumed uniform heating. Thirty measurements were flown in the base region, all of which recorded usable data for the duration of flight. As on AS-201, only membrane-type calorimeters were mounted on AS-203, along with gas, skin, and structural thermocouples. The heat shield thermal envirol_nent was analyzed as two separate regions of assumed uniform heating, termed the outer and inner regions. Two radiation calorimeters were mounted on the AS-203 outer region heat shield. Figure 18-19 presents the recorded data along with the measured values from AS-201. One instrument located near Pos. IV on AS-203 exhibited peak levels occurring between 2 and 6 km and again at 20 km. The other radiation calorimeter located near Pos. III showed a similar, but lower, peak at 22 km of altitude. In general, AS-203 heat shield outer region radiation levels were higher than observed on AS-201. The center plot of Figure 18-19 presents the data recorded by two total heat flux calorimeters mounted in the heat shield outer region. Also shown are corresponding AS-201 values temperatures (lower plot of AS-201 up to 28 km. Beyond than the levels measured on which indicated similar trends. AS-203 gas Figure 18-19) were generally high_ than 28 km, the AS-203 recorded values were lower AS-201.

Figure 18-20 (upper plot) presents the data recorded by the radiation calorimeter mounted on the heat shield inner region. Since no corresponding instrumentation was flown on AS-201, the figure correlates the measured values with S-l, Block II data. The major difference between the two sets of data occurred between 8 and 23 km of altitude where the AS-203 data are, at most, 3 watts/cm 2 above the Block II data

band. At other altitudes, the AS-203 values were approximately the same as previously observed. The heat shield inner region total heating rates are compared to the AS-201 data (Figure 18-20, middle plot), indicating that the AS-203 values were generally higher. Two peaks were noted in the AS-203 heat flux data between 2 and 7 km and between I0 and 28 km of altitude similar to those in the gas temperature data (Figure 18-20, lower plot). The heat shield inner region gas temperature was generally higher than that shown for AS-201, with peaks occurring between 2 and 8 km and again between 13 and 28 km.

_adiatl.on

Heat

Flux

(wal:t.'-;/011 z

50

k
1

i
"- {

_/

30 _,

--+

......

" :

--

:_
0

l0

20 Altitude

3C, (k_!)

_0

50

60

local

}]eat

Flt_ (uatcs'm

2)

30 ' ,Rk

I f

i st-_l DA_

_ ----I i ': .Fo

lc--

" _ .....
f
I iO 2O Altitud_, ,

!
I 30 (kin') AO 50 6O

!J

Gas Temperar"re

(K)

12 _

,_

/ //-

75,0

i/I

"_:::

-"

250

10

20

....

30 (kin)

40

50

---

60

Altitude FIGURE 18-19 HEAT

S}{IELD OL_fER REGION

I'_ERMAL E2CVIRO_gh'r

244 , 9 _)

Radiation

Heat

Flux

(watts,'cm

3O t

_, i ,,, D

DA' ' '

._

o
o Io 2o
? Heat Flux (_atts/cm ")

i
30
Altitude (km)

Lo

5o

60

Total

30--

_-

2ol

SA-20_ DATA

-- -- -- TM

t
I0 2O 30 Altitude (kin) /.0 Gas Temperature 125C (OK)

i
50 60

,
. I ;

_
750

!
/

_,_
ii ,

,_/o
,_

250 --

'" _l'
I0

20

i'-_'-=_A'A t r" I
i
30 Altitude 40 (kin) 18-20 HEAT SHIELD

50

60

"
ENVIRO_4ENT

'

FIGURE

INNER REGION

THERMAL

245

and along

Three thermocouples were the recorded temperatures with corresponding data

mounted on the heat shield forward face, are presented in Figure 18-21 (upper plot) from AS-201. As can be seen from this the sensor adjacent to engine 5 recorded observed. From 38 km to engine cutoff, the the heat shield outer region showed a conof is an expected leveling explained as follows: or A decreasing of thermocouple

figure, between 2 and 30 km, lower values than previously sensor located near fin I on tinual temperature recorded values.

rise instead This increase

was paired with another sensor (2 pairs) to determine the differential temperature across the heat shield honeycomb. One pair was installed in the heat shield outer region near fin I and the other pair was installed in the inner region adjacent to engine both for 5. the Each forward pair was of installed the heat to shield record temperature histories and the braze line. Data indicated saturation The braze from the two face

thermocouples

in

the

outer

region

near

fin

the presence of water. These two sets of data and a water temperature curve are presented in Figure 18-21 (center plot). line temperature, measured by the sensor on the forward face, first 20 sec cruve. This of flight indicates and then followed closely that water had entered the braze line separation, saturation

rose rapidly for the the water saturation

honeycomb through the hole in the forward face around the thermocouple lead wire. Between approximately 60 sec and the temperature history is slightly higher than the water

temperature indicating greater than ambient pressure inside the honeycomb cells which could be caused by the boiling water. The backface temperature, as shown in this figure, rises slowly for the first 80 sec, until it reaches the water saturation curve. Then, for approximately 30 sec, the recorded temperature agrees with the saturation curve. At approximately ii0 sec, there was a sharp increase in the backface temperature. This may have been caused by water on the heat shield forward surface for the first ii0 sec, after which time the water was completely boiled off. Since these two sensors are off-set by approximately 5 cm, there is no reason to expect that the braze line temperature influencing the forward face sensor has been affected by the presence of water. Analytical results presented in Figure 18-21 show that, for a dry braze line throughout the flight and water on the forward face to only Ii0 sec of flight, a forward face temperature rise of 2.78K/s could be expected following ii0 seconds. This compares with a recorded rise initially of 6.95K/s for approximately 4 sec followed by a steady rise of 2.60K/s. Data obtained from the inner region measurements (located adjacent

to engine 5) are presented in the lower plot of Figure 18-21. The braze line thermocouple located on the aft honeycomb surface has a slower initial response than its complementary measurement in the heat shield outer region, and the backface thermocouple data at this location indicates water was present throughout S-IB powered flight. These two differences

246 Forward Side Skin Temperature (OK

DATA B, qD

_"

.....

--

,
60 ,,

l ................

I0

20

30 Altitude

40 (kin)

50

Hone, comb Differential

Temperature

(OK)

5oo

I..... _
i

'

t
Simulation <_, _ /_

i_B-O'_ - Postflight

4OO

_f-WATER SAT

TEMPERAUEE

=_,v

L
2oo0....................... 20
40

[
60 Range Time 80 (sec)

!
100 120 140

E
&
"_1 FI"-.. I i I

r" 4
, i

I _

Honeycomb

Differential

Temperature

(OK)

,i

//-

WATER

SATUR_ION

TEMP mATURE

_v

&O0

I /---

3oo

'
60 Range Time 18-21 80 (sec) I00 120 la0

i
200 ' 20

i
40

FIGURE

HEAT SHIELD SKIN AND HONEYCOMB

THERMAL

ENVIRONMENT

247

from the outer region thermal

region case environment.

can

be

attributed

to

the

less

severe

inner

eter

Flame shield radiant located on the flame

heating shield

rates measured by a radiation are presented in Figure 18-22

calorim(upper

plot). shield, values.

Since no radiation calorimeter was mounted on the AS-201 flame the AS-203 data are correlated with Saturn I, Block II measured As shown in the figure, AS-203 flame shield radiant rates were II vehicles. duct redesign. This This

considerably lower than the data shown for the Block effect was due to the inboard engine turbine exhaust

redesign was such that the fuel-rich turbine exhaust gases effectively blocked plume radiation to the flame shield. However, a definite similarity exists between the shapes of the curves formed by the two sets of data. AS-203 flame shield total heating rates are shown in Figure 18-22

(middle plot) along with the recorded data of the S-I, Block II vehicles. (Installation of the AS-201 flame shield total calorimeter exposed the heat sink of that instrument to the severe flame shield environment; consequently, unrealistic AS-201 and are flame shield not presented.) total heating rates are When compared with considered the Block II

data, AS-203 recorded total heating data were considerably lower, as would be expected for much lowered radiant rates. As with the radiation heating rates, the curves of the two sets of data have similar shapes. Flame shield gas temperatures are Because the AS-201 analogous instrument shown in _igure 18-22 (lower plot). failed to record, the current

data are presented with the S-I, Block II data. From liftoff to 6 kln, the AS-203 data are virtually in the Block II data band. Above this altitude, the Block II data continued to rise to approximately 1,800K where it became constant up to engine burnout. The AS-203 data, however, drop off at 6 km to a constant value of 800K (except for a data dropout between 43 and 56 km). This 800K temperature level very nearly corresponds to turbine exhaust gas temperatures measured within the exhaust duct.

The measured temperature of the forward face of the flame shield is presented with corresponding AS-201 data in Figure 18-23 (upper plot). Both sets of data are nearly the same with neither showing any appreciable change from liftoff to burnout. Flame shield access chute temperatures, recorded by two instruments, are shown in middle plot of Figure 18-23. The the rmocouple mounted nearest the flame shield showed a 70K rise from beginning to end of powered flight while the other sensor indicated a maximum rise of 30K. Figure 18-23 (lower plot) presents the total heating rates recorded by a calorimeter mounted on the inboard engine nozzle along with data from AS-201. Above 35 km, both sets of data are approximately the same; however, below 35 km, the two sets of data criss-cross each other.

2:_ 8

Radiacxo,:

Hear

Flux

(_att_,cm

2)

_0

,,,

.,'

;,ko

I0

2O Altitude

30 (_)

l,o

50

6G

Total

H_,at

F[uw

(_att_,'c_

2"t

,2, / ,j--- -

".s "-"r

_F-_--

%;

!_

i ' I
i0 2O Alticuee 30 (kin) &O _0 6C Gas T_perature (OK)

15C_

--

'i

10_3

"-

i i

0 0 I0 ;_0

[
30 Air ltude _,O (_a) FIGURE I8.22

:
5(_

:
60

PIP.ME SHIELD _ ERMAL ENVIRO_ENT

249

Flame

Shield

Skin

Temperatures

(OK)

400

._

,.

/SA-_ Ol DATA

SHIELD
CT-301
I_ SULATIO_ ._
I

_i

20(

10

20

30 Altitude

40 (km)

50

60

Flat (K6oo Shield

Access _ Chute

Temperatures

_--_

I//..

300

_-_ --,-

200 0

SHIELD i0 20 30 titude (km) 40 50--"

--

60

\. I
'"

Inboard

Engine

Nozzle

._eat Flux

watts/cm 2

30

1 IO m /

/SA-_

I DATA

o
O _

1o

2o

30
T_" ALTITUDE (_M) FLAME

&o
_ _

_o

6o

>'-'---"-C

FIGURE

18-23

TYPICAL

SHIELD

REGION

THERMAL

ENVIRONMENTS

250

AS-203

heating

rates

were

lower

than

AS-201

between

7 and

13 km

and

again from 27 to 32 km. Since the envirot_nent on the outboard turbine exhaust reroute design this area. Two total heat flux

the instrument was mounted facing side of an inboard was felt to have little or

to measure engine, the no effect in

calorimeters

were

mounted

on

the

newly

designed

inboard engine The instruments flame shield.

turbine exhaust ducts, one each on two different engines. were mounted to face aft and yet not be covered by the The data from these two measurements are presented in and are similar to 2 at liftoff. The a drop to each data other, recording a then show an increase 2 at about ii km. and to the

Figure 18-24 (upper plot) level of about 28 watts/cm to 38 watts/cm 2 at 2 km

and

16 watts/cm

Thereafter, 46 watts/cm the trends

both sets of data increase rapidly to levels between 39 2. The trends exhibited by these data were very similar shown for the S-IB stage outboard engine aspirator body. probability exists that both areas were affected by

Therefore, the same phenomena.

For the first time, gas thermocouples the inboard engine turbine duct inlet gas were installed on two of the four ducts.

were installed to measure temperatures. Instruments As shown in Figure 18-24

(lower plot) the two sets of data are virtually identical. The data indicate nearly constant values, averaging about 740K. These levels were about 60K lower than the flame shield gas temperatures. This indicates that the major contribution to the flame shield gas temperature environment was due to the turbine exhaust gases, which was anticipated for the inboard engine turbine duct reroute design. Two total heat flux calorimeters were flown on the outboard engine

3 aspirator. One calorimeter was located on the aspirator body approximately at the engine nozzle exit plane while the other was mounted on the aspirator neck. Figure 18-25 (upper plot) shows the aspirator body data along with corresponding AS-201 and Saturn I, Block II data_ The two sets of S-IB data are similar to each other, but late in flight both indicate considerably higher levels than recorded on the Block II vehicle.(A similar effect is noted for the inboard engine turbine exhaust ducts.) The cause of this increase in total heating rates is under investigation. Figure 18-25 (lower plot) presents the total heat flux data measured on the aspirator neck for both S-IB flights. Little difference is noted between the AS-201 and AS-203 flight results_ both indicating The similar radiation trends heating and levels. of the fin trailing edge are shown in II

rates

Figure 18-26 (upper plot) along with corresponding recorded values. The Block II data were measured trailing edge, but because both the stub fins in the same position relative to the engines, and the

Saturn I, Block on the stub fin

the AS-203 fins were data for the two were

251

Duct Heat Flux

(watts/cm 2)

50

2o
0

H
i0 20 (K)

Engine

ngineS
f_ 40 50 60 Engine 6 _] En$ine 8 f__ 1

30 Altitude

(km)

iooo

Inlet Temperature

750

--

50 0 io 20 30 Altitude (km) EXHAUST 40 50 60

FIGURE

18-24

TURBINE

THERMAL

ENVIRONMENT

)sf

Neck _o

Heat

Ftux

(watts/cm

2)

Eng.

O I0 2o 3O &O 50 6O

ALTITUDE (KM) F_GHRE t8-25 O_OA_ _CINEASPI_TOR THEm, E_VI_O_E_ mL

253

Radiation

Heat

Flux

'wstts/cm 2)

20

"'

lO

"'

/-- BLOC}< II DATA

AND

i0

20

30 Altitude (kin)

40

50

60

Total iO

Heat

Flux

(wattS/Gin 2)

//

BLOCK

II DATI

BAND

0 k...'_"_'

--

........

--I[I

,..x

-1O

I0

20

30 Altitude (km)

40

50

60 <>[] O " '

Gas

Temperature

(OK)

500

250

" '

_-

BLOC!

_,AND

0 0 i0 20
ALTITUDE FIGURE 18-26 FIN TRAILING

30
(KM) EDGE

_0

50

60

THERMAL

ENVIRONMENT

254

considered comparable. to the engine shrouds.

On Block II vehicles,the Partial blockage by the

stub shroud

fins were adjacent at low altitudes

(when the plumes were virtually cylindrical in shape) caused the shape factors on Block II to be slightly lower than on AS-203; the slightly higher AS-203 data indicate this effect. At higher altitudes, the outboard engine plumes expand (beyond the shrouds in the case of the Block II vehicles), and the shape factors for the two vehicle configurations approach the same value. As shown in this figure, the AS-203 data match the Block II data at altitudes above 16 km. Figure 18-26 (middle plot) compares the total heating rates of the fin trailing edge of AS-203 with the stub fin trailing edge total heating rates of Block II vehicles. As on Block II vehicles, the total heating rates were less than the radiation rates for altitudes lower than 40 km, indicating that the convective flow of the gases tended to have a cooling effect. The fin trailing edge gas temperatures are shown in Figure 18-26 (lower plot) and are compared with Block II data from the stub fin trailing edge. Although removal of the engine shrouds would tend to cause a change in the flow pattern of the gases, most of the AS-203 data points fall in the upper region of the data band, with points between 33 and 50 km being the only exceptions. A fast-scan infrared spectrometer was mounted on the heat shield of

the Saturn IB stage of AS-203. The purpose of this experiment was to observe the radiation to the base region from the high temperature impingement regions and exhaust plumes. The spectrometer, which was located betweenengines 2 and 6, received radiation from.three different lines of sight (normal to the base, 5 deg from the normal toward outboard engine 2, and 5 deg from normal toward inboard engine 6). The spectrometer recorded the infrared spectrum over a region from approximately 1.1 to 4.8 microns. In general, the spectrometer operated satisfactorily and the flight data is very usable. The data shown in Figure 18-27 indicate some of the trends noted throughout the flight. The upper plot shows the spectrum recorded just after liftoff. The channel which recorded the spectra from I.i to 2.2 microns was saturated (i.e., the intensity level exceeded the instrument capability) during the first part of the flight, but later yielded useful data. The channel from 2.3 to 4.8 microns was never saturated and always operated The spectrum within shows the expected intensity limits. with absorption from

carbon and the

continuum

radiation

H20 in the 2.7 plot of Figure

micron 18-27

band shows

CO 2 in the 4.3 micron band. The m_dle spectrum at 0.8 km. The intensity level

was unchanged and the H20 and CO 2 bands were still present along with an absorption band at 3.4 microns which was probably due to the presence of methane or propane in the base region. The level of radiation was slightly reduced from that shown at liftoff. The lower plot shows a spectrum late in flight. All significant absorption has disappeared and the level of radiation was lower.

2% The dips indicate the presence of HOG CH Mcl,':,:h', or CO3 as noted on the curve,

Radlatlom imt enslty IO

_t

Llftoff

(_atts/em2.m[c't'or-ster)

Saturated

.._

!,

@0

I I00

_0

OJl.O

2 0

3 0 Wave Length (microns)

4.0

5 0

R_diati_n

Iateqslty

at

0,8

_ra (watts/caa2-micron

"ate_)

-"- i__

_ _-_-

,o I.O

-i-i
ZO

-=_fli

!._ _ i
40

L /
3.0

.i
5.0

_ave Length (microns)

Radiation I0.

Intensity

at 57.9

kJn (watts/cm2-micron-ster)

l I@ O0 p_

Ol@

O'lio

ZO

3.O Wave Length (microns)

40

50

FIGLgE 18-27

VARIATION

IN ODTBOARD

ENGINE PLt_E INFRA-RED SPEL'TF_ WITH ALTITUDR

256

The spectral

data appears to present nature of the radiation

a very reasonable that reaches the

description heat shield.

of the The

absorption bands at low altitudes indicate that the base free-stream air and that possibly some water is present. intensity level gives an equivalent blackbody temperature plumes which agrees very well with other measured data. 18.3.4 INSTRUMENT UNIT TEMPERATURES

region contains The indicated for the exhaust

The upper portion of Figure 18-28 shows during powered flight compared to calculated lower portion of Figure 18-28 shows IU inner during orbital flight. The overall below their

the IU skin temperatures skin temperatures. The skin temperature profiles

fell

temperatures of the components nominal operating ranges after coolant fell below shows time slices of trends during CONTROL that

shown in Figure the first orbit. the ECS selected and

18-29 At

that time the of 288.15OK. temperatures 18.4

methanol/water Figure 18-29 which

control point component orbital flight.

illustrate UNIT

powered SYSTEMS the

INSTRUMENT All the

ENVIRONMENTAL data indicates

available

Environmental

Control

System system During dropped

(ECS) operated satisfactorily. The Gas Bearing Supply (GBS) functioned properly, holding pressures within the desired ranges. the fourth orbit over Bermuda, the gas bearing inlet temperature to about 3.33OK below the 283.15K allowable minimum in response

to the cold methanol/water temperatures in the gas bearing heat exchanger. The heat load was removed from the Thermal Conditioning System (TCS) soon after orbital insertion because of the relatively low component heat dissipation and colder orbital environmental conditions. 18.4.1 THERMAL CONDITIONING SYSTEM (TCS) pressures and trend of the orbital flow

rates

The TCS in the

appeared desired coolant

to function ranges. An temperature

properly, holding expected downward was apparent

methanol/water

during

flight.

The top portion of Figure 18-30 shows that the sublimator began operating at approximately 200 sec and increased its cooling rate to approximately I0 kw by 700 seconds. The lower portion of Figure 18-30 compares the inlet temperature of the sublimator with the exit temperature, demonstrating the effect that the removal of heat had on these temperatures. As expected, all temperatures were generally above those of AS-201 for the first 700 seconds. Indications are that, during orbital flight, when the control temperature began falling below the 288.15K control point, the the specified coolant through control valve worked a by-pass around the properly, routing sublimator. A

III _ II IIV _-Upper A 0 _ Near Near Pos. Pos. Pos. Pos.

357

I II IV III

k Temperature 340 (%)

_0 --Lo,,er <> Near

,oo

_-

,0 4

24o
0

I
i _ Range

__
4 Time (hr) Calc;aloted

Temperaeure

(OK)

_yeasured

370

.,o.,o,od onl: o H
-S]_ n T1mperatuPe Tin tial "- 31

310

;,osition _

_m_._._

/_ //I __

Upper Range of Measureme its

1 290

los'It_on 0 20

II, Ill, IV 40

I 60 80 Range Time 100 (see) 120 140

i 153 189

FIGURE

18-28

IU IhrNEK SKIN TL-_iPERATURES DURING

BOOST AND ORBITAL

FLICHT

_5,q

T,mp_rut J20

ire

(:_K)

O-313

--O

O- "O- -o-

-o- -o

_---O---St[-124M -_!(I ---o----O-----O----O----O-_ --o _i_---Gui_!,

Internal Comp. (Logi_

Gimbal Page)

--O----O--Data Adapter @ DGuid. Comp. (Memory) O Q fq g=cel. Sig. Cond. --O- Cent rol Computer /_ _ _1 ST-124M IU Ambient Eiec. Box

_0_

100

2qll

28_ i

o--------o

9- "41-" -@ O O 0 0

280

O-O

O'-O

400

500

bOO

700 Range

6000 Tinlt,

'

7 O0 (se'g)

o'

110

'o '
O 12000

13

'o -+---4--00 17000 lgO0

Temperature 3[0

(oK)

Temp. _

250

va

Inverter ] | | F2)| |

--__k7

_'(_

Temp. PC_/RY Assy. Surface PI Recorder, Assy. Tape, Surface Typical for Internal, Batteries Typical amd for Temp. T_I Assv. Rg ASS). S_reae_ serrate-

1-4 (FI S (FI)

0"--'--'---0 J05

1oo

0 _-_0-0

290

G--qn
28, I I00 , 200 , 300 , 400 l 500 l bOO l 700 I 6000 Range Time 18-29 IU l 7000 (see) l ['I--"_T I1000 12000 l 13000 l 17000 , 18000

FIGURE

COMPONENT

Tk_PERATURES

259

Methanol/Water 294

Subllmator

Temperature

(OK)

Sublimator . Temperature Inlet

Cooling

Rate

(kw) 12

_._/

Cooling

Rate

290 /

__

0,Jtlet Temperature

/
288 0 i00 200 300 Range Heat Exchanger (OK) Time 400 (sec) S00 600 700 0

Tempersture

290

1_Inlet

Metha_

286 0 i00 200 300 Range Time 400 (see) 500 600 700

Heat

Exchanger

Temperature

OK)

293 300

[ I

---_Exit : _ /_

GN 2 Inlet Methanol/Water

"_ Allowable

28_290_

_(ST.,2_)

TemperattJre

280

_'_

283"15

275 0 Range FIGURE 18-30 ENVIRONMENTAL Time (hr)

----

CONTROL

SYSTEM

OPERATION

260

continued general downward trend of the methanol/water temperature (to approximately 284.82K during the fourth revolution over Bermuda - allowable 288.15 + 0.56K) indicates that component heat dissipations were lower than e_pected and/or thermal losses from the ECS and components were greater than expected. There is no evidence of TCS hardware malfunction. 18.4.2 GAS BEARING SUPPLY SYSTEM (GBSS)

The GBSS appeared to function properly. The middle portion of Figure 18-30 illustrates how the ST-124 inlet temperatures were also affected by the downward trend of the methanol/water coolant temperatures. The GBSS temperatures during orbital flight are shown in the lower portion of Figure 18-30. As the methanol/water temperatures lowered during the orbital phase (lower portion of Figure 18-30), the gas bearing inlet temperature also lowered (to around 279.82K during the fourth revolution over Bermuda - allowable 283.15 to 298.15K)$ This indicates an expected gas response to the gas bearing heat exchanger methanol/water temperature and not a malfunction of the GBSS. The GBSS held the pressure differential between the GN 2 inlet and ST-124 internal ambient pressure steady at approximately I0 N/cm 2.

261

19.0 19. i SUMMARY

(U)

AERODYNAMICS

Differential pressures, measured across the fin exterior surfaces, and the corresponding wind tunnel data were in fair agreement. The base drag coefficient shows some deviation from predicted. Beyond Mach I the base drag deviation from predicted was similar to that indicated by the total aerodynamic axial force coefficient (obtained from the flight simulation). At subsonic Mach numbers the base drag coefficient was lower than predicted, whereas the total aerodynamic axial force coefficient was generally higher than predicted. 19.2 FIN SURFACE PRESSURES

Differential pressures, measured across the exterior surface of fins 5 and 7,are compared with wind tunnel data in Figures 19-1 and 19-2, respectively. Angles-of-attack determined from the Q-ball measurement and the basic wind tunnel data were used to obtain predicted values. In general, the predicted and measured data trends agree, although in some instances there was a pressure level difference. In all cases, the deviation between measured and wind tunnel values was within the accuracies of the wind tunnel data and flight The AS-201 measurements are not shown because fin locations and angles-of-attack. 19.3 DRAG data measuring system. they were at different

The base drag coefficient, determined from measured base pressures, is compared with predicted in the upper portion of Figure 19-3. The base drag coefficient was lower than predicted, except for the period between Mach 2.3 and Mach 5.6. After Math 1.7 the base drag became negative; i.e._ acted in the thrust direction, and at about Mach 5.6 this negative drag became larger than predicted. In the subsonic region the base drag coefficient was lower than predicted; whereas the total aerodynamic axial force, obtained from flight simulation, was generally higher than predicted. Beyond Mach 2.3 the deviations from predicted of the base drag coefficient and he axial force coefficient were similar. The total axial force coefficient (lower portion of Figure 19-3) indicates that the forebody drag was less than predicted in the hypersonic Mach number range (above Mach 4). At Maeh 6.3 the total axial force coefficient became negative; e.g. became thrust instead of drag. This occurred at a lower than expected Mach number because the base pressure being higher than predicted in the hypersonic region resulted in a lower base drag coefficient.

262 / % //

------Predicted

(Wind

Tunnel

Data)

Differenttal 0.2

Pressure

Coefficient,

'.Cp

-0.2 0

/-0.5 l,O 1.5 2.0 Mach Numhe r 2.b 3.0 3.5 4.0 Pressure Coefficient, .", Cp

Differential 0.2

-\

-0.2 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Mach 2.0 Number 2.5 3.0 3.5 _,0

Differential 0.2

Pressure

Coefficient,

:h Cp

/_-_'-0.2 O 0.5 1,0

\t, _ l" _ I \J
1.5 2.0 Mach Number

__&---------.__1_

2.5

3.0

3,5

4.0

Differential 0.2

Pressure

Coefficient,

"; Cp

&

-0.2 0 0.5 1.0 1.5

2,0 2,5 Macl, N,Lc, b,,r PRESSURE 3.0 3.5 4.0 FIGURE 19-1 FIN 5 DIFFERENTIAL COEFFICIENTS

263

------Predicted _ Measured

(Wind T ..... Data) I /_

---_ii_

Differential 0.2

pressure

Coefficient,

Cp

0,5

[.O

1.5

2.0

2,_

3,0

3.5

4.0

Differential 0.2

Pressure

Coefficient,

!Cp

-O.&

02F
0 0.5 [.0 1.5 2.0 Math Number 2.5 Differential 0.2 pressure Coefficient, f,Cp

1
3.0 3.5 4.0

/ -0.2 O 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Math Number 2.5 1.0 3.5 4.0

Differential 0.2

press_ire Coefficient,

,IC

0
/
-O.2

r_/_ _,_-_ _ i_
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Math Number 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

FIGURE

19-2

FIN 7 DIFFERENTIAL

PRESSURE

COEFFICIENTS

;:.

..

, i
I

ti

_............

_ --

---

+---

.1"
I

..

265

20,0 20.1 SUMMARY There AS-203 were 1434

(U) INSTRUMENTATION

telemetered

measurements Of the

active 1434

at

the

start 17

of

the

automatic

countdown in an

sequence. overall

measurements, reliability

failed of 98.8

in flight, per cent. The preflight

resulting

measuring

system

airborne

telemetry

systems

operated

satisfactorily, and was though tape as recorder expected. one of

including operation. TV the coverage two

calibrations, of the

flight RF

calibration, systems even

Performance

telemetry good,

for the LH 2 experiment was very scheduled TV cameras operated. Performance GLOTRAC safety overall decoder of the RF

only

tracking poor.

systems The

was

good, command

except system

that and

Azusa/ range

coverage operated the The

was

secure

satisfactorily. 70 engineering sequential cameras 12 tracking cameras provided good particle was seen by the vehicle at about provided coverage. good

Thirty-six of quality coverage.

in

An unidentified falling the same field of view as

two up-range 96 seconds.

cameras

Both onboard cameras viewing the separation sequence were successfully; however, only one camera capsule was recovered. 20.2 VEHICLE There MEASURING were 1434 ANALYSIS telemetered measurements active on the

ejected

vehicle

at

liFtoff, 500 on the S-IB stage, 567 on the S-IVB stage, and 367 on the Instrument Unit. Of the 1434 total, 19 failed in flight, resulting in an overall measuring system reliability of 98.7 per cent. Six measurements failed prior to the automatic sequence and were scrubbed, 22 were partially successful, 9 required special data processing techniques to extract the usable data, and 26 had insufficient range. The measurements are identified in Table 20-1. 20.2.1 S-IB Five STAGE MEASURING and two ANALYSIS flight measurements were scheduled for the S-IB

hundred

stage. Of these, 2 measurements were scrubbed prior to the automatic countdown sequence, 7 failed completely, 7 were partially successful, 3 had insufficient range, and 9 required special data processing techniques to extract the usable data. Based on 7 measurement failures 500 expected to produce useful data, the resulting reliability is per cent. out of 98.6

266 TABLE (U) HEASUR_EN_ 20-I HALFIJNCTIONS

Scrubbed

prior

to

),,n:h

BLaSe S-IB

_eas. ESJS-OL SS_8_II

No, Vtb Strain = Tank

Measurement FiI! & Dr_n S_=d

Title Line Flange Fa_!e_ F_led prior pviur tn t,>

R*'_arks a,]=_atic )u=n_ati. enuntdown :o_td_n s_nee. se_e.ce.

- Mou_tin_

$-I_

Clio

_0_

T_mp

LH 2

Ullase

Gas

Failed _ith_u: 5 Failed not be Chsm_er 2-2 ([lip) 1-I (IIv) Failed

during LH 2 d_rin_ replace_ d_rLn_

C3OT. Co_:l,_ tank entry. prcpoLlant _ithaut tDOT.

:,uc

be

repla_d

CJ_9-_08

Tamp

LH2

Ullage

Ga_

load_n_ LH 2 tank _,l,e,_L:le RepLarez mtnnte_.

test. _,ctry.

Co.,iJ

DT_-_l_ O_i _1_

Press Press

- A_L_de A_tirJde

Control Control

prohibited _,,t f_i!ed

(i_. ag_

Fa_l_d d_r_ng F_T _t liftof_ minus _ Failures

IB

C9-2

Te_p

- G_s

_enerator

l_eic_=lng some_ha_ Spar _ Only Only O2 O2 Support Support Pin Lnng't Dat_ Data D_ta _aza

_igh erratic. after _o n,,

,=p to

Ot

se_nd_

Subsequently

E528-22 E_30-20 E530-22 WE3_8=9 _339-[l WX3_216

Vibbration Vibration Vibration Vibration V,bration Vibr_tion

Fin F_n Pin

7 R_ar Tip Tip

S second_. da_a, _ata, overdri_en o_erdri_en o,-erdr_en ampL_er. amplifiur. amplifier,

notre, _ois_, indicated indic_te_ in, in.ted

- Tank - Tank

- Holddo_n

;-Iv_

C127=_03 CIS_-_OJ D2-_03 DS4-_LC D55-_24 _2-_2_ DLO5-403

Temp* T_p press Press p<e_s P_ess Press

LH 2

D_(_

2 e Inlet Inlet Inlet Return Press Line, Hode Hell. Tank Inlet Gas B/p Line Wall

Never Never Felled Failed

:ame came ar at

on on [39 }_8

stele, s_a}e, sec;readin_ seond_. no response t_ _anges. 1o_.

= LOX pr_v_Lx, LH_ _p LH 2 Tank

= LOX Tank LH. Cite,

Cnexpe:ted Palled F_ile_ liftolf F_iled flight, Radial Air. Sys Pt, Tan No Lo_ Failed NO data partlaIly S_cce_alul Hgn dat_ high; high_ data fur frc_ _alid dar_ to at

ie_eL; 90 seconds.

LOX T_k

during mxn,_$ to

CDDT. Repaired _] _Lnu_es. Remained at

bur

_aLled

again

_t

DtlO-&26

Press

Fnr_ard

Skirt

]n=,

re_pond.

1_.7

pa

_hroughout

E30-_O9 E#6-_O2 K_70-A2_ [U B3-900

Vib _,lb Event

- Sty.

_36

Pus.

Ill

d_t_ ie_e[_.

- Retrorocket COX ULLag_ Shrou_

Forward Thr_t

$OV-OP

i_dicate

ope_

Acoustic

Nose

received.

S-IB

C9-2 DI]_I DL3=5 LLg-OC L_-OC SS_O-I_ $_[6-8

Tamp pr_s p_ess

Gas LOX LOX

Generator P_p P_p Discrete In_et Inlet

fcr Lo_ lo_

seconds. (raquencv frequency _ibr_ion vibr_:i_n 7, usec) nsed fo_ [or polo. pogo.

Dat_ Dat_ No

LOX Level

probe of 80 60 rang(

_o.

LOX Le,_el Continuous Strai_ Strain Tamp TempTemp _emp Tamp press Vib Strain Strain Speed . Radial Fin F_el F_el Eng - Ap$ Fuel Outrigger Tank _ank LH 2 P_p _n_ _a_k V_lve Ext L_na Forward Forward Pu*_p COX _l_ Eng Skirt Skirt _e Thru_ SFS F_<_ Ext WsII Wa_i Eng 2 & 3

D_ta Erratic No

5C_, a_ter afteF firs= first at 253 h_ _gh

_econds seconds orbit. orbit.

data

_=I_q_

C78-&O9 C79 _Og

Off-scale Off-scale Failed Off=scale off-scale o_f-scale Dat_ Us(less UseLess Fa_led Cutoff Lost

C150-401 C177-_5 c_10-_09 D_I&-40_ E55_O3 SI~_2_ $16-&26 T2-_OI

sac, h, at

off fourth 3330 _92 to 250 max ma_

scale orbit. seconds. second_. _econOs. aero sero

high,

D_ffu_er

lob;at at data data b_ after after

LH 2 Trans - Axial - Axial - Fuel

Thrust i 2

beating. heating. a_ engine p_p 5i_ut-

to g_ to this not

zero _eveL !ndlcating

267

T^_LE 20-I

(_C)

partie[[y $_a_e IU Me,s. A8-603 All.b03 H32.603 No. Acceler_tto_, Accele_atio_. L_n_'t _e_su_e_e_t Lon&'_ Lo_'_ T_tle

Suce_uful _e_rka

0rbits_ Orbits2

_LN2 Vending) (I*N2 Ven_n_) (LH2 Venting) Special _oce_lir_

Inoperative _n_Fera_ve Inoperative

on t_e on t_ on t_e

second o_bit, ae_o_ _b_t,

Pea Volt_e

Orbttal

second o_b_,

I
I

DI.4 l._-0_

C_busr_o_ Lox Level

Chamber Pressure _onrinuou_

_r_n$

_altbration

_[l ra_e poin_ _B out of calibration. The LOX level data polnt_, whe_ t_e_ted _ith of_ection factor, po_uce _ali_ dat_. _e S_e a_ L45-0C. _s %z_5-0_

L4_-01 _-02

LOX Level LOX Lewl _OX Level LOX L_vel Strain

Continuous Conttn_o_s Continuous Contl_uou_

L4B.0_ L49-04

Sere _s 1_5.0C. Sa_e a8 _5-0C. Reversal _n _ygt_ po;J_tty.

$608-_

_Ln Outrigger

j I

Tl2. l _12-8

Turb_n_ Tu_btne

_ _

_ron_ m_pl_er. _ro_ multiplier,

268

b!easurement E535-01 (Vibration, after being rendered inoperative due in the vicinity or the accelerometer. insulation to eliminate this problem The not 32.

Tank Fill & Drain Line) was scrubbed to the low temperature environment The feasibility oF providing thermal on S-IB-4 is under investigation.

turbine RPM measurements (special processing), TI2-1 and T12-8, did operate in the normal mode, but divided by 40 instead of the normal When this data was rescaled, valid data was obtained. Measurement psi aCter from the and

[)1-4 (Combustion Chamber Pressure) indicated a pressure of -15 OECO. Using the Remote Automatic Calibrate System checkpoints pre-flight calibration, the calibration curve was reconstructed acceptable data was obtained.

Three measurements had insufficient ranges. Measurements E529-20 and E533-20 (Vib Fin 5 Rear and Front Spar, respectively) had a range of +5 g's, which was exceeded during flight. This problem was observed on AS-201 and is expected on AS-202 and AS-204. To change the range of the accelerometers, it would be necessary to cut the skin of the fins to replace the internal transducers. These measurements, however, do provide good frequency data. 20.2.2 The S-IVB S-IVB MEASURING ANALYSIS performed satisfactorily during flight.

instrumentation

Of 590 scheduled measurements, 5 measurements were not wholly on the S-IVB stage and 12 measurements were for checkout only. One measurement, though installed, was not used; the assembly that was to be measured was not installed. The interface between another measurement and the S-IVB T/M system was removed. Four measurements became inoperative or malfunctioned before the start or the automatic count sequence and were therefore scrubbed. No measurements were lost due to noise from unknown sources, nor were any degraded or prevented from being transmitted by any cause. Measurements totaling 567 were to be evaluated from the beginning o_ the count sequence through the end of the mission. Of these measurements, ii failed during the evaluation period and I0 were partially successful. The measuring system reliability was 98.1 percent. The quality meter, N54-410 (Misc Quality, GH2-Vapor Continuous Vent System) was installed on S-IVB-203 as a part of the LH 2 orbital experiment to measure the quality of the vented hydrogen. This measurement did not yield this: the desired type of data. There are (I) by the instrument manufacturer two and different explanations for (2) by the stage contractor.

I. The following explanation was given by the instrument manufacturer: The output characteristics of the quality meter required special data handling in order to be sufficiently evaluated. The problems associated with the meter are traceable to short delivery time and the inability to adequately define the flight environment of the quality meter.

269

The output of the quality meter during orbital operations can be explained with the aid of an extended calibration curve as shown in Figure 20-1. The figure shows the extension of the calibration curve well into the superheated region. The curve indicates that quality of the vented fluid in the saturated condition (0-100% quality) is indicated by an output reading of from 0.5 to 5 volts. Between i00 to 2007 quality in the superheated region, the meter reads oFf-scale high; 5.6 volts is the maximum reading. When the quality of the vented fluid becomes greater than 2007, the voltage reading of the meter returns back on scale and varies from 5 down to 0.5 volts. This phenomenon of returning on-scale is termed "folding-over". The pressure and temperature data derived from flight indicate that the quality of the vented fluid was in both the saturated and superheated regions. Thus an ambiguity in the interpretation of a given reading results; that is, as to whether the fluid is in the saturated or superheated region. During the early design and development stages, engineering data

indicated that the venting conditions would be at or near saturated condition for most of the flight. Therefore, the meter was not designed or intended for use well into the superheat region. Conditions resulting in the "fold over" problem were discovered too late to be corrected before flight. During periods when there was no venting activity, the output indicated continuous 20 to 22% quality. However, the pressure and temperature data indicated a condition well into the superheat region beyond 250% quality. During periods when the continuous vent was open, the indicated quality was random, between 20 to 100% quality. Analysis of the pressure and temperature data indicated a superheated condition in the region of the sharp roll-off on the extended calibration curve (200 to 250% quality). The only period when saturated conditions existed was when the non-propulsive vent was opened. This occurred over Cape Kennedy between revolutions 3 and 4 at about 17,030 and 17,110 seconds. This condition was confirmed by TV coverage. The meter did work satisfactorily during the period of saturated condition; and, with special data handling, the output during the superheated condition agreed with predicted values. Therefore, it was concluded that the quality meter was working as designed during flight. As a result of the and improvements which could meaningful: A. problem. This The is major experiment, there are several modifications be made to make any future measurements more

modification and

is

the

elimination modification.

of

the Since

"fold-over" the major the to 100%

a simple

inexpensive

portion of flight data was outside the 50 to 100% instrument should be modified to be less sensitive quality and to include a broader range.

quality region, in range of 50

Quality

Meter

Output

(volts)

56 *Values vapor and greater densities be

__ated

Condition

Superheat

Condition

than 100% are representative of less than the saturated density interpreted only as equivalent

should

qualities. 4

To

0.46

for

Q = 0%

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

i00 (percent) METER CALIBRATION

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

I000

Quality* FIGURE 20-1 QUALITY

CURVE

271

B.

Appropriate

modifications

should

be made

to

acquire

the

signal from the vapor and liquid mass channels (Mv and ML). be meaningful in determining density or mass of the hydrogen, of the thermodynamic condition of the vented media. 2. Evaluation The of following explanation was given by the the quality meter indicates conclusively

This would regardless

stage contractor: that the measure-

ment did not provide valid data. The meter was designed to operate primarily between the 50 to 100% quality range; however, most of the flight data was outside this range. Due to a design deficiency in the ratio computer circuit, the "foldover" condition resulted in the meter readings. In addition, it was observed that, during calibration of the quality meter when the meter should have read off-scale high, the meter output "folded-over" and read on-scale erroneously. The invalidate preceding the quality data was three factors are meter readings. which within themselves sufficient However, a detailed evaluation in the following

to

of the flight conclusions: A.

performed

resulted

The

meter

read

on-scale

erroneously and

when pressure

the

ullage

gas and

was superheated (determined from temperature also when the propulsive vents were closed. B. Although the meter indications

data),

suggested

that

liquid

was

being vented during the same period of time as indicated by the in-tank TV cameras, this data is not considered valid, because the meter output did not change during subsequent periods of time when the vents were closed. There should have been a gradual change in the output as the fluid in the meter changed condition due to heat input. It is felt that, during the subsequent periods, zero because of the cold soak remain on-scale. the crystal phenomenon, response finally dropped thus causing the meter to to

C. Using temperature and pressure data from three stations (KSC, Antigua, and Carnarvon), quality points were determined which fell between I00 to 200%. The data points included periods prior to and after blowdown. The meter and output during these times varied from 0.25 to 5.0 volts. However, according to the calibration curve shown in Figure 20-1, the meter should have been reading off-scale high. Any discussion of just what the various on-scale readings recorded in orbit do indicate, apart from pressure and temperature data, is purely academic. Any attempt to attach meaning to these readings is nebulous, since there is no way to determine the count rates present in the meter or the voltage output of the pressure transducer. Both factors are required to evaluate vapor quality present in the meter.

272

Both explanations concerning the quality meter data are plausible. However, several conditions which are required to adequately evaluate the performance of the quality are unknown. It is felt that, based upon the best information available, the meter did respond to changes data. 20.2.3 in quality; but no quantitative values should be placed upon the

IU MEASURING

ANALYSIS on the IU totaled 367. Of partially, 23 went off-scale, 1 measurement failure out of data, the resulting these, 1 failed and i had question367 measurements is 99.7%. excessive some-

Inflight measurements completely, 3 succeeded able readings. Based on expected to produce useful

reliability

spikes

The measurement failure,B3-900 (Acoustic Nose and transients. This circumstance indicates

Shroud), had a malfunction

where ahead of the AC amplifier. Measurements A8-603, AII-603, and M32-603, which were partially successful, were all from the low-g orbital longitudinal accelerometer. The unit was functioning normally when Canary Island lost signal, but was out when Tananarive acquired the signal in the first orbit. Since all 3 measurements apparently were lost simultaneously, it is believed that the malfunction occurred somewhere in the 28-volt power supply. measurements, because they but rejected C37 through C44 (Temp, IU were off-scale on AS-201. A for this flight. Most of the the environmental temperahence, these measurements devices.

The off-scale temperature Inner Skin), were anticipated change in range was requested remaining measurements tures were cooler than are 20.3 not considered AIRBORNE as

were off-scale because expected during orbit; reflecting SYSTEMS defects

in measuring

TELEMETRY

There were 13 telemetry links used to transmit flight AS-203 launch vehicle: 4 on the S-IB stage, 5 on the S-IVB in the IU. All telemetry links functioned satisfactorily. of the telemetry systems is shown in Table 20-II.

data on the stage, and 4 A description

The S-IB stage SS-FM oscillograph recordings evidently operated satisfactorily with the exception that intermodulation appears on channel i0. The blips have been correlated with the ID pulses from the logic and timing in the vibration multiplexer. The S-IB stage TM calibrations were sequenced as programmed.

273

TABLE AS-203 LAUNCH VEHICLE

20-II SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

TELEMETRY

Link No.

Frequency (mHz)

Modulation

Power Output (Watts)

Location

GF - 1 GF - 2 GS-I GP-I CF-I CF-2 CF-3 CS-I CP-I DF-I DF-2 DS-I DP-I

240.2 244.3 252.4 257.2 258.5 246.3 253.8 226.2 232.9 250.7 245.3 259.7 255.1

PAM/FM/FM PAM/FM/FM SS/FM PCM/FM FM/FM FM/FM FM/FM SS/FM PCM/FM FM/FM FM/FM SS/FM PCM/FM & FM/FM/FM & PAM/FM/FM

* * * * 22.76 28.98 23.94 29.40 24.36 18 14 21 19.5

S- IB S - IB S-IB S-IB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB S-IVB IU IU IU IU

There

were

no

onboard

power

measurements

of

S-IB

telemetry.

Transmission of data from all five S-IVB links was satisfactory throughout flight except for a 2.3 sec period, at approximately 143.53 sec, when transmission from all links was lost due to flame attenuation. The data during the 2.3 sec loss of transmission, from CF-I, CF-2, and CF-3, was recorded and played back by the S-IVB tape recorder. Otherwise, all transmitters, multiplexers, and vehicle carrier oscillators were operational until S-IVB flight termination.

274

The single flight

S-IVB

stage

calibration

of

the

subcarrier conducted

oscillators three times

and

the

sideband and once

system on the

was satisfactorily ground.

during

Approximately two seconds of data dropout due to retro rocket firing. All IU preflight satisfactory. Inflight TM calibration signals observed to about 490 seconds. Two vibration measurements were made in

occurred in the IU telemetry calibrations were normal and were normal for cal_rations

the

IU

near

the DF2-RF 2..75 rapidly

assembly. The g's at liftoff to remain less 20.4 AIRBORNE

maximum acceleration in the longitudinal than I g throughout TAPE RECORDERS

experienced was approximately direction, and this decreased the rest of the flight.

The airborne tape recorders record and store, for future transmission, portions of data that would otherwise be lost because of atmospheric ionization during retro fire, other transmission blackouts, or distance from receiving stations. 20.4.1 S-IB RECORDER

Tape recorder on-command was verified at 39.82 seconds. Playback of the tape recorder began at 170.25 seconds. The recorded data was satisfactory. Measurement A7-12 (Acceleration, Longitudinal) on F2 channel 06 indicated noise during record mode at approximately 140 sec which was not evident on the recorder playback at tape recorder start +30 seconds. Reason for this phenomenon is undetermined. This noise caused no degradation 20.4.2 of S-IVB data. RECORDER

During the 2.3 sec blackout period of all transmission links, the S-IVB recorder recorded the data from CF-I, CF-2, and CF-3, and later played it back, thus filling in the data lost during the blackout. The tape recorder recorded data from 137.05 sec to 154.73 sec, a total of 17.68 seconds. Recorder playback was started at 628 sec and was completed at approximately 646 seconds. Satisfactory data was obtained. The corrected 120 on kHz speedlock signal problem which occurred AS-203. There was no difficulty in reducing on AS-201 playback was data.

Except when within range of the U.S. or when in the playback mode, the tape recorder satisfactorily recorded all PCM data from 858 sec to the end of the mission. Recorded data was satisfactorily played back nine times (from 7 to i0 min per playback) during the orbital period.

275

However,

most

of

the

transmitted

could

not

be

received and

because was

the of

ground recorder was a narrow-band accepting the wideband transmitted 20.4.3 INSTRUMENT UNIT the and RECORDER

type recorder, signal.

incapable

was the

Operation of free of retro outputs of

tape recorder was flame attenuation. DFI and DF2 during

satisfactory, The IU tape retro rocket

and recorded data recorder recorded firing. The legible

Links

portion of the playback contained the real time data that occurred from 137.5 sec to 166.1 seconds. Tape recorder playback was initiated at 628.7 sec and playback speed was obtained at 629.9 seconds. Playback was terminated at 655.3 sec, with real time modulation being reapplied at 658.5 seconds. A total of 28.6 sec of legible data was contained in the 20.5 playback. RF The SYSTEMS S-IB ANALYSIS RF system performed within expected operating limits.

Stage

Signal strengths were above threshold level for adequate reception. No significant signal "drop-outs" occurred during powered flight. The limiter test voltage measurements on the secure command system and range safety decoder indicated a state of readiness throughout powered flight.

The duration separation. The

S-IVB stage telemetry of the flight except The effects nominal of the

forward power was during the 2.3 sec output reflected was

normal for the entire blackout at stage 25 watts. at the antenna during

transmitter change in

impedance

separation were evident in visual standing wave ratio antenna are shown in Table

the tape recorder data. The (VSWR) are 1.7 to 1 maximum. 20-IIl.

design Values

limits for for each

TABLE S-IVB ANTENNA

20-111 AT SEPARATION

CHARACTERISTICS

Antenna I 2 3 4

VSWR 1.42:1 1.33:1 1.35:1 1.54:1

Power

Loss 6.1 6.5 5.1 6.8

(db)

276

The IU RF system included VHF telemetry, Azusa/GLOTRAC, C-Band Radar, and a television system. The performance of all the systems was excellent with the exception of the Azusa/GLOTRAC system. The C-Band radar system exceeded all tracking requirements. The television system provided excellent pictures at KSC and Bermuda, with poor to fair quality being received intermittently at Corpus Christi and Carnarvon. telemetry and command systems fulfilled all requirements. 20.5.1 The TELEMETRY RF telemetry performance of the AS-203 launch vehicle was satisonly pictures The

factory throughout the entire flight. The performance was by main engine flame attenuation, ullage, and retro rocket attenuation. Main engine flame attenuation during this launch was experienced on past Saturn launches. Cape area telemetry perienced signal strength drops of 15 db at maximum flame approximately 106 seconds. The major attenuation effects sec at an altitude of approximately 61.5 km. This altitude 54 to 60 km region, where the flame attenuation had ended Saturn flights.

degraded ignition

similar to that stations exattenuation at c_ased at 138.5 is above the on all previous

25 db S-IVB

The S-IB links at Cape Tel 2, CIF, and New Smyrna Beach had a 15 to drop at ullage ignition, with the signal well above threshold. The and IU links at these stations had a 55 to 65 db drop at retro rocket were 2.5

ignition (143.4 see), with the signal going to threshold. D_ta interrupted during this attenuation for a period of approximately seconds. Orbital telemetry coverage was good at all committed

stations.

Ample signal strengtb was received to record data and provide tracking. Overall telemetry coverage is shown in Figure 20-2. Data for telemetry coverage from Canton Island and Tananarive are not included ir this figure. 20.5. 2 ONBOARD TELEVISION

Prior to launch, television system 2 was found to be inoperative. A decision was made to continue the flight with system 1 only. The operating television system performed exceptionally well during the entire flight. Some data were lost due to ground problems; the USB station at Cape Kennedy had a problem at launch due to signal multi-path. Good pictures were supplied by the station as soon as the vehicle attained enough altitude to eliminate the ground path to the receiving antenna. Corpus Christi was limited to a broad beam positioning antenna system, resulting in poorer reception than possible with a narrow beam tracking system. Generally, the picture quality and the duration oF picture signal for each pass were better than expected.

CIF TEL 2 GBI NEW SMYRNA BEACH BERMUDA TIMBER HITCH (SHIP) ANTIGUA ASCENSION CANARY ISLAND CARNARVON HAWAII GUYMAS CORPUS CHRISTI
I !

---4 _

_ _

_ _

_ _ _ _ _-4 _ _ _ _
I I _

,----4 _ _ _
! ! !

_-4

;..--4 _
! v !

2000 I 0

4000

6000 , 2

8000

i0,000 12,000 Range Time (sec) , 3 Range Time (hr) 20-2 OVERALL TEL_ETRY

14,000

16,000

18,000 a 5

20,000

22,000 l 6

FIGURE

COVERAGE

278

20.5 .3

TRACKING the different stages Tracking requirements of the launch were met by vehicle the

The tracking systems for are tabulated in Table 20-IV. ODOP and C-Band radar systems.

TABLE DATA ACQUISITION

20-IV EQUIPMENT

Frequencies Location S-IB IU IU ODOP C-Band Azusa Radar (GLOTRAC) System Receiving 890 5690 5060.194

(mHz) Transmitting 960 5765 5000,00

The 340 km. flight, evident

ODOP

tracking

system

met

its

mission

requirements

from

launch

to

The standard interrogator with no reported problems. in the time period between

transmitter was used throughout the Main engine flame attenuation was 105 and 138.5 sec but was not of

sufficient amplitude to cause loss of data. There was no dropout of the ODOP signal at ullage rocket ignition; however, the signal was attent_ated as expected. The minimum of three-station coverage for ODOP was maintained in phase lock track through 310 sec, with some stations having intermittent track as long as 440 seconds. ODOP station coverage is shown in Figure 20-3. C-Band Radar tracking data for the launch phase indicate that Patrick, GBI, and Bermuda tracked for their committed times. C-Band records station tracking was accomplished. the first revolution (Carnarvon)

Cape,

for 3 orbits indicate that all scheduled Tracking periods ranged from 327 sec on

to a 460 sec pass on the third revolution (Hawaii), The only exception was the White Sands Station, which was unable to obtain target verification during the first revolution until almost 300 sec of the pass had elapsed. Generally, the look angles and other pointing data supplied to tracking stations were excellent. The overall C-Band System performed better than expected. C-Band radar coverage during launch phase is shown in Figure System. 20-3. Figure 20-4 shows orbital radar coverage by the C-Band

-'l

GOOD SIGNAL

_o_ _L_O_
Insertion

0 [-I
ist Orbit

0 D
2nd Orbit

I2 D
3rd Orbit 4th Orbit

I
0 2500 5000 0 60

I
7500 10,000 Range 120 2

I
12,500 Time (sec) 15,000 180 3 Range 240 4 Time

,I
17,500 20,000 300

I
22,500 360 6 (min) (hr)

0,

I
5

FIGURE

20- 4

ORBITAL

RADAR

COVERAGE

281

Overall coverage from Azusa/GLOTRAC was poor, as reflected by available data. Station 1 produced data from 63 to 166 sec at 37 db above threshold and from 293 to 344 sec at 35 db above threshold. The Azusa Mark II site was required to provide metric data from 24 to 440 seconds. The metric data was usable only from 52 to 143 sec and _rom 345 to 440 seconds. These time periods do not correlate with the significant drops in antenna gain and the signal strength recorded _t the ground station (Figure 20-5). The signal strength appears to be smoother during the periods when usable data was recorded than during the periods when no usable data was obtained. The the Changes Mark in II Azusa function thus records making of indicate phase the RF difficulty and for in locking difficult. of

transponder

oscillator,

lock

tracking

the modulation

frequency

carrier

purposes

range resolution added to the difficulty in maintaining phase lock. Signal levels during launch phase interruptions should have been adequate to maintain the phase-lock loop for all periods other than between 18.5 and 40 seconds. Handover to Bermuda occurred at 460 sec, with Bermuda tracking until 697 seconds.

On the first orbital pass over the Cape, the Mark II Azusa station locked the transponder and resolved range with a minimum of difficulty. When Bermuda took over the track on this pass, the original unstable condition recurred in the transponder oscillator. During the periods resulting in unusable data, the signal strength level fluctuated sharply. These fluctuations are not due to varying vehicle antenna gains and it i_ therefore believed that the loss of data was caused by the transponder intermittently a drift of the losing fine transponder phase local lock. This could have oscillator which moved been caused by the IF off center could not frequenc F

frequency. The drift was far enough so that enable the transponder and the ground station so that lock- on could occur.

the sweep network to find a co_mon

Transponder No. 193 was used in the Azusa/GLOTRAC system on AS-203. This transponder was originally designated as a spare for this flight. When the originally scheduled transponder caused troublej No_ 193 was installed. This transponder had a past history of phase-lock trouble and it was returned to the manufacturer to be repaired. It was then sent directly to KSC as a spare for AS-203 failure a change is that in its an internal component operating characteristics

of

The most probable cause of this transponder experienced

during the initial vibration force of between 3.91 g and 4.14 g longitudinal and between 3.55 g and 3.42 g perpendicular. It is believed that this susceptibility to vibration was peculiar to transponder No. 193 due to a marginal Klystron oscillator and that a more thoro-gh check of the problem than occurred during environmental test might have prevented the loss of data on AS-203.

282

Gain

(db)

2o

o
-_0

/
x,
_o
Above

!
i 3_o

F"_

go

l_o

i_o

200
Range

2_o
Tt_e ($ec)

'

I _go

3_o

_oo

_o

_8o

Signal Level 70

Threshold

(db)

4O

3O

20

I0

0 0 40 80 [20

--L_ 160

200 240 280 Range Time (sec) ANTENNA C_AIN AND

320

360

400

440

480

FIGURE

20-5

AZUSA/GLOTRAC

SIGNAL

LEVEL

283

Onboard measurements indicate weak signal strength due to ground antenna positioning as the cause of lost data between 18.5 and 40 seconds. The positioning of this antenna was accomplished through the use of an optical orientation direction. system. The optical system was oriented in the wrong

GLOTRAC stations at Jupiter and Little Carter Cay maintained phase lock from about 45 sec until retro fire. Eleuthera and Cherry Point stations began tracking when the vehicle was above the line-of-sight horizon. All stations experienced loss of phase lock during retro fire. All GLOTRAC stations indicate lock between 230 and 235 sec and from 250 to 270 between launch 20.6 20.6.1 seconds. 300 and phase OPTICAL GROUND RF Phase lock 325 sec and coverage was again accomplished by all stations from 345 until 440 seconds. The composite is shown in Figure 20-3.

by Azusa/GLOTRAC

INSTRUMENTATION CAMERAS

A total of 70 fixed sequential cameras was scheduled to cover the launch operations. Of the 70 cameras, 36 had good engineering quality coverage and 34 provided unusable or no data. The 34 ineffective cameras revealed the following discrepancies: 21 had no timing, 4 did not operate, 3 were over exposed, and 6 were oriented incorrectly. Camera coverage reliability was 51%, based on 36 effective cameras out of 70 scheduled. The 12 tracking time displacement A field origin 20.6.2 cameras provided good coverage, although and 2 were improperly oriented. seen by two uprange cameras approximately 96 sec into are unknown. in the flight. 8 did not

have

falling particle was of view as the vehicle and type of particle ONBOARD CAMERAS

same The

The two onboard cameras were mounted on the S-IB stage spider beam (radial portion). Camera I was located near Fin 2 and Camera 2 near Fin 6. The cameras were programmed to record the S-IB/S-IVB separation sequence. Telemetry data indicates that both cameras functioned normally and that ejection was satisfactorily performed. However, only one camera capsule (Camera 2) was recovered. This film produced excellent engineering quality coverage of S-IB/S-IVB separation, S-IB retro rocket ignition, S-IVB ullage rocket ignition, and S-IVB main engine ignition. The recovered capsule sustained minimal damage limited to a broken view port caused by the perpendicular landing. The old paraballoon system usually resulted in an angular impact at a higher velocity, subjecting the capsule to severe damage and often to wet film.

284

There is no certain reason why Camera 1 capsule was not recovered. The following failure modes are given as possible causes: (I) failure capsule recovery circuitry, (2) failure of the parachute to open, (3) failure of the radio beacon, (4) damage from collision with booster debris. If the aircraft tracking radar had not failed, a track of: the

of

capsule might have been obtained and a good estimate of the failure mode could then have been made. For example, if the parachute had not opened, the radar would have shown a sizeable velocity of approximately twice that of the opened parachute capsule. The recovered capsule would probably have been lost if the radio beacon (SARAH) receiver had failed. Camera 1 located on fin line 2 was also unrecovered on AS-201.

285

21.0 21.1 SUMMARY

(U)

LH2

ORBITAL

EXPERIMENT

The LH 2 orbital experiment verified the adequacy of the LH 2 continuous propulsive venting system and permitted study of the restart capability of the J-2 engine under general conditions approaching those of Saturn V orbital flight. Elapsed time necessary for these events was shortened from the Saturn V maximum of three orbits to only one orbit on S-IVB-203. The remaining orbits were devoted to experiments to verify the performance of the stage under conditions other than currently planned for Saturn V. Directly pertinent to Saturn V development were the evaluations of propellant control at J-2 cutoff, propellant control during continuous venting, restart systems, and bottle storage characteristics. Primarily of significance for the general understanding of LH 2 behavior in low gravity states were the evaluations of unpressurized chilldown, zero gravity behavior, non-propulsive vent blowdowns, and the pressure rise test. Propellant During orbital thrusting and control functioned satisfactorily successfully deflectors. and within tolerances.

insertion, LH 2 was by tank baffles and

controlled Control of

by LOX ullage the propellant phase allowed position during

in an essentially settled condition during the continuous vent system to maintain the orbital coast.

this critical propellant in

The J-2 engine restart systems and operations--including fuel repressurization, fuel recirculation chilldown, fuel lead during simulated restart, fuel anti-vortex screen, LOX recirculation chilldown, and storage bottles--functioned satisfactorily in general and give confidence that restart of the J-2 engine under Saturn V conditions can be accomplished. The pressure rise test provided valuable knowledge of dynamic and heat transfer characteristics of the LN2 tank. pressure rise rate was much greater than expected. 21.2 21.2.1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION the thermoThe indicated

HARDWARE

The major S-IVB stage systems required to perform during the LH 2 orbital experiment were those necessary for J-2 engine restart. These include the fuel and oxidizer repressurization and recirculation chilldown systems, engine start and control bottle systems, stage pneumatic control system, and the cold helium bottles. The S-IVB-203 stage also had several special systems and components which were required to simulate S-IVB/V operation. These and their vehicle station are shown in Figure 21-1 and include the following:

286

Vehicle Sta.(m) External Insulation Quality Meter_ TV Cameras Fwd & Lights Battery No. 3

Non-Propulsive Vent (Location) 40.69 40.55 _ , 38.97 LH 2 Tank Deflector

Cont inuous Vent Regulator LH 2 Continuous Venting System

-_- --!

LH 2 Tank LH 2 Level at Insertion Additional Instrument Probe Tank Markings (Internal) Baffle 36.55 36.17

White Ref Paint

Paint Pigment Modification

31.31 LOX AntiSlosh Baffle LOX Level LOX Tank Vent Nozzle
i

29.47 29.25

I LH 2 Tank Repressurization System

at Insertion LOX Ullage Thrusting System

FIGURE

21-1

S-IVB-203 STAGE DIFFERENCES AND

VERSUS S-IVB-201 STAGE CONFIGURATION VEHICLE STATION LOCATION

287

i. An LH2 tank provide a minlmum of

continuous propulsive 2 x 10 -5 g's forward

venting system (CVS) to acceleration (Figure 21-2). system (LUTS-LOX ullage of thrust (Figure 21-3), 311.4 N (70 ibf) thrust

2. A LOX tank ullage propulsive venting thrusting system) to provide 124.6 N (28 Ibf) the thrust-to-weight equivalent of the S-IVB/V APS engines.

3. A T_7 camera and light installation on the LH 2 tank forward (Figure 21-4) and an instrumentation array inside the LH 2 tank for observing tank interior conditions during the experiment. 4. S-IVB/V (to allow 5. 6. configuration anti-vortex screens in both propellant trapped gas to escape during J-2 engine restart). mylar helium insulation sphere on the LH 2 dome. repressurization.

dome

tanks

Aluminized One ambient

for LH 2 tank

of

7. Special the abnormal

propellant tank liquid

tank baffles and loading levels:

liquid deflectors because a short load in the LOX

tank, approximately 60%, residual of approximately 8. correct Open the loop

and a maximum load in the LH 2 tank to allow a 8,850 kg (19,500 ibm) of LH 2 at engine cutoff. of 2 the PU system (the to engine prevent was its preset trying to an to _MR

operation LOX/LH

apparent

imbalance

of 5.0:1).
The power supply for 14.0 of this report. 21.2.2 ORBITAL the TV cameras and lights is discussed in section.

EXPERIMENT

SCHEME

AND

DESCRIPTION AS-203 venting flight in order thrusting system

to

The LH 2 experiment was incorporated in the determine the adequacy of the LH 2 continuous to maintain satisfactory configuration), to study study the behavior conditions the restart

(planned S-IVB/V and to tions.

in the LH 2 tank for the capability of the J-2 engine, very low gravity condi-

of LH 2 under

extended

The AS-203 orbital scheme was defined with primary emphasis on proving he S-IVB/V systems and sequence of orbital operations. The sequence of events duplicates as closely as possible, within the constraints of payload imposed by the Saturn IB vehicle, the projected Saturn V sequence from J-2 cutoff through simulated engine restart. Evaluation of the primary events from insertion to engine cutoff command (see Figure 21-5) included: propellant control at J-2 cutoff, propellant control during continuous venting, restart systems, and various bottle

288

CONTINUOUS VENT SYSTEM QUALITY METER BACKUP DIRECTIONAL RELIEF CONTROL

//

'

CONTINUOUS R

VA_

FIGURE 21-2

CONTINUOUS VENT SYSTEM

Normal Relief

Vent Port

and

Vent and Relief Valve

"--__/

LOX

Vent

Tee

Actuation Shutoff Module _alve For "-'-LOX Ullage (Propulsive Thrusting Vent)

LOX Ullage Thrusting Shutoff Valve

Repressurization

Sphere

FIGURE

21-3

LOX

ULLAGE

THRUSTING

SYSTIII

Baffle Approximate --'_ / Field of View

Deflector

Markings

" TV Camera_

IVJO

Bulkhead Common

_Inner

Edge

of Deflector

Nearly Coincides with Outer Edge of Baffle in TV View

Vehicle

LH2 Tank_

_ Field of View Approximate HI Typical F TV View

TV CAMEPA

Station

(m)

_
52

iV

_
OO g g

_---LIG

e O

36.55

--

Baffle

.e___/ ======:===_:=_.

Tv

LIC4_T

Orientation

of Cameras

and Lights

FIGURE

21-A

S-IVB-203

LH 2 TANK

TELEVISION

INSTALLATION

powered

Flight

ThrUStcontrol GOX Ullage On

[LH2

Conti

......

Vent

On

] ,LH2

Conti

.....

Vent

On

[ LI_2 Conti

.....

Vent

On

pressurized

Engine

Restart

LOX

Chilldown

LH 2

Chilldo_n

Engine

Start

and

Cutoff

Command

(Fuel

Lead)

Restart Unpressurized Engine

LH 2

Chilldown

Time

of

Breakup

ze oc,vityPor od------ 2 vv .-- D OO

[ LH 2 Eressur_ KSC Rise LOS

o00oo I
Test _ I. l Trinidad AOS fl -----1_---- 6 hr 22 min _L_ 22920 sec (pieces)

6 hr 20 min 22800 sec

3'
3600 7200 10800 II_95 0 43.35 l 5671, 2 I Range FIGURE 21-5

14400

4 I
16981 3 '

18000

t5

21600

6 I

I: 11 II
ii II g _1 [R

(hO (,e_)
(see) Crbi_ evolution 1

22494*

T_me O_BIT EVEntS

' 4 It" l " 4.3068----_---&,3294

Insertion

LH 2 EXPERIMENT

Approximate

292

storage characteristics. Elapsed time necessary for these events was shortened from the Saturn V maximum of three orbits to only one orbit on S-IVB-203. The remaining orbits were devoted to experiments to verify the performance of the stage under conditions other than currently planned for Saturn V. As shown in Figure 21-5, the unpressurized chilldown, zero gravity period, non-propulsive vent blowdowns, and pressure rise test fall in this category. 21.3 21.3.1 The SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND vent NON-PROPULSIVE system VENT SYSTEMS satisfactorily, venting the

CONTINUOUS continous

performed

fuel tank to the desired pressure level and, when required, settled the propellants. Thrust and g-levels in general exceeded predicted values by small amounts, as tank heat input (Figure 21-6) and resulting boiloff (flowrate) and vent gas temperature were higher than predicted. The measured hydrogen tank pressure as a function of time after liftoff is presented in Figure 21-7. It is apparent from the tank pressure history that the CVS valve began operating in a regulating mode for the first time at approximately 800 sec and continued until 5540 sec, when the sequence to repressurize the tank for J-2 engine chilldown was initiated. The pressure spike shown by the flight data at 5500 to 6150 sec is caused by the combined effects of repressurization and ullage heating with the tank vents closed; this sequence was not considered in the preflight predictions. However, the effect on the tank pressure and CVS performance is apparent for only a very short duration after the CVS is again actuated. The CVS line temperatures were well above tank saturation conditions, indicating that liquid loss (prior to blowdown sequences) was negligible. The cumulative mass flow for the CVS and NPVS is shown in Figure 21-8. The only unexpected occurrence was the "bang-bang" cycling of the CVS regulator valve as evidenced by the CVS nozzle pressure data. This cycling occurred whenever the ullage pressure was within the regulation band of the regulator. Pressure oscillations between 1.8 and 4.8 N/cm2 (2.6 and 7.0 psi) were experienced during most of the first 2 orbits. Figure 21-9 shows this pressure fluctuation during the third pass over Carnarvon, Australia, when the period of modulation was approximately two seconds. Vehicle acceleration, as shown in Figure 21-10, varied between 0.3 and 0.8 x 10 -4 g's corresponding to the pressure fluctuations. Vent cycling disappeared after opening the NPV valve over Carnarvon due to lowering of the tank pressure below the CVS regulator pressure. This phase of continuous venting is therefore tive of that expected for S-IVB/V. Propellant remained this time even with the vehicle axial acceleration down lower activation most representasettled during to about shown approxi-

1.5 x 10 -5 g's. The vehicle acceleration during orbital flight is in Figure 21-ii. The acceleration level during the experiment was mately the same magnitude expected on the S-IVB/V.

Heat Input (watt) i00,000

Heat

Input

(Btu/s)

\ \
\ 80,000 \ \ \ Heat Input to Liquid Heat Input to Ullage Gas 80 -----O--Flight Data Predicted Maximum _----Flight Data

\ \

6o

60,000

4O

40,000

20,000

_.._.__._

__

0 0 I, 0 2,000 4,000 I i 6,000 8,000 I0,000 Range Time (sec) I 2 Range Time ., (hr) I , 3 12,000 ,, 14,000 _ i 4

0 16,000 _o

FIGURE 21-6 HEAT INPUT TO LH 2 AND ULLAGE GAS (AS DETERMINED FROM CVS PERFORMANCE)

-- 14295.01 --NPVS On

-- 14478.01 --NPVS Off -- 16676.01 -- NPv8 On

_-

__ CVS Time (sec) r'488.71

Off r11237.71

--NPVS

Off

--[-- 5541.11 5540.01

__- 16769.01 16976.01

3O

I
2o

4o
_o

_I }

Actual .... Predicted

_'

-" "_

0 0 2500 5000 7500 i0000 Range 0 i 2 Range FIGURE 21-7 Time 3 Time (hr) PRESSURE 12500 (sec) 4 5 6 15000 17500 20000 22500

LH 2 TANK

Acc_ulated 1600

Flow (kg)

Acc_ulated

Flow

(Ibm)

Flight M____ 1200 Predicted Total _ _

- 3200

2400

_S 800

_ .-_,_ --_

_v

1600

400

....

i FI

800

o/
0 L 0

2,000 .

4,000 I I

6,000

8,000 i0,000 12,000 Range T_e (sec) I ! 2 3 Range T_e (hr) _R _

14,000 I 4

II ==
16,000 I 5

18,000

20,000

FIG_E

21-8

CUMI/LATIVE _SS

_W

AND _V

SYST_S

296

Ple[ Le_d spike to l. _ 10 -2 g Acceleration (g) Aclel .... ion (8) _f_ .____

8 x 10.4 '-,---_

iT'-

CV8 and (;OX

2 Eng

[ f-

_ ' CVS Only Os'tllatioo Cycling

I d,_e to CVS lcps ' Keg

4 i t

COX

, i

il

*/I -----+

"_ Approx.

--

430

440

&50

_60

470 480 Range Time (see)

M!O

500

510

520

5480

5580

5680R,lngeime T

(sec)5780

5880

5980

Accel_*

ation

(_)

CVS and Thrust

GOX

GOX Thrl_s t

____

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

._

......

t
, .

---ly

2 ---_

............
(NS Only

.......

........ 1

i _
0 14 11,800 12,000 , 3[0 11% _H) 1_4,350 iL,)70 Ran_,e Time (_e)

[
]&, _90 14 &IO

cvs on],'
14,4{0

0 10,800

I II,O00 11,200 Range 11_400 Time ',l,b00 (see)

FIGURE

21-10

Vt_ICLE

ACCELERATION

OSCILLATIONS

298

Vehlcle AccelerJti'on (.a/8o)

W_cle

Acceleration (_i_o)o

6_

i;5

s.0 _,.o

"

4 o e _o

2.0

....

N"

'

loo _ Time After

zoo
LO_ Ullage On (see)

_oo

-o. t .2oo

-Ioo

[ I o lOO Time kEte_ LOX Ullage

Range Time (sec)

o On (&ec)

lOO

2o0

Range Time (sec)

VQhic_e

Accelecatto_

(aJgo)

i
!
! j I i _

_l
2,000 _.000 6,000

_
8,000 10,000 12_000 Range Time (see) 3 Tl_e l_O00

i _._
16,000 18,000 20,000 22_000

2 R_e FIGURE 21-11

_ (hr)

VE_4ICLACC_'_ERATION

299

During the third orbit three rapid blowdowns of the fuel tank were performed to determine the behavior of the saturated hydrogen under the combined conditions of a low gravity field and rapid tank decompression. The tank blowdowns were accomplished by venting fuel tank ullage gases through the non-propulsive vent (NPV) system. (For system description see Figure during the 21-2.) blowdown A low acceleration sequence by the CV level was maintained on and/or the LUT system. the vehicle

The fuel tank pressure, the measured temperature, and the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure upstream of the NPV system orifice for the first blowdown, as shown in Figure 21-12, indicate that the vented fluid never reached saturated conditions. Therefore, it would be expected that the quantity of liquid vented overboard, if any, was small. The fuel tank pressure and the pressures upstream of the NPV orifices and CVS nozzl_s during the second and third blowdown tests are also shown on Figure 21-12. These indicate the vented fluid temperatures were superheated in both the CV and NPV systems throughout both blowdown periods. Due to the turbulent flow conditions in the vent lines and the low incipient boiling temperature difference for liquid hydrogen, it is unlikely that any significant amount of liquid hydrogen was vented overboard through either the NPV or CV system. The sharp decrease in vented fluid temperature near 17,141 sec indicates that some liquid did enter the CVS after the second blowdown. However, this liquid was probably evaporated by the hotter surrounding gas and vent line walls before reaching the overboard nozzles. The total vented mass during the three blowdown periods mined from measured conditions to be 184.1 kg (406 Ibm) for 84.8 kg (187 ibm) for the second, and 80.7 kg (178 ibm) for sequence. 21.3.2 LOX ULLAGE THRUSTING SYST_ initially at J-2 engine time the system was was deterthe first, the third

cutoff

The LOX ullage thrusting system was operated and four additional times in orbit. Each

actuated, a near predicted thrust was developed, and successfully provided an acceleration equivalent to that which would he achieved by the S-IVB/V ullage rockets. This acceleration was sufficient to maintain control of the LH 2 at J-2 engine shutdown and during the engine chilldown sequence. In addition, the propellants were successfully resettled after the zero g test which occurred during the second orbit. The accelerations during the times when the LUT system was operating are shown on expanded time scales on Figure 21-10. The measured LOX tank pressure compared to the predicted pressure is shown on Figure 21-13. During the first ullaging sequence (433.77 sec to 513.71 sec), the tank pressure decreased approximately at the predicted rate. However, the assumed initial pressure was higher than the actual pressure at insertion, resulting in a lower than predicted ullage pressure when the sequence was

FIGURE

21-12

NPV SYSTEM

TANK BLOWDOWN

-- 11540.52 --LOX UII On --11663.22 LOx UII off -- ]4294.0] --LOX Time Event (sec) [---- 33.77 4 I _ _-- 5519.01 _LOX UII On 5931.1 (estimated) LOX UII Off _ UII On

14484.0]

LOX UII On

-- LOX UII Off 17072.01 LOX UII On Pre,_sure (psi)

Pressure

I_ 513.71 I_ LOX UII Off (N/cm 2)

20

30

I0

te_

._

o
0 t 0 2,000 4,000 4 i 6,000 I 2 8,000 ., 10,000 12,000 Range Time (see) , Range FIGURE 21-13 _ 3 Time 14,000 I 4 (hr) PRESSURE .. 16,000 18,000 I 5 20,000 22,000 t 6

LOX TANK

302

terminated. During the second ullaging sequence, which occurred during J-2 engine chilldown, the LOX recirculation pump was operating and adding gaseous oxygen to the tank, thus resulting in a small amount of repressurization. Consequently, the ullage pressure was approximately 2.06 N/cm 2 (3 psi) higher than predicted at the termination of LOX ullaging. During the first four ullaging periods, the flowrate from both nozzles varied between 0.14 and 0.18 kg/s (0.3 to 0.4 Ibm/s) so that a total mass of 132 kg (290 Ibm) was vented prior to the final blowdo_n. Thr_ts developed were between 68 and 134 N (15 and 30 Ibf), resulting in accelerations between 2 and 5 x 10-4 g's. The thrust imbalance encountered in the system was on the order of 0.31 N (0.07 ibf) and was not significant. These thrusts were 7% lower than predicted values, which were based on heat inputs of 2.58 kw (8800 Btu/hr) to the tank. 21.3.3 21.3.3.1 RESTART SYSTEMS SYSTEM

FUEL REPRESSURIZATION

The S-IVB/V repressurization phase of the S-IVB-203 simulated restart operation was successfully accomplished. A single ambient bottle was used on the stage due to payload limitations. Fuel repressurization was initiated during the first orbit 5107.55 sec after J-2 engine cutoff (5541.11 sec range time) and was terminated 70 sec later. The system conditions are shown in Figure 21-14. The initial pressure rise to 15.7 N/cm 2 was 2.2 N/cm 2 higher than predicted due to the warm ullage. As a result of the additional heat input to the ullage, hhe pressure continued to increase, reaching a value of 17.5 N/cm 2 at 5470 sec after J-2 engine cutoff (5904.7 sec range time) when the CVS was activated. The S-IVB/V configuration will carry seven ambient repressurization bottles, and there is no problem foreseen with the Saturn V repressurization in orbit. 21.3.3.2 FUEL RECIRCUIATION CHILLDOWN SYSTEM

The fuel recirculation chilldown system performed well. The orbital chilldown performance exceeded the performance obtained from ground chilldown. Two fuel recirculation chilldowns were performed: the first, with repressurization and GOX thrust ullaging to simulate a S-IVB/V chilldown; and the second, with no repressurization and the tank vented through the propulsive nozzles. The second chill was to give data on the possibility of an extended chilldown to provide for a contii_ency on Saturn V. Both chilldowns were successful. Performance of the recirculation chill system during the pressurized chilldown is shown in Figures 21-15 and 21-16. Pressure cycling in the chill system (caused by rapid vaporization) lasted only 45 sec compared to 350 sec during acceptance ground test. The maximum pressure peak at pump inlet was 9 N/cm 2 (13 psi) above ullage pressure compared to

304

800
o 600 --_-CHILL

I _

[
_

200 150

PUMP FLOWRATE

2oo ....
0 _'_ 9 1_ _ _'_"_ ' ' ' ' E -'y'_e_ CH' LLDOWN PLIMP D' FFERENTI AL PRESSURE[ ' PREV _LVE OPEN zD--'--

,
_

50
0 .t2 _.

"---PREVJ _VE CLOSE D 3

03 Dr.] _

4
_ _3 _

"'---CHILL P MP ON 0 30 /--ENGINE I I PUI1P INLET I

CHILL

PU IP OFF "-'_ I

t. rU r._

I 40

CHILLDOWN SYSTEM PRESSURES

20

30

15--

_
LLD(._'JN RETURN LINE ULLAGE PRESSURE -_.t_-_ .,,,_.,=,a_.._

2o
Q"

NPSP

--_

_J

"-"

2
0 5100 5150

__("
5200 T]_ (J-2 Engine FIGURE 5250 5300 5350 CUTOFF (SEC) Time) 5400 5450 5500

2 0

,,t

FROM ENGINE Cutoff 21-15

= 433.35

sec Range

LH 2 RESTART

CHILLDOWN

305

28 o 26 ,,'--ENGINE 24 J PUMP INLET TEHPERJ_TURE

1,--

20

BULK TEN=EP-J_TURE 'i I

EHICL

STA

I.85m ,

,"n v o

LH2 BLEED VALVE TEMPERATURE 23 ""

=-" PREVAL /E CLOSEI_

.
CHILL PUMP OFF --w"I J /_-CHILLZX)WN RETURN

20

I-,_-CHILL PLIvP 01'I i

21 23 L

LINE TEMPERATURE , ' I -.

22
21 160

k_n .... [_iL-'_"_'_-_---'_-_ -::_-'--_--"_">"_-_" v,../

! ....
,, 1 I "_'-"CHILLDOWN i PUMP I OUTLET 1 TEMPERATURE ,.

1 ' P_

_._ENGINE

DISCHARGE LINE W,_L TEMPERATURE

80

.
0_ 5100 5150 5200 5250 5300 5350 CUTOFF (SEC) Time) 5400 5450 5500 TIME FROM ENGINE (J-2 Engine FIGURE 2t-16 Cutoff = 433.35 sec Range

LH 2 RESTART

CHILLDOWN

TEMPEILATURES

306

39 N/cm 2 (57 psi) during acceptance firing. After these cycles, changes in pressures, temperatures, and flowrate were gradual. The flowrate increased and the pump inlet temperature decreased with time closely approaching steady state at the end of chilldown. The fuel pump inlet temperature became saturated after starting chilldown and subcooled 12 sec later. The NPSP at the pump inlet increased as chilldown progressed, reaching a maximum value of 5 N/cm 2 (7.3 psi) just prior to opening the prevalve. After the prevalve was opened, and the effect of the chilldown pump pressure at the pump inlet was lost, the LH 2 at the pump inlet became saturated. The NPSP prior to opening the prevalve was approximately equal to the chilldown pump developed pressure. The pump discharge line and GG fuel inlet line wall temperatures rapidly decreased and leveled off at 26K. Performance of the unpressurized recirculation chilldown is shown in Figures 21-17 and 21-18. During this second orbital chilldown, the flowrate and developed pressure were very oscillatory. This resulted in the system pressures and temperatures also oscillating throughout chilldown. The pump inlet pressure and temperature indicated saturated conditions prior to the last 40 sec of chilldown, during which slightly "subcooled conditions were indicated. Maximum NPSP was 1.6 N/cm 2 (2.3 psi). The other system pressures and temperatures indicated saturated conditions. 21.3.3.3 FUEL LEAD DURING SIMULATED RESTART

A 12.5 sec fuel lead occurred during the first simulated restart. Fuel lead was initiated at engine start command and terminated by the engine cutoff command (see Figure 21-5). Fuel lead performance and conditions are shown in Figures 21-19 and 21-20, respectively. Fuel injection temperature initially thrust chamber (the thrust rose due to the passage chamber was at a higher of warm GH 2 from the temperature than the

injector due to environmental heading), and then fell as the GH 2 temperature dropped. All thrust chamber readings were below the maximum temperature limit by engine cutoff command (ESC + 12.5 sec). The fuel flowrate agreed well with predicted val_s for the first four sec of fuel lead. The flow then rose somewhat above the predicted rate to 1.9 kg/s (4.1 Ib/s) and remained there for the duration of the fuel lead. Injection temperatures were lower than predicted. This resulted in the higher flowrate. The fuel lead thrust also was as predicted, about 3200 N (710 Ibf) for the first four sec; it then dropped to about 1200 N (260 ibf), again showing the effect of the lower temperatures. The resultant vehicle axial acceleration varied from a high of 1.3 x 10 -2 to a low of 0.5 x 10 -2 g's.

307

soo
l

- 200

CH ILLDOWN FLOWRATE

,.J '-'

,, ,

,Ill

""

P "--

VALVE CLOSED "" |

PREVAL_ OPEN----i

12

t'_

0t 2_,[ I _---PLI_

CHILL_ i I [NLE[T

PUI_ DIFFERENTIAL I I

PRESSURE I

"'L

"

a.

CHILLDOV_ SYSTEM PRESSURES

12 3 Z 2

'_

"_"'-_ ULL. AGE PRESSURE I NPSH l CHI LLD(_| PUMP OFF--re"I

18 -4 o.

-,_-CH ILLDOWIW :1:

-I 106 CUTOFF = 433.35 (I00 SEC) sec Range Time) CHILLDOWN / 107 "2 108

,]] ,4

105

o,,,,
TIME FROM ENGINE Cutoff

(J-2 Engine FIGURE

21-17

LH 2 UNPRESSURIZED

308

24 :

. _

I ENGINE PUMP

I I INLET TEMPERATURE

,_
i-w

23
22 .

_ i-

21 20 24

. = _ _= . _ . . =_ --LM2 BULK TEMPERATL_E - VEHICLE I I t I , i LH2 BLEED VALVE TEMPERATURE I

p,l i llilj,,l

= : _I "._ii_.STA 31.85m J i

r', o 23

22

li,L.l, I,. ,I._

.... _"

,
20 r-_ v 23:: /_1 I _/----CHILLDOWN I ?..., uJ 22

.
I I TF.MPERATURE PUMP OUTLET

_,_,,_r_.n ^1.., _,^_._L..,

.I, .._._ ._1 ,,_....

,,.,"," . .LU

_;

21

_-

20
-ENGINE N

,_ 150 o_

i / PUMP DISCHARGE

I I LINE WALL TEMF'ERATURE

"-'_.GASENERATOR G

LH2 LINE WALL TEMPERATURE

50
_" 0 i04 105

i
106 CUTOFF

I
107 C100 SEC) 108

TIME FROf.i ENGINE

(J-2 Engine FIGURE '1-18

Cutoff

- 433.35

sec Range CHILLDOWN

Time) TEMPERATURES

LH 2 UNPRESSURIZED

3O9

400 _-' _d

I f LH2 INJECTOR TEMPERATURE

l,i V U.I rv

300 ......

g 200

S--'

I
, THRUST CHAMBER SKIN TEMPERATURE
-t......

0 600, J
...... _ .....

4001

---

_ 300:
200' 400 _ .=._:._ v 300 -:-_...,._._ _ ___.._ -.....,-'_ F_ ---_ AT FIN 2-3

---_--____:_p!ytlA

310

2.0 -,", '..",

v

I '1 LH2 FLOWRATE {

4.5

1.8 -,,i-- FUEL LEAD 1.6

u.I

m 3.5 ON/ 4.0

_-'
c_ LU u

1.4 _' u_ 1.2 V _-FUEL LEAD OFF 3.0 _ -2.5 1.0

4000

I THRUST

I 1 (FUEL LEAD Ot4LY)

- 800

3000
z _,v 2000

r"-'_
_ 600
J

4oo
200 _
0

1i
0 ", 0.015

0.005 --_0.010
J

S_._

STAGE, ACCELERATION,

(FUEL, LEAD ONLY),

o
5458 5460 5462 5464 5466 5468 5470 5472 5474 5476 5478 TIME FROM E_INE (J-2 Engine FIGURE Cutoff 21-20 CUTOFF (SEC) sec Range Time)

= 433.35

FUEL LEAD CONDITIONS

311

21.3.3.4 The

FUEL

ANTI-VORTEX

SCREEN of the fuel anti-vortex screen was

satisfactory

performance

demonstrated during the LH 2 recirculation chilldowns. The performance of the anti-vortex screen is shown in Figures 21-21 and 21-22 for the first and second chilldowns, respectively. Prior to repressurization,

the LH 2 in the tank, as shown in Figure 21-21, was saturated. The measured temperature under the anti-vortex screen was also saturation temperature. When repressurization was initiated, the measured temperatures increased at the same rate as the saturation temperature, indicating vapor under the anti-vortex screen. Five seconds after starting repressurization, the measured temperature rapidly subcooled, indicating that the vapor under the anti-vortex screen had been removed. When the chilldown pump was started with the prevalve open,the temperature under the anti-vortex screen increased. This is due to the chilldown pump temperature rise and heat input from the warm bypass line. This temperature rise also occurred at the end of chilldown when the prevalve was once again opened with the pump running. The temperature rise was not so great at the end of chilldown as at the beginning since the bypass line had been chilled. This small temperature rise had no important effect, as the LH 2 under the anti-vortex the end of chilldown, after the prevalve there was no vapor under the anti-vortex verified the screen performance as shown 21.3.3.5 LOX RECIRCIFLATION CHILLDOWN screen was still subcooled at was open, demonstrating that screen. The second chilldown in Figure 21-22.

SYSTEM

The LOX recirculation chilldown system performed well during orbital chilldown in view of the small quantity of LOX in the tank. The pump inlet temperature was off scale high (above 94.3K) throughout chilldown, due to the relatively high temperature of the LOX. The transducer was scaled for normal conditions during chilldown, and the late decision to perform the S-IVB-203 LOX chilldown precluded changing its scale prior to launch. The effective operation of the chilldown system was shown by the various system temperatures, Figure 21-23, which reached saturation within i00 sec after starting chilldown and becoming subcooled shortly thereafter. The return line temperature indicated subcooled LOX for approximately 3 minutes of chilldown, thus demonstrating that subcooled LOX was flowing through the entire ehilldown system during that period. The orbital LOX chilldown was much less severe than the chilldown conducted on the ground. The maximum pressure at the pump inlet (due to rapid vaporization) was 7.5 N/cm 2 (ii psi) above the ullage pressure during orbital chilldown, compared to 28 N/cm 2 (41 psi) during ground tests. The chilldown pump differential pressure, as shown in Figure 21-24, indicates that there was some sloshing An the LOX tank during the chilldown. At approximately 5340 sec, the flowrate becomes erratic indicating that the inlet was uncovered. Flow recovered at 5400 seconds. The LOX recirculation chilldown system performed well, especially in view of the

312

24.0

'

LH2 SYSTEM TEMPERATURES 23.5

23.0 _, o 22.s 22.0 _21.5 = / UNDER PREVALVE --TANK OU_ _ /_ _AT ULLAGE PRESS /-SATURATION TI_MPERA*IURE

__--- _-_-----

L_DER ANTI-VORTEX SCREEN 20.5 20.0 23.0 22.5 , ] I 1 I

LH2 TANK BULK TEMPERATURES

o 22.0' VEHICLE STA 31.85m

"' Wu_ _" 21.0

_.m'_V" - "w_r-_-r:_A,+:.- _, __
EHICLE ? 32.74m STA VEH C TA_ 33.55m

--PREVALVE CLOSEE

PREVALVE OPEN--"

20.0 5100

/1 5150

I 5200

5250

5300

1 5350

I 5400

5450

5500

TIME FROM ENGINE CUTOFF (SEC) (J-2 Engine Cutoff = 433.35 sec Range Time) FIGURE 21-21 ANTI-VOR_E'< SC?.EEN PERFf_;"_k&N<E- 1" ' _:!11!_OWN

313

23.0

I 1 LH2 SYSTEM TEMPERATURES

"_- 21.0 LET

i

L._!DER ANTI-VORTEX 20.5

SCREEN

20.0 22.0 I I LH2 TANK BULK TEMPERATURES

21.5

f--VEHICLE

STA

33.55m

-_
UA W

--VEHICLE

STA

31.85m

21.0

i-.- 20.5

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

20.0 104 105 TIPE (J-2 FIGURE Engine 21-22 106 FROM ENGINE Cutoff CUTOFF (i00 sec SEC) Range Time) - 2ND CIIII+t+DOWN 107 108

= 433.35

ANTI-VORfEX

SC:_EEN PERFO_NCE

314

Q_ _

o --OFF SCALE HIGH

,--LOX

BULK

TEMPERATURE

. VEHICLE 31.85

STA

_: I_J

- ENGINE

PUP._' INLET

TEMPERATURE

_o

92
102 i _LOX BLEED I VALVE _

J
I

,,I ,,, 99
re'

TEMPERATURE

uJ 93

ENGINE I

PUMP J

DISCHARGE i

TEMPERATURE I

v o
kU

i00 98

_,,

--CHILLDOWNI ,

RETURN

LINE

TEMPERATURE

+
_l tLJ

96

u+,

L.+. lJ

._a_la.,.

.m

,,,+.,. +_.+,
TEMPERATURE

9:+ CHILLDOWN

I PUMP OUTLET

9_
102

J
I

i
I

i
I i

_-_

_L

LOX SUCTION TEMPERATUREI DUCT

WALL

o_LU 96 _E
LU

1_-' + "I 111 "Vl Y II '

" '"l

r'P"'w',',m'Itr,: t'"'"l,
5350 (SEC) Range SYSTEM Time TEMPERA IURES 5400 5450 5500

e-

93 5100

5150

5200

5250 TIME FR(_

5300

V:-NGINE CUTOFF ; 433.35 CHILLDOWN sec

(J-2 FIGURE

Engine

Cutoff

21-23

LOX RESTART

PRSSURE (N/CM2)

PRSSURE (N/CM 2)

FLOWRATE (LITERS/MIN)

L_

-11

PRESSURE(PS_A)

PRESSURE(PSi)

FLOWRAT CGPM)

BI6

adverse conditions of a nearly saturated bulk, decaying ullage pressure, and slosh severe enough to uncover the chilldown pump inlet. This conservative test confirms the adequacy of the S-IVB/V LOX recirculation chilldown 21.3.3.6 system. ENGINE START TANK AND CONTROL BOTTLES

Engine start tank conditions are given in Figure 21-25. At engine cutoff the start sphere had been recharged to 790 N/cm 2 (1150 psi) with a mass of 2.05 kg (4.6 Ibm). GOX ullaging was initiated at engine cutoff. The flow from the number 1GOX ullaging nozzle impinges directly on the start s_phere temperature transducer. Consequently, the temperature recorded during the periods of GOX ullaging does not reflect the actual start sphere gas temperature. The sphere pressure shows no change during these periods. Therefore, the fluctuation in the calculated mass during GOX ullaging should not be considered to actually exist. Engine control bottle conditions ar_ given in Figure 21-26. After engine cutoff the pressure was 1350 N/cm _ (1969 psi) with a mass of 0.85 kg (1.87 ibm). The engine control bottle temperature transducer was affected by the flow of gas from the number 1GOX ullaging nozzle as was the engine start sphere. Due to the effects of GOX ullaging on the temperature, the helium mass calculations presented should a]so be viewed with some caution. The control helium pressure prior to fuel lead was ].550 N/cm 2 (2250 psi) with a mass of 0.82 kg (1.82 Ibm). At the end of fuel lead,the sphere pressure and mass had dropped to 625 N/cm 2 (908 psi) and 0.50 kg (1.12 Ibm), respectively. The large amount of helium consumed during fuel lead was the result of the oxidizer dome and GG oxidizer injector cavity purges, which are normally shut off by a check valve at mainstage pickup during engine burn. However, the engine was not actually restarted require 96.5 N/cm2/s (140 psi/s) the entire 12.5 sec fuel lead. 21.3.3.7 Cold COLD helium HELIUM bottle BOTTLES conditions are shown in Figure 21-27. Behavior explained. the and consequently of control helium, these were purges, active which during

of the pressure The helium mass

and temperatures at J-2 cutoff is shown at a constant 104 kg

is not entirely (228 Ibm) due to

difficulty in calculating mass with the widely varying compressibility factor encountered in this region. Integration of flowrates during S-IVB burn and computation of mass remaining at 250 sec gives approximately 104 kg (229 Ibm). However, mass calculations at J-2 cutoff indicate about II0 kg (240 Ibm) while mass calculated at the peak of pressure is about 114 kg (250 Ibm). In view of these erratic results, the constant 104 kg was chosen. This mass is maintained through the third orbit. Bottle pressure remains essentially constant through the first three orbits, changing slightly in response to unexplained peaks in bottle No. 5 temperature at the end of the second and third orbits. Adequate

FIGURE 21-25

ENGINE START SPHERE CONDITIONS

FIGURE

21-26

ENGINE

PNEUMATIC

CONTROL

SPHERE

FIGURE

21-27

COLD

HELIUM

SPHERE

CONDITIONS

320

helium remained in the bottles to provide a Saturn V duration second burn.

LOX tank pressurization

for

21.3.4

STAGE PNEUMATIC

CONTROL

SYSTEM

Stage pneumatic bottle conditions are given in Figure 21-28. At engine cutoff the pressure and mass remaining in the stage pneumatic sphere was 2122 N/cm 2 (3080 psi) and 4.3 kg (9.47 ibm) respectively. During the four orbit mission stage, pneumatic helium was utilized for several operations. The major helium consumption was due to two simulated orbital restarts, GOX ullaging valve actuation, CVS actuation, and LH 2 vent actuation. The average helium usage rate for the continuous venting was 0.00167 SCMM (0.059 SCFM); for the prevalve (closed), was 0.0665 SCMM (2.35 SCFM); and for the GOX ullaging, was 0.0996 SCMM (3.52 SCFM). All stage pneumatic control valves responded properly throughout the orbital flight. The control helium regulator operated satisfactorily and generally maintained an output pressure of 353 to 365 N/cm 2 (530 to 540 psi). GOX ullaging was initiated in the third orbit and remained on until the end of the mission. During this time the pressure in the pneumatic control sphere dropped from 2185 N/em 2 (3180 psi) to 1158 N/cm 2 (1681 psi). The mass remaining at the end of the fourth orbit (last data received) was 2.58 kg (5.68 ibm). The minimum mass requirement for the sphere is 1.02 kg (2.25 Ibm). Conditions and performance of the system during this test indicate that the system is adequate for projected S-IVB/V consumption. 21.4 21.4.1 LH 2 ORBITAL PROPELLANT EXPERIMENT CONTROL EVALUATION

The orbital insertion phase of the AS-203 experiment indicated that the liquid hydrogen was successfully controlled by the LUT system, tank baffle, and deflector. Though some liquid hydrogen impacted the forward dome, the quantity was small relative to the bulk of liquid in the tank. The major portion of the liquid propellant at J-2 engine cutoff was maintained in a settled condition. No problems concerning the control of propellant at insertion were indicated that could impair the success of the Saturn V mission. Controlling the propellant in an essentially settled condition during this critical time allowed the thrust of the continuous vent system to maintain it in position during the orbital coast period. The visual observation of the liquid hydrogen behavior at orbital insertion was one of the most informative results of the AS-203 experiment. The video tape TV coverage was analyzed to determine the event pattern of propellant dynamics at orbital insertion. The liquid level, as established from the residual mass of the LH 2 propellant at S-IVB cutoff, was located approximately 0.24 m below the wall attach point of the lower anti-slosh baffle.

FIGURE

21-28

STAGE

PNEUMATIC

CONTROL

SYSTEM

322

The

following are

events

were

observed from J-2

from engine

the video cutoff

tape signal

at

the

times sec

indicated, and range time):

referenced

(433.35

at

i. The baffle area within approximately 6 seconds.

the

field

of

view

was

uniformly

wetted

2. Asymmetrical movement was detected on the pellant at approximately 14 seconds. The direction to be towards the side of the tank out of the field

surface of of motion of view

the proappeared III).

(Pos.

3. movement seconds.

A small portion of the liquid independent of this asymmetrical wetted the underside of the deflector at approximately 21

4. The asymmetrical movement of the propellant, apparently deflected by the baffle, came into view of the TV camera at approximately 23 sec after J-2 engine cutoff. At this time, a significant portion of liquid appeared to pass through the center opening of the deflector in a direction opposite to that previously noted on the free surface of the liquid below the baffle. The ullage temperature sensor at vehicle Sta. 39.14 m indicated the presence of liquid from 21 sec until 41 sec after J-2 engine cutoff, which confirms the TV observation. The liquid passed over the edge of the deflector at 27 sec and impinged on the tank wall outside the field of view. The 70% ullage temperature measurement at Sta. 38.65 m (located near the center clearance of the deflector) indicated a rapid decrease in temperature (starting at 47 sec) probably due to the proximity of the deflected liquid. Measurements at Sta. 37.21 m and at Sta. 40.23 m showed only instantaneous exposure to liquid at the same approximate times. From these indications and the TV picture, it appears that the displaced mass consisted of a relatively thin sheet of liquid. No temperature measurements forward of Sta. 40.23 m indicated wetting by liquid hydrogen. The mass of the displaced liquid is estimated to be approximately 23 kg (50 ibm). Measurements below the quiescent liquid level indicated the presence of ullage gas from 47 sec until 76 seconds. Two inside wall temperature measurements located at the attach plane of the deflector at different radial locations indicated liquid temperatures from 27 sec until 97 sec and from 37 sec until 252 seconds. 5. The forward motion of the deflected liquid ceased at approximately 61 seconds. The liquid began to settle at 73 sec and gradually receded over the top of the deflector. A large quantity of liquid was distributed between the baffle and the deflector at this time. The portion of the at approximately seconds. deflector 91 sec within and the the field of vision was clear of liquid baffle was cleared of liquid at 145

323

6.

The

liquid

surface

was

quiescent

until

surface

boiling

appeared seconds. to the

at 166 seconds. This coincides liquid

A vapor fog with the time pressure.

began to appear when the ullage

in the ullage at 191 pressure had decayed

saturation

A sketch depicting the approximate liquid motion 21-29. The liquid jump-up velocity has been estimated 0.15 m/s (0.5 ft/s) and the velocity of the deflected estimated to he approximately 0.3 to 0.45 m/s (i.0 to

is shown in Figure to be approximately liquid has been 1.5 ft/s).

The propellant sloshing developed during powered flight represents the major source of kinetic energy in the liquid at orbital insertion. It is believed that the observed liquid behavior is almost entirely a result of the slosh wave kinetic energy. The trajectory of the liquid sheet indicates that the liquid attempted to flow up the wall but was deflected to the opposite tank wall by the baffle. The estimated peakto-peak amplitude of the LH 2 slosh wave at orbital insertion is approximately 7.62 cm (3 in). The corresponding frequency is about 0.72 Hz. These values represent a maximum liquid velocity at the tank wall of approximately 17.0 cm/s (6.7 in/s). The height ultimately attained by the liquid sheet is consistent with the existing energy conditions. Thermal convection at orbital insertion. ground hold and ascent warm inside surface of was another source of propellant motion present Environmental and aerodynamic heating during flight caused the density of the fluid near the the tank wall to be reduced. This resulted in a

buoyancy effect and circulation along the wall. Thermal convective motion may have been one source of the small amount of liquid jump-up which wetted the upper deflector approximately 21 sec after J-2 engine cutoff. Pressure surges associated with engine valve closure were not significant. Released strain energy which was stored in the LH 2 tank wall during boost was estimated to produce insignificant fluid disturbances at J-2 engine cutoff. This structural relaxation, however, may have been a contributing cause of the jump-up of the small amount of liquid near the wall at orbital insertion. Due to the relatively small amount of instrumentation in the LOX tank, the propellant dynamics at insertion were not so well defined as for the fuel tank. However_ it appears, from the rapid drop in the LOX suction duct pressure at engine cutoff, that liquid surged into the tank before the prevalve was closed (prevalve closed 0.5 sec after cutoff). This surge was sensed immediately after engine cutoff by two temperature sensors which were located 0.5 m (20 in) and 1.0 m (39 in) above the mean liquid level. Approximately 80 see after cutoff, a slosh wave at least one meter in height was sensed by temperature sensors. This wave was also detected by a vapor liquid sensor.

324

LH 2 Experiment Probe Def]ector

Liquid

Jump

Up _ _

Vehicle Sta. 38_97 Deflected Baffle

m Wave

Sta. Liquid Level (Vehicle Sta, 36.17 m) Thermal Boundary Layer I

36.55 m

PU

FIGURE

21-29

SKETCH

OF 11{ TANK 2

SHOWING

DEFLECTED

WAVE

325

Adequate propellant control during the entire experiment was maintained by the CVS and/or the LUT system. The propellant resettled and/or remained settled during the perils of CVS activation, indicating that the acceleration level was adequate. The pressure oscillations in the CVS and resulting acceleration variations did not adversely affect propellant control. 21.4.2 J-2 ENGINE CHILLDOWN

One of the primary objectives of the flight was to determine the ability of the J-2 engine chilldown system to adequately condition the engine for orbital restart. One LOX and two fuel system chilldown experiments were conducted. The purpose of the engine chilldown is to remove heat from the propellant feed systems so that the cryogenic propellants entering the pumps are in the liquid state when the engine is ignited. The types o_ measurement associated with chilldown evaluation and their location are shown on a schematic of the chilldown system in Figure 21-30. At the beginning of both chilldown experiments, the engine feed system hardware temperatures were lower than had been anticipated. Two conditions contributed to these low temperatures. The first occurred at main engine cutoff. The prevalves were closed 0.5 sec after cutoff, trapping liquid propellant in the suction ducts and engine plumbing. Heat from the hot turbines was conducted through the pumps and into the liquid. This heating caused a pressure rise in the fuel duet, forcing flow back to the tanks through the return lines. Temperature sensors at the return line discharge indicated that saturated fluid was flowing through both the fuel and oxidizer chilldown return lines shortly after engine cutoff. The fluid temperatures at the LOX return line discharge remained saturated for over 250 sec after engine cutoff, indicating that flow had continued through the system even after the LOX prevalve had been opened (prevalves opened 60 sec after cutoff). Although the saturation temperature was maintained for only i0 sec at the fuel return line exit, from other data it appears that flow also continued through the fuel system for over 250 sec after cutoff. The heat removed by this artificial recirculation prevented the pumps from absorbing the total heat stored in the turbines at engine cutoff. The second condition that contributed to lower hardware temperatures was the presence of saturated fluid in the fuel suction duct during the flight. The temperature below the fuel anti-vortex screen was saturated (or subcooled) during the entire flight. The temperature in the fuel suction duct below the prevalve was saturated or subcooled during the flight except during the final LH 2 tank blowdown, when some superheating of the fluid occurred. There are indications that some liquid also remained in the LOX suction duct throughout the flight.

326

LH 2 Tank Recirculation P (2) Pump

(Ullage

- P)

Anti-Vortex Screen

LOX

Tank

(Ullage

- P)

S-IVB/V T

Level

T&P

Recirculation Pump Prevalve T S-IVB/203 Level cm P T&P (2)

Prevslve

F T&P T&P T&P

LOX LH 2 Pump T

Pump

T T
2"

Main T

LOX

Valve

Type

Mess.

Symbol P F

Pressure Flowrate

T Temperature T

/
FIGURE 21-30 S-IVB J-2 ENGINE CHILLDOWN SYSTEM

Main

Fuel

Valve

327

"

The first hydrogen chilldown was conducted during the final minutes of the first orbit, beginning at approximately 5540 sec range time. During the first orbit, the liquid hydrogen had been maintained in the bottom of the fuel tank by a low level acceleration applied to the stage by the CVS. Shortly before the chilldown experiment began, the LUT system was opened and remained open throughout the chilldown experiment. This system applied an average acceleration of approximately 4.4 x 10 -4 g's to the vehicle during chilldown. Twenty-one sec after opening the LUT system, the CVS was closed, leaving the hydrogen in the fuel tank saturated at 13.5 N/cm 2 (19.6 psi). Immediately after the CVS was closed, repressurization of the fuel tank was initiated (5541 sec). A review of the TV pictures received during repressurization showed a wavy motion in the upper portion of the fuel tank. At first it appeared that liquid completely filled the tank. However, the waviness was apparently only an optical phenomenon caused by the hot pressurant gases which created thermal gradients throughout the ullage gases. These thermal gradients were sensed by temperature measurements located in the ullage near the top of the tank.

The LH 2 recirculation pump was energized at 5565.2 seconds. The ullage pressure at this time was 14.9 N/cm 2 (21.6 psi), giving the recirculation pump an initial NPSP of 1.4 N/cm2 (2.0 psi). Because of the increasing ullage pressure, the final NPSP was 4.3 N/em 2 (6.2 psi). For the first i0 see, the reclrculation pump operated with the prevalve open. The prevalve closed at 5575 sec, forcing the flow through the suction duct, fuel pump, and return line. Because the suction line already contained some saturated liquid, the fuel pump inlet conditions became saturated only 5 sec after the prevalve closed and began suhcooling after only 30 seconds. The fuel pump discharge line wall temperature dropped to 26K after 42 sec and remained at this temperature during the chilldown. This is a lower temperature than was obtained on ground tests, primarily due to the formatiDn of solid air on the wall during the ground tests. The initial pressure loss of the system was 7.6 N/cm 2 (ii.0 psi). As the fluid quality was reduced during the chilldown, the pressure losses also decreased; and, at the end of the chill, the pressure loss was only 5.2 N/cm 2 (7.6 psi). Consequently, the recirculation pump flowrate increased during the chilldown period until 60 sec before the prevalve Prior was opened, when the to the first burn of flowrate leveled off at the S-IVB-203 acceptance 0.645 kg/s (1.41 ibm/s). firing, the propellant

systems were completely chilled down with subcooled liquid through the chilldown system, and the flowrate was 0.636 kg/s (1.39 ibm/s). Because the chilldown flowrate during the S-IVB-203 flight reached this value and leveled off, the system appeared to have been completely chilled. A review of the TV pictures received during the chilldown indicated

that very little surface disturbance wa caused by the ehilldown return flow into the fuel tank. The fluid surface appeared to be rippled, but no gas bubbles were observed breaking the surface. The prevalve was

328

opened 20 sec prior to the recirculation flow vortex within hydrogen perature sec and

the end of chilldown (5866 sec). This caused to short-circuit through the prevalve and antiand removing any time the prevalve trapped vapor located was open_ the liquid

screen, thereby chilling this region. During the

temperature in the fuel pump increased until saturation temwas reached. The recirculation pump was turned off at 5887 the fuel lead was initiated at 5893 seconds. The fuel lead through of 12.5 the engine tubes and injector and seconds. The fluid in the suction out the duct

allowed LH 2 to flow bell for a duration appears to have fuel pump inlet fuel lead. The 167K after 8

remained subcooled, since the saturated fluid at the was replaced almost immediately after the start of the thrust chamber nozzle temperature decreased from 244 to of fuel lead, and down to 136K after 12.5 seconds.

sec

The fluid conditions at the fuel pump inlet which are required for an engine start are shown in Figure 21-31. Prior to the opening of the prevalve, start conditions had been met. However, when the prevalve opened, the pressure rise of the recirculation pump was lost and start conditions were not maintained. When the fuel lead was activated, the fluid at the fuel pump again became subcooled. S-IVB/V flights will have a fuel lead of only 8 sec; however, this should present no problem because subcooled liquid was present at the fuel pump inlet almost: immediately after the fuel lead was initiated. The system was sufficiently chilled that the ullage pressure of the S-IVB/V vehicle would have provided fluid conditions at the fuel pump inlet well within the engine start requirements. the first hydrogen chilldown, The initial LOX tank ullage a LOX system chilldown pressure was 24.3 N/cm 2

was

At the time of also conducted.

(35.2 psi). Since the LUT system was being used to keep the propellants settled, the LOX tank ullage pressure decayed to 15.9 N/cm 2 (23.1 psi) by the end of the chilldown period. The LOX bulk temperature was approximately 95K, indicating that the LOX was subcooled. The nominal level of the LOX in the tank was only 13 cm (5 in) above the recirculation pump impeller. The initial LOX recirculation pump NPSP of 8.0 N/cm 2 (11.6 psi) decreased to only 0.48 N/cm 2 (0.7 psi) when the recirculation pump was de-energized. The recirculation pump appeared to operate properly during the initial phases of the chilldown; but, near the end of the chilldown, the flowrate became unstable and the pump performance became poor due to the pumping of gas. The period of no-flow corresponds to a suspected uncovering of the LOX recirculation pump inlet. LOX sloshing appears to have uncovered the pump since the theoretical period of LOX sloshing corresponds to the apparent uncovered period. The fluid conditions required shown in Figure 21-32. Fluid at the LOX pump inlet for engine conditions at both the recirculation just pump prior inlet to prevalve is located start "

are

pump discharge and the GG LOX are shown. The fluid condition

bleed valve of the LOX

opening between

Temperature

(OK)

25 O
26

T
Prior

I
to Prevalve

TOpening

['] After T After

Prevalve Opening _ Fuel Lead

J
Saturation 23 ] Line Envelope of LH 2 Conditions Required 22 Engine for Start
I

.4
21

20 Bulk Temperature in Tank 19 Final S-IVB/V Ullage Pressure _ _ * S-IVB-203 Ullage Pressure

18 i0 15 20 Pressure (N/cm 2) 25 30 35

2O

30 Pressure (psi) PUMP INLET

40

5O

FIGURE

21-31

CONDITIONS

OF LH2

AT FUEL

- FIRST

CHILLDOWN

Temperature 104

(OK)

0
O

GG LOX Bleed Valve Recir. Pump Discharge

_------

S-IVB-203

Final

I I /

Ullage Pressure

S-IVB/V Ullage Pressure

__ /I /

lOO

//

I/ /

//

/4
/ II /'

/
Saturation Line ----_ /i

94

I
_ of LOX in Tank I _ Envelo)e of LOX Req.

for Engine Start Conditions

92

Bulk Temperature

9o

/
8 i0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Pressure (N/cm 2) 26

,
I
I

I I
28 30 32 34 36

I
20 FIGURE 21-32

I
30 Pressure (psi)

i
40

I
50

CONDITION OF LOX PRIOR TO PREVALVE OPENING

331

these points. This indicates that, although the start conditions not exist, the LOX was subcooled and the system was chilled. The tional ullage pressure and the higher liquid level in the S-IVB/V would have produced the required fluid conditions for start. Of primary concern during the second hydrogen chilldown,

did addivehicle

conducted

at the end of the second orbit, was the operation of the LH 2 recirculation pump under low gravity conditions with zero NPSP. The propellant was settled by the continuous vent system, which provided 0.55 x 10 -4 g's acceleration. The fuel tank was not pressurized during the chilldown, but instead the continuous vent maintained the hydrogen saturated at 13.5 pump N/cm 2 (19.5 was started psi) during the entire chilldoun. The recirculation at 10,886 sec, and i0 sec later the prevalve closed.

Saturated hydrogen was sensed at the fuel pump inlet i0 sec after the prevalve closed. The recirculation pump provided alternately subcooled and saturated fluid to the suction line. Although liquid subcooled as much as 0.39 K was pumped into the suction line, the fluid was always saturated by the time it reached the fuel pump inlet (See Figure 21-33). The pump performance during the second chilldown was very poor at

times, indicating that culation pump pressure

gas as well rise varied

as liquid from 1.7

was being _umped. to 6.5 N/cm z (2.5

The recirto 9.5 psi).

The accumulated mass of LH 2 provided by the recirculation pump was less than 105 kg (230 ibm), whereas the accumulated mass during the first orbital chilldown was 168 kg (370 ibm). Although the second chilldown accumulated flow was only 557o of the total accumulated during the first hydrogen ehilldown, the recirculation pump did supply l%quid to the system, and a considerable amount of heat was removed. The initial temperature of the fuel pump discharge line was 128K; however, only 34 sec after the prevalve closed, the temperature had dropped to 26K, and remained at that temperature 270 sec after the recirculation pump was turned off. The unpressurized chilldown under very low gravity did operate successfully and removed heat from the system. Indications are that the system was completely chilled. However, the saturated fluid in the suction ducts must be subcooled prior to engine ignition. This could be requiring accomplished during engine restart. the LH 2 tank repressurization on vehicles

The J-2 engine bell heating prediction is compared to measured values on Figure 21-34 for a representative engine location. The prediction was based upon an engine free from optical contamination, and the . best estimates and insulation of solar absorptivity and were used in the analysis. emissivity Because of the engine bell of the chill sequence

occurring after the first revolution, the temperatures do not rise to the predicted until toward the end of the coast. However, the data is close enough that the prediction methods and the mathematical model of the the engine Saturn appear to be accurate V orbital coast. and can be used without correction for

Lo Lo

Temperature (OK) 26 Recircu_tion

P_p

On

25

P_evalve

Closed

i revalve !Open Recirculation

Pump Off

24

--_

I___

Cont. Vent

Closed

_____

(Based on measured

press)

t----Measured Temperature

_--

Saturation li,lO0 (see)

Temperature ll,i40 Ii,i80 11,220 11,260 ll,300

21
I0,860 10,900 10,940 i0,980

I
I1,020 11,060 Range T_e FIG_E 21-33 LH 2 TI_IPE_TURE AT _EL PUMP I_ET - SECOND CHILL_

NOTE: i. 2. 3. 4. 5. Velocity Orientated Vehicle Emissivity of Insulation = 0.9 Solar Absorptivity of Insulation = 0.16 Emissivity of Engine Tubes and Hat Bands Solar = 0.35 Absorptivity of Engine Tubes II Insulation---,,,,

III k_i /

Pos.l (Earth) Approximate _/ Sensor Location

an_ HaS Ba_s = 0.55

18*Y "_
IV

Tem)erature 280

(OK)

200

_,/j/t

160
J I

# i

120

/ / t -Flight Data

80
l 40 0 ! 2,000 ' I 4,000 I 6,000 I 8,000 _ : : " 14,000 ....... ; 16,000 Predicted _ 18,000 : 20,000 " : 22,000

10,000 12,000 Range Time (see)

I
0

B
i

I
2

J
3 Range Time PREDICTED

,,
(hr)

_
4

o
5

:
6

FIGE2E

21-34

POSTFLIGHT

ENGINE

TUBE TEMPERATURE

VARIATIONS

334

21.4.3

PRESSURE

RISE

TEST

The knowledge LH 2 tank. ferential

pressure of the

rise test was carried thermodynamic and heat

out in order to provide transfer characteristics

valuable of the

It also provided structural limits

valuable data of the common

on the negative pressure difbulkhead. During this test were due closed and to external the heating.

the LH 2 tank continuous and non-propulsive vents pressure allowed to rise from self-pressurization The LH 2 tank relief vents were operative. During vents were closed, the LOX tank was depressurized thrusting system. The hydrogen approximately tank ullage pressure at 8.51N/cm2 (12.35 psi).

the time when the LH 2 through the ullage

was

the time of The ullage

closing pressure

the tank 5360 sec

later (approximately one orbit) was 25.97 N/cm 2 (37.7 psi), which represents a pressure rise rate of 11.71N/cm2/hr (17.0 psi/hr) in the closed tank. The calculated pressure rise rate, based upon maximum predicted liquid heating only and assuming homogeneous distribution of the heat input within the liquid, was approximately 2.20 N/cm2/hr (3.2 psi/hr). The increased pressure rise rate is attributed to heating of the ullage gases. The initial and final ullage temperature profiles are shown in Figure 21-35. As shown, a significant degree of stratification was developed in the ullage during this period of time. Initially, the temperature profile was quite flat, there being a temperature gradient from the liquid level to the forward dome of only approximately 5.55OK. The third hydrogen tank blowdown sequence had been completed just prior to closing the hydrogen tank. Extreme fogging and liquid droplet extrainment were observed in the ullage during the blowdown. The increased heat transfer with the blowdown between mixing explain the ullage gases effect created by the small ullage and small liquid particles coupled the relatively high flow rates during temperature gradient at this time. the time a result period was approximately of convective boundary

The temperature gradient at the end of O 107.7 K. This gradient is necessarily layer development at the sidewall.

During the 90 minute period when the LH 2 ullage pressure had risen, the LOX ullage pressure had dropped from 16.2 to 3.4 N/cm 2 (23.5 to 5 psi). Figure 21-36 shows the pressure history of both tanks. It includes an extrapolation of pressures following the last data point, which gives a good indicatien of the range of the possible common bulkhead burst pressures. two minute detection Bursting of the common bulkhead must have occurred period between the KSC telemetry loss and Trinidad of several pieces. Thus, the common bulkhead burst to a range of 23.4 + 0.3 has previously occurred during radar pressure the

differential is confined A common bulkhead failure ential pressure test program at

N/cm 2 (34 + 0.5 psi). at a rever_e differstructural

of 23.9 N/em 2 (34.7 psi) during a full scale test facilities Sn Sacramento, California.

335

Vehicle 43

Station

(m) _ T [ Dome

of LH 2 Tank Forward

42 nitial Temperature t = 17,138.2 sec 41 Profile

4O Final Temperature t = 22,498.2 sec 39 Profile

38

36 Liquid :urface

35 0 . FIGURE 20 40 Hydrogen 60 Ullage 80 Temperature i00 (OK) 120 140

21-35 HYDROGEN TANK ULLAGE T_4PERATURE PROFILES DURING TANK PRESSURE RISE EXPERIMENT

Ullage

Pressure

(H/cm 2) Flight Data

Ullage

Pressure

(psi) 50

Extrapo la ted 30

Vent Setting

__

40

20

LH2 ..._ _..._- _"_"_""_" _"_'"_" "

30

i...-"_ I

A P @ KSC (33.77

_OS 20

psi)

-< lO _ _"-t....
_"_ _'_" _--.._ LOX

23 NJcmL 28
I0

KSC LO

Trinidad

AOS 0 2500(

22800 .c
0 , 17000 . 18000 I 5 Range FIGURE 21-36 LH2 AND LOX ULLAGE Time (hr) DURING THE PRESSURE . 19000 , 20000 Range Time , 21000 (sec) I 6 , 22000

i!
I/, 23000

(_io_o.)22920 se_
, 24000

PRESSURES

RISE

TEST

337

22.0 22.1 SUMMARY

(U)

SUBCRITICAL

CRYOGENIC

NITROGEN

EXPERIMENT

A subcritical cryogenic nitrogen storage experiment was flown on AS-203 for MSC to demonstrate the feasibility of subcritical cryogenic storage and delivery systems in a low "g" environment. In general, the results of this experiment indicate that all objectives were fulfilled. Good pressure control throughout the system, expected heat exchanger outlet temperature, and a steady decrease in the fluid quantity were demonstrated,indicating that vapor was uniformly delivered from a two-phase mixture. The location of the subcritical is presented in Appendix A. 22.2 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION cryogenic nitrogen storage system

The storage and supply system flown on AS-203 was located in the nose cone at Sta. 51.2 m (2017 in). The package consisted of two major subsystems: the storage vessel and signal conditioner plate. The signal conditioner plate was mounted horizontally directly above the storage vessel. A 28 vdc power supply was supplied to the signal conditioner plate from the IU. Instrumentation was contained in the tankage system and a telemetry interface was provided so that quantity gauging, flow control, fluid orientation, and pressure maintenance could be monitored during ascent and orbital flight. A schematic of the system is shown in Figure 22-1. 22.3 SYSTEM OPERATION AND PERFORMANCE

The storage system parameters were monitored during manual servicing with liquid nitrogen. Servicing was performed from the service structure, using a portable dewar, until the specified percent fill was reached. Several hours before launch, the pressurization heater was activated and monitored remotely from the blockhouse. The storage system requires no attention after pressurization to 103 N/cm 2 (150 psi), other than monitoring. The storage sphere contains two sets of wire matrices or grids which are used to determine the mass of stored fluid. The capacitance between grids is proportional to specific density. Since the matrices occupy the total storage volume, mass determination is possible regardless of the liquid and vapor orientation. A valve arrangement at the pressure vessel delivery port is referenced to a downstream delivery line pressure. The valve position regulates the mass flow and is dependent upon the quality of the entering fluid.

[ .................................................. Pressure Safety __;_ _

Signal

Conditioner,

Current

Monitor,

II

_ _qqq!il __= _--_rl Switch I I I I Quantity Capacitance Gauge

Relief

Valve

_--_

Pressure Sisnal

PI Plate

Vent

Valve

(Capped)

Conditioner Matrix Matrix "A"

Signal Signal Signal Matrix I I Signal Conditioner, Signal Fill

Cond., Cond., Cond. Cond., Valve

Temp, Matrix, Temp, Temp, (Capped)

T1 QI T2 T3

Fiberglass Support Pads Ground Heater

28 vdc e--e--Press Internal Pressure Regulator

Elee J P2

I _2J _

ressure' Solenoid Shutoff

PI " ;Absolute Regulator

28

vde Con8 Flow "' Flow, Restrictor FMI

Signal

T4

Heater I i Warm-Up ;_-[____j Heat Exc. _i I Heater -/ I Control

L__

Supply Relief Valve Sensor I, u .... " Signal Signal Current Signal Cond., Cond., Monitor, Cond., Press, Temp, 12 Temp, T4 P3 T5

Temp

FIGURE

22-1

STORAGE

AND

SUPPLY

SYSTEM

339

The entering fluid is throttled to a lower pressure and temperature to provide vapor cooling. This is accomplished by passing the fluid through a fluid- to-fluid heat exchanger in contact with the surface of the pressure vessel. The fluid is subsequently routed outside the storage dewar, where it is brought to delivery temperature. This is accomplished by the higher environmental temperatures and the use of an electrical heater. The results fulfilled. obtained from the experiment indicate All pressure measurements were within that the objectives their expected

were

ranges. The tank pressure P1 varied from 120 N/cm 2 (175 psi) at liftoff to 108 N/cm 2 (157 psi) at 300 minutes. The tank outlet pressure P2 remained nearly constant at 55 N/cm 2 (80 psi) over the entire mission. The supply pressure P3 was constant at approximately 46 N/cm 2 (67 psi). All temperatures were nominal throughout flight. The heat exchanger temperature was as expected and an expected steady decrease in fluid quantity was observed. These measurements show that vapor was uniformly delivered from the two phase mixture, which was a prime requirement. The vapor flowrate was nominal and varied from 0.625 kg/hr (1.38 ibm/hr) to 0.851 kg/hr (1.88 ibm/hr). The measurement of flowrate and delivery temperature failed at 6 minutes, but the flowrate was determined from the quantity data. A three dimensional wire matrix, measuring the average capacitance throughout the storage volume, was employed to measure the quantity of stored f_uid. This was the first successful orbital test of this device. An absolute pressure regulator was used to deliver the stored fluid from the pressure vessel. Its position was proportional to the flowrate and it operated nominally as evidenced by continuous constant pressure vapor delivery.

340

23.0 23.1 SUMMARY

(U)

SUMMARY

OF MALFUNCTIONS

AND DEVIATIONS

Evaluation of the launch vehicle performance, during the AS-203 flight test, did not reveal any malfunctions or deviations which could be considered a serious system failure for this flight. However, certain minor modifications are planned for future flights to improve system operations. 23.2 SYSTEMS MALFUNCTIONS AND DEVIATIONS

The systems having malfunctions (abnormal operation) or significant deviations (actual operation deviated from expected operation), the nature of the malfunction or deviation, and the recommended corrective action, are summarized in Table 23-I. A more complete discussion of each problem area is included in the paragraphs of this report that are referenced.

TABLE

23-1

SI_MARY

OF MALFUNCTIONS

AND

DEVIATIONS

Malfunctions

Mode Vehicle System Malfunctions

of Failure

Recommended Corrective Action Para. Ref.

or Cause Instrumentation

S-IVB

LH 2 Experiment

Failure onboard

of TV

redundant camera No.

Failure of transmitter

IU TV amplifier

No action required. The transmitter amplifier is not scheduled for future use.

20.5.2

S-IB

Recovery

One onhoard camera viewing separation recovered IU Azusa/GLOTRAC intermittent

for not

Cause of failure unknown. Camera was jettisoned properly. "Intermittent Lock" probably by a change in Phase caused operat-

Improve support.

recovery

20.6.2

Tracking

System,

More thorough check during electrical testing.

20.5.3

ing characteristics of an internal component of the transponder during the initial vibration force of between 3.9 longitudinal g and 4.Z and be3.6 g g

tween 3.4 g and perpendicular. Propulsion S-IPB Stage Fuel reeircul_tion shutoff valve did close as System

not

Valve did not to command,

respond

Valve being redesigned due to DEQ Test failures. Present valve acceptable for AS-202.

9.2.1 9.2.3

programmed,

TABLE

23-I

SUMMARY OF MALFUNCTIONS Deviations

AND DEVIATIONS

(CONC)

Mode Vehicle System Deviations or Guidance Instrument Unit Accumulation of II An

of Failure Cause System stabilized

Recommended Corrective

Action

Pars.

Ref.

ST-124M

Hardwlre

monitor

of

12.4.3.1

pulses on "X" channel between S-IB ignition and liftoff,

platform rometer m/s was ably due

"X" acceleerror of 0.55 accumulated.Prob to vibration. System system constrained to its

encoder outputs prior to liftoff on AS-202 and subs.

Control S-IB Dynamics Abnormal vehicle lation (1.6 cps) holddown liftoff, and oscilduring at

The control excited the vehicle release, prior

No problem with systems released to date. This condition will ered in future systems design. be considcom_rol

12.3.4.4

ending

Propulsion S-IVB

System: Stage Regulator in t_nuous vent module dicted cycles, LR 2 consystem

Propulsion

System Redesign tinuous of the convent module to 21.3.1

Probably caused by higher than expected boiloff ment of adjustable and/or adjustregulator orifice.

exceeded prenumber of

(initiated prior AS-203 flight).

Enviror_nental

Control

Systems

Instrument

Unit

Excessive IU during orbit,

cooling

Heat balance in orbit different from the expected,

(I) Change specificstion limits for AS-204 and subs.

18.4.1

343

APPENDIX (U) A. I SUMMARY VEHICLE

DESCRIPTION

The

Saturn

IB AS-203

vehicle

configuration

consisted

of

an

S-IB

Stage, an S-IVB Stage modified to represent the S-IVB Stage to be flown on Saturn V, an Instrument Unit_and a Nose Cone. The vehicle measured approximately 52 m (170 ft) in length and weighed approximately 538,247 (1,186,632 ibm) at liftoff. A pictorial description of the vehicle is presented in Figure A-I. A.2 A.2.1 S-IB STAGE CONFIGURATION

kg

S-IB

The S-IB Stage had nominal dimensions of 24.5 m (80.3 ft) in length and 6.5 m (21.4 ft) in diameter. A cluster of eight uprated H-I engines powered the S-IB stage (Figure A-2) and produced s total sea-level thrust of 7.12 million was capable of Newtons (1.6 million ibf). Each of the four o:utboard engines gimballing in a + 8 deg square pattern to provide pitch,yaw and and from outboard engines were canted 3 deg and 6 deg the vehicle longitudinal axis to minimize would be induced by an engine failure at

roll control. Inboard outwards respectively

the disturbing momentsthat critical dynamic pressure.

Propellants were supplied to the engines through suction lines from the clustered arrangement of nine propellant tanks. These tanks consisted of four 1.78 m (70 in) diameter RP-1 (fuel) tanks, four 1.78 m (70 in) diameter LOX (oxidizer) tanks, and a 2.67 m (105 in) diameter center LOX tank. Each outboard tank (LOX and RP-l) supplied propellants to one inboard and one outboard engine. The center LOX tank supplied the outboard tanks through the LOX interchange system. Thrust and longitudinal loads were carried by the pressurized LOX tanks. The propellant tanks were structurally retained at the forward end of the S-IB stage by the spider beam. LOX and ground fuel tank pressurization modules regulated operations and S-IB flight. The control tank pressures pressure system relief, of LOX It was an

during

used GN 2 to actuate various valves for such purposes as vent fill, and drain. The propellant utilization system consisted mass sensors, fuel mass sensors, and electronic assemblies. open loop system which initiated signals to cutoff the ate times. Nominal stage propellant loading capacity (880,550 ibm).

engines at appropriwas 398,866 kg

344 _-- Q-BALL Sta. 52,7 m _2074 in)

,,_ 15 -

Sta. 51.7 m (2037 in)

i
No,le C@IHI /

I,
_ Sta 47,3 m (1864 in)

/
V
Instrument U_it I Sta 43.2 m (1699 in)

--_ ---I-S-IVB

_ _

6.6 m (260 in) Dia. Sta 42.2 m (1663 in)

-_ 52.78 m (2078 in) _

8ta 30.1 m (1187 in) (Sep Plane;

X_.J- -

Sta 27.6 m (1086 in) (Gimba I Plane) 8ta 24.4 m (962 in)

LI
/ i !

6.5 m (257 in) Dia.

S-IB

/ _

--

_ _

Sta 2.5 m (I00 in) (Gimba I Plane) Sta.-0.102 CONFIGURATION m (-4.018 in)

FIGURE A-I

AS-203

FIGURE

A-2

S-IB

STAGE

346

Four 162,805 N (36,600 ibf) thrust solid propellant retro motors, mounted circumferentially on the S-IVB aft interstage (canted at 9.6 deg), decelerated the S-IB stage and S-IVB aft interstage to accomplish separation from the S-IVB stage. Eight equally sized fins were attached to the base of the S-IB stage to provide vehicle support and holddown points prior to launch and to provide inflight stability. Each fin projected an area of spploximately 4.95 m 2 (53.5 ft 2) and extended radially about 2.74 m (9 ft) from the outer surface of the thrust structure. Additional systems on the S-IB stage included: (a) the flight

control system; (b) the hydraulic system, which gimballed the outboard engines; (c) the electrical system, which distributed and controlled the stage electrical power; (d) the environmental control system, which thermally conditioned instrument canisters FI and F2 prior to flight; (e) the data acquisition system,which acquired and transmitted data for the evaluation of stage performance and environment; and (f) a secure range safety system. Guidance and control commands were received from the Instrument Unit. A.2.2 S-IB-3 CONFIGURATION DIFFERENCES

The discussed pressure system, i.

significant configuration differences between S-IB-3 and S-IB-I, below, pertain to the stage structure, H-I engines, control system, LOX container pressurization system, flight control electrical Stage system_and environmental control system.

Structure structural modifications were incorporated into

the

S-IB-3

The following stage: Tail Section in the tail

elements

- The. metal thickness section was reduced.

of The

sheet metal heat shield

and machined brazed honeyturbine chamber exhaust

comb was redesigned_ the was rerouted. Rerouting

engine skirt was removed, and the the exhaust ducts along the thrust

instead of through the stub fins resulted in the following: (a) permitted removal of four turbine exhaust fairings (stub fins) from the exterior of the lower shroud, (b) dictated reorientation of the heat shield support structure, (c) entailed the redesign of the inboard honeycomb heat shield panels and inboard engine flame curtains, and (d) entailed redesign of the flame shield and its support structure. Propellant Containers - Thicknesses were reduced in certain sheet metal elements o_ skirts, bulkheads, and milled skin areas of all LOX tanks. The sump cover in the 2.67 m (105 in) LOX tank was inverted and tank from 2.67 the associated gasket was redesigned. Changes were made to the LOX upper manifolds and LOX vent redesign. m (105 in) LOX tank tube apertures in the upper skirts, resulting The G0X line and diffuser were rerouted in the to permit added topping.

347

Retro Rockets - The retro rockets on the S-IVB aft interstage were moved 16.5 cm (6.5 in) farther outboard and parallel to the vehicle skin in order that loss of one retro rocket would not cause a collision during separation (due to unbalanced lateral forces). Retro rocket thrust was increased by about 5/. In addition, a stronger support structure was added, fairings were redesigned, and insulation patterns changed. 2. H-I Engine System modifications were incorporated into the S-IB-3

The following H-I engine system:

Turbine Inboard Engine Exhaust System - The system was redesigned to reroute the exhaust gases into the area enclosed by the 4 inboard engines instead of through the stub fins. LOX Turbopump Seal - The seal was redesigned to incorporate a vent that provided a pressure balance of the carbon seal during the start transient. Thrust OK Pressure Switch (TOPS) - A third TOPS _as added for purposes of redundancy. Remote checkout capability for the three TOPS was also incorporated. Unitized Check Valve - The single new valve replaced two individual check valves on the heat exchanger LOX supply line. There was no functional change. Heat Exchanger Orifice - The three orifices inlet were reduced to 0.257 cm (0. i01 in) diameter. at the heat exchanger

Electrical Harness Potting - The engine starting and armored electrical harnesses have been revorked to incorporate connectors with a metal sleeve. 3. Control Pressure System were incorporated into the S-IB-3

Control

The following modifications Pressure System:

Fiberglass Sphere - A 0.0283 m 3 (I ft3) sphere was added to the control pressure system. This increased the system volume to 0.0566 m3 (2 ft3) in order to yield additional purging capability. Pressure Regulator - Vent regulator bleed ports to eliminate the SA-10 regulator. check _alves were added to the pressure the prelannch problem encountered with

348

4.

LOX

Container

Pressurization changes were System:

System incorporated into the S-IB-3 LOX

Container

The following Pressurization

GOX Vent and Interconnect System permit reduction of the ullage volume from an additional 680 kg (1500 Ibm) of LOX to was added to each of the four outboard valve _as added to the center LOX tank to pressure. GOX engine to the 5. Interconnects - The GOX

- The system was redesigned to 1.7% to 1.5%, thereby allowing be loaded. A dome and vent valve LOX containers. A new relief vent and relieve the over-

interconnects as a result

from of the

the

inboard

heat exchanger turbine exhaust Flight The Control

were redesigned system. System to the

modification

only

modification

S-IB-3

flight

control

system

was

the reduction (0.004 in) to 6.

of the prevent

outer dismeter of the accumulator piston by 0.010 cm piston - sleeve interference noted on earlier stages. Systems modifications were incorporated into the S-IB-3

Electrical

electrical

The following system: S_itch Selector

- A more

reliable

switch

selector was

was added

added. to

accommodate

Distributor - A second the added TOPS.

propulsion

distributor

Fuel and LOX Vent LOX Vent system was removed ground system.

System - The control from the stage and

logic for incorporated

the fuel and into the

would event

OECO Logic - The OECO logic was modified have to cut off before the remaining engines one outboard engine failed prior to grouping

so that a second engine shut down, in the of the TOPS.

Range Ssfety System - The Range Safety Command Destruct System used on S-IB-I was supplemented by the Secure Range Safety Command Destruct System (operational on S-IB-3). A second control path for charging the EBW firing units was added. Blocking diodes were added to the "measurement engine squib fired" lines for each Conax squib to preclude inadvertent firing by a ground signal.

349

TOPS and Fuel Depletion Sensors - Grouping the TOPS and enabling the fuel depletion sensors was separated into two functions. The likelihood of premature fuel depletion OECO encountered on S-IB-I is minimized. possible. Enabling the fuel depletion sensors i sec after TOPS was

Control removed 7. from the

Accelerometers stage. Control

- The

control

accelerometers

were

Environmental The only

System to the S-IB-3 environmental control

modification

system was the resulting from A.3 A.3.1 S-IVB STAGE

rerouting of the the installation

instrument of a dome

compartment precooling ducts, on each outboard LOX tank.

S-IVB

CONFIGURATION nominal dimensions of 17.98 m diameter. A single gJmbal mounted

(59

The S-IVB stage (Figure A-3) bad it) in length and 6,60 m (260) in

J-2 engine, providing 877,000 N (200,000 Ibf) total thrust at vacuum, powered the vehicle during the S-IVB stage portion of powered flight. The engine was mounted on the thrust structure and was capable of gimballing in a + 7 deg square pattern. The thrust structure provided engine The thrust--transfer LH 2 forward to and the LOX LH 2 (fuel) were and LOX (oxidizer) by a containers. bulkhead. tanks, aft, separated common

LOX and LH 2 tank pressurization modules regulated tank pressures during ground operations, S-IB boost phase, and S-IVB burn phase. The pneumatic control system used ambient helium to operate various valves for such purposes as venting, fill_ and drain. The propellant utilization system consisted of a LOX mass sensor_ a LH 2 mass sensor, an electronics assembly, and a valve positioner. The PU valve was flown in a null position in order to maximize the propellant residuals. Nominal propellant loading capacity was 103,510 kg (228,500 ibm). A skirt assembly was attached to the portion of the propellant container. The was connected to the aft skirt assembly. attached container to the forward end of the to support the Instrument aft end of the cylindrical S-IVB aft interstage and fairing Another skirt assembly was the propellant

cylindrical portion of Unit and Nose Cone.

35O

SKIRT ASSEMBL Y FORWARD I

PROPEL L.-_g-_ T ] ,_',,_ ,,K AS 3E?'lbLY LOX L'_2 / / /_

HE L 1 SPHERES (8 PLACES)

/
APS HODULE (2 PLACES

BULKHEAD

SKIRT ASSEMBLY

"FT I
AFT [NTE RSI AGE AS SEb_BLY

1"
ULLAGE ROCKETS "_ '_ (3 PLACES)

X_
i
" _ I

SEPARAT IC_ PLANE

IT HELIUM SPHERE THRUST STRUCTURE ASSEMBLY

-

J2 ENGINE

RETRO-ROCKETS (4 PLACES)

FIGURE

A-3

S-IVB

STAGE

351

Three 15,130 N (3,400 ibf) thrust solid propellant ullage motors, mounted circumferentially on the S-IVB aft skirt (canted outwards at 35 deg), accelerated the S-IVB stage to provide proper positioning of the propellants prior to S-IVB stage ignition. Attitude control of the S-IVB stage within + 0.5 deg was provided by two Auxiliary Propulsion System (APS) modules--during S-IVB powered flight and coast. The modules were mounted on opposite sides of the S-IVB aft skirt at fin positions I and III. Each module was a selfcontained unit composed of four basic systems: oxidizer system, fuel system, helium pressurization system, and three 667 N (150 Ibf) thrust engines. Each APS module was a positive expulsion system with the hypergolic propellants contained in separate metal bellows, _hich, in turn, were contained in helium-pressurized ullage tanks. A high pressure helium sphere, contained in the module, supplied helium to the ullage tanks at regulated pressure. This pressure was exerted on the bellows to pressurize the propellants. Monomethyl-Hydrazine (MMH) and nitrogen tetroxide (N204) were used as fuel and oxidizer respectively. Each module contained two motors to provide roll control during S-IVB powered flight, and yaw and roll control after S-IVB engine cutoff. A third motor in each module was oriented perpendicularly to the S-IVB longitudinal axis to provide pitch control. Additional systems on the S-IVB stage included: (a) the flight control system, which included an auxiliary attitude control subsystem and a thrust vector control subsystem; (b) the hydraulic system, which gimballed the and controlled J'2 engine; the stage (c) the electrical electrical system, which distributed power; (d) the thermoconditioning

system, which thermally conditioned the electrical/electronic modules in the stage aft compartment and forward skirt area; (e) the data acquisition system, which acquired and transmitted data for the evaluation of stage performance and environment; and (f) a set of ordnance systems used for ullage rocket ignition, stage separation, retro rocket ignition, ullage rocket jettison, and range safety. Guidance and control commands were received from the Instrument Unit. A.3.2 S-IVB-203 CONFIGURATION DIFFERENCES differences between S-IVB-203 additional capabilities needed and to Many on Saturn

The S-IVB-201

significant configuration resulted primarily from

perform the modifications

LH 2 orbital experiment on AS-203 (see Figure 21-1). were intended to simulate items that will be used

V missions. The basic modifications incorporated into the S-IVB-203 stage, discussed below, pertain to the stage structure, J-2 engine, fuel and LOX tank pressurization sys_ms, LOX ullage thrusting system, propellant system, control flight system. control system, electrical system, and the environmental

352

i.

Stage

Structure following stage: Skirt structural modifications were incorporated into

the

The S-IVB-203 Aft

- The and

aft

skirt Baffle

was

modified

to carry and ring

heavier baffle

loads. was fuel

Deflector installed in level at J-2 cutoff. The

Ring

- A deflector

the LH 2 cutoff)

tank at two locations to control propellant also minimized

(ullage area and slosh, especially the venting of the

nominal at J-2 LH 2 .

installation

Anti-Slosh was extended be insured. 2. J-2 to 61

Baffle cm (24

- The in) so

anti-slosh that a 3%

baffle damping

in

the

S-IVB

LOX would

tank

effectivity

Engine

System modifications were incorporated into the S-.IVB-203

J-2

engine

The following system:

order

to

Start Tank - Two insure recharging

recharging lines were of the start tank. Line - The

added

to

the

tank

in

the

line

Fuel Tank Pressurization was increased.

strength

and

flexibility

of

Start Sequence Improvements - Thrust chamber insulation was added to reduce the _,_armup rate during boost. The main oxidizer valve was re-orificed to compensate for the lower temperature interstage environment. The fuel pump rotor diameter was increased to enlarge the stall margin. 3. Fuel Tank Pressurization modifications system: System were incorporated into the S--IVB-203

fuel

tank

The following pressurization

Continuous Vent System - The non-propulsive vent (NPV) system used on S-IVB-201 was supplemented with the Saturn V/S-IVB continuous vent system. The new system consisted of two 2.54 cm (i in) lines routed around the inside of the S-IVB-203 forward skirt to two nozzles located 180 deg apart in the axial direction. The purpose of adding the new

vent system was to obtain data regarding the behavior less condition, and the effect upon the residual LH2 was shut down and restarted. The NPV and continuous shown in Section 21.0, Figure 21-2.

of LH 2 in a weightwhen the J-2 engine vent systems are

353

Relief Valve - The backup relief valve in the NPV system was modified to insure a 0.689 N/cm 2 (i psi) band between the backup relief valve setting and the vent relief valve setting. This reduces the probability of relief valve operation in its backup function to the vent relief valve. Ambient Helium Storage Sphere - The 0.0149 m 3 (0.525 ft 3) helium sphere used in the stage pneumatic control system, was replaced by a 0.127 m3'(4.5 ft 3) sphere, for use in repressurizing the fuel tan|< at the end of the first orbit. Repressuri=ation Control Module - This module, mounted on thrust structure, _as added to repressurize the fuel tank by about 1.03 N/cm 2 (1.5 psi) at the end of the first orbit. Pressurization the LH 2 pressurant surface, 4. L0X in gas order to Diffuser and reduce - The the diffuser direct of was modified collapsing the

to reduce on the the ullage.

velocity

to prevent

gas

impingement

possibility

Tank

Pressurization

System was

The to supplement system. 5. LOX

only modification to the LOX tank pressurization system the existing vent system with the LOX ullage thrusting

Ullage

Thrusting

System

The LOX ullage thrusting system was added to vent residual G0X through ducting to two nozzles located 180 deg apart. The resulting acceleration was intended to maintain ullage control during the 50 sec after J-2 engine cutoff and to assist was intended to simulate the ullaging Gemini engines on the Saturn V AP8. 6. Propellant The propellant System modifications were incorporated into the S-IVB-203 in propellant settling. The system effects of the 311N (70 ibf) thrust

following

system:

PU System - The PU system was operated in an open loop configuration using a 5.0 to 1 propellant ratio, instead of a closed loop (variable propellant ratio) configuration. The open loop configuration was required in order to maximize the propellant residuals. LH 2 Auxiliary Chilldown Pump - This pump was redesigned provide a differential pressure measurement across the pump. It both S-IVB and S-If stage requirements. to met

354

Flip-Top solid plates ducts. The was geysered 7.

Anti-Vortex

Screens

- These

screens,

with

inclined

over the screens, were added at the LH 2 and LOX suction plates were used to deflect and diffuse propellant that back into the tank during J-2 cutoff transient. Control System modifications were incorporated into the S-IVB-203

Flight

flight

The following control system:

APS - The parallel-redundant regulator system in the helix, control module was replaced with a series-redundant system. The solenoid valve and the pressure switch backup system were deleted. The propellant control module was redesigned to make it less susceptible to contamination, and the helium control regulator design was simplified.

Engine Gimbal System - The high and low pressure relief valves on the accumulator r_servoir were redesigned. The gas seal on the auxiliary hydraulic pump was improved to prevent leakage. The engine actuator and dynamic pressure feedback sys_m was redesigned to eliminate undesirable oscillations. The tolerances on the hydraulic system starter switch were tightened and the 13.3 N (3 Ibf) spring was replaced by a 26.7 N (6 ibf) spring. 8. Electrical System modifications were incorporated into the S-IV_B-203

electrical

The following system:

camera

Battery - Forward lights and battery Battery Noise and

Battery No. heater power Temperature

3 was added requirements. Control

to handle

the

TV

- The

battery

heater

con-

troller was redesigned to eliminate the noise problem encountered during preparation for S-IVB-202 static firing. Thermostats were added in series with the battery heater controller as an additional preventive to the battery fire encountered on S-IVB-202 preflight testing. Sequencer and Switch Selector a more reliable configuration. Dispersion System dispersion systems was deleted from - These items were changed to

make

Propellant and S-IB propellant connecting primacord

- As initially designed, the S-IVB were interconnected. The interall Saturn IB/V vehicles.

Range Safety System - The Range Safety Command Destruct System used on S-IVB-201 was replaced by the Secure Range Safety Command System on S-IVB-203. The new digital system provided a high degree of security

355

(protection) tional false 9.

against signals.

unfriendly intentional RF commands The Secure System uses a separate Control System

and against unintenreceiver and decoder.

Environmental

The only modification to the S-IVB-203 Environmental Control System was the addition of thermal covering to the cold plates and to selected components on the cold plates. The thermal covering, of aluminum tape or aluminized Mylar sheets, insured the retention of sufficient heat for operation during coast. A.4 A.4.1 INSTRUMENT IU UNIT

CONFIGURATION stage. a

It

The Instrument Unit (IU) was located just forward of the S-IVB was a three segment, cylindricalj unpressurized structure having

diameter of 6.60 m (260 in) and a length of 0.91 m (36 in). The cylinder formed a part of the vehicle load-bearing structure and interfaced with the S-IVB stage and payload. Figure A-4 shows the Instrument Unit layout and antenna orientation. Figure A-5 shows the components located in each of the three segments. The Instrument Unit housed electrical and mechanical equipment that

guided, controlled and monitored vehicle performance from liftoff to orbital coast stabilization, including S-IB stage powered flight, S-IB/ S-IVB separation, S-IVB powered flight, and insertion into earth orbit. A.4.2 IU-203 CONFIGURATION DIFFERENCES

The significant configuration differences between the SA-203 IU and the SA-2011U, discussed below, pertain to the structure, guidance system, flight control system, electrical system, and environmental control system. i. Structure structural difference between the SA-203 of shim sections 19 nm (7.5 in) thick in order to close various gaps ranging up

The only significant and SA-201 IU was the placing between the IU and Nose Cone, tO 3.48 2. cm (0.137 in). System

Guidance The

following system:

modifications

were

incorporated

into

the

SA-203

IU guidance

FIGURE

A-4

INSTRUMENT

UNIT

LAYOUT

AND

ANTENNAE

ORIENTATION

_BA_T_Y TV ANTENN(--% BATTERY

r--CONTrOL T

m:;CIELEROIaETER (PITCH) "E SOURC FOLLOWER POW[ DS

&_IX _WER Mr:AS i/_ _41CK

/r x_,oc.,, o_,
/-'LT CON'r COMI=UTER /-"

;
"i

r--/ l. ./ /
_\ "I _

OntlOER

//_

L _6 VOLT

0S _TE RO 51_ULL

X_ooo,.o .,,,.
_EA$ /"" E0$ DIST_I6UTOR 14EArS

_-co,, ,.,.
Ol_,XltqBu_OII R, ASS_ .CM 0_A| _

\
J, ! /

_ELF_C'rRONI SLOW SPEEt, Mul.'r 1400 Zi_, TAPE RECOLOUR ._ULTt_.EXE# _EA5 MEA5 /F2 MOO2?0

.,, .<..,,,<,.
CONTROl. &SSY

t_E_l$

/,

//

.1. /__ /

, ./JJ

/I

-q

....

....

_"

1_

,.

_,.'_t_

*_" B_

"C'BANO

AZUSA F_TER

_IR IIEARIN6

TIe CAt.ll_ItOR

COW, TIrOL T

_ LAU_R:H VEHICLE l C_NTROL .,

Swi'fCH SELEE'rOR REMO E 04GITAJ. IICOEL.R_._.iD

,_,,-,_-_1\
(IREQDI i ]l 'D (

/.'.".-/ri-..
(,Rml$-( (" I' (

,-<o.,=:,< .--,LE_ <,.> _,o.,,/,-,,

(] ( / / (OA

A<=',, '--<,,,R,.o_O. /--,U,...-,,,<,.

( ,/ /

,..
--

"x_ .....
\ _ LOIIIIUOINAI (LNII vl_rrl AC_[LI/ITll

II

_=

k_liEAi

,,<,.,,_. x_,,o v
_

X_<.o._. ,,.

X_oo.\

X_..,.,,,,_ _.

O_IIIAL

FIGURE A-5

INSTRUMENT

UNIT

COMPONENTS

LAYOUT

-_

358

LVDC/LVDA

- The memory

capacity

of the Launch

Vehicle

Digital

Computer (LVDC) was increased from 4 to 6 modules. The LVDC logic was changed to permit checking of the duplex redundancy memory operation. The Launch Vehicle Digital Adapter (LVDA) was changed to increase the reliability of the discrete output circuits and switch selector signals. ST-124M Stabilized Platform - The middle gimbal of the ST-124M Stabilized Platform System (SPS) was modified to reduce weight. Wiring on the ST-124M SPS was changed from silver-plated teflon-coated copper to nickel-plated teflon-coated copper, to prevent corrosion. 3. Flight Control System were incorporated into the SA-203

IU

flight

The following modifications control system:

Flight Control Computer - A spatial synchronizer module was added to balance utilization of the auxiliary propulsion fuel for roll maneuvers. Capacitors were also added to the spatial amplifiers and filter. Control Signal Processor - A dual rate switch was added to the

control signal processor abort limit to another.

to provide capability of switching Power line filters were also added

from one to the unit.

The system rate switch function was modified by adding filter circuits to attenuate input frequencies above 16 Hz which were encountered on the AS-201 flight. 4. Electrical System

The only significant differences between the AS-203 and AS-201 IU electrical system were the use of s more reliable switch selector, and the addition of shock mounts on certain distributors. Two UHF TM antennas and two TV antennas were also added to the IU. 5. Environmental Control System incorporated into the AS-203

The following modifications were IU Environmental Control System (ECS):

Coolant Pump and Shutoff Valve - The pump was redesigned to eliminate the low temperature starting problem that existed on AS-201. The valve was relocated on the ECS panel to reduce the vibration level. Valve position was changed from normally closed to normally open in order to assure flow into the sublimator in case of power failure.

359

crushing

Preflight Heat Exchanger - The unit was redesigned to prevent of the inlet and outlet fittings during installation. Sublimator - The unit was modified to vent inside any possible thrust contribution in orbit. the IU, to

eliminate

Gas Bearing Heat Exchanger - The unit was relocated (closer to the ST-124M) in an attempt to provide the required temperature control throughout the entire mission. Gas Bearing IU. Quick Disconnect Couplings - The stainless steel springs the coupling were improved to eliminate cracking problems. in Pressure Switch - This item was removed from the

eliminate A.5 A.5.1 NOSE

Electronic Control Assembly - The assembly was redesigned to the apparent sticking valve problem that occurred on AS-201. CONE CONE CONFIGURATION

NOSE

The Nose Cone configuration consistedof a semimonocoque double angled cone structure that provided an aerodynamic closure for the top of the AS-203. The overall length of the Nose Cone was 953 cm (375 in) and the base diameter was 660 cm (260 in). The Nose Cone was constructed with ring frames and skin stringers and contained s Q-ball transducer at its apex, a signal conditioning plate at Sta. 51.7 m (2037 in), and a small cryogenic sphere at Sta. 51.2 m (2017 in). Figure A-6 shows the cryogenic sphere in the upper portion of the Nose Cone, A,5,2 NOSE CONE CONFIGURATION DIFFERENCES the Apollo Spacecraft and Launch

The Nose Escape System

Cone on AS-203 replaced used on AS-201.

360

Q-Ball

,/

,,

Sta. 52.3 m (2061 in)

\ \

__/_Signal Sta. (2037 Vent Fill 51.7 in) Line Line _ / m kk

Conditioning

Plate

\
j

Supply Line J Wiring J Harness

Sta.

51.4 in)

(2022

Sta. (2017

51.2 in)

m -_ _ -

Sta. (1990

50.6 in)

Cryogenic Sphere

FIGURE

A-6

NOSE

CONE

(UPPER

PORTION)

361

APPENDIX (U) B. i T time INTRODUCTION This appendix of the launch presents s of AS-203. ATMOSPHERIC

B SUMMARY

summary of the The format of

atmospheric environment the data is similar to comparisons data near

at that

presented be made. launch B.2

in launches Surface and are given.

of the Saturn I vehicles to allow upper air _inds and thermodynamic

to the

time GENERAL

ATMOSPHERIC

CONDITIONS

AT

LAUNCH

TIME

A weak high pressure ridge was centered over the southern part of Florida. The nearest frontal system _as a _eak warm front running from the northeast corner of North Carolina, across Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, and the northeast corner of Illinois. At up to 15 km, the wind flow was controlled by the general culation. B.3 SURFACE At the OBSERVATIONS time of launch, AT LAUNCH there TIME _ere a few scattered cumulus, alto303.35K. launch West Virginia, higher altitudes, westerly cir-

cumulus, and cirrus clouds. Table B-I gives a tabulation time. Win8 Records Surface on Launch winds _ere Pad

Visibility was of the surface

16 km, temperature observations near

measured

near

launch

time

with

aerovane

anemometers

located on the service structure, umbilical the blockhouse. All _inds were light, from showed no systematic variation with height. direction are given in Table B-I. B.4 Wind UPPER Data AIR MEASUREMENTS

tower, pad light pole, and the west and northwest, and Values of wind speed and

Upper air wind data were obtained from five being used in the final meteorological of data available is given in Table B-II. Wind Speed The 26 _ind km. speed at the lower altitudes The maximum win8 was 18 m/s steadily, reaching a maximum

six different wind systems, tape. A summary of the types

below wind Figure

was low, at 13 km. of 135

not exceeding Above 26 km, at 63.6 km.

20 m/s the See

increased B-I.

m/s

LO _o

TABLE SURFACE OBSERVATIONS

B-I AT AS-203 LAUNCH TIME

Location

Time after T-0 (min)

PressTempure ^ erature (N/cm Z) (OK)

Rel. Hum _%)

Visibi]ity (km)

Sky Cover Amount Type (tenths)

Wind Height Speed of base (m/s) (m) Dir (deg)

Cape Kennedy Rawinsonde Station

T - 0

10.166

303.37

69

16

i I I

CU AC Ci

610 4200 unk

, 5.1 310

Cape Kennedy Rawinsonde l_easurements Pad 37_ Light Pole W (20_7 m)# Service Structure T - 0 T - 0 T - 0 T - 0 grade. * i0 meter 4.4 5.1 6.4 4.5 height 315 292 310 260 T + 4 10.159 303.17 68 9 300

r - 0

6.3

242

SW (29.6 m)# SW (67.0 m)# W (91.7 m)# m)#

Top(103,3 # Above

natural

TABLE SYSTEMS

B-II UPPER AIR WIND DATA

USED TO MEASURE

Release

Time

Portion

of Data Used

July 5, 1966 Type of Data UT Time after T-O (rain) Start Altitude (m) Time after T-O (min) End Altitude (m) Time after T-O (min) Remarks

Double FPS-16

Theodolite Jimsphere

1510 1509 1457 1600 1645

17 16 4 7 112

Surface 1,250 15,500 59,750 75,500

17 19 62 II 119

1,000 15,250 34,000 34,250 60,500

22 66 136 26 148 Data not available at time needed for use in, MeteoroloKical Tape,

Rawinsonde Arcasonde Cajun-Dart

Lo Lo

365

Wind

Direction The wind direction it shifted through the Wind limit of the was approximately north to the east wind data (see from the WNW up to 12 Itm, and remained generally east B-2).

then up to

Figure

Pitch

Component up to 20 km, reaching a the _inds were headwinds, P_. (see A bias Figure pitch B-3)

The pitch component winds were tailwinds maximum of ii.i m/s at 12.5 km. Above 20 km, increasing with altitude wind _as net used in the Yaw Wind Component to of 16 km, the yaw component winds were 16.6 m/s st 13.25 km. Above 16 km, increased to a maximum of to a maximum tilt program

of 70 m/s at 57 for this launch

Up maximum from (see

from the left with a the winds were generally m/s at 54.75 km

the right and Figure B-4). Wind

36.7

Component

Shears wind shears magnitude. (fSh = i000 m) shown in Figure B-5 were in

Component general of low Rawinsonde

- FPS/16

Jimsphere

Balloon

Data

Comparison of the FPS/16 Jimsphere balloon less than 1.0m/s different

With the light winds up to data, the FPS/16 and rawinsonde at all altitudes. B.5 THERMODYNAMIC DATA

the limit data were

Comparison of the thermodynamic Patrick Reference Atmosphere (1963) optical index of refraction are shown

data taken at for temperature, in Figures

launch time with the density, pressure, and B-7.

B-6

Temperature The Atmosphere

w

temperature deviated only (1963) (I to 3 percent)

slightly up to 45

from km.

the Patrick

Reference

There _--

were

only

slight

(<2%) km. of

deviations

from

the Patrick deviations

Reference increased

Atmosphere (1963) below 21 with altitude, to a maximum

Above 21 km, the 12.4% at 46 km.

Ra_insonde

(ta57-1709

fIT)

Arcaeonde (1626-1611

UT)

37l

A1ttude 60

(kin>

Range Time

(sec)

$5 L..... -130

.Z

45

_: .<

35

40 30

IlO

9o
20 80 ....

_
_ _

I0

60

50 5

/
C-IO -5 0 5 _0 15 R4_fiv_ O_via_iO_ Of PcetIBure (_] FIGURE B-? RELATIVE DEVIATION OF PRESSURE FROM TNE PAFB REFRACTION (63)

"
3o

=o 0

_
-40 -20 0 20 Abso(ufe Ol_cr_d_of Ihe Optioi Lndei of RQfoclion (n-i) IO 6 ANO ABSOLUTE REFERENCE OEVIATION OF THE ATMOSPHERE, INDEX AS-203 OF 40

372

Pressure The pressure creased (positive) Optical Index deviations from the Patrick Reference with altitude, reaching a maximum of Atmosphere 11.07o at 45 inkm.

of Refraction had a deviation of Atmosphere (1963). - I) x 10 -6 units.

11.6 Above B.6

The optical index of refraction at the surface (n - I) x 10 -6 units from the Patrick Reference the surface the value remained less than 9 (n COMPARISON OF WIND DATA WITH PREVIOUS SATURN

LAUNCHES

Table B-Ill shows the maximum wind speed and wind speed components in the high dynamic pressure region for AS-201, AS-203, and Saturn I vehicles. The wind shears are given for the same vehicles in Table B-IV.

373

TABLE MAXIMUM WIND SPEED IN

E-Ill HIGH DYNAMIC PRESSURE REGION

Maximum Vehicle Number SA-I SA-2 SA-3 SA-4 SA-5 SA-6 SA-7 SA-9 SA-8 SA-IO AS-201 AS-203 Speed (m/s) 47.0 33.6 31.3 51.8 42.1 15.0 17.3 34.3 16.0 15.0 70.0 18.0

Wind Alt (kin) 12.25 13.50 13.75 13.00 10.75 12.50 11.75 13.00 15.25 14.75 13.75 13.00

Maximum Pitch (Wx) (m/s) 36.8 31.8 30.7 46.2 41.1 -14.8 -ii.i 27.5 12.0 12.9 57.3 ii.I

Wind Alt (kin)

Components Yaw (Wz) (m/s) -29.2 -13.3 11.2 -23.4 -11.5 12.2 14.8 23.6 14.6 10.8 -43.3 16.6 Alt (kin) 12.25 12.25 12.00 13.00 11.25 17.00 12.00 13.25 15.25 15.45 13.25 13.25

Dir (deg) 242 261 269 253 268 96 47 243 351 306 250 312

13.00 13.50 13.75 13.00 [0.75 12.50 12.75 10.75 ii.00 14.75 13.75 12.50

374

TABLE EXTR_E WIND

B-IV PRESSURE REGION

SHEAR IN HIGH DYNAMIC

i000 m Interval Pitch Plane Vehicle Number $A-I SA-2 SA-3 SA-4 SA-5 SA-6 SA-7 SA-9 SA-8 SA-IO AS-201 AS-203 Shear (sec -I) 0.0145 0.0144 0.0105 0.0155 0.0162 0.0121 0.0078 0.0096 0.0065 0.0130 0.0206 0.0104 Altitude (km) 14.75 15.O0 13.75 13.00 17.00 12.25 14.25 10.50 I0.00 14.75 16.00 14.75 Yaw Plane Shear (sec -I) 0.0168 0.0083 0.0157 O.0144 0.0086 0.0113 0.0068 0.O184 0.0073 0.0090 0.0205 0.0079 Altitude (km) 16.00 16.00 13.25 Ii.00 I0.00 12.50 11.25 10.75 17.00 15.00 12.00 14.25

375

(U)

REFERENCES

I.

Memo R-P&VE-VAW-66-46, "Saturn IB SA-203, Characteristics", dated May 16, 1966. CCSD Technical Note Flight Trajectory", SE008-001-1, June, 1966. MPR-SAT-FE-66-8 Launch Vehicle "Project TN-AP-66-28, "SA-203 dated May 13, 1966. Apollo Coordinate

Final

Predicted

Mass

2.

Launch

Vehicle

Operational

3.

System

Standards",

dated

4.

(Confidential), Test Flight

"Results dated

of

the 6,

First 1966.

Saturn

IB

AS-201",

May

5.

MPR-SAT-FE-65-11, July II, 1965, (Confidential), Ninth Saturn I Launch Vehicle Test Flight SA-8" Flight Evaluation Working Group.

"Results of the by the Saturn

6.

MPR-SAT-FE-65-14, the Tenth Saturn Flight Evaluation Saturn

September 24, 1965, (Confidential), I Launch Vehicle Test Flight SA-IO" Working Group. Book", Manuals July 15, 1965, R-P&VE.

"Results of by the Saturn

7.

'_S-203 by

Vehicle Handbooks

Data and

(Confidential),

Technical

Section,

8.

"Saturn IB, SA-203, June 22, 1966,MSFC

Launch Saturn

Vehicle Flight Readiness IB Program Office.

Review

Report",

376

APPROVAL

MPR-SAT-FE-66-12

RESULTS

OF

THE

SECOND

SATURN IB LAUNCH AS-203

VEHICLE

TEST

FLIGHT

By

Saturn

Flight

Evaluation

Working

Group

The information in this report has been reviewed for security classification. Review of any information concerning Department of Defense or Atomic Energy Commission programs has been made by the MSPC Security Classification Officer. The highest classification has been determined to be Confidential. This report has been reviewed and approved for technical accuracy.

_mL_

n b:tgrn_light

Evaluation

Working

Group

_er_ann K. Weidner Dii_ector, Research

and

Development

Operations

L. B. James Saturn I/IB

Program

Manager

377

DISTRIBUTION: Dr. Dr. Mr, E-S Mr. Mr. I yon Braun, DIR Rees, DEP-T Gorma_l, DEP-A R-ASTR (Cone) Mr. R. Smith, R-ASTR-E Mr. Strot:d, R-ASTR-EA Mr. Mr, Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. 1 cope (5) Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. _r. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Fir. Mr. _r. Mr. Robinson, R-ASTR-ESA Rosenthicn, R-ASTR-F Blackstone, R-ASTR-F M_ode_, Ferrell, Hoberg, R-ASTR-G R-ASTR-GSA R-ASTR-I R-P&VE (Cone) Fir. Aberg, R-PNVE-V Mr. G]o_,erj R-P&VE-VA Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Marmann, R-P&VE-VAW Devenish, R-P&VE-VNH Sells, R-P&VE-VOO Schulz_, Rothe, Criner, R-P&VE-VS R-P&VE-XF R-P&VE-XA (2) (2)

Maus, Smith,

E-DIR E-F E-S

F_r. AbhoRS,

_en. O'Connor, I-DIR Dr. Mrazek, I-DI Col. James, Fir. Johnson, Mr. Vreuls, Mr. Mr. Dunlap, Pikes, I-1/IB-MGR I-I/1B-C I-I/IB-E I-IIB-C I-I/IB-T (2)

Price, Powell, R-ASTR-IE R-ASTR-I A_.,er_',R-ASTR-IMD El)', R-ASTR-IRD Threlke[d, R-ASTR Boeh_, Moore, R-ASTR-M R-ASTR-N

Hr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. R-RP

Boone,

R-P&VE-XK

]TP

Gr_,_, R-QUAL-DIR Renrit:!e, R-QUAL-A Corder, Klauss, R-QUAL-DIE R-QUAL-J

Maj. _linek, I-I/IB-T Mr. Tbompsont I-I/IR-S-I/IB Dr. Rudolph, I-V-MGR Mr. Peters, I-V-S-IVB Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr, Mr, Gale),. I-V-IU McCulloeh, I-I/'[B-S-IV5 Sirmnons_ Ferrell, Speer, Wood, Riemer, Belch, Auter, I-I/IB-U l-E-J

Krtlme, R-ASTR-NFE Lominick, R-ASTR-NFS Nicaise R-ASTR-NGI Taylor, R-ASTR-R Mock, Noel, _olfe, R-ASTR-S R-ASTR-S R-ASTR-S

Brooks, R-QUAL-P peck, R-QUAL-QVS Chandler, R-QUAL-R Brien, R-QUAL-R Smith, _tmann, R-QUAL-R R-QL_L-T

I-MO-MGR (_) I-SC-C (3) I-MICH-MGR I-MICH-_P I-MT-MGR I-MT-H

R-CSMP Or. Houizer, Mr. Mr. Prince, Cochran,

R-C(AMP-DIR R-COMP-A R-COMP-R R-COMP-RR

Dr. Mr.

Stuhlingor, R-RP-DIR Heifer, R-R/_-T

Constan,

Fir. Fertenberry,

R-TEST Mr. Heimburg, Mr, Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr.

R-TEST-DIR

R-ME Mr. Kuers, R-ME-DIR Mr. Orr, R-ME-M R&D Mr. Weidner, Dr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Franklin. W aei_chet, R-ME-T R-ME-X

Tessmann, R-TEST-DIR Grafton, R-TEST-C Sieber, R-TEST-I Edwards, R-TEST-M Driscoll, R-TEST-S

R-SIR

Johnson, R-EO-DIR Williams, R-AS-DIR Messer, R-OM-V Davldson, Richard,

(2) under MSC) R-P&VE Dr. Lllcas, R-P&VE-DIR Mr. Rellebraud, R-P&VE-DIR Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. __ I J copy Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Palaoro, Coerner_ R-P&VE-DIR R-P&VE-A

MS _-H MS-1 MS-IP MS-IPL MS-D CC-_P Mr. Wofford,

R-S (Moiled R-TO-DIR

(15)

R-AEI_O Dr. Geissler, Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr, Mr.

R-AERO-DIR

Jean, R-AERO-DIR Da_l, R-AERO-A (2) Bolderer, R-AERO-A Wilson, R-AERO-AT Reed, R-AERO-AU Rorn, R-AERO-D Deaton, R-AERO-DA Ryan, R-AERO-DD McDonough, Lindberg, Baker, McNair, TeaRue, R-AERO-DDS R-AERO-F (33) (3)

Stein, R-P&VE-A Kingsbtlry, R-P&VE-M Paul, R-P&VE-P (2) Thompson, R-P&VE-PA Fuhrmann, R-P&VE-PM Igou, R-P&VE-PPE MeKay, Black, R-P&VE-PPE R-P&VE-PPE (2)

CC-P

KS._CC Dr, Debus, DIR C_[. Bagnu!a, EDV Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr. Lt. Mr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr. (&) L_O Dr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr, Gruene, JA Poppel, Sparks, EDV-[ EDV-17

Nelson, R-P&VE-PPE Wood, R-P&VE-PT McAnelly, R-P&VE-PTD Plate, R-P&VE-PTF Kroll, R-P&VE-S Hunt, R-P&VE-S Blumrlch, R-P&VE-SA Garrett, R-P&VE-SE Katz, R-P&VE-SER Showers_ R-P&VE-SL Frederick, R-P&VE-SS Farro%_ R-P&VE-SV Gassaway, R-P&VE-SV Green, R-P&VE-SVM

Derby, EDV-162 Sendler, INS (4) Bruns, INS-I Collins, INS-4 JeZen, INS-13 (3) Col. Petrone, PPR Mothers, FPR-4 Body, PPR-B Knothe, TEC Lee, l-l-I/1R Gosset=, ULO-22

R-AERO-G R-AERO-P R-AERO-P

Cummings, R-AERO-T Vaughan , R-AERO-Y Scoggins, R-AERO-Y

O. E, Smith, R-AERO-Y Mr. Danlels, R-AERO-y R-ASTR Dr. Mr. Mr. Raeltssermann, Dig,s. , R-ASTR-A Fi, htner, R-ASTR-E

R-ASTR-DIR

Rlgell, JR Edwards, JC Fannin, JD Pickett, JF O'Hara, JF G. Williams,

MJ

378

EXTERNAL Headquarters_ Washington, Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Dr. Hi[burn. Shapley, Kerr, E Condon, Mueller, Matlona[ Aeronautics C. 20546 & Space Administration Office of the Asst. and Engineering Room 3EI065 The Pentagon D. C. Library 20301 Sec. of Defense for Research

D,

AAD ADA KR M

Capt. Mr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr. Dr. Mr. Mr.

Freitag, Disher, MiD H_mgardner, Adams. R Tisehler,

MC MiT

Washington, Attn: Tech Director

P_P

of Guided

Missiles Defense

Gen. Phillips, MA Capt. Rolcc_nb, MAD Mr. Willoughby, MAR Mr. Thompson, MAS (3 Mr. Mr. Mr. Day, MAT (5 White, MAT King_ MAT

copies>

Underwood, RVA Newell. S Garbarini, SE Johnson, SV (tO

copies)

Office of the Secretary of Room 3E131 The Pentagon Washington, D. C. 20301 Central Intelligence Agency

copies)

Mr. Kerr, U Mission Director: Capt. Middleton, Allen MO-3 (2 cpy)

Washington_ D. C. 20505 Attn: O_R/DD/Publications

(5

copies)

Director, National Moffett

Ames Research Aeronautics & Field, Oalifornia

Center: Dr. H, Julian Space Administration 94038

Director, National Security Ft. George Mead. Maryland grin: U. S. C3/TDL Atomic Energy

Agency 20755

Director, Flight Research Ceuter: Paul F. Bikle NaCional Aeronautics & Space Ackainistration P. O. Box 273 Edwards, Goddard National California Space Flight Aeronauti:s 93523 Center & Space 20771 Code 300

Commission.

Sandia Lab.

Corp.

University TechRica[ Administration P.O. Box Livermore, Attn: U. S.

of California Radiation Information Division BOg California Craig Energy Commission_ 94551

Greenbelt. Maryland Attn: Herman LaGow, John F, National Kennedy Attn:

Clovis Atomic

Sandia

Corp.

Kennedy Space Center Aeronautics & Space Space Center, Florida Technical Library, Mrs. L. B. Russell

Administration 32899 ASO 3R

Livermore Livermore, Attn:

Br, P. O. Box 969 California 94551 Library Technical Inf. Agency

Tech

Code

Commander. Arlington L. Thompson

Armed Services Hall Station

Director, National Langley Hampton, Director. National 2[000 Cleveland,

Langley Research Center: Floyd Aeronautics & Space Administration Station Virginia 23365

Arlington, Virginia 22212 Attn: TIFCR (Transmittal per Security CO._nanding Instruction) General Proving 88002 BS-OMTIO-TL U. C. for for Ground (3 (5

Cognizant

Act

copies)

Lewis Research Center: Dr. Abe Si[_ersteln Aeronautics & Space A chninistration Road 44135 Ohio

White Sands New Mexico Attn: Chief ORD of

Brookpark

copies) Force

Staff, O.

S. Air 20330 DCS/D DCS/D

Lewis Research Center National Aeronautics 21000 Brookpark Road

&

Space

Administration

The pentagon Washington, [ Cpy [ Cpy

marked marked

AFDRD AFDRD-E_

Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Attn: Robert Washko, Mail Stop 86-1 E. R. Jonash, Centaur Project Manned Spacecraft Center National Aeronautics & Space Houston, Texas Attn: Director: 77058 Dr. Robert

Mgr.

Coranander*in-Chief Strategic Air Co--and Offutt AFt, Nebraska Attn: Director of 6gli3 Missile Division

Administration R. Gilruth Code PM4 (3 copies) copies> Office)

Operations,

Robert

E. McKann,

CoPmmander Arnold Arnold Attn: Engi.eering Development Center Air Force Station, Tennessee Tech Library (2 copies) 37389

John D. Lobb, PM4 Charles M. Grant,

(3 copies) Code BMI (2

Wm. E. Davldson, R-L (MSFC M. J. Quinn, Code FS-2 Director, National Wallops Director, National 150 Pico Santa Wallops Station: R, L. Krieger Aeronautics & Space Administration Island. Virginia 23337 Office: Robert Administration

Liaison

Co._mander Air Force Edwards Attn: W. Kamm Cor_mander Air Force

Flight

Test

Center 93523

AFB, FTOTL

California

Western Operations Aeronautics & Space Blvd. California Technical

Missile

Development Base (SP_LT)

Center

Monica, and 5700

90406 Information Facility

Holloman Air Force New Mexico 88330 Attn: Tech Library

Scientific P. O. Box

Bethesda, Maryland 200[4 Attn: NASA Representative Jet Propulsion 4800 Oak Grove Pasadena, Attn: Laboratory Drive 9[[03

(S-AK/RKT)

(25

copies)

Commander, AF Missile Test Patrick AFB, Florida 32925 Attn: Technical Information MTGRY Coramander Det. Code; 11, 4th ETQFW AFB, Weather Florida Group 32925 (3 copies)

Center Intelligence Office.

California

Ir[ Newlan, Reports Group (Mail [11-122) H. Levy_ C(]dTA (Mail 179-203) (4 copies) Thomas A. Lance, (Mall 126-I16F)

Patrick

AFETR ( ETLLG- I) Patrick AF$, Florida

32925

379

gXT ERNAL

(CON(;) CbrTsler Medical Division (AFSC) Ohio !*5&33 CorporJtio_ /',O 70129 Smith (_ Space _,sp(_) Divisi'n SpA_( !)i_is!on

Headqtmrters B57Oth Aerospace U. S. Air Forte Wright Attn:

Mi_loud Operalions Dep:. 2712, Bldg. P.O. Be 2u2BO New Orle_[!s, La. Attn: Mr. Lero}

patterson All M. E. V<mgierke

F'nrco Base,

Systems Engineering Attn: SEPIR Wrigb_-Patternson '. Director . O. S. Naval Washington, Attn: Code Chief ._f Department R_.svarah D. C. 2(227

Gro:p AFB, Ohio

(RTD) Chrysler 45431 Huntsville 1312 N. H:mtsvil Alto: Corporation Operations Meridian St. in, H. M. G. Alabama 35807 D. Bader, Dept. 48OC (! _:,ples) L. Bell, Dept. 4830 (2 epics) Martin, Dept. 4820 (2 ,epics) Company, l:_. Plight Center 35812 (40 copies) Carp 1171_

Laboratory 2f)]_O

Naval of

Research Navy 2039B

Douglas Marshall

Aircraft Spa<e

Washingcon_ Atln: CO:6, Chief, Bt:reau

D. C. 465 oI o[ Navy D. C. RBSI, AD),

Bldg. 4481, H.ntsville, Attn: J. A.

Room 58 gl,!bama Tobias

Weapons 2D390 1 Cpv ] Cpy GruwJm_n Aircraft Engineerin_ Bethpa_>, L_mg Island, N. T. Alia: NASA Resident Ofiie_. John international Job,navy Business Design, Dept. Dr. NW Alabama E. Po,.pard Machine 22q 35808 (2 .oples)

Department 14ashimgton, I Cpy 1 Cpv Cormmander U. S. Naval

to to

to to

SP. REWI

Air

Mistily

Test 01041

Center

System

PF, int

Mtlgu ,

California RSIC (]

150 Sparkman Hunts_ ille, Attn: R.

AMSMI-RBLD; Bldg. 4:.84 Rt'dsttule

,epics) 1580g general Manager Mntars Carl)oration

Arsenal,

Al,2balna

Martin Space

Compzt_y Systems

Di_ !$ion 21205

AC Spark PI.g Division, Attn: Mr. Mar_in Caserio Vi_ Flint. President Mi<higan G_neral 48556

Ba!itmere. Attn: W. North Space

Maryland P. Sommezs

Ameri.an A_:_,tion & Information Division Blvd. 9C241 (I BC-B5 _opy)

qvs=emg

Aerospace 2400 East El Su:undo, kiln: D. Aur_spa_e

Corporation E1 Sv_m_<h_ C. Califc_rr_ia B_lkeman 90245

12214 S_ Lake_,ood rlownev, Calif_rnia Attn: W. T. W. g. Corpor*_tton

Schleich, Park, r el

(2)

C_rporation

Radio

America

Reliability Dept. P. O. Box 95OB5 Los Angelt.s, California Attn: l}on Ilerz_tein Be I !_ on_a, "_nc. llOO Sevemtoenth Washitlgtoe, kt_n: Miss The Boeing P. O. Box D, C. Scott, Demean [680 >

'_OOq5

Defense Electr_mic Prod.eta Data Systems Division 8300 Balboa Blvd. Van Nuys, California 9140b Rocketdynt 6633 Canoga Canoga k_tn: Park. T. L. g. N. D. C.

St.

N.

t4.

Avenue California Johnson Jolmson Revel (2 9110_ (2 copies) copies)

2(1036 I.ibrarian

Huntsville, Alabama 35807 Attn: 3. E. Scott, Mail Stop AF-67 K. II. Hagenau, Mail Stop AFt67 The Boeing P. O. Box Ne_ Attn: Orleans, Company 2qlD0 Louisiana 70129 Mail St_p LA-42 Mail Stop LP-36 Mail St_p LS-55 (3 _opies)

Foreign Technology Division FTD (TDBDP) Wright Patterson Air Force

Base,

Ohi.

:.542_

R. H. Nelson, S. Johnson, T. J. Kornell,