Copy No.

MSC -A-R-66 -3

POSTLAUNCH REPORT FOR APOLLO MISSION A-004

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER

HOUSTON, TEXAS
April 15, 1966
RfPROOUCfD BY

NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMAT ION SERVICE

U.S. OEPARlMENl OF COMMERCE
SPRINGFIELD. VA. 22161

PSOLLO SPACECRAFT FLIGH!I' HISTORY Mission PA- 1 Spacec r a f t BP- 5 Description F i r s t pad a t o r t Launch date Nov. 7, 1963 Launch s i t e
White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex.

A-001

BP- 12

Transonic abort

M y 13, 1964 a

White Sands Missile Range,

PT. Mex.

AS-101 AS-102

BP-13
BF-15
BP- 23

Nominal launch and May 28, 1964 e x i t environment

N o m i n a l launch and

Cape Kennedy, Fla

Sept. 18,

1964 Cape Kennedy,

e x i t environment

ma.

A-002

Maximum dynamic pressure abort Micrometeoroid experiment Low-altitude abort (planned higha l t i t u d e abort) Micrometeoroid experiment and service module RCS launch environment Second pad abort

Dec. 8, 1964

White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex.

Cape Kennedy,
Fla

AS-103 A-003

BP- 15
BP- 22

White Sands Missile Range, M Mex. .

k Y 25, 1955

AS-104

BP-26

Cape Kennedy,
Fla.

PA- 2

BP- 2 3 ~

June 29, 1965

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

AS-

105

BP- 9A

Micrometeoroid experiment and service module R S lamch C environment Power-on tumbling boundary abort

J d Y 30, 1965

Fla

A-004

sc-002

Jan. 20, 1966

White Sands Nissile Range, N. Mex.

N A S A - 5 - 4 6 - 3 6 5 7 APR 15

Lift-off, Apollo Mission 14-004.

MSC-A-X-66-3

P0S"LMBCE f(EpOFO? FOR A P O m MISSIOM A-004

(SPACECRCIFP 002)

Mission Operations Division

NA!Y?IONAL mONAUl?ICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

NANNED SPACIERAFT CENTER

BOUSTON, TEXAS

April 15, 1966

Unless otherwise specified, zero t i m e ( T - 0 ) for a l l d a t a i n t h i s report i s referenced t o 4-inch motion of the t e s t vehicle.

ii

CONTENTS Section Page

....................... FIGURES . ..
TABUS

v vii

ABBWVLCITIONS AND SYMBOLS

10 .
2.0

3.0

................... ...................... MISSTONSWRY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TEST VEHICLE DESCRIPTION ..... ........

Abbreviations Symbols

xxii xxiv

1-1
2-1

31 . 3.2 3.3
4.0

............. ............. MISSION TRAJECTORY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.1 Real-Time Flight Dynamics Control . . . . . . . 4 2 Comparison of Flight with Preflight and .
Postflight Simulations

Spacecraft . . . . . Launch Vehicle MESS Characteristics

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

3-1 3-1 3-8

5-10

4-1

4-1
4-6

...........

5.0

SPACECRAFT PERFORMANCE
5-1

5.2
5.3

5.4 5.5 5.6

5.7

5.8 5.9

5.10 5.11

5-12

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 Aerodynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 Structural Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-8 Structural Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-32 Boost Protective Cover . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-96 Me chznical Subsystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-101 Launch-Escape Propulsion Subystem . . . . . . 5-117 Pyrotechnic Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-121 Earth Landing and Impact Attenuation . . . . . 5-129 Crew Station Acoustics . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-150 Sequential Subsystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 1 5 Electrical Power Subsystem . . . . . . . . . . 5-159 Spacecrait Instrumentation and Communication Subsystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-168
Relief Valve

5.13 Environmental Control Subsystem Cabin Pressure

5.14 Crew Windows

................ .................
iii

5-176 5-180

Section

Page U N X VEH1CI;E FTRFORMANCE UC .

6.c

6.1 6-1 6.2 6-6 6.3 6-7 6.4 6-20 6.5. 6-22 6.6 6-23 6.7 Launch Vehicle Instrumentation Subsystem . . . 6-24 6.8 Radio-Frequency Command Subsystem . . . . . . . 6-27 6.9 Range Safety Subsystem . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-29 6.10 Launch Vehicle Ignition . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-31
7-0
RECOVERY OPERATIONS
'. 71 7.2

............. Pro-pdsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Launch Vehicle Pyrotechnic Devices . . . . . . Attitude Control Subsysten . . . . . . . . . . Launch yehicle Aerodynamics . . . . . . . . . . Launch Vehicle Structures . . . . . . . . . . . Launch Vehicle Electrical Fmer Subsystem . . .

6-1

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

7-1

8.0

9.0
1. 00

11.0

........ ........ 7.3 ........ 7.4 ........ POSTFLIGHT TESTIDJG AND ADJOMALY S m W Y . . . . . . . 8.1 Postflight Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 Summary of Wlfunctions and Deviations . . . . CONCLUDING REMARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AWEXDIXA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1 Test Vehicle History . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 Launch Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.3 Real-Time Data System . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4 Range Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.5 Weather Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . Mission A-004 Test Objectives . . . . . . . . . 11
11.2 Test Vehicle Measurements
REFEXNCES

Command Module . . . . hunch-Escape Subsystem Service Module . . . . Launch Vehicle . . . .

7-3
7-8

7-10

7-11
8-1 8-1 8-2
9-1
10-1

10-1

10-9
10-16
10-18 10-32

11-1
1 11

1. 20

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

11-3
12-1

iv

TABUS Table

Page

3.3-1
4.2-1

MASS PROPERTIES FOR MISSION A-004

MISSION A - 0 0 4 TRAJECTORY

.......... PARAME3'ERS . . .. ...

STRE:SSES,

3-11

4-8

5.2-1
5.2-11
5.2-111

LAUNCH-ESCAPE SUBSYSTEM TOWER IXG LOADS, MISSION A - 0 0 4

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

5-13
5-16 5-19
3-20

COMMAND MODULE SUBSTRUCTURE

MISSION A-004

SERVICE MODUIX RADIAL BEAM TRUSS AND TENSION TIE STRESSES DURING MISSION A-004

5.2-IV 5.2-v
5.2-VI

MISSION A-004 FLIGET TRAJECTORY P~~RAMETERS FOR INTERFACE LOAD CONDITIONS . . .

COMPARISON OF LES-CM INTERFACE

DATA

. . . .... ~ l o f i ~ s. . . . . . . .

5-21
5-22

F COMPARISON O CM-SM INTEWACE LOADS FROM STRAIN

FLIGET PARABETERS

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

5.3-1 5.6-1
3.7-1

LOCATIONS O STRAIN GAGES ON bEBS O SERVICE F F M0DUL;CRADIALBEAMS *

- -. -

3-41

MOTOR PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

5.8-1
5.8-11 5.14-1
10-1-1

...... .... . PYROTECHNIC DEVICES FOR MISSION A-004 (SC-002) . . . . M T H IANDING SUBSYSTEM EVENTS FOR MISSION A - 0 0 4 . . . . . . ... . ..

5-118
7-123

5-133
5-134
5-182
10-3

APOLLO MISSIOI\T A - 0 0 4 F I E L D MEASUREMENTS O IMF'ACT F STRUT STROKES .

....

ELEMENTS FOUND I N T;ES ENGINE DEPOSITS ON THE SC-002 LEFT-HAND RENDEZVOUS WINDOW OPERA_TIONAL

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

9

CHECKOUT PROCEDURES FOR MISSION A - 0 0 4

10.1-11 PROBIXM HISTORY O LAUNCH VEHICIE F

10.2-1

10-6
*

MAJOR TASKS OF SC-002 SPACECRAF CLOSE-OVT

1-1 01

Takle

Fage
RANGE EVALUATION OF FZLM COPIED FOR i C G '
RANGE ZVAIUATION OF FILM NOT

10.4-1 10.4-11

...... COPIED FOR MSC . . . .

10-21

10-24
10-28

10.4-111 FILM EYAIUATION O BEST MOTION PICTURE COVERAGE F F0RE"S.. 11.2-1 11-2-11 11.2-111

................... TEST VEH1CL;E I'WLSTJREMENTLIST .. .- ..... LAUNCH vEHICL;E MEYSUREMENT LIST, AIRSONYE ..... LAUNCH V E H I C U MEASUREMENT LIST, LAPIDLINE . ....
a

11-4
11-15

11-17

vi

FIGURES
Figure Lift-off, Apollo Eilission A-004
2.0-1
2.0-2

Page

...........

-. j

Test vehicle f o r Apollo Mission A-004 prior to Lamch (11-30-65)

3.1-1

3.1-2

................. Sequence of major events, Apol-lo Mission A-004 . . . Test vehicle configuration, Apollo Mission A-004 . . Launch-escape vehicle reference s t a t i o n s and centerof-gravity locations, Ap01l0 Mission A-004 . . . .
Launch-escape vehicle center-of-gravity and thrust vector location, Apollo K.ssion A-004 Spacecraft axis system for orientation and motion, Apollo Mission A-004 Paint patterns, Apollo Mission A-004

2-2
2-3

3-2

3-3

3.1-3

.......

3-4
3-5

3.1-4

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

3.1-5

(a) Command m o d u l e and boost protective cover (b) Launch-escape motor (c) Service module
3.2-1

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

3-6

3-7
3-7

Little Joe I1 launch vehicle U-31-3, Apollo

Mission A-004

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

3-9
3-12

393-3. 3-94
3.3-3

Apollo Mission A-004 tirnf? history of launch-escape vehicle weight vehicle center-of-gravity XA station locatim

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

Apollo Miss ion A-004 time history of launch-escape

3-13

Apollo Mission A-004 time history of launch-escape vehicle center-of-gravity Y-axis location
Apollo Mission A-004 time history of launch-escape

.....

3-14 3-15
3-16

3.3-4
3 3-5 9

vehicle center-of-gravity Z-axis location

.....

Apollo Mission A-004 Lime history of launch-escape vehicle r o l l moment of inertia

vi9

..........

Page
Apollo Mission A-004 time h i s t o r y of launch-escape vehicle pitch and y a w moments of i n e r t i a

.....

3-17

4.1-1

Apollo Mission A-0&

RTDS plotboard displays

4-2

( a ) P1aZ;board A (b) Plotboard I3 ( c ) Plotboard c

(a) Plotboard
4.2-1
4.2-2

I)

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

4-3 4-4
4-5

Apollo LNission A-004 RTDS plotboard B with T-2 hour weather

A l t i - k d e plotted against time, Apollo Mission A-004.

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

4-11
4-12

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

4.2-3
4.2-4

&ch number p l o t t e d a g a i n s t t i m e , Apollo Pdssion

A-004..

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

plotted agalnst t i m e , Apollo

4-13

Dynamic pressure plotted against t i m e , Apollo Mission A-004

4-14
4-17
4-16

4.2-5
4.2-6

Tangential velocity p l o t t e d against time, Apollo Mission A-004

Flight-path a ; e nl Mission A-004

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

4.2-7
4.2-8
5.0-1
5.0-2

Altitude plotted against t o t a l range, Apollo

.................. Ground track, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . .

Mission A-004.

4-17
4-18
5-2

W R abort points i n relatiox! t o Saturn boost S M flighk envelope

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

Test region and abort points, Apollo Mlssion A-004..

.....................
...................
........
viii

5-3

5.1-1

Comparison of actual and predicted launch-escape vehicle spacecraft r o t a t i o n a l r a t e s f o r Apallo

MXssion A-004

5-6
5-7

5.1-2

Comparison of actml and predicted angular rate envelope, Apollo Mission A-004

Figure 5.2-1 Launch-escape subsystem structure, Apollo Mission A-004

Page

5.2-2

5* 2-3
5.2-4
59 2-5

................... Command module structure, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . Service module construction, Apollo Mission A-004 . .
Quad D prototype SM RCS engine chamber and nozzle extension, Apollo Mission A-004
U S - C M interface total bending moment calculated

5-23
5-24 5-25
5-26

..........

from tower leg strain gage dzta, Apollo Mission A-004..

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

5-27

5.2-6

LES-CM interface total axial force calculated from tower leg strain gage data, Apollo Mission A-004..
Maximum conical surface plume impingement pressure and aft equipment compartment; pressure measured on CM, Apollo Mission A-004 Conical surface plume impingement pressures on Mission A-004 (a) Upwind surface in pitch plane (b) Yaw plane surface (c) Downwina surface in pitch plane

5-28

5-2-7

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

5-29

5- 2-8

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

5-50 5-30
5-30

5.2-9

CM-SM interface (station XAIOIO) Block

I limit design loaa capabilities envelope and maximum load conditions; Apollo Mission A-004

5-31

5*3-1

rms time history of CM X-axis acceleration, Apollo Mission A-004

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

5-42
5-45

5* 3-2

X-axis acceleration spectral density during staging, Apollo Mission A-004

...............
.............
sec-

5* 3-3

Z-axis acceleration spectral density at Ti-51.5 ond, Apollo Mission A-004

5-44

5.3-4

rms time history of Z-axis tower acceleration, Apollo Mission A-004

(a) -10 to 130 seconds

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

5-45

Figure

Page Continued
(b)

5.3-4

130 to

270 seconds

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

5-46
5-47
5-48

5.3-5
59 3-6

Z-axis acceleration spectral density at lift-off, Apollo Mission A-004 Effect of RCS protuberance of SM fluctuating pressure levels as shown by wicd tunnel data Comparison of SC-002 and BP-13 fluctuating pressure in vicinity of RCS engines on Apollo Missions A-004 and A-101 Comparison of SC-002 and BP-15 fluctuating
pressure environments on Apollo Missions

...

53-7

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

5-49

5-3-8

A-004 and A-102

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

5-50
5-51 3-52

5.3-9
3-3-10

Service module fluctuating pressure time history i04 for RCS panel, Apollo Mission f - 0 Service module s h e l l fluctuating pressure time history, Apollo Mission A-004

...........

3-3-11
5-3-12

Comparison of overall sound pressure levels (dB) on %he service module, Apollo Mission A-004

....

5-53

Comparison of angle of attack for Apollo Missions A-004 (SC-002), A-101 (BP-l3), and A-102 (BP-13). Comparison of pressure spectral density for similar locztions on the SM for Apollo Missions A-004 (SC-002) and A-102 (BP-15) SM RCS panel fluctuating pressure spectral density during transonic flight, Apollo Mission A-004 SM fluctuating pressure spectral density during transonic flight, Apollo Mission -4-004

. 3-54
5-55 5-56

5-3-13

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

......
..

5-57
5-58

rms "ume history of CSM fairing vibration, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure

Page rms time history of SM vibration. Apollo Mission

A-004

5-3-17

(a) Measurement SA09GD (b) Measurement SA0945D ( c ) Measurement SAO94p (a) Measurement SAO95OD (e) Measurement SAO946D ( f) Measurement SA0948D (g) Measurement SAO949D (h) Measurement SAO952D

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

......

5-59 5-59 5-60 5-60 5-61 5-62 5-63 5-64 5-65

5.3-18 5.349

CSM fairing acceleration spectral density during transonic flight. Apollo Mission A-004 SM shell acceleration spectral density during transonic flight. Apollo Mission A-004 (a) Measurement SAO944D (b) Measurement SA0945D (c) Measurement SA0946D (a) Measurement SA0947D (e) Measurement SA0948D ( f) Measurement SAO949D ( g ) Measurement S O 5 D A 9O (h) Measurement SA0952D

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

5-66 5-67 5-68 5-69 5-70 5-71 5-72 5-73

5-74

5.3-20 5.3-21 33-22 503-23

5.3-24

SM shell acceleration spectra:L density at 1 f . f . itof

A p o l l o Mission A-004

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

r s time history of radial beam circumferential m vibration. Apollo Mission A-004

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

5-75 5-76 5-77 5-78

Radial beam acceleration spectral density during transonic flight. Apollo Mission A-004 Radial beam acceleration spectral density during supersonic flight. Apollo Mbsion A-004

rms time history of aft bulkhead vibration. Apollo Mission A-004

Mission A-004

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

5.345

A f t bulkhead acceleration spectral density. Apollo

...................
xi

5-79

Figure 5.3-26

Page

rm t i m e h i s t o r y of forwara bulkhead vibration,

Apollo Mission A-004

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

5-80

5.3-27

Forward bulkhead acceleration s p e c t r a l density, Apollo Mission A-004 (a) (b) Lift-off Daring transonic f l i g h t

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

5-81 5-82
5-83

5.3-28

ms time hisbory of R tank shelf vibration,

2 tank shelf vibration, Apollo Mission A-004

....

5.3-29

H2 tank shelf acceleration s p e c t r a l density,

Apollo Mission A-004

(a) L i f t - o f f (b) During transonic f l i g h t

5.3-30 Location of

.................... ............ S RCS quad D, Apollo Mission Ai-004 . . . M

...

5-84 5-85
5-86

5.3-31
5.3-32

Location of accelerometers on SM RCS panel and p r o p e l l m t tank bracket, Apollo Mission Pi-004 X-axis vibration measured on t h e oxidizer tank support bracket of quad D, S RCS, Apollo M Mission A-004

5-87

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

5-88

5.3-33

D i g i t a l power s p e c t r a l density of X-axis vibration measured from Ti-33.008 to ~ + 3 6 . Olk seconds on t h e oxidizer tank suppod bracket of quad D, SM RCS, Apollo Mission -4-004 Radisl vibration mezsured i n the counterclockwise roll engine nozzle of quad D, S RCS, Apollo M

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

5-89

5.3-34

Mission A-001:

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

5-90

5.3-35

D i g i t a l power s p e c t r a l density of r a d i a l vibration measured from Ti-50.01k t o T-t.53.010 seconds i n t h e counterclockwise roll engine nozzle of quad D, SM 9CS, Apollo Mission A-004 Location of r a d i a l beams i n service module f o r fi~ollo Mission A-004

...........

5-91
5-92

53-56

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

xii

Figure

5-3-37

Comparison of rms strain history from typical radial beam web panel on SC-002 (Apollo Mission A-004) with strain from ground acoustic test of

sc-007 5.3-38

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

5-93

Comparison 'between BP-l3 measured and SC-002 calculated CM external acoustic environment on Apollo Missions A-101 and A-004 rms time history of CM heat shield vibration, Apollo Mission A-004

........

5-94 5-95 5-99

5.3-39 5.4-1 5.4-2

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

Boost protective cover assembly and details,

Apollo Mission A-004

Mission A-004 soft boost protective cover static pressmes (a) TI-25 seconds (b) T-I-36seconds ( c ) T-I-73 seconds

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

5-100
5-100

5-103

3-54 5.5-2
5.5-3

Canard deployment time history, Apollo Mission

A-004

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

5-10?

Canard CY link load time history during deployment, Apollo Mission A-004

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

5-106
5-107
5-108

Canard -Y link load time history during deployment, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Canard +Y link'load t i m e history, Apollo Mission

5.5-4 5.5-5 5.54 5.5-7

A-004..

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

Canard -Y link load time history, Apollo Mission A-004.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Uprighting system canisters and VHE' recovery aids, Apollo Mission A-004 Uprighting system canisters and recovery aids, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . .

5-109 5-110 5-111

5-112

5.5-8

Sea dye canister and flashing light recovery aids, Apollo Mission A-004 xiii

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

Figure

Page Inner surface of side ablative hatch and latching mechanism, Apollo Missioxr A-004 Latched side pressure hatch at recovery, Apollo Mission A-004

5.5-9 5.5-10 5.5-33 5.5-32 5.6-1

5- 6-2

..........

5-U3

.......

: e . . . . . . . . . .

5-114
5-115

Unlatched side pressure hatch after recovery, Apollo Mission A-004

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

...

Side pressure hatch postflight inspection, kpollo Wlssion A-004 . Launch-escape motor vacuum thrust time history, Apollo Mission A-004 .

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

5-116 5-119 5-120 5-126 5-127

t

Pitch-control motor vacuum thrust time history, Apollo Mission A-004 .. .

CM-SM umbilical disconnect, Apollo

5.7-1 5.7-2
5.7-3

... Mission A-004 . .

. ......

CM-SM umbilical separation system components on

Apollo Mission A-004

.....

Apollo electrical circuit interrupter

........

-5-128 5-135 5-136 5-137 5-138 5-139

5.8-1 5.8-2 5.8-3 5.8-4 5.8-5 5.8-6 5.8-7

Drogue parachute subsystem (Block I , Apollo ) Mission A-004 ..

..

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

Pilot parachute subsystem (Block I) except for metal cover, Apollo Mission A-004 . . .

. ....

Vehicle harness attach fitting and vehicle harness disconnect, Apollo Mission A-004 . . , Main parachute harness showing disconnect cut on Apollo Mission A-004 .. . ... .. .

... ... .. ..

No. 2 main parachute attach fitting and disconnect,

Apollo Mission A-004

. .. .... .... .. ..
...... .......
EO.

Parachute (-Z)quadrant showing drogue mortar Apollo Mission A-004 ..

1 ,

=j-140

Parachute (-Z)quadrant showing drogue mortar no. 2, Apollo Mission A-004 . . xiv

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

5-141

Figure

Page thin parachute

5.8-8 5.8-9 5.8-10 5.8-11 5-8-32

A-004A-004..
%in

- .. . . .

( i - ~ )quadrant, A~OZLO Mission

- .. . . . . . . - .
,

5-142

Main parachute (4-2) quadrant, Apollo Mission

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

....

5-143
5-1.U.

parachute (-Y) quadrant, Apollo Mission quadrant, Apollo

A-004..

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

Split retention strip (+Z) Mission A-004

5-147

Command module attenuation subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004 (a) External configuration (b) Internal configuration

5-146

5-147

5.8-13

Impact attenuation struts, Apollo Mission A-004 predicted load-stroke curves (a) X-x foot strut X-X head strut (c) Z-Z strut (a) Y-Y Strut
(b)

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

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

5-148
5-14-8

5-149 5-149 5-152

5.9-1
5.9-2

Microphone mountings on equipment platform at the crew station, Apollo Mission A-004

Overall sound,pressure level time history of crew station acoustics CKOO3FjY, Apollo Mission A-004

..

5-153

59-3

Spectrum sound pressure levels (SPL per cycle) for CKOO35Y at ~1-38.8(mch 1 , TI-41. 5 (max q) , and ) Wn.3 (prior to abort) for Apollo Mission

A-004.

- . ..

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

5-3-54

5.9-4

Spectrum sound pressure levels (SPL per cycle) for CXD035Y at T+74.3, 75.6, 76.6, and 78.8 sec during abort for Apollo Mission A-004

5-155

5.10-1

Relation of events controlled l~ysequential subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004 5-157

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

Figure

5.10-2

Blown fuses and f u s i s t o r locations i n mission sequencer and ELS sequence c o n t r o l l e r for Apollo Mission A-004

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

5-158
5-161

5.11-1
5.11-2

E l e c t r i c a l power subsystem block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004 .

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

Time h i s t o r i e s of dc current and m a i r t bus voltage, Apollo Mission A-004 Time h i s t o r i e s of l o g i c bus A and B voltage, Apollo Mission A-004 . .

5-162

5.11-3

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

5-163

5.11-4

Time h i s t o r i e s o f pyro bus A and B voltages, Apollo Mission A-004 (a) (b)
-20 t o 260 seconds 2 0 t o 460 seconds 6

5.11-5

Pyro bus A voltage,

5.11-6
5.12-1
5.12-2

Pyro bus B voltage,

............ . ............... Apollo Mission A-OOk . . . . . . Apollo Ydssion A-004 . . . . . . .. .

.

5-164 5-165
5-166
5-167

Telemetry subsystem block diagram, Apollo Mission

A-004..

..

......-.

5-17-1
5-172
5-173

Onboard tape recorder F block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004

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

5.12-3

Onboard tape recorder H block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004 . . Scimitar

5.12-4
5.2-5

......... .... .... antenna damage, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . .. ............ ...

5-174
5-1-75

Tower ard CM camera i n s t a l l a t i o n , Apollo Mission A-004..

ECS cabin pressure r e l i e f valve, Apollo Mission

5.13-1
5.13-2

A-004..

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

5-178
5-179

SC-002 cormnand modvle i n t e r i o r pressure p r o f i l e s ,

Apollo Missior? A-004

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

5.14-1

Command module after landing shcwing general condition of windows, Apollo PlIission A-004

5-183

xvi

Figure

Page Left and right rendezvous and docking windows after landing, Apollo Mission A-004 Left and right crew windows after landing, Apollo Mission A-004 First-stage Algol motor no. 2 flight thrust time history, Apollo Mission A-OC4

5.14-2 5.14-3 6.1-1

6.1-2

...........

5-184
5-185
6-2

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

First-stage Algol motor no. 5 flight thrust time history, Apollo Mission A-004

...........
time history,

6-3
6-4

6.1-3 6.1-4 6.3-1 6.3-2 6.3-3 6.3-4

Second-stage Algol motor no. 1 thrust time history, . Apollo Mission A-004 Second-stage A l g o l motor no. Apollo Mission A-004

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

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

4-thrust

6-5
6-9

Launch-vehicle attitude contrcil subsystem block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004

...........

Launch-vehicle pitch attitude plotted against time, Apollo Mission A-004 Time history of launch-vehicle pitch rate, Apollo Mission A-004

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

6-10 6-11 6-12

6-13

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

Time history of launch-vehicle yaw and r o l l rates, Apollo Mission A-004

Apollo Mission

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

Time history of launch-vehicle roll s n yaw attitudes, td

A-004

Time history of launch-vehicle swn of pitch attitude g y r o plus pitch programer, llpollo Mission A-004

..

6-14 6-15 6-16

6.3-7 6.3-8
6.3-9

Time history of position of launch-vehicle elevons no. 1 and 4, Apollo Mission A-004

.........

Time history of position of launch-vehicle elevons no. 2 and 3, Apollo Mission A-004

.........

Time history of launch-vehicle hydraulic pressures,

Apollo Mission A-004

(a) Elevon no. 1

..................
xvii

6-17

a
Figure Page Continued
(1) Elewnno. 2 . (c) Elevon no. 3 (a) Elevon no. 4

6.3-9

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

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

6-17
6-18 6-18

6.3-10 6.4-1

Time history of launch-vehicle electrical power, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of estimated power-on drag with two Algol motors with actual drag coefficients for various Mach numbers, Apollo Mssion A-004 . . Launch-vehicle instrymentation subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004 Launch-vehicle landline instrumentation block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . .

6-19

6-21

6.7-1
6.7-2

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

6-25 6-26 6-28 6-30

6.8-1

Launch-vehicle RF comand subsystem block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Range safety subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004 Apollo Mission A-004 launch-vehicle ignition subsystem. Typical for each motor
9

. ....

(a) F i r s t stage ignition system (b) Second stage ignition system

..........

..........

6-32 6-33 7-2

7.0-1
7.1-1

Location of recovered components, Apollo Mission A-004..

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

Apollo Mission A-004 command module after landing, showing cork ablator broker, from impact . . . . . Lifting Apollo Mission A-004 command module by the recovery loop Lifting Apollo Mission A-004 command module by alternate three-point sling Apollo Mission A-004 ZFS Apollo Mission impact area

7-5
7-6

712 .-

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

7.1-3
721 .-

............ impact area . . . . . . . .

Joe I1 launch vehicle

7-7 7-9
7-12

7.14

....................
xviii

A-004 Little

Figure
10.2-1

Page Final preparation and countdown schedule, Apollo Mission A-004 Final preparation and countdown schedule of operation no. 1 Apollo Mission A-004 ,

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

10-12
10-13

10.2-2

io.2-3
10.2-4

Final preparation and countdown schedule of operation no. 2 , Apollo Mission A-004 . . Final preparation and countdown schedule of operation no. 3 , Apollo Mission A-004

10-14
10-15

.......

1.041
10.4-2
io.5-1

Telemetry, meteorological, and radar station locations, Apollo Mission A-004

.......... Camera locations, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . .

10-30

10-31

Apollo Mission A-004 atmospheric pressure compared with WSMR December standard. (From Small Missile Range rawinsonde at 8:20 a.m. in. s. t January 2 ) . 0.

10-33

io.5-2

Apollo Mission A-004 atmospheric temperature compared with WSMR December standard. (From Small Missile Range rawinsonde at 8 20 a.m. m. s. t January 2 ) . 10-34 : . 0. Apollo Mission A-004 atmospheric humidity compared with WSMR December standard. (From Small Yissile Range rawinsonde at 8:20 a.m. m s. t. January 2 ) . 0. Apollo Mission A-004 atmospheric density compared with WSMR December standard. (From Small Missile Range rawinsonde at 8 2 a.m. m s. t January 2 ) :0 . . 0. Apollo Mission A-004 launch time wind direction, S R Ascension 1 . (From Small Missile Range M 6 rawinsonde at 8: 0 a m m s. t. January 2 ) 2 .. . 0.

10.5-3

10-35

10.5-4

10-36

10.5-5

....
..

10-37

io.5-6

Apollo Mission A-004 launch time wind magnitude, S R Ascension 1 . (From Small Missile Range M 6 rawinsonde at 8 2 a m m s.t January 2 ) . . : 0 .. . 0.
LES motor and &-ball measurement locations,

10-38
11-18

11.2-1

Apollo Mission A-004

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

11.2-2

Apollo Mission A-004 canard strain and deployment instrumentation

XiX

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

1-9 11

Figure
11.2-3

?age Launch-escape tower measurement locations, Apollo Mission A-004

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

11-20

11.2-4

Conical surface pressures, Apollo Mission A-004. (Location of BPC surface and BPC-CM Interface pressure measurements)

11-21

11.2-5

Command module structural measurement locations, Apollo Mission A-004

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

11-22

11.2-6

Forward sidewall longeron 4 command module inner structure - forward sidewall, Apollo Mission A-004..

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

11-23
11-24

11.2-7
11.2-8

Strain gage locations on longeron 8 command rnod.de, Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 Strain gage locations on longeron 2 command module, Apollo Mission A-004 Strain gage locations on right-hand beam of main hatch, Apollo Mission A-004 Apollo MXssion A-004

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

11-27
11-26

11.2-9

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

11.2-10 Command module heat flux measurement locations,

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

11-27
11-28

11.2-11 Tenperature and strain measurements on main heat shield, Apollo Mssion A-004
11.2-12
11.2-13

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

Base pressure measurement locations, Apollo Missiol? A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11-29
11-30

Strain gage locations on CM-SM tension-tie bel-ts 2, 4, and 6, Apollo Mission A-OC4 . . . . . . . . . Strain gage locations CM-SM compression struclure, Apollo Mission A-004 Strain gage locations, beam 2, service module, Apollo Mission A-004 . . . . . . . . . . . . Strain gage location, beam Apollo Mission A-004

1.-4 121
11.2-15

...............
...
4, service

11-51
11-52

11.2-16

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

module,

11-33

Figure
11.2-17

%e

Strain gage and vibration measurement location, beam service module, Apollo Mission A-004

>,

...

11-34
11-35

11.2-18

Vibration measurements, service module, Apollo Mission A-004

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

11.2-19 11.2-20

Service module vibration and fluctuating pressure measurement locations, Apollo Mission A-004

11-36

Service module temperature and strain gage locations, Apollo Mission A-004 11-37

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

xxi

AJaBRFvIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

Abbreviations
ASD

Apollo standard detonator Boilerplate boost protective cover customer acceptance readiness review Computer Augmented Trajectory Simulator comaand module environmental control subsystem emergency detection subsystem earth landing subsystem earth landing subsystem sequence controller electrical power subsystem
.

BP

BPC

CARR CATS CM
ECS

EDS
ELS

EUSC
EPS

FM
FRR

frequency modulation Flight Readiness Review

ground support equipment

GSE

IC
N S

hunch Complex launch-escape subsystem launch-escape vehicle

U V

w
LV

I1

Little Joe I1 launch vehicle measurement acceptance evaluation

ME A

MF D

mild detonator fuse

xxii

MSC

Manned Spacecraft Center mean sea l e v e l mountain standard time operational checkout procedure
pad a b o r t

m. s. 1 . m. s t. .
OP C
PA

PAT

pre-delivery acceptance test pulse code modulation pulse duration modulation reaction control subsystem radio frequency root mean square real-time data system spacecraft service module

E M
PDM RCS

RF Ells

ECDS

sc
SM
S R M
SPL

Small Nissile Range

sound pressure level

SPS VAB

secondary propulsion subsystem Vehicle Assembly Building very high frequency White Sands Missile Range White Sands Test F a c i l i t y

VHF

WSMR
WSTF

xxiii

g r a v i t a t i o n a l constant
I x X

moment of i n e r t i a about X - a x i s
moment of i n e r t i a about Y-axis
moment of i n e r t i a about Z-axis Mach number dynzmic pressure, l b / n
2

Y Y

IZ Z M

elapsed t i m e f r o m lift-off, see

X
xi

longitudinal axis longitudinal location, referenced to o v e r a l l spacecraft, in.

xC

longitudinal location, referenced t o command module, in. longitudinal location, referenced to hunch-escape su-bsystern, in.

Y
Z

axis normal to the X and Z axes

axis normal to the X and Y a x i s

angle of attack, aeg

xxiv

1-1

10 .

rnSSIOPT

sway

Apollo spacecraft 002 was launched on Jarzuary 20, 1966, from the White Sands Missile Range, Nw Mexico, a t 8 l a.m. m.s.t. e :7 a f t e r several postponements because of launch vehicle technical d i f f i c u l t i e s and delays because of adverse weather conditions. The mission was completed successfuJ.ly.
Apollo spacecraft 002 was of a Block I: type configuration. Among the differences between the spacecraft 002 configuration and Block I were t h e change i n location of t h e center of g r a v i t y of the launch-escape vehicle and the change i n the t h r u s t vector of the launch-escape subsystem. These changes were made t o assure the a t t a i n i n g of t h e reqaired condition of power-on tumbling after abort i n i t i a t i o n ,

The L i t t l e Joe I1 two-stage, fin-stabilized, autopilot-controlled launch vehicle performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . Iirst- and second-stage ign i t i o n occurred a s planned. T h i s was the first completed mission of a two-stage L i t t l e Joe I1 launch vehicle, and t h e f i r s t second-stage application of Algol motors.
The pitch-up maneuver was i n i t i a t e d a%; T-I-70.8 seconds when the test region of a l t i t u d e and velocity w s indicated by the real-time data sysa tem. A t Ti-73.7 seconds, t h e planned abort w a s automatically i n i t i a t e d .

Dynamic loads and s t r u c t u r a l response data for the service module s t r u c t u r e were obtained during t h e launch phase and the pitch-uTj maneuver.
Command module - service module separation a t abort i n i t i a t i o n was s a t i s f a c t o r y although t h e main heat s h i e l d suffered l i m i t e d blast damage from the pyrotechnic cutting of t h e tension ties. The launchescape and pitch-control motors performed as required. The boost protective cover remained i n t a c t through t h e launch phase and pitch-up maneuver as required, w i t h the soft cover Sreaking up during t h e f i r s t tuqble after abort i n i t i a t i o n , as expected.

The power-on tumbling boundary abort demonstrated the s a t i s f a c t o r y performance of the launch-escape vehicle and a l s o the s t r u c t u r a l integr i t y of the launch-escape vehicle airframe structure,
A t T+-74.7 seconds, the single a c t i v e scimitar antenna f a i l e d , and transmission of telemetry signals from the spacecraft ceased f o r t h e r e s t of t h e mission.

A onboard camera, photographing the condition of the l e f t s i d e n rendezvous window from w i t h i n the command inodule, operated as planned

1-2

from Ti-70 seconds to T+240 seconds. Film coverage indicated the time at which deposits on the window occurred. The maximum differential pressure of 7.1 psid, indicated by measurements across the command moduZe exterior wall structure (11.1& 1 5 psid . was desired), was attained at Ti-73.2 seconds during the first tumble and lawch-escape motor bum. Maximum plume impingement pressure on the cornmand module was about 8 percent of predicted values, and the aft c r 0 on partment pressure was about 1 5 psi higher than predicted. Cabin pres. sure measurements during the flight and postflight testing and inspection results indicated that excessive leakage past the inner hatch seal had occurred during the flight because of the manner in which the hatch was installed before launch, , During the power-on abort phase, pitch and yaw rates reached peak 6 values of 1 0 deg/sec and roll rates, a peak value of -70 deg/sec. After launch-escape motor burnout, tumbling continued until canard seconds. After the canards had deployed, deployment occurred at ~i-84.8 the launch-escape vehicle quickly stabilized to a main heat shield forward attitude. Both the high tumbling rates and quick stabilization of the launch-escape vehicle were partially a result of the mass characteristics peculiar to spacecraft 002. The sequential subsystem performed as planned. The launch-escape 0 subsystem was jettisoned at Ti-193.7 seconds and approximately 23 0 0 ft m.s.l., drogue mortars were fired at ~ i 1 9 5 . 8seconds, drogue risers were disconnected and main parachute pilot mortars were fired at Ti-237.6 seconds and 1 450 ft m s. 1 0 . . At Ti-2O9.5 seconds onboard recorder F jammed, but onboard recorder H continued to record flight data for the duration of the mission. Descent of the command module on the main parachutes was steady, and the rate of descent was within nominal limits at the time of landing. The main parachutes were disconnected from the command module at touchdown by the inertial switch disconnect.
; The recovered comand module was inspected z t the field facility, and postflight tests were conducted at the contractorsDo-iey facility on the scimitar antenna, cabin pressure relief valve, questionable instrumentation, p p o buses A and B and sequencer, and on the crew widows. In addition, comand module cz3in leak tests were completed.

The test objectives were accomplished.

2-1 2.0 1 T O U T: N N R D C lO

Apollo Mission A-004 was the f i r s t f l i g h t with a production type Apollo spacecraft structure, t h e l a s t of the s i x unmanned f l i g h t abort t e s t s t o be launched a t t h e White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico, and the eleventh f l i g h t t e s t with an unmanned Apollo spacecraft. (See t a b l e on inside f r o n t cover.) The test vehicle, consisting of :Block I type spacecraft 002 (SC-002) and L i t t l e Joe I1 ( L J 1 ) lzunch vehicle 1 12-91-3, was launched from Launch Complex 36 a t White Sands Missile Range on January 20, 1966, a t 8:l7:00.776 a.m. m.s. t. Launch, i3bort, and recovery were successfully accomplished. Figure 2.0-1 shows the t e s t vehicle a t Launch Complex 36. The fr-ight sequence of major events i s given i n f i g u r e 2.0-2. The f i r s t - o r d e r t e s t objectives f o r Mission A-004 were a s follows:

(a) Demonstrate s a t i s f a c t o r y launch-escape vehicle (LEV) performance f o r an abort i n t h e power-on tumbling boundary region.
(b) Demonstrate t h e s t r u c t u r a l i n t e g r i t y of the LEV airframe s t r u c t u r e f o r an abort i n t h e power-on twnbling boundary region.

A l l t e s t objectives f o r the mission are l i s t e d i n section 1 . . 11

The t e s t region was defined by t h e a:Ltitude and velocity a t which

t h e combination of aerodynamic loading and launch-escape-motor plume

impingement loading would be s u f f i c i e n t t o load t h e command module s t r u c t u r e t o i t s design l i m i t .

T h i s report includes an evaluation of the mission and an analysis of the spacecraft and launch vehicle performance on the basis of the

f l i g h t - t e s t data and r e s u l t s of completed p o s t f l i g h t t e s t s . Although the publication of t h i s report i s subsequent t o the f l i g h t of Apollo ?fission AS-201 ( f i r s t f l i g h t t e s t of a n A:?ollo Block I type spacecraft with a Saturn I B launch vehicle, February 26, 1966), the analysis of the Mission A-004 f l i g h t data was completed prior t o Mission AS-201 and t h e results applied t o pertinent prelaunch preparatiom. I n addition t o the analysis and pertinent plotted data included i n t h i s report, t h e complete p l o t t e d f l i g h t data a r e contained i n a companion volume, Flight Data Report f o r Apollo f i s s i o n A-004 (SC-002) (ref. 1 . ) Unless otherwise specified, zero time (T-0) f o r a l l data i n t h i s report is referenced t o &-inch motion of the test vehicle.

2- 2
NASA-S-66-3661 APR 15

Figure 2.0-1.- Test vehicle for Apollo Mission A-004 prior to launch (11-30-65).

NASA-S-66-3665 APR 15 84X

2- 3

lo3

e
3
U

a ,

.
44

.a

24

12
4
Range, ft

103
Time from lift-off, sec Lift-off (8: 17:00.776 a.m. m.s. t.) Staging Mach= 1.0 Maxq Pitch-up initiation Abort initiation Canard deployment Tower jettison Drogue parachute depl yment Main parachute deployment Main parachute disconnect CM landing

1 .

2. 3.
4. 5. 6.

7.
8.

9.
10.

1. 1 12.

36.4 38.7 41.8 70.81 73.7 84.8 193.8 195.8 237.6 410.0 410.0

Figure 2.0-2.-

Sequence of major events, Apollo Mission A-004.

3.0

TEST

mmcm DESCRIEION

3 1 Spacecraft .
The unmanned spacecraft (SC-002) flown on Apollo Mission A-004 consisted of a modified Block I command module (CM), modified Block I service module (SM), and modified Block I launch-escape subsystem (US). (See refs. 2 and 3 . ) Among other differences from the Block I configuration, the center of gravity of the launch-escape vehicle (LEV), and the thrust vector of the launch-escape subsystem were changed to assure the attainment of the required condition of power-on tumbling after .. abort initiation. (See sections 3.3 and 5 0 ) The spacecraft was mated 1 to the Little Joe I1 (LJ 1 ) launch vehicle by means of an aluminum adapter ring. The test vehicle configuration is shown in figure 3.1-1; figure 3.1-2 shows the U V configuration; and the locations of U3V centers of gravity and U S thrust vector are shown 2.n figures 3.1-2 and 3.1-3 and in table 3.3-1. Spacecraft 0 2 approached the producticn spacecraft Block I config0 uration that will be used for future manned flight, and was approximately the same in external size, shape, and gross weight as the Apollo Mission A-003 boilerplate configuration (ref. L ) Production, prototype, and interim design subsystems were included in the configuration to be compatible with the operational requirements f o r flight tests at the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR). These sulisystems and their associated mission performance are described in detail in sections 5.2 to 5.14 of this report.

Spacecraft body axes are indicated in figure

3.1-4. (Also see

ref. 5.)
To assist i n photographic identification of spacecraft attitudes and motion during flight, the exterior surfaces of the CM and boost protective cover ( P ) the launch-escape motor, and the SM were painted BC, as shown in figure 3.1-5.

34
NASA-S-66-3830 APR 15

400.7

I
26

--

,,.,,,ich=escape

subsystem

I
I

Comtnand module 133.5 excluding heat shield

-Command

module

t .
I
including fa and adapter

10 5.0

Note: A l l dimensions are in inches

+X

Figure 3.1-1.- Test vehicle configuration, Apollo Mission A-004.

(Also see figure 3.2-1 and 5.2-1 t o 5.2-31.

3- 3
NASA-S-66-3669 APR 15

Station

Reference Spacecraft Command module

Location
Top of nose cone

xA Inches

xC Inches
484.2

xL Inches
400.7I

Launch-escape subsystem

1484.2

-Canard

deployed

Center of gravity for LES

1282.5

282.5

199.0

-26.0"
Launch-escape subsystem

Confluence 1222.34 point Center of gravity for LEY

222.34

138.84

1137.4

137.4

53.9Resultant thrust vector for launchescape motor Command module

rower base 1083.5 Center of gravity 1035.6 for CM Heat shie IC 1000 bondline

83.5

0-

35.6

0-

Figure 3.1-2.-

Launch-escape vehicle rererence stations and center-of-gravity locations, Apollo Mission A-004.

3-4
NASA-S-66-3673 APR 15

Thrust vector angle

XAIOOO
~~

+X

Note: All dimensions are

i n inches

+Z
-Y

-Z

Figure 3.1-3.- Launch-escape vehicle center-of-gravity and thrust vector location, Apollo Mission A-004.

3-5
NASA-S-66-3677 APR 15
+X

Command module

Direction
Longitudinal Lateral

Axis
X

Moment

Positive direction Y to z ZtoX

Spacecraft maneuver & symbol

Linear velocity u
V

Angular velocity
P

Roll

Pitch' 8

X 0'

0"

0 '

Z 270'

10 8' Figure 3.1-4.-

10 8'
Z

Spacecraft axis system for orientation and motion, Apollo Mission A-004.

3-6
N A S A - S - 6 6 - 3 6 8 1 APR 15

+Y

- - Y 24"

II

(on CM only)

(a> Command module and boost protective cover. Figure

3.1-5.- Paint patterns, Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 .

3-7
NASA-S-66-3685 APR 15

+z

-Y -Z+Y

36.25"

(typical)

(b) Launch-escape motor.

(Mates with the command module)

-Z

+Y

fZ

-Y

-Z

48"

L 6" 3
1 2 4"

A-

(Mates with the launch-vehicle adaater) (e) Service module. Figure

1 0" 2

3.1-5. -

Concluded.

3-8
3.2
Launch Vehicle

L i t t l e Joe I1 launch vehicle 12-51-3 was the fourth i n a series of W I1 launch vehicles u t i l i z e d t o boost an Apollo spacecraft f o r an abort test a t White Sands K s s i l e Range. The launch vehicle w a s a f i n s t a b i l i z e d , autopilot-controlled airframe which used- s o l i d - f u e l rocket motors f a r propulsion power. (See fig. 3.2-1.) This launch vehicle was s i m i l a r t o t h a t used f o r Mission A-003 (ref. 4). Reference 6 contains a description and specifications f o r t h e launch vehicle, including the differences between vehicle 12-31-3 and 12-51-2. The launch vehicle airframe consisted of c y l i n d r i c a l forebody and afterbody s h e l l s , and four f i n s with autopilot-controlled elevons. A reaction c o n t r o l subsystem included on L J I1 12-51-2 f o r Mission A-003 w s omitted f o r t h i s mission. Four Algol I D Mod I motors and f i v e a Recruit TE-29 motors were mounted on t h e t h r u s t bulkhead, the main
structural m e m b e r of the vehicle.

The launch vehicle subsystems and t h e i r associated mission perfomnance a r e described i n d e t a i l in section 6.0 af t h i s report.

*
I

3-9
NASA-S-66-3689 APR 15

Locat ion
Top of

LJ lI
station

LJ II

0.00 (XA823)

154.0"

Base of elevon

393.82 -

Fin 1

Elevon actuator fairing (4) Direction of launch azimuth (North)

0 First stage Algol motors

Second stage Algol motors o First stage Recruit motors

Fi

Note:

1 Bottom view . 2. Positive r o l l (4) is from +Y t o +Z axis

Figure 3.2-1.L i t t l e Joe

II launch vehicle 12-51-3, Apollo Mission A-004.

3-10

3.3 Mass Characteristics

The mass properties calculated from actual measurements and the predicted values are shown in table 3.3-1.

For Mission A-004 the launch-escape system was unballasted and the CM was ballasted to achieve the desired center of gravity of the launchescape vehicle at launch-escape motor burnout. Primarily as a result of the additional ballast, the cormand module for Ession A-004 exceeded the Block 1 control weight by lo7 pounds at launch.
Figures 3.3-3- to 3.3-6 illustrate the changes in mass properties with burning time for the launch-escape vehicle. Predicted calculations did not include removal of the s o f t boost protective cover. Actual values shown are based on the fact that the entire s o f t portion of the boost protective cover was lost ak 1.7 seconds after launch-escape-motor ignition since the actual time for break-up of t h i s p o r t i o n cannot be detemLned accurately from the s?vailable data.
The m s characteristics for the launch vehicle show minor changes as from those predicted. The Y and 2 coordinates are zero and remain constant throughout the flight. l"ne remaining mass properties f o r the launch phase are shown in reference 1 .

3-11

TABLE 3.3-1.

- b5ASS PROPEBTfES FOR MISSION A-004

Moment of i n e r t i a , Center of gravity, in.

Weight,

lb

X
I e s t vehicle a t launch (actual) Launch payload ( a c t u a l ) Launch-escape vehicle (actual) Launch-escape vehicle a t burn-out (without s o f t BPC)
CM p r i o r t o drogue

- -Y - --2
0 0 0.0
-0. '1

slug-ft (a1

Ixx

139 875
32 680

706.7
12. 028

8 421 1

423 500 224 077

84 834

1 498 6 5 96 7

1 go6 8
15

1137.L. 1107.1

0.3
0. 'j

1' .j

275

2 '5 .

5 537

62 407

1 695 0

1033.2

1.1

3.3

5 223

4 255

parachute deployment (predicted)

CM a t landing

b10

26 8

1030.9

1.1

34 .3

5 1-73

3 917

(predicted)

A l l moment-of-inertia d a t a a r e calculated based on -Jeights shown.

bgased on measured weights a t launch.

3-12

3-13

r'l r'l

C
r

.-

U
S 0 .Y
Y

Ln

f0

.>
Y L

e m

0
rl rl

I n

rl rl

0
rl $4

N
rl
rl

0
N
rl

.I -

Ln

0
4

Ln 0
rl
rl

0
0
rl
rl

rl
rl

rl
rl

rl

3- 14

0
d

0 .-

m C .-

U
I

0 0 Q

.-

m UI .-

=z

a 0

rl

iY

3-13

0
rl

Tr 0

3-16

0
rt

( r

co

d 0
0
I

7-17

2
r

.W
0

L W

0 .e

%
m 0 v) aJ
c c m

m .-

a W

0
o + .

2
W

%
v)

I-

m E
L

F a ,

E .-

e
W

I -

E .-

P 0 0

4.0

MISSION TRAJECTORY ANALYSIS

4.1

Real-Time Flight Dynamics Control

This mission, as i n previous Apollo missions launched a t WSMR with t h e L i t t l e Joe I1 launch vehicle, made use of t h e range real-time data system (RTDS) in connection w i t h i n f l i g h t control, The four plotboards, A, B, C, and D, which presented t h e real-time data during t h e f l i g h t , are shown i n figure k.l-l(a) t o (a). (Also see section 10.3.) The pref l i g h t data included on t h e plotboards presented appropriate t r a j e c t o r y SR parameters based on nominal vehicle performace, t h e WM December atmosphere, and no wind. Plotboards A and 8 included t h e action lines f o r control of t h e mission. Plotboard B a l s o showed the L i t t l e Joe I1 veh i c l e performance envelope.
SR The WM December atmosphere without wtnd was used i n the FiTDS f o r the a c t u a l mission. On the basis of t h e information presented by the RTDS, t h e F l i g h t Dynamics Officer i n i t i a t e d t h e pitch-up maneuver by radio s i g n a l t o t h e launch vehicle when the real-time t r a j e c t o r y trace of Mach number p l o t t e d against dynamic pressure crossed the actio,? l i n e on plotboard B (as required by r e f . 7). The action l i n e was derived so t h a t 2.8 seconds a f t e r pitch-up ( t h e nominal time between t h e pitzh-up maneuver and abort i n i t i a t i o n ) , the command module would experience the abort i n i t i a t i o n conditions which were expected t o r e s u l t i n the desired 1 . 11 1.5 psid. (See f i g . 24, ref. 8 . ) If t h e launch vehicle f a i l e d , plotboard A (flight-path angle plotted against a l t i t u d e ) would be used f o r abort control i n order t o recover the cormand module i n t a c t , i possible.
The WSMR December atmosphere and the Launch-time atmosphere sre compared i n figures 10.5-1 t o 10.5-6.

) I

NASA-S-66-3737 APR 15

(a) Plotboard A.
Figure 4.1-1.- Apollo Mission A-004 RTDS plotboard displays,

4-3
NASA-S-66-3741 APR 15

(b) Plotboard

B.

Figure 4.1-1.- Continued,

4-4
NASA-S-66-3745 APR I5

(c) Plotboard C.

Figure 4. I-1.- Continued.

45 NASA-S-66-3749 APR 15

(d) Plotboard D .

Figure 4.1-1.- Concluded.

4-6

4.2

Comparison of F l i g h t with P r e f l i g h t and Postflight Simulations

The values of several t r a j e c t o r y parameters a t s i g n i f i c a n t events i n Mission A-004 a r e shown i n t a b l e 4.2-1. Values f o r t h e a c t w l m i s sion were derived from rabr and o p t i c a l tracking. I n addition, two prelaunch predictions and one postlaunch prediction are included. A b r i e f discussion of each t r a j e c t o r y follows.
SR (a) Prelaunch prediction based on WM December atmosphere - This ' prelaunch t r a j e c t o r y simulation w a s based 02 nominal vehicle performmce and the standard WM December atmosphere without wind. Trajectory SR parameters on the plotboards used by the RTDS during Mission k,-034 were from t h i s simulation.

(b) Prelaunch prediction with January atmosphere - T h i s p r e f l i g h t prediction w a s based on the f i n a l weight and balence data from VSTF' and the standard January WSMR atmosphere without winds. Because the changes were s o s l i g h t from t h e values based on t h e WM December atmosphere SR which were already drawn on t h e plotboards, the decision w a s made t o SR use t h e standard WM December atmosphere for cmducting the mission. (c) Actual f l i g h t results - Flight r e s u l t s were primarily obtained from the replay of the RTDS f l i g h t tapes with the launch-time atmosphere and winds as shown i n figures 19.7-1 t o 10.5-6. I n addition, o p t i c a l tracking w a s used where it w a s available. Flight event times are based on telemetry for the launch vehicle and on t h e recording of onboard t i m e r functions f o r t h e spacecraft.

(a) Postflight t r a j e c t o r y simulations were made using t h e following flight-derived inputs: (1)launch-time atmosphere and winds, (2) the a c t u a l t i m e s of pitch-rate i n i t i a t i o n , staging, pitch-up, and a b o r t i n i t i a t i o n , (3) f l i g h t t h r u s t as shown i n f i g u r e s 6.1-1 t c t 6.1-4, and (4) f l i g h t weight and balance as discussed i n section 3.3.
Figure 4.2-1 shows plotboard B i n which t h e T-2 hour atmosphere and winds were used t o recalculate Mach number and dynaxic pressure. This plotboard w a s used f o r e a r l y assessment of t h e f l i g h t . F l i g h t results, including time h i s t o r i e s of a l t i t u d e , Mach number, dynamic pressure, t o t a l velocity, and flight-path zngle, a r e presented i n figures 4.2-2 t o 4.2-8. Altitude with respect t o range and a ground t r a c k of t h e cormnand module are a l s o shown. Figure 4.1-1(a) shows t h a t as soon as aiscernible, t h e f l i g h t - p a t h angle w a s higher than predicted, even though t h e nominal 840 launch elevation w a s used. This higher flight-path angle combined w i t h an approximate 1-second delay i n the s t a r t of t h e p i t c h programmer caused the t r a j e c t o r y t o be higher than nominal for a given range, as seen on f i g u r e 4.1-1(c). This higher

4-7
a l t i t u d e and the denser atmosphere, as seen on figure 10.5-4,'conkined t o place t h e real-time Mach number/dynamic pressure t r a c e a t the action l i n e approximately 5 seconds e a r l i e r than nminal.
2.9 seconds l a t e r .

The pitch-up IF command w a s sent, ana zbort i n i t i a t i o n occurred F l i g h t results, i n terms of k c h number and dynamic 1 pressure, indicated that t h e L i t t l e Joe I launch vehicle placed the command.modde well within the planned altitude-velocity t e s t region. (See f i g s . 5.0-1 and 5.0-2.)

Launcher azimuth was set a t 348O29' t o compensate f o r the predomi n a t e l y westerly wind shown i n figure 10.5-5. Figure 4.2-8 i l l u s t r a t e s the amount of parachute d r i f t caused by t h i s wind.

48
TABU 4.2-1.

'a

- MISSION A-004

TRAJECTOPY PWmETWS
1

Preflight Ekerk o r parameter

edictions January atmosphere Flight results

Dee ember atnosphere

'os t f l i g h t
imulation

Launch azimuth, deg E. of N. Launch elevation, deg Staging

Time, sec

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

351
84

351 84

348'29'
84

348'29' ,84

...........

37.0 17 854 0.793

480

37.0
17

36.4
18 243 0.81
4 75

36.4

Altitude, ft m. 8.1. ' Mach number

936

18 023
0.807 485

.......... Cynamic pressure, lb/sq f . . . % Cownrange, ft R. . . . . . . . . ' Crossrange, f't W. .......

Flight-Wth angle, deg

0.798
482

3 806 658 68.4

3 882
657

3 520 785 71.5

3 767
5 71

.....

68.4

71.2

Pitch-up maneuver

........... Altitude, tf m . s . 1. . . . . . . '

Time, sec Mach number

76.1

75.85
60

70.81

70.8 56 319 2.27 648 34 216

3 775
2 179

50 040
2.484

037

56 985
2.24 610
32 940

..........

2. k89

Dynamic pressure, lb/sq ft

... Downrange, f't .?!I . . . . . . . . Crossrange, f W. ' t ....... Total velocity, f t / s e c . . . . . Flight-path angle, deg . . . . . Angle of a t t a c k , deg . . . . . .
Time, sec
Altitude,

559.7
42 652

659.5
42 422 6 851
2

6 886
2

4 465
2 140

351

365

31.57
1.73

31.84

38.4
2.3

37.53 1.67

1.73

Abort i n i t i a t i o n

........... ft m.s. 1 . . . . . . .

78.9

78.65

73.73 63. 083

73.73 60 359

53 449

63 489

4-9

TABLE 4.2-1.- MISSION A-004 TRAJECTORY P R M ! E S A A ET R

- Continued

Event or parameter

c pressure, l b / s q ft ,

Downrange, ft N.

........ Crossrange, ft W. . . . . . . . T o t a l v e l o c i t y , f:/sec . . . . . Flight-path angle, deg .... A n g l e of a t t a c k , deg . . . . . .

Time, see

Canard deployment

...........

A l t i t u d e , ft m. s. 1.

...... Mach n m b e r . . . . . . . . . . Dynamic pressure, lb/sq ft . . , Downrange, ft N. . . . . . . . .

....... Total velocity, f t j s e c . . . . . n i g h t - p a t h angle, deg . . . . .
Crossrange, ft W.

Apogee
Time, see

Altitude,

........... ft m. s. 1 . . . . . . .

Mach number

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

Dynamic pressure, lb/sq f t

I

Downrange, f t N . .

.......

4-10
TABU 4.2-1.

.MISSION A-004 TRAJECTORY PARAMETERS .Concluded

P r e f1 g h t i ,edictions January atmosphere Fl-ight results 'ost f l i g h t iimulation December atmosphere

Event or parameter Crossrange. f t W T o t a l velocity. Tower j e t t i s o n

Time. see

........ ft/sec . . . . .

13 557
1 066

13 673
1 061

9 655 935

9643 921

Altitude.

........... ft m .s.1. ' ......

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

188.8
24 003

189.o 23 886 0.526 164.0 119 797 19 728 543

193.8 23 050 0.48 135

110 405

185.9 23 250

Mach number

0.533 168.8
119 498
20 123

0.53
168
108 040

Dynamic pressure. l b / s q f% Downrange. ft N

.........

Crossrange. f t W

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

8 036 500

9958 557

T o t a l velocity. f t / s e c

552

Main parachute deployment ( p i l o t parachute mortar f i r e )

........... Altitude. f t m.s. 1 . . . . . . . Mach number . . . . . . . . . .

Time. sec Dynamic pressure. lb/sq ft Downrange. f't N

237.4
10

237.7
18 486
0.200

237.6
10 450
0.21

234.0
1 189 0
0.20

554

0.200

...

40.6 119 460 19 955

218

40.6
120 028

43
112 400

41
1 0150 1

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

Crossrange. f t W

19 810 218

4 842
226

6460
220

T o t a l velocity. f t / s e c Cammand module landing

.....

Time. sec
Altitude.

........... ft m . s.1. ......

.........

426.2

424.5

410

413.1
4000
1 0958 1

000

4 000
119 989 19 802
28.21

4 062
113 624 3 328 27- 5

Downrange. ft N

119 422

Crossrange. f't W T o t a l velocity.

........ f't/sec . . . . .

19 947
28.18

4949 27.78

4-11
NASA-S-66-3753 APR 15

MACH NUMB

Figure

4.2-1.- Apollo Mission A-004 RTDS plotboard B with

T-2 hour weather.

4- 12

413

0
0

0 9

0 ..z
8

I n

*
8 I n ._

m m m

.E"
O
0
N

b
L

I u

2
0 N
l-3

CL

a
U

0
v)

I-

.-

m rl

= l

S .0

v)

UI W

-0 W

E .I -

aJ

m m OI

3 cu a'

I -

3 9 ?

co

0 0
N

0 0 .r ;
N

0 0 0
(v

0
0
9
,I -

0
0

cu
rl

co

0 O

4-16
NASA-S-66-3773 APR 15

..

- ._. __ __

I - - - - - - -

40

80

12 0

160

200

240

Time, sec Figure 4.2-6.Flight-path angle plotted against time, Apollo Mission A-004.

4-17

.I n .5

f-

I -

418
N A S A - S - 6 6 - 3 7 8 1 APR 15

120

100

80

60

40

20

-12

-8

-4

Crossrange, ft, East

Figure 4.2-8.-

Ground track, Apolio Mission A-004.

5.0

SPACECRAFT PERFORMANCE

The Mission A - 0 0 4 t e s t point r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e Saturn launch vehicle performance envelope and other WSMR missions i s shown i n f i g In conformance w i t h t h e f i r s t - o r d e r test objectives, t h i s ure 5.0-1. t e s t point was located within t h e region of t h e power-on tumbling boundary. The boundary w a s based on t h e s t r u c t u r a l load c a p a b i l i t y of the spacecraft and the a l t i t u d e and v e l o c i t y a t which t h e launch-escape vehicle (LEV) could be allowed t o tumble, during t h e power-on phc cLse of t h e zbort, without experiencing g r e a t e r than design l i m i t loads. The s t r u c t u r a l loading of primary i n t e r e s t i n t h e above d e f i n i t i o n was the l o c a l pressure d i f f e r e n t i a l across t h e command module (CM) e x t e r i o r wall caused by ti,e difference between t h e i n t e r n a l cavity pressure and t h e combined external e f f e c t s of t h e aerodynamic and launch-escape motor plume impingement pressures. The spzcecraft design limit load f o r t h i s condition i s 1 . psid. 11 Figure 5.0-2 shows an expanded view of the t e s t region. The planned and actual abort points are indicated on t h e figure. The test 1 region i s bounded by t h e predicted L i t t l e Joe I1 ( L J 1 ) maximum and minimum performance t r a j e c t o r i e s and an allowable d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure dispersion of fl.5 psi. A s shown i n t h e figure, a d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure of approximately 11.8 psid should have been developed during t h e a c t u a l abort of Nission A-004 with nominal LEV performance. The plume impingement pressure data used i n the mission design were a p p r o x - d t e d from data taken i n wind-tunnel t e s t s (ref. 9 ) . The approximation assumed the impingement pressures t o be a d i r e c t function of free-stream dynamic pressure and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between plume and free-stream momentum.

5-2

5- 3

d
0

0
f

a
v) U

n
4

Ln

rl

LL

2 3 u1 .-

Qf

a
9
9
Ln

9
.n

d
N

(\I

0
(v

(v

z.

5-4

5.1 Aerodynamics
A manned spacecraft would have a low probability of experiencing tumble during an abort a t the altitude-velocity conditions of However, because design l i m i t pressure loads during a tumbling abort w e r e desired, and because of the t e s t vehicle Etructural l i m i t a t i o n s imposed on the pitch-up maneuver, t h e launch-escape vehicle (LEY) w a s configured t o insure power-on tumble. This w a s accolrplished by using t h e pitch-control motor a t t h e abort a l t i t u d e , noving the LEV center-ofgravity by using b a l l a s t , and s e t t i n g t h e launch-escape subsystem (LES) t h r u s t vector t o i t s extreme d e s t a b i l i z i n g position. (See section 3 . 3 and figure 3.1-3. )
A s a r e s u l t of t h i s configuration, the vehicle d i d tumble and the loads and t h e r o t a t i o n a l r a t e s were higher than wmld be expected during a normal spacecraft abort i n t h i s a l t i t u d e - v e l o c i t y region. The p i t c h and ya,w rates displayed peak values of 160 deg/sec, while the r o l l rate reached a peak of -70 deg/sec during the power-on portion of t h e abort. The longitudinal load f a c t o r peaked a t about Cl5g during peak t h r u s t with the vehicle oriented main heat s h i e l d forward. The Y - a x i s load was o s c i l l a t o r y between &2.5g, and t h e Z-axis load reached peaks of +2.5g and -5g.

A p o s t f l i g h t six-degree-of-freedom simulation was conducted t o determine i f t h e LEX motions can be predicted s a t i s f a c t o r i l y by using wind-tunnel-derived aerodynamic data i n the abort Mxh number range. The simulation u t i l i z e d a c t u a l abort i n i t i a l conditions, atmosphere properties and winds measured a t t i m e of l i f t - o f f , a c t u a l thrust values, and a c t u a l mass chm-acteristics.

The aerodynamic data used f o r t h e simulation were obtained from nwerous wind-tunnel t e s t runs conducted for limited values of Mach number, angle of attack, and thrust. The power-on tests were limited t o an angle of attack, a, of approximately 500 ( f o r s t a t i c force date). T o provide a d d i t i o n a l data necessary t o cover the complete range of' t h e f l i g h t parameters expected for t h i s mission, t h e power-on data were extended using power-off wind-tunnel data. Neither dynamic damping nor roll data were available f o r t h e LEV with power on. The simulated r o t a t i o n a l rates are compared w i t h t h e flight-measured r a t e s f o r t h e f i r s t f e w seconds following abort a s shown i n f i g u r e 5.1-1. There i s good agreement between simulated and a c t u a l rates f o r t h e f i r s t 1.5 seconds subsequent t o abort, whereas beyond t h i s time the comparison becomes divergent. The f l i g h t -parameters during t h e f i r s t 1.5 seconds a r e within t h e range of measured wind-tunnel power-on data (a = 50"). A f t e r about 1.3 seconds t h e spacecraft had r o t a t e d t o aerodynamic angles which necessitated t h e use Of extrapolated data, which probably accounts

5-5
f o r most of t h e divergence of t h i s portion of t h e simdation. The dynamic damping becomes more s i g n i f i c a n t during t h e portion of t h e f l i g h t when high angular r a t e s are encountered.

As expected f o r the configuration c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and the abort conditions, the LEX exceeded the a t t i t u d e of s t a t i c s t a b i l i t y (a 350 f o r this LEV) a t about 1 second after abort i n i t i a t i o n .

Based on t h e reasonable agreement of the f l i g h t and simulated r a t e s during t h e first 1.5 seconds of LFV f l i g h t , it i s indicated that the exi s t i n g aerodynamic data a r e adequate t o predict t h e vehicle s t a t i c stab i l i t y and can be used t o determine operati3naltumbling boundaries. The results of a d e t a i l e d analysis of the aerodynamic f l i g h t data i n order t o improve the sirnulation a r e not within the sco-pe of t h i s report. The aerodynamic effectiveness of t h e IXV with canards extended i n a r r e s t i n g t h e tumbling motions and providing damping during the descent was s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r than the design requirements of the operational vehicle and can be, in p a r t , a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e more rearward center-ofgravity location of spacecraft 002. Flight, data indicated t h a t cpaasisteady-state o s c i l l a t i o n s about 0 deg/sec were established about a l l +1, axes a t T l : seconds w i t h the maximum rate: a t tower j e t t i s o n being 60 deg/sec and occurring i n the p i t c h plane.
A p o s t f l i g h t simulation of the LEV with canards was conducted using the spacecraft f l i g h t position and velocity data a t the t i m e of canard deployment (T-1-84.8 sec). Figure 5.1-2 shows a comparison of t h e envelope of t h e a c t u a l and simulated angular r a t e s f o r approximately 50 seeonds p r i o r t o tower j e t t i s o n . The upper and lower boundaries of each r a t e envelope were obtained by connecting the peaks of the positive and negative r a t e s f o r t h e t i m e h i s t o r y p e r i o d shown. There i s reasonably good agreement between t h e simulation and f l i g h t rates during t h i s t i m e i n t e r v a l although t h e magnitude of the peak values from the f l i g h t were l e s s than t h e simulation. It can be concluded t h a t t h e canard aerodynamic data are adequate f o r t r a j e c t o r y simulation t o be used f o r pred i c t i n g vehicle r a t e s a t tower j e t t i s o n .

5- 6
NASA-S-66-3664 APR 15

240

2 00

160

120

5 2 0 .U U

0)

80

40

-40

-80
0

Time from abort, sec

Figure 5.1-1.- Comparison of actual and predicted launchescape vehicle spacecraft rotational rates for Apollo

Mission A-004.

5-7
NASA-S-66-3668 APR 15

200

-100

Time froin lift-off, sec Figure 5.1-2.- Comparison of actual and predicted angular rate envelope, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-8

5.2 Structural Loads

5.2.1 Swmnary.- Analysis of the flight data indicates that spacecraft 0 2 performed with no structural problems throughout the flight. 0 Interface loads calculated for the maximum load flight conditions throughout the flight show that the limit load capability of the structure was not exceeded. The m a x i m u m differential pressure measured on the command module (CM) conical heat shield during plume impingement was 7.1 psid based on flight data, although the desired differential pressure was l . f 1 5 psid. Strain-gage data on the CM structure inl1 . dicated lar stress levels during the entire flight. Strain gages installed on the launch-escape subsystem (L;ES) tower legs gave m a x i m tension loads during the tumbling abort that reached 8 . percent of 58 design limit. Strain-gage instrumentation on the service module (SM) radial beam trusses and tension ties showed very low stress levels until pitch-up. At pitch-up, the stress levels were still less than 50 percent of the allowable in any member.

5.2.2 Structural description. Mission A-004 was the first flight test of the Block 1 command module and service module structures; however, the Block I launch-escape subsystem structure had been previously tested on 14ission A-002 (BP-231, Kission A-003 (BP-22), and Mission PA-2 (BP-23A), references 10, 4, and 11, respectively. li basic detailed description of the I;FS is included in reference 10 and additional in1 formation may be found in references 4 and 1 .

c Launch-escape subsystem: The LES used on spacecraft 002 w s a Block I configuration consisting of a Q-ball assembly, a ballast compartment, the canard subsystem, launch-escape, pitch-control, and tover-jettison motors, a tower structure, and the boost protective cover. (See flg. 5.2-1. ) The tower structure was a four-legged., welded, tubular, titanium a l l o y truss, covered with Buna-N-rubber for thermal protection. The tower structure was attached to the LE3 motor structural skirt by alignment bolts and attached to the command module by four explosive bolts of interim design (refs. 10 and 4 . The hard ) portion of the boost protective cover was also attached to the tower at the C - S interface. Ballast plates, normally located at the Mm interface between the &-ball assembly and the pitch-control motor, were omitted on spacecraft 0 2 as a part of the LEV center-of-gravity shift 0 to assure the tumbling required (see sections 3.3 and 3,l).

Command module: The command module structure consisted of a crew compartment inner structure, a c r e w compartment outer structure conical heat shield, a main heat shield, and a forward compxtment heat shield (apex cover) as shown in figure 5.2-2. The crew compartment inner structure, which was the primary loadcarrying structure of the CM, was a semi-monocoque, aluminum honeycomb,

5-9
The s t r u c t u r e resembled. base-opposed truncated cones, each capped by bulkheads. The f k t forward bulkhead incorporated a c y l i n d r i c a l access tunnel capped by a f l a k pressure hatch cover. The a f t bulkbead was s-pherically contoured. Longerons were incorporated i n the side w a l l s of t h e structure. 1ncl.uded i n t h e conical s t r u c t u r e were f3ur windows, t h e astro-sextant navigational hatch, and t h e main crew access hatch. pressure vessel.

The conical heat shield protecting the outer s t r u c t u r e of t h e crew compartment formed the center conical portion of t h e command module be-tween the forwhrd and a f t heat shields. The conical heat s h i e l d was attached t o the inner structure by load-transfer s t r i n g e r s and frames, and included equipment access panels, f o w windows, two hatches, the CM-SM umbilical, and two scimitar entennas.

The main heat shield, which WES not a Block 1 design, but w a s of interim configuration and material f o r t k i s f l i g h t , enclosed t h e blunt end of t h e command module. Three compreEsion and three shear - compression pads were incorporated i n t h e ma.in heat shield t o transmit loads from the CM t o the S . A t the three shear - compression pads, M tension t i e b o l t s were attached t o t h e crew compartment inner structure.
The forward compartment heat shield (apex cover) w a s of interim configuration f o r t h i s mission and w a s secured t o t h e crew compartment inner s t r u c t u r e by four tension t i e rods which w e r e located within the apex cover j e t t i s o n t h r u s t e r assemblies.

The substructures f o r t h e heat shields were constructed of brazed s t e e l honeycomb panels w i t h the outer surfaces covered w i t h a b l a t i v e cork t o simulate the Block I heat shield. Service module: The service module was a Block I s t r u c t u r a l s h e l l wi-bhout the Block I subsystems installed. It consisted of an outer s h e l l , r a d i a l beams, forward and a f t bulkheads, and CM-SM f a i r i n g . (See f i g . 4.2-3. )
The outer s h e l l was divided i n t o six basic panels of aluminum honeycomb material attached t o t h e alwnirum r a d i a l beams and t o the forward and the a f t bulkheads. SubpanelE incorporated r a d i a t o r s f o r the environmental control subsystem (ECS) End t h e e l e c t r i c a l power subsystem (EPS). The radiators were inactive f o r t h i s mission. Reaction control subsystem (RCS) panels included one panel complete with Block I engine nozzles, and three panels w i t h simulated engines installed.

The quad D RCS engines were prototype Block I with the exception of the solenoid valves which were mass simulated. A prototype quad housing, two propellant tank mass simulators, and one helium tank mass

5-10
simulator completed t h e quad D RCS assembly. Details of t h e prototype engine w e shown i n figure 5.2-4. Each d m y assembly of quads A, B, u m and C consisted o f a prototype kousing and four dummy engines which simulated the weight and center of g r a v i t y of the prototype engines. The r a d i a l beams t r a n s f e r r e d loads from t h e CM t o t h e SM outer shell. The a f t bulkhead w a s u t i l i z e d t o carry b a l l a s t . The service propulsion subsystem ( SPS) components were not i n s t a l l e d . The CM-SM i n t e r f a c e consisted of s i x compression mounting pads, one a t the apex of each r a d i a l beam truss. Tension t i e s with shear pads were i n s t a l l e d a t the i n t e r f a c e s o _ r a d i a l beams 2, 4, and 6. r (See f i g . U.2-13. A production f a i r i n g extended between the service ) module and the commmd module. Launch vehicle adapter:
'

A launch vehicle adzpter, or mating ring,

15 inches long, was used t o a t t a c h the service module t o the launch vehicle.

included i n t h e adz;pter w a s a. b l z s t barrier o f l a m i n a t e d fibergless construction. Venting of t h e service module and adapter vas accomplished through holes i n t h e adapter.

5.2.3 LES tower l e g loads.- The L;ES tower legs w e r e instrumented with s t r a i n gages oriented t o measure a x i a l s t r e i n end calibrated i n pounds o f force (refer t o t a b l e 11.2-1f o r exrct location 2nd r a g e of t h e s t r a i n gages). A comparison of t h e mzximum t e n s i l e and compressive measured f l i g h t lozds w i t h l i m i t design lords i s given i n t z b l e 5.2-1. It should be noted t h a t t h e l i m i t design loads shown a r e based on Saturn V f l i g h t conditions.
During launch and pitch-up t h e loads experienced were l o w compared t o t h e l i m i t design loads based on a Saturn V launch. After abort i n i tiation and separation from the launch vehicle, t h e spacecraft 002 LEV configuration was similar t o t h e design condition configuration except for t h e center-of-gravity mass c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The f l i g h t loads measured f o r t h e LEV during the tumbling abort were higher and more nearly comparable t o t h e design loads, w i t h t h e maximtun being 83.8 percent of t h e design l i m i t . Figures 5.2-5 and 5.2-6 show t i x e h i s t o r i e s o f t h e t o t a l bending moment and the t o t a l a x i a l force a t the LIES-CM interface. These loads s were calculated using t h e strain-gage data from t h e tower legs. A can be seen i n these figures, t h e maximum bending moment experienced s t t t h i s interface occurred during pitch-up, t h e maximum compressive a i a l force occurred during staging, and t h e m a x i m . t e n s i l e z x i a l force occurred during power-on abort.
I f , as shown i n t a b l e 5.2-1, the tower l e g s a r e considered individually, t h e combined bending moment and a x i a l force during pitch-up
a

5-11

produced t h e maximum compressive load per leg, although the maximum t o t a l compressive a x i a l force a t the i n t e r f a c e occurred during staging. The maximum t e n s i l e load per l e g occurred during t h e tumbling abort as did the maximum t o t a l t e n s i l e interface load.

2.2.4 Command module loads, Command module i n t e r n a l loads: S t r a i n gages were i n s t a l l e d i n the CM as indicated i n figures 11.2-6 t o 11.2-9. Stresses calculated from the f l i g h t data f o r each of t h e instrumented members a r e shown i n t a b l e 5.2-11 for the launch, staging, pitch-up, tumbling abort, tower j e t t i s o n , main parachute deployment, and earth-landing impact phases of the flFght. The s t r e s s e s shown i n t a b l e 5.2-11 f o r the heat shield hatch were the only ones indicating t h e maximum and minimum p r i n c i p a l s t r e s s e s for the conical heat-shield substructure. W i t h the exception of l e v e l s measured during e a r t h landing, t h e s t r e s s l e v e l s shown i n t a b l e 52-11 were very low, and indicate that the substructure was l i g h t l y loaded during t h e mission. The s t r e s s e s measured i n t h e crew compartment heat shield at impact were high i n comparison w i t h s t r e s s e s measured during t h e f l i g h t , but were well below the capability of t h e brazed s t a i n l e s s steel honeycomb structure

CM plume impingement loads: During t h e abort, the LEV tumbled as planned. The I;ES motor plumes impinging on t h e CM conical surface created high s t a t i c pressures on t h e surface within t h e plume. The planned mission was t o obtain a d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure across the conical heat s h i e l d of U 1 1.5 psid i n order t o demonstrate the c a p a b i l i t y . f o f t h e CM s t r u c t u r e t o withstand t h e l i m i t design load. (Also see sections 5.0 and 5.1.) Figure 3.2-7 show:; the maximum absolute pressures measured during the plume i ~ r p i n g e m e ~ ~ t t h e i n t e r n a l cavity and pressures measured a t t h e same f l i g h t time. It can be seen in f i g ure 5.2-7 t h a t the maximum d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure indicated w a s 6.8 p s i d , based on the a f t equipment compartment pressure measurement near t h e +Y axis, o r 7.1 psid, based on t h e a f t equipment compartment pressure measurement near the -Z axis. The measured d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure was lower than the planned pressure because: (a) the plume impingement pressures were approximately 80 percent of those predicted f o r a nominal mission, and (b) the i n t e r n a l pressure i n the a f t compartment was higher than planned by approximately 1.9 psi. (Refer t o section 5.13.) Figure 11.2-3 shows the locations of the pressure measurements.

The CM a f t equipment compartment vent system was designed i n such a manner t h a t compartment pressure would remain within 6 . p s i of am10 bient during f l i g h t . P r e f l i g h t calculations f o r Mission A-004 showed t h a t a f t compartment pressure f o r the nominal mission was approximately 0.3 p s i above ambient during abort. Postflight inspection and postf l i g h t tests at t h e contractor's Downey f s c i l i t y (see section 5.13 and 8.2) indicated t h a t there w a s i n f l i g h t venting of the crew compartment, past t h e s e a l s of the crew access inner h3;tch, i n t o t h e area =der t h e

5-12
conical heat shield s t r u c t u r e (including t h e a f t compartment). Addit i o n a l a i r from t h e crew compsrtment could place 8n a d d i t i o r a l load on t h e a f t equipment compartment venting arrangement. Figure 5.2-8(a) t o ( e ) shows the comparison of conical surfece s t a t i c pressures on t h e upwind pitch-plane surfwe, on the yaw-plane surface, and on t h e downwind pitch-plane surface. The cross-hatched area represents the pressure range from wind-tunnel dzta i f t h e angle of a t t a c k were variedny & O . The angles of a t t a c k represented by the p l o t t e d wind-tunnel data a r e calculated values f o r the spacecrstft 002 Good agreement between the f l i g h t end f l i g h t , assuming no roll o r YEW. wind-tunnel data i s indicated on the upwind s u r f i c e until Ebout Tt.74.8 seconds. The f l i g h t data show t h a t a t Tt.75 seconds the LEV r o l l e d epproximately 5 O 2nd yawed approximately 80. To obtain a b e t t e r comperison between t h e f l i g h t and wind-tunnel data, a more accurate measurement of angle of a t t a c k would be necessary. The uncertainty i n accuracy of angle-of-attack measurement could possibly explain p a r t of the disagreement between t h e f l i g h t and wind-tunnel data a t the highest angle of comparison (a = 480). The pressures on t h e y a w plane and downwind surfaces do not vary as much w i t h angle of a t t a c k as those on the upwind surface; therefore an e r r o r i n angle-of-attack measurement i s not as apparent. The method used t o obtain the wind-tunnel data shown i n f i g ure 5.2-8 consisted of using t h e pressures measured i n the wind tunnel with no scaling applied t o free-stream dynamic pressure. This was possible because t h e plumes envelope t h e command module, and the freestream flow does not d i r e c t l y a f f e c t the surface pressures. This, i n e f f e c t , means t h a t t h e pressures within t h e plume a r e not a d i r e c t function of free-stream dynamic pressure but are primarily a f f e c t e d by a l t i t u d e conditions.

5.2.5 Service module i n t e r n a l loads.- S t r a i n gages were i n s t a l led on both the inboard and outboard l e g s of t h e six radial beam trusses and on the t h r e e CM-SM tension t i e s (refer t o table U.2-I f o r location and range). A l l s t r a i n measurements on t h e truss members were calibrated i n microinches per inch while those on t h e three tension ties were calibrated i n pounds of force.
The axial s t r a i n on each truss member and the tension t i e loads were c o n v e r t e d t o a x i d stress and are shown in table 5.2-111 f o r the l i f t - o f f , staging, and pitch-up events. Also shown a r e t h e maximum stresses experienced during t h e mission and t h e times a t which they occurred.

5-13
The l a r g e s t stress experienced by the :inboard t r u s s members w a s

47 000 p s i ) while the l a r g e s t s t r e s s experienced by t h e outboard t r u s s members w a s 39 percent of i t s allowable (based on a compressive y i e l d 000 p s i f o r t h e material). The maximm s t r e s s experienced by a of tension t i e during f l i g h t was 30 percent of i t s allowable l i m i t of 90 000 psi.
Generally, most of the s t r a i n experienzed by t h e truss members was low during the g r e a t e r p a r t of t h e f l i g h t , and w a s less than 'j percent of t h e f u l l - s c a l e range of t h e instrumentation. The maximum measured values f o r the truss members were only 5 t o 1 0 percent of f u l l scale, and t h e maximum measurements f o r t h e tension t i e s were approximately 20 percent of full scale. 5.2.6 Interface body loads.- During Mission A-004 the maximum quasi-steady loads experienced by the spacecraft s t r u c t u r a l interfaces occurred during l i f t - o f f , staging, pitch-up, and t h e f i r s t abort tumble. The net body loads a t the IES-CM and CM-SM interfaces were calcul a t e d using t h e f l i g h t t r a j e c t o r y parameters together with wind-tunnel MS aerodynamic data. I n f i g u r e 5.2-9 loads calculated a t t h e C - M and SM-adapter interfaces a r e compared with t h e i n t e r f a c e l i m i t load capab i l i t y . A summary of t h e f l i g h t t r a j e c t o r y parameters used t o determine these loads i s shown i n t a b l e 5.2-IY. None o f t h e load conditions shown i n figure 5.2-9 exceeded the l i m i t load c a r a b i l i t y of t h e interfaces. Load condition 6 i n f i g u r e 5.2-9 w a s on the l i m i t load design envelope i t s e l f because the a x i a l force a t the t i m e of abort was approxirrritely twice the planned value. The axial force was high because of the e a r l y abort, a t which time the launch vehicle thrust w a s approximately 5 t o 6 t i m e s as high as f o r t h e planned time f o r the abort. {See t a b l e 4.1-1 ) and f i g s . 6.1-3 and 6.1-4. Strain-gage instrumentation on t h e LES tower legs, on the SI4 r a d i a l beam t r u s s e s , and on CM-SMtension t i e s were a l s o u t i l i z e d t o calculate l n t e r f a c e loads f o r these two interfaces. The data from t h e instrument a t i o n on t h e tower l e g s were used t o calculate both a x i a l force and MS bending moment. The s t r u c t u r a l geometry of' the C - M i n t e r f a c e "es t r i c t e d t h e use of the f l i g h t data t o the determination of axial forces only. Table 5.2-V shows a comparison of the LES-CM i n t e r f a c e a i a l loads calculated using f l i g h t t r a j e c t o r y parameters, those calculated from strain-gage data, and t h e l i m i t design loads. The f l i g h t loads shown did not exceed t h e limit design, and t h e calculated loads were i n good agreement.

43 percent of i t s allowable (based on c r i t i c a l buckling stress of

5-14

The CM-SM i n t e r f a c e loads calculated from f l i g h t t r a j e c t o r y parameters and from strain-gage data a r e presented i n t a b l e 5.2-VI. Axial force agreement i s only fair. Calculations of bending moment and shear using strain-gage data were not considered valid.

3-15

f f

l 9
m

0 CR 0

0 CR

m
M

m
CR

v3

0 Ln Ln W

0 u

8
\D

2
I

En,

E-

E-

8 rl

4
M
4

8 rl

a
M

a
ri
ri

a , rl

5-16

8
W

3
i

"
;

8
d

8
N

8
9
3

"

0 ?

8 ?

L l 2

" N

g o i

% f i

g
N
0

g
S

$ oi

-;1
0 0

2
w
i n
r

w
N

u
r

l
o

x C

8
c
C

"
I

d
o
d

8
o
O

d d

I
0

0
u

& 3
f

& cu
l

" : "

t r i -P

& h c u o m t n

0
0
I

g -

c o c o
d
c

5- 17

&

Y
0

?
0

- 3 3

I! -

0 0

0 0

I5

I n n \

8
2

9
4

0 ?

co

& e
m r l

0 O

I -

3
7

O i U i

5-18

cu

G ( u

o
m

d Lr\

'B
'd

I _
m
i a l
P k

8
a d m
CJ

8
u

d
m

rn

I
I

I i

i
1
!

5- 19

or-tn
1 1

d d r -

oCh n cu cu c\I n rw i
Lr,

IQ

r;l3

CT

8 K 3
w w
d

o o n

R 8

r l n o c u n r

I n c h + d

ili
0

+
oIo nco
0

80"s
0

c-* F ! . . . . . .

n m n n

. . . . . .
. . .
4-4

*rl

10 i

. a -

nncF r i d r l

T O " " 3 ' 3

cu e

0 W f

l n N E -

ma3

c h

(v

e i d P P
tQ a , rf

.-.

4 2 cd
0

h c

-r 1

5-20

TABLE 7.2-lY.- MISSION A-004 FLIGEm' TRAJECTORY PARAl.IcIIERs F R O IEJTERFACE LOAD C O N D ~ I O N S

[Refer t o fig. 5.2-91

J

Tbne from l i f t - o f f , sec

T+O. 5

WCh
lumber

a>
deg

P, deg

?Ig
2.72

&

..

z/g

0.82
1.02

2.2

-4.4
-2.0

0.025 -0.15

93-36.56 93-39.44
~ 7 0o .
n-72.7
WE.

3.6 2.3 2.55

2.55 2.35

-.12
-. l2
.1

2.3
2.1

-.20 -.22
-. 32
1.50
1-40

2.2

0.5

2-39
2.42

-11.7

.6

.14
.16

-ll. 1

.4

%he

values used were calculated using rate gyro and linear accelerometer

data and therefore m u s t be considered approximate.

pitch-up

Note.- Related mission events: Lift-off, staging (36.4 sec), max q (40.1 s e e ) (70.8 sec), and abort (73.7 sec).

5- 21

T ~ L E 5.2-v.

- COMPARISON OF LES-CM

INTERFACE LOADS

Time from lift-off, sec

Loads calculated ising f l i g h t t r a j e c t o r y parameters Axial f o r c e ,

lb

Loeds calculzted using strain-gage d a t a Axial force,

L i n i t desiga loads
Axial f o x e ,

(4
T+O. 5

lb (b)
-21

lb

-21 100

:*65

-98 800 -98 800 -98 800 -98 800 -98 800 -98 800

~36.56 T+39.44
~ + 7 0o . w72.7
T+D.6

-30 400
-21 000

-36 738
-24 4-22
-25 281

-24 100
-24 800

-23 337
-18 800
1 1.30 2

-23

ooo

r-t.75.39

--

163 163

200
200

T+75.69

--

113 974

a See t a b l e 5.2-IV f o r condition f l i g h t parameters.

bIncludes effects of structurzl dynamics.

Note. - Related mission events: L i f t - o f f , staging (36.4 See), Mx q (40.1 s e e ) , pitch-up (70.8 s e e ) , artd abort (73.7 see). a

5-22

T B 5.2-m.- COMPARISON O CM-SM INTERFACE LOADS FROM Am F

S W I N DATA

AND FLIGIIT PAENMETERS

I
F l i g h t time, see
(8)

Loads calculated using f l i g h t t r a x t o r y parameter Shear, lb 2 870

Loads calculated using strain-gage data Axial force, lb

Axial force,
lb

Bending moment, in. -1b

0.458X10

WO.5

-51 400

-64 703

~+36.56

6 600
6 800
1 010 I 600
1 800
1 1

-85 600

-065

-97

244

9339.4.4
~ + 7 0o .

-94 200
-88
100

.187

-106 030
-102

- 569
1.105
1.903

838

~+72.7
T+D. 6

-91 600

-92 005
-90 913

-86 400

a See t a b l e 5.2-IV f o r condition f l i g h t parameters.

Note.

- Related mission

events:

Lift-off,

staging

(36.4

sec)

?&x q (40.1 s e c ) , pitch-up (70.8 sec), and abort (73.7 sec).

5-23

.
.u ) v)

rl

Ln

5- 24

k
0 .S
v) v)

.I

a
U

0 Q

L. a ,

0 3 U L

a , 3 0

v)

Y
(\I

ut
Q, L

I&

m .-

5-25

0 .V

U L
v)

3 N
Ln

5-26

5-27
0
rl 4

0 0
rl

co

0
l -

0 9

In

2
ai

co a

a
0
1

3 9 ? v)

0 0
(v

0 0 0
rl

0
0

0
rl
I

3 P

5-29

'0
l l

-1 .
9

X
0

T
1

cu

rl

co

d-

ci,

?-

S J a

0 .LI

f Y

5- 30
NASA-S-66-3700 APR 15 16

12

m .ln 2 2

0
(a) Upwind surface i n pitch plane.

m
0

u .r:

(b) Yaw plane surface.

73.2

73.6

74.0

74.4

74.8

75.2

75.6

76.0

Time, sec (c) Downwind surface in pitch plane. Figure 5.2-8.Conical surface plume impingement pressures on Mission A-004.

5- 31

a
d
0

r-

3 9 ?
v)

v )

a z

5-32

5.3 Structural Dynamics

5 . 3 . 1 Summary.- Examination of all spacecraft strain, pressure, and acceleration data indicated that the spacecraft performed adequately in the launch environment.
Command module X-axis oscillatory accelerations of 2.4g peak-topezk were measured at engine staging. The predomioant frequency was 14 cps. These oscillations damped out within 1 second and are of no consequence structurally. Power spectml analyses of Y- and Z-axis accelerations showed a predominant frequency of 36 cps throughout the powered phase of flight. Small excitations of the first and second free-free bending modes of the launch vehicle were noted in oscillograph records. The first freefree bending mode of the launch escape vehicle (LEV) was excited at abort. W i m u m bending moments caused by these oscillations were low anE of no structural consequence. Service module fluctuating pressure data show levels approximately the same as those of boilerplate flights; however, the effects of the larger angle of attack on the complete pressure environment could not be assessed sirce no measurements were made on the windward side of the spacecraft. Service module outer shell and interior vibration data show levels much lower than those obtained in acoustic tests simulating the flight enviroEment. One exception to this is the vibration level of the inner flange of radial beam 7 which was approximately the same as that obtained in the acoustic tests, although the spectral distribution was different. This high level indicates a much greater transmissibility from the outer shell to the radial beam inner flange than was obtained in the acoustic tests. At. present this phenomenon is not understood. Service module RCS engine nozzles experienced vibration levels approximately twice those obtained on the siinulated nozzles of BP-15 (ref. 12). At present the mode associated with the predominant frequency of vibration, 490 cps, is unknown. Service module strain data showed extremely low levels which were generally within the noise of the instrumentation system. Acoustic data taken inside the CM indicated levels lower than those of simulated flight environment in ground tests.

5-33
Command module vibration data show levels lower than those obtained in acoustic tests. The majority of data throughout flight were close to the noise of the instrumentation system.

5.3.2 Vehicle low frequency vibrations. CM X-axis vibrations: Two accelerometers, located in the CM as shown in figure 11.2-5, were used to measure X-axis low-frequency vibrations.

The maximum boost low-frequency vibration occurred at ~+36.5seconds, the time of second-stage ignition, as shown in the rms time history of figure 5.3-1. Oscillograph records indicate that the magnitude of the vibration was 2.4g peak-to-peak at a frequency of 11 cps at this time. Figure 5.3-2 is an acceleration spectral density plot seconds to which shows all vibratory energy in the period from ~+36.5 TI-39.5 seconds to be concentrated at this frequency. The oscillation was damped out completely within 1 second after staging, and is therefore considered to be of no consequence. Y-axis and Z-axis vibrations: The test vehicle was instrumented with eight accelerometers which measured low-frequency vibrations along the Y-axis and Z-axis of the vehicle. Two measurements, L A O O l U and LAOO12A, were provided in the forward extremity of the LES, and two measurements, CA0005A and CAOO07A, in the CM. Four measurements were located in the W I1 launch vehicle. Two measurements, BBOl22A and BB0123A, were on the forward bulkhead, and two measurements, BBOO48A and BBOObgA, on the aft bulkhead. The LES and CM accelerometers were ranged &g, and the launch vehicle accelerometers were ranged g g . %ne Z-axis LES accelerometer showed rraximm Low-frequency vibrations during launch and abort to be 2g and 9.7g peak-to-peak, respectively. The maximum level f o r the launch phase occurred at a frequency of 36 cps and lasted from Tt.30 seconds t o TI-55seconds. This frequency is shown to possess maximum energy in the acceleration spectral density plot of figure 5.3-3. The maximum LEV abcrt vibration level also occurred at 36 cps. These frequencies are well above those of the lowest predicted test vehicle and IEV free-free bending mode shapes. The associatea mode of vibration is unknown; however, vibration at this frequency is of little concern since the maximum displacements produced are 0 0 5 inch and 0.072 inch, respectively. .1 The rms time history of the Z-axis tower accelerometer is sham in In general, the Y-axis tower accelerometer showed the figure 5.3-4. same vibration characteristics with slightly lower levels.

5-34
Analysis of the LES data showed small excitation of the lower freefree bending modes for both the L;Ev and the SC-O02/LJ 11 test vehicles during flight. The acceleration of the test vehicle at lift-off was l.3g peak-to-peak at 3 cps. The predicted value for this first freefree bending mode frequency was 3.4 cps. The acceleration spectral density plot of figure 5.3-5 shows the maximum energy concentrated at approximately 3 cps. At T-I-15 seconds, E, maximum response of O.7g peakto-peak was noted at the predicted second bending mode frequency of 1 cps. After abort, a maximum response of '7.59 peak-to-peak was ob1 first free-free tained at 9 cps. The predicted frequency for this bending mode was 9.7 cps. Oscillations at the first mode frequercies of the two configurations produce maximum interface bending moments as shown in the following table. These bending moments, when combined with the static moments, lie well within the limit-load capability.

Interface bending moment Configuration First free-free frequency,

CPS

1
SFGfairing

LES skirt-tower

xA=1083, xA=ioio,
in-lb in-lb

Tower-CM

CYLSM

xA,=838,
iz-lb

in-lb
2. ogno5

SC-O02/LJ I1

3
9

LEV

6.75~10~

The CM Y-axis and Z-axis acceleration datz. exhibited similar waveforms at corresponding times. As was expected, the magnitudes for the CM measurements were much lower than those given by the L;ES measurements (see ref. 1 . )

5 . 3 . 3 Service module dynamics. Fluctuating pressures: Spacecraft 0 2 was instrumented with two 0 pressure transducers to measure SM fluctuating pressures during atmospheric flight. Transducer SA0957p was locrted on the SM exterior surface near the -Y axis and 2 . inches forwsrd of the RCS quad D center68 line (see fig. 11.2-19) which was within an area in which pressure levels chaage rapidly with axial distance from the RCS engine.

5-35
Figure 5.3-6, which presents r s pressure p l o t t e d against vehicle m s t a t i o n obtained from PSTL-1 wind-tunnel daka, i l l u s t r a t e s the e f f e c t of t h e RCS protuberance i n t h i s region during transonic f l i g h t . No previous f l i g h t s had transducers a t t h i s exact position. However, data from measurement SAO186P (Mission A-101, r e f . 13) and SAO957P (Mssion A-004), indicated approximately t h e same o v e r a l l sound pressure l e v e l and a r e shown f o r comparison of figure 5.3-7. Additional cornparisor* of S fluctuating pressure can be made using measurements SAO958P (Mission M A-004) SA0166P and SA0164F (Mission A-102, r e f . 1 ) located a t com2, parable S position. This comparison i s m6de i n figure 5.3-8. 1 1 f i g M U ures indicate data which are corrected t o dynamic pressures of SC-002 f l i g h t trajectory. The maximum o v e r a l l sound pressure l e v e l s obtained from t h e rms time h i s t o r i e s of figures 5.3-9 and 5.3-10 a r e 161.5 dB (0.345 p s i ) and 157.6 d (0.22 p s i ) f o r SA0957p and SAO958P, respectively. B

In general, maximum o v e r a l l sound pressure l e v e l s of t h e SC-002 transducers agree with l e v e l s obtained i n previous f l i g h t s a t comparable SM locations. These values a r e compared with data from previous f l i g h t s i n figure 5.3-11.
It i s w o r t h noting t h a t the SC-002 maximum o v e r a l l SPL's occurred a t a Mach number of approximately 0.85 whi:le previous f l i g h t s showed maximum l e v e l s occurring a t M = 0.80. This Mach number s h i f t , as i l l u s t r a t e d i n r m s k c h h i s t o r i e s of figure 5.3-8, i s believed t o have been caused by t h e l a r g e r angles of a t t a c k obtained i n the SC-002 f l i g h t . This phenomenon has been noticed i n wind-timnel t e s t s a s angle of attack, a, i s increased from 0 degrees (refs. 1 and 15). T h i s e f f e c t , 4 i s caused by a delay of the subsonic flow separation from the windward CSM shoulder. Figure 5.3-12 presents a comparison of angle of a t t a c k plotted against Wch number for Missions A-004, A-101, and A-102. The angle-of-attack effect i s a l s o known t o caqBe pressure fluctuations which a r e l a r g e r on the leeward h a l f of the S than on the windward M half f o r angles of a t t a c k greater than 0 degrees ( r e f . 16). A s much as 5 dB differences have been noted between windward and leeward sides of the S a t u = 4 O (ref. 1.5) M

The two SC-002 measurements are known t o l i e on t h e leeward side M of the S and, therefore, would be expected t o indicate the m a x i m u m values for t h e i r respective a x i a l and c i r c - m f e r e n t i a l locations a s opposed t o similar locations on the windward s i d e of t h e SM. Since the SC-002 angle of a t t a c k was generally g r e a t e r than 3 . 5 O during the transonic region of Mission A-004, it is possyde t h a t the SC-002 data represent maximum pressures r a t h e r than pressures which are more or less symmetrically d i s t r i b u t e d around t h e SM, as were the pressures on previous f l i g h t s . If t h i s case e x i s t s , t h e f l u c t u a t i n g pressure environment of the complete SM, a s w e l l as t h e corresponding S vibration M response, could be down as much as 50 percent from t h a t of previous

5-36
flights. Further analysis will be required to determine if such a case did exist. The pressure spectral density, when compared with applicable data frori Mission A-102 (BP-15) in figure 5.3-13, seems to possess approximately the same frequency distribution of ecergy. The l w e r energy levels can be attributed to the large time slice used in the data reduction which encompassed the large drop in pressure thzt occurred between T+37 seconds and T1-39 seconds (fig. 5.3-10). The pressure spectral densities for the two SC-002 measurements are given in figures 5.3-14 and 5.3-15. Outer shell vibrations: Nine radial vibration measurements were made on the SM. One of these measurements was located on the fairing at station X,.373.1 at 187.50. These measurements were ranged to measure amplitudes of lOOOg peak-to-peak with a frequency response from 1 to 4CO cps. All measurement locations are shown in fig0 ure ll.2-19.

3.3-17.

Plots of r m s time histories are presented in figures 5.3-16 and These plots indicate that the maximum vibretion levels occur during the lift-off, transonic, and supersonic periods. Vibration values range from l7.1g (rms) to 36.0g (rms) during the transonic period of flight. W i m u m values during both transonic and supersonic perLods are presented in the following table:
Transonic region Maximum level, Mach number gbs) Supersonic region Maximum level, Mach nunber g(rms)

Accelerometer number

SA0940D SAO944D SA0945D ~~0946~ SA0947D ~~094-8~ SAO949D S O5 D A 9O SAO952D

0.78 .84 .84 .84 .84 87 .84 .84 .84

22.0

31. o

36.o 27.5
2. 20

1.83 1.72 1.68

22.5 30. o
28. o
20.8
20.0

17.1
20.5

19. o 29. o

1.55 1.62 1-55 1.90 1.62 w55 sec

I

14.9 18. o
18.0

Data invalid beyond

5-37
These values show r m s levels approximately 3C to 50 percent of those experienced in the spacecrzft 007 acoustic tests. (See ref. 17.) The frequency composition of energy during transonic flight is presented in spectral density plots (figs. 5.3-18 and 5.3-19). A comparison of the frequency distribution of SM measurements indicated no consistent trend as was indicated in boilerplate flights. Energy levels were approximately 1 percent of the levels experienced in the SC-007 0 acoustic tests. Figure 3.3-20 is representative of shell. vibration energy distribution for the lift-off period and illustrates the significant difference i n frequency distribution of energy when compared with the transonic condition of figure 5.3-lg(b). Interior vibrations: Four vibration measurements were made c the m interior structure of the SM at locations shown in figures 11.2-17' and

11.248.
Measurement SAO99kD located on the innel- flange of beam 5 at station X 275, R22, indicated a l o w response of the flange for the S first 40 seconds after lift-off. The time h:istory p l o t (fig. 5.3-21) shows that the maximum rms vibration o' ll7g occurred at Tt.42.2 seconds. f This value decreased to 40g ( r m s ) at the time of CM-SM separation. A lag of approximately 5 seconds was indicated between the time of maxim m fluctuating pressure and vibration levels on the exterior of the SM and maximum response of beam 5 inner flange. Examination of the data and instrumentation system indicates these values to be based on valid data. The frequency composition of the vibratory energy during transonic flight is shown in figure 5.3-22 and for a condition of high response in figure 5.3-23. During this period, an oscillograph recording of the composite waveform shows maxhum peak-to-peak values of 300g. The major period of the data, from T-&O seconds to separation, gives peak-to-peak values of approximately l3Og. These values, when considering the low outer shell vibration levels, are extremely high. Acoustic ground tests of SC-007 created vibration levels of the magnitude experienced in SC-002 flight and at the same location, but only when the vibration levels on the SM shell were much higher than those of the SC-002 SM sheU (ref. 17. No explanation for this apparent ') increase in transmissibility has been found. If additional accelerometers had been included on the radial beam inner flange, providing data for intermediate or associated conditims, the abnormal behavior associated with this measurement could possibly have been resolved..

5-38
Peasurement SAO995D, located on the aft bulkhead at station XS 203, ~62, excited beyond its calibration range (GOg) at liftwas .) off and during the transonic period (M = 0.8 to 1 0 . Fig is a time history of g(rms) for this measurement. These sidered invalid after T+33 seconds for reasons explained in section 5.12. This made it impossible to determine the level of maximum excitation. Hence, the frequence spectrum could only be defined by selecting a time sample during a period of valid data. Figure 5-3-27 gives the acceleration spectral density for SAO995D on the aft bulkhead at T-I-29seconds to Tt.31 seconds. Time histories and lift-off and transonic spectral density plots for measurements SAO996D and SAO997D, located on the forward bulkhead and center of the hydrogen tank shelf, are shown in figures 5.3-26 to 5.3-29. Comparison of SAOg96D and SAOg97D data to vibration acceleration spectral density levels established during acoustic tests on SC-007 indicated that the flight levels are approximately 10 percent of the acoustic test levels. Reaction control subsystem vibrations: The SM RCS for SC-002 consisted of one prototype quad assembly (D) and three simulated quad assemblies (fig. 5.3-30). Mass simulation of all RCS helium and propellant tanks was included. For a detailed descriptfon of the prototype RCS engine assembly, see reference 12 and the structural descript i o n in section 5.2.2. The prototype RCS vas instrumented with accelerometers to measure vibration levels encountered by the engine nozzles, the oxidizer tank support, and the RCS panel as shown in figures 11.2-19and 3.3-31. All accelerometers were ranged &OOg, except the tank support accelerometer which was ranged &75g. All measurements had a frequency response of 1 to 400 cps. 0
A examination of the oscillograph record and the r m s time history n of SAO953D shows the vibration level of the RCS panel to be within the noise of the instrumentation system throughout the majority of the launch phase. This indicates a small vibration input, generally less than 7g m, transmitted to the RCS engine housing and propellant tanks from the panel.

A ms time history of RCS oxidizer tank support vibration is shown n in figure 5.3-32. The maximum vibration occurs just prior to transonic conditions. Figure 5.3-33 shows the maximum energy during this time to exist at approximately 45 cps. This tank support bracket had been modified structurally prior to flight because of the failure which occurred awing the SC-007 acoustic test.

Vibration levels of the four accelerometers mounted in the engine nozzles were considerably higher than the levels obtained on the
h

5-39
simulated nozzles of BP-15 (ref. 1 2 ) . A t y p i c a l r m s t i m e history, which shows vibration of the counterclockwise nozzle i n the r a d i a l direction, i s i l l u s t r a t e d by f i g u r e 5.3-34. An acceleration s p e c t r a l density p l o t f o r t h i s measurement (SA09551>), f i g u r e 5-3-35, shows m a x i mum nozzle vibratory energy existing a t approximately 490 cps. A t present, t h e mode of vibration associated with t h i s frequency i s unknown. Vibration records indicate t h a t the s t r u c t u r a l i n t e g r i t y of t h e nozzles w a s maintained throughout the f l i g h t . Outer s h e l l s t r a i n s :
w i t h s t r a i n gages

The outer she1:L of the S was instrumented M

SAOg36S through SAOg3gS t o measure bending and ex-

tensional s t r a i n s i n the axial and circumferential directions a t xS 2173, 2 5 2 . 7 ~ . The gages were ranged f o r amplitudes of h7000 p i n . /in. with a frequency response cf 0 t o 400 cps (ref. 18).
A l l data were o f very low magnitude and within the noise of the instrumentation system; therefore, no usable s t r a i n data were obtained from the S outer s h e l l . M

Radial beam web s t r a i n s : Fourteen channels of instrumentation were used t o record the web s t r a i n s on r a d i a l beams 2, 4, and 5 continuously. (See f i g . 5.3-36 f o r location of t h e instrumented r a d i a l beams.) The exact location of a11 the s t r a i n gages, and t h e frequency response and range of t h e measurements, a r e shown i n t a b l e 5.3-1. The purpose of the s t r a i n measurements w a s t o evaluate t h e dynamic response of t h e webs t o t h e launch acoustic environment, and a l s o t o compare the fluct u a t i n g s t r e s s e s from f l i g h t data with those from t h e ground t e s t s of SC-007 (ref. 17). This was done t o determine a measure of the r e s i s t ance of t h e r a d i a l beam webs t o f a t i g u e f a i l u r e . Adhesive-backed "damping" tape w a s i n s t a l l e d on one side of the web panels of r a d i a l beam 2. It was planr?ed t h a t the f o u r s t r a i n gages on the web panels of beam 2 would indicate the effectiveness of t h e damping tape i n reducing the web dynamic response. The magnitude of the f l u c t u a t i n g s t m i n s on the r a d i a l beam webs indicated by Mission A-004 f l i g h t data was unexpectedly low. The magnitude of the o v e r a l l r m s s t r a i n of a t y p i c a l s t r a i n gage on a web panel of r a d i a l beam 5, from l i f t - o f f u n t i l abort i n i t i a t i o n , is shown i n f i g u r e 5.3-37. The m a x i m u m rms s t r a i n response cf t h i s p a r t i c u l a r gage (SAO728S) w a s only 120 Pin. /in. This maximum response w a s indicated a t the time of l i f t - o f f and during transonic f l i g h t . Figure 3-3-37 a l s o presents the r m s of web panel s t r a i n response t o t h e acoustic environment of SC-007 ground t e s t s which simulated the environment of e a r l i e r b o i l e r p l a t e f l i g h t s . 'mere is no technical explanation a t t h i s time f o r the l a r g e discrepancy between the two s e t s of s t r a i n results.

5-40
Because of the low response levels that were recorded at all

14 strain-gage locations, it could not be determined whether the strain

levels on beam 2 were reduced or increased as a result of the application of the damping tape.

5.3.4 Command module dynamics. Acoustics: The SC-002 command module was instrumented with two microphones to measure internal noise levels, measurements CKOO34Y and CKOO35Y. (For a discussion of the crew compartment internal noise le-rels, see section 5.9.) The one-third octave band sound level obtained from measurement seconds was used to obtain an estimated CM external CKOO35Y at T-+-38 acoustic environment based on the CM attenuation of SC-007. The onethird octave band noise attenuation values, determined during SC-007 ground acoustic tests, were approximately 35 d B (ref 18). These attenuation values were added to spacecraft 2 reduced flight data to obtain the estimate of the exterior acoustic environment as indicated in figure 5.3-38. The estimated external level for Mission A-004 compared with the measured value for Mission A-LO1 (BP-13) indicates that the external acoustic level for Mission A-004 was considerably lower. This could account for the unexpectedly lotr vibration response in the CM and SM structures on Mission A-004. Additional study of the CM acoustic attenuation characteristics would be necessary to establish confidence in this comparison. Vibrations: The spacecraft 0 2 CM was instrumented with a total of 0 12 accelerometers located as shown in figure 11.2-5. Each measurement was ranged QOOg with a frequency response of 1 to 2530 cps and 0 to 0 600 cps, as given in table 11.2-1. Magnitudes of all vibration levels measured were consideralbly lower than had been anticipated. Throughout the flight, acceleration was less than 5g rms for all measurements with the exception of measurement CA0123D, located on the crew compartment heat shield at station X 33, which showed levels of log to 4Og rms (fig. 5.3-39). PeakC to-peak values measured at this location, were 80g during the transonic period and 200g at T+7O seconds. These values were at the upper range of the instrumentation system and are considered valid. All other measurements were within the noise of the instrumentation system and are being reduced further f o r additional evaluation. Figure 5.3-39 gives the rms time history of measurement CAOl23D. This plot shows an inzrease in vibration level from the transonic period to Tt-70seconds. This trend is characteristic of all vibration measurements on the CM. For spectral density info-tim on measurement CAOl23D, see reference 1 .

5- 41
TKl3LE

3.3-1.-

LOCATIONS OF STRl-IN GAGES ON WEBE OF SERVICE M9DUI.E @.DIAL BEAMS

Beam no.
2

StraLn gage designation

Sf-0721S

Location ~~268, R74.12 XS340* 5, R74.12 XS3O5, R74.12

11~218,

Gage d i r e c t ion
Radial

Range, jiir. /in.

.g000

'requency,
CPS

Gage xype

0 to 400

membrane
Radial
&OOO

SA07225

0 to

400

membrane
Radial membrane Radial membrane
Radial membrane

SA0723S

&OOO

t o 400 t o 400
t o 600

SAO724S SA0725S ~~0726s

SA0728S

&1000

R74.12

BLH FA-25-35-Sl3 NTis 2.1.1.5.1

5
5
3

%340.5, R74.12 ~~268, R74.12

Xs305,

&OOO

o o
0

Radial membrane
Radial

h5000

t o 600

gj000

t o 400
to 600

R74.12 4
5 5
5

membrane
Radial
QOOO

~~0727s

xs305,

R74.34 SAO865S SAO866S ~~0867s ~~0868s SA386gS

SAO87OS

membrane

Xs217, R74.12 Xs217, R74.12

Xs217,

Axial
membrane
Radial

j&ooo
-$!to00

o
0

to 600

to 600

membrane

45" membrane

&ooo
&+ooo
*4000

to

600

R74.12
5 5
5

Xs219, R74.12
Xs219,

Axial
bending
Radial bending

0 t o 600

to 600

R74.12
Xs219,

450 bending

p.000

0 t o 600

R74.12

5-42
NASA-566-3834 APR 15

! .

. ,, < .,
....

'

.
'

_ _ ,

.i . . . . . . X-axis SC acceleration (high) CAOOOlA q (rms) overall vs time iocation: Xc78, YcO, 2 ~ 2 1 Range40 g to +20 g 0 to 25 cps

~
I

. .; . ! : . :

. . . .
. .

i 2nd stage ignition

. . . . . . .* . . . , . . . .
. : .

. . . .

!
.

1
I
I

. . .i.
. .
.:.

. . .

. . . .

. . . -

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

.
.

.
.

.
. .

.
.

.
.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

.
.

* . . . .-..... .

. . . . .

. . . .

. . . . . . . .
. . . .
I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.

. . . . . . . . . .

30

Time, sec

Figure 5.3-1.-

r m s time history of CM X-axis acceleration, Apollo Mission A-OM.

5-43
NASA-S-66-3838 APR 15

In

$ 0
> f:
W

z
n
J 4 a
V

IU
P

I !
W

a J

I4

0 0 4

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 5.3-2

.-

X-axis acceleration spectral density during staging, Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 ,

5- 44
NASA-S-66-3842 APR 15

cn

>

t m
z w

0
J

cr

<
IU
U

cn

0
!-

2
J
W

Figure 5.3-3.- Z-axis acceleration spectral density at T+51.5 second, Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 .

5-45

\D

. D m
(SWJ)

In I

;5

5-46

5- 47
NASA-S-66-3655 APR 15

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

LAOOIZA Z - A X I S TOWER ACCEL

.030 T O 1.531 S E C . 60. C P S 2.5000 C P 5

236

VERTICAL SCALE T I M E S I O 0 0

I) I

$ u
>

t
z

w 0
J

!0

12:

a
I) I

0
4

i -

V 0 4

w J w

Figure 5.3-5,- Z-axis acceleration spectral density at lift-off, Apollo Mission A-004.

5- 48
NASA-S-66-3659 APR 15

.7

.6

.5

.UI

9 .
4

.4

i ? ! 3

K z
In

In In

.3

.2

.1

1 150

1100

1050 1000 950 900 X station (wind-tunnel PSTL-1 model), in.

A

85 0

800

Figure 5.3-6.-

Effect of RCS protuberance of SM fluctuating pressure levels as shown by wind tunnel data.

5-49

0 *
N

9
f-l

d-

cv
!sd anssaid suli

d
N

0
N

9
rl

a ,

N e
m 5

co

dLn
rl

t Y

a
I 4

r'.

Y l 9
9 1 v ,

NASA-S-66-3675 APR 15

1.0

.9

Location:

SM RCS sys D

.8

.7

-6

m
s 1

4-

.V Y

"5

-4

.3

.2

-1

0 -10

10

20

30 40 Time, sec

80

Figure 5.3-9.

Service module fluctuating pressure time history for RCS panel, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-52
NASA-S-66-3679 APR 1 5

-10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Time, sec Figure 5.3-10.

Service module shell fluctuating pressure time history, Apollo Mission A-004.

5- 53

m
9
I-l

2
'?
In
d .
rl
0

-r-

0
N

onoa
b
M

0
-03 rl

4 In
rl

; __e ; ;
U m
rl

N Ln

In
Ln

rl

- N 0

e+

In

".z
N

..

(r\

4 In
0 0
( r

5-54

m
d

e
cv
rt

0 0

a 4

0
r-l

a , I I

cv
I

0
rl

Q
TI S

a
I

S
tn .L

SJ 0
I
0

m
I

rl

0
rl

cv
I n
r(

d I

a
n

nc a

0 0
Y

a
h

LL

m .- m
3

a 0 , l

5 -55
NASA-S-66-3691 APR 15

. 7

.6

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1

100

200

300
Frequency, cps

400

500

600

Figure 5.3-13.-

Comparison of pressure spectral density for similar locations on the

SM for Apollo Missions A-004 (SC-002)and A-102 (BP-15).

3-56 NASA-S-66-3695 APR 15

FREQUENCY, CPS

Figure 5.3-14.-

SM RCS panel fluctuating pressure spectral density during

transonic flight, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-57
NASA-S-66-3699 APR 15

SENSOR

SA0958P S M FLUC P R E S S (2)

T I M E SLICE
LOW-PASS'

3 . 0 T O 39.506 SEC. 651

600. C P S

FILTER

FILTER BW

5.0000 C P S

Figure 5-3-15 SM fluctuating pressure spectral density during transonic flight, Apollo Mission A-004.

.-

5-58
NASA-S-66-3703

APR

15

50

45

40

. . . .

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

. . _ . . . . .
. .

35
. , . . i . . . . .

.,
!

. . . .

30

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

....

I _ _

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

25

......

. . . .

20

15

10

...
.

5
-

CM.
............
~

n
10

10

20

30 40 Time, sec

50

. . .. .
I ,

..

60

70

80

Figure 5.3-16.

rms time history of CSM fairing vibration, Apollo Mission A-OM.

5-59
NASA-S-66-3707 APR 15

125

100

VI

75

E -

50

25

(a) Measurement SA0944D.

i

125

100

75

50

25

-10

lo

20

30

40

70

Time, set

(bl Measurement SAO945D.

Figure 5.3-17.

rms time history of SM vibration, Apollo Mission A-004.

NASA-S-66-3711 APR 15

60

50

40

z
m

30

20

10

(c) Measurement SA0947D.

50

40

- 30
v)

E
m

20

10

10

10

20

30

Time, sec

40

60

70

(d) Measurement SA0950D.

Figure 5.3-17.

Continued.
i

5-61
NASA-3-66-3715 APR 15

-__ - -

Time, sec (e) Measurement SA0946D. Figure 5.3-17.

Continued.

5-62
NASA-S-66-3719 APR 15

50

45

40

35

--

.-++. -' ...-. .. __ ----c,

. . . . .
..-_
,
.

+-. I

. - ..

. .....

. : :.

.
.

30

__

. . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . .
. . . . .
~

. .
. . . .

.,

. . . . . ~..-

__-.

....

........

80
Time, sec

(fl Measurement SA0948D.

Figure 5.3-17.

Continued.

5-63
NASA-S-66-3723 APR 15

__

Time, sec
(g) Measurement SA0949D.

Figure 5.3-17.

Continued.

5-64
NASA-S-66-3727 APR 15

50

45

40

35

313

2 25
CP

v)

20

15

10

G 0-10

10

20

30

Time, sec

40

50

60

70

(h) Measurement SA0952D.

Figure 5.3-17.

Concluded.

5-65
NASA-S-66-3731 APR 15
SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS F I L T E R BW FILTER SAWllOD S M V I B R A T I O N S E C T O R V 37.110 T O 40.116 SEC.
600. C P S

(1)

5.0000 C P S
16.993

S L I C E R M S VALUE

">
>

R 0

t m
z
W

0
J

4
I-

rr
W

Q . li l

0
I4
W

J w

D
FREQUENCY,

CPS

Figure 5.3-18.- CSM fairing acceleration spectral density during transonic flight, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-66

NASA-S-66-3735 APR 15

F R E Q U E N C Y , CPS

(a) Measurement SA0944D. Figure 5.3-19.- SM shell acceleration spectral density during transonic flight, Apollo Mission A-004.

a
I

5-67
*

NASA-S-66-3739 APR 15
SENSOR TIME SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER
SA09450 SM V I B R A T I O N S E C T O R I l l 36.501 T O 39.516 S E C . 600. C P S (6)

FILTER BW

5.0000 C P S

SLICE R M S V A L U E

22.716

FREQUENCY, CFS

(b) Measurement SA0945D.

Figure 5.3-19.- Continued.

1

5-68
NASA-5-66-3743 APR 15

SENSOR

SA0946D SM V I B R A T I O N S E C T O R 33.008

I V (7)

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

TO

36.014 SEC.

600. CPS

5.0000 CPS
19.357

100

200

300

4 00

500

600

FREQUENCY, CPS

(6)

Measurement SA0946D.

Figure 5.3-19.- Continued.

5-69

NASA-S-66-3747

APR 15

SENSOR
TIME SLICE
LOW-PASS

S A 0 9 4 7 0 SM V I B R A T I O N S E C T O R V ( 8 ) 36.501 T O 39.506 SEC. 600. C P S

FILTER

FILTER BW S L I C E R M S VALUE

5.0000 CPS
19.686

FREQUENCY, C P 5

(d) Measurement Figure

SA0947D.

5 3 19 .-

.- Continued .

9-70
NASA-S-66-3751 APR 15

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS

FILTER

SA09480 S M VIBRATION SECTOR V ( ) 9

36.51 I TO 39.516 SEC.

600. CPS
5.0000 C P S 14.142

FILTER

aw

SLICE RMS V A L U E

FREQUENCY. CPS

(e) Measurement SA0948D. Figure 53 - 19. .

Continued

5-71

NASA-S-66-3755 APR 15

SENSOR TIME S L I C E LOW-PASS FILTER BW FILTER

SA0949D

SM

V I B R A T I O N SECTOR V

(IO)

37.110 T O 40.115

SEC.

450. C P S
5.0000 C P S

SLICE R M S VALUE 35

18.925

30

s
k
w
J

cn a

'>
25

cn z
0 20

4 U

I-

u w

cn z

1 5

0
I-

J w

p: W

IO

u
5

0 0
IO0

200

300 FREQUENCY, C P S

400

500

600

(f> Measurement SA0949D.

Figure

5.3-19,- Continued.

5-72

NASA-S-66-3759 APR 15

SENSOR
T I M E SLICE
LOW-PASS

SA0950D SM VIBRATION SECTOR V (11)

37.120 T O 40.105
SEC.

FILTER

600. CPS

FILTER BW

5.0000 C P S

F R E Q U E N C Y , CPS

(9) Measurement SA0950D. Figure

5.3-19

.- Continued.

5- 73
NASA-S-66-3763 APR 15

SENSOR TIME S L I C E
LOW-PASS

SA0952D SM V I B R A T I O N S E C T O R V I

(13)

36.501 T O 39.506 S E C .

FILTER

600. C P S

(h) Measurement SA0952D.

Fi gure 5.3-19.- Concluded.

5-74

NASA-S-66-3767 APR 15

SENSOR
T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS

SA0945D S M V I B R A T I O N S E C T O R
.010 T O 1.513 S E C .

111

(6)

FILTER

600. C P S
5.0000 C P S 27.112

FILTER BW SLICE R M S VALUE

IO0

200

300

400

500

600

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 5.3-20.-

SM

shell acceleration spectral density at lift-off, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-75
NASA-S-66-3771 APR 15

Time, sec Figure 5.3-21.

rms time history of radial beam circumferential vibration, Apollo Mission A-004.
.--

5-76

NASA-S-66-3775 APR 15

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

SA0994D VIBRATION C I R S M B E A M 5

37.110 T O 4 0 . 1 0 5 S E C .
600. C P S
5.0000 C P S

20.057

I
600

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 5.3-22.- Radial beam acceleration spectral density during transonic flight, ApoIio Mission A-004.

5- 77
NASA-S-66-3779 APR 15

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER BW FILTER

SA0994D V I B R A T I O N C I R S M B E A M 5

50.015 T O 53.010 S E C .
600.

CPS

5.0000 C P S

Figure 5.3-23.- Radial beam acceleration spectra1 density during supersonic flight, Apollo Mission A-004,

5-78
NASA-S-66-3783 APR 15

50

45

40

35

30

E m

VI

25

20

20

30 40 Time, sec

50

60

70

80

Figure 5.3-24.

rms time history of aft bulkhead vibration, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-79
NASA-S-66-3787 APR 15

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS

FILTER B W

SA0995D VIBRATION A X I A L S M SECTOR I V

29.505 T O 91.709 S E C .

FILTER

600. C P S
5.0000 CPS

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 5.3-25.-

Aft bulkhead acceleration spectral density, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-80
NASA-S-66-3791 APR 15

Time, see
Figure 5.3-26.

- rms time history of forward bulkhead vibration, Apoiio Mission A-004.

5-81
NASA-S-66-3795 APR 15

SENSOR TIME SLICE

LOW-PASS

SA0996D VIBRATION I A X I A L S M SECTOR I

.020 T O 1.503 S E C
600.

FILTER

CPS

FILTER BW

5.0000 C P S 13.952

SLICE R M S V A L U E

m a
N

Y 0
t m
z w
) .

-J

a tu w

a m z
4

c
a w
w

0
-1

u u
4

FREQUENCY, C P S

(a) Lift-off.

Figure 5.3-27

.- Forward bulkhead acceleration spectral density,

Apollo Mission A-004.

5-82

NASA-S-66-3799 APR 15

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

.250

SA0996D V I B R A T I O N 1 A X I A L 33.018 TO 36.003

S M SECTOR I

SEC.

FILTER

600. CPS 5.0000

CPS

7.412

,225

u)

(b> During transonic flight.

Figure 5 3-2 7.

Conc I uded

5-8 3
NASA-S-66-3803 APR 15

g (rms) overall vs time

Time, sec
Figure 5.3-28.

rms time history of ti2 tank shelf vibration, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-84 NASA-S-66-3807 APR 15

SENSOR
TIME SLICE

SA09970 V I B R A T I O N 2 A X I A L SM S E C T O R I

.019 T O 1 5 3 S E C . .1
600. C P S

LOW-PASS

FILTER

FILTER B W

5.0000 C P S

FREQUENCY, C P S

(a) Lift-off. Figure 5.3-29,- H2 tank shelf acceleration spectral density, Apoflo Mission A-004.

5-85

N A S A - S - 6 6 - 3 8 1 1 APR 15

SENSOR

SA0997D V I B R A T I O N 2 A X I A L

S M SECTOR I

T I M E SLICE
LOW-PASS FILTER BW FlLTER

36.510 T O 39.506
600. C P S

5EC.

5.0000 C P S 4 -990

SLICE R M S VALUE

FREQUENCY, CPS

(b) During transonic flight,

Figure 5.3-29.-

Concluded,

5-86

aft

Xs377.2-.

- Yaw
_ . _ _ -. _
Counterclockwise - - - - - ---- rol I engine

Xs 320.9-

Clockwise roil engine

1
+Yaw
I

xs200

Figure 5.3-30.-

Location of SM RCS quad

D,

Apollo Mission A-004,

5-87

m -

L ! 0
h
L

v, l n
I 4

C Y

t Y

5-88
NASA -5-66-382'3 APR 15

5.0

,
,

i
ni. SA0954D
. - .

:
4.5

' Mea!u/ement

- -1
I

,
_ _ *
8

. I
. !
!
,

.
I

4.0
*

i
~

I
I

-4-I .
. t

3.5

stage ignition .

!
! t

3.0

E -

Y )

2.5

CT,

2.0

1.5

1.0

60

70

Time, sec Figure 5.3-32. - X-axis vibration measured on the oxidizer tank support bracket of quad D, SM RCS, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-89
NASA-S-66-3827

APR 15

SENSOR TIME SLICE

LOW-PASS

SA0954 S M V I B R A T I O N R C S S U P P O R T (15)
33.008 TO 36.014

SEC.

FILTER

600. C P S 5.0000 C P S
1.477

FILTER 6 W SLICE R M S VALUE

> I-

b
n

3
a

FREQUENCY, CPS

Figure 5.3-33.- Digital power spectra1 density of X-axis vibration measured from T+33.008 t o T+36.014 seconds on the oxidizer tank support bracket of quad D, SM RCS, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-90
NASA-S-66-3831 APR 15

250

225

200

175

150

E
1, 3

v)

125

100

(I-

___ . .
.

-...,. - ......

. . . -. .
. . .

I .

. . . . 4. . . I

.........

. .

4 .

'

. .

. . . .
.

I-_____

. . . . . .
.

. . . -1.. . .

1
+

. . .

. . . . . . .

CM-SM separation _ . - ! . .
*
,

I*

i
. .
. .

.
.

. .-.

. :. j i
i !

1
~

- 2

.--..;-

.. ...

. - .
. .

. . . . . . . . .......
i

!
,

. 1 . .
: ,

'

.;...
2 -

':

0-l0

10

20

30 Time,

40

50

60

70

80

sec

Figure 5.3-34. - Radial vibration measured i n the counterclockwise roll engine nozzle of quad D, SM RCS, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-91
NASA-S-66-3835 APR 15

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER 8 W S L I C E R M S VALUE

SA0955D RCS E N G I N E N U Z Z L E V l B X-AXIS 50.014 T O 53.010 S E C .

FtLTER

600. CPS
5.0000 C P S
81.159

F R E Q U E N C Y , CI'S

Figure 5.3-35 Digital power spectral density of radial vibration measured from T+5 0.0 14 t o T+53.0 10 seconds i n the counterclockwise r o l l engine nozzle of quad D, S M RCS, Apollo Mission

.-

A-004.

5-92
NASA-S-66-3839 APR 15

-Y

Be

Beam no. 1

tY Looking aft at station X 355

Figure 5.3-36.-

Location of radial beams in service module for Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 .

5-93
co
0

cu
I

0 0
b

0
v)

S 0

12

V
(u
v)
4

ucc 0

0 2 *,
I M
O
E .-

aJ

0
(v

0
rl

0 0 0
rl

co

0 0

0 0

0 0

d-

cv

5- 94

NASA-S-66-3847 APR 15

160

150

\
S

3 140
a

7 3

cu

0
0

0 '

E?

a ,

..

130

- -- -

i n

-a

SC-002 CM internal SPL -SC-002 CM internal SPL plus noise attenuation characteristics Average of three BP-13 CM
L .

k~

100

90 20

50

100 200 500 Frequency, cps (1/3octave)

1000

2000

Figure 5.3-38.- Comparison between BP-13 measured and SC-002 calculated CM external acoustic environment on Apollo Missions A-101 a d A-004.

5-95
NASA-S-66-3851 APR 15

. . .

. . . .

p
.
. I

.:.

.,
I

.:.

-10

10

.:,* . 40

Time, sec Figure 5.3-39.

- rms time history of CM heat shield vibration, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-96

5.4 Boost Protective Cover

Description.- The boost protective cover ( B E ) consisted of a hard cover over the apex portion of the comnand module (CM), and a soft cover made up of seven panels over the remainder of the conical portion of the CM (see fig. 5.4-1). The boost protective cover was of Block I configuration and construction except for the interface of the hard cover to soft cover on sFX of the seven soft cover panels. The interface on the panel containing the side access hatch did have the Block I interface structure. The cover was also modified to accomodate the installation of 36 pressure measureaents, and 6 calorimeter measurements. This instrumentation was mounted on the CM heat shield through individualbosses, and mated to matching holes in the BPC so that the transducer surfaces were flush with the BPC outer surface. The basic installation was the same as that on BP-22 (ref. 4 . ) The hard cover over the CM apex was constructed of ablative cork bonaed to a fiberglass honeycomb substructure. The soft panels were laminated with a layer of teflon impregnated glass cloth, a second covering of nylon fabric, and an outer layer of cork. An additional panel over the hatch area was removable with all other panels installed. Incorporated in this panel was a circular window coinciding with the CM hatch window. Protuberances covering the CM-SM umbilical, scimitar antennas, and CM venting systems were incorporated in the soft panels. The BPC was fastened together with mechanical fasteners at all Joints. Instrumentation.- Four static pressure transducers were installed to measure the pressure between the boost protective cover and CM heat shield. One of the measurements was under the hard cover and three under the soft cover. (See section 11.2 for exact locations and range.) These pressures in conjunction with the external conical surface pressures were used to obtain the differential pressure across the cover. In addition, s i x calorimeters were installed on the external surface to measure heating rates throughout the mission. Performance.- The essential function of the boost protective cover is to protect the CN crew compartment heat shield and thermal control coating from ablating, charring, or discoloring during launch. It also serves to reduce the sooting on the CM windows and CM thermal control coating following the firing of the tower-jettison Rotor. The test objective for the boost protective ewer on this flight was to demmstrate its structural capability to withstand the launch environment. There is no requirement for the cover to remain intact following an abort. Based on tracking and onboard films, in addition to the pressure data, the boost protective cover performed as planned. There was no

5-97
evidence from these data of any breathing or f l u t t e r of t h e soft cover, o r any other s t r u c t u r a l problems occurring during launch and pi.tch-up. The cover remained i n t a c t u n t i l after abort i n i t i a t i o n when t h e s o f t cover f a i l e d , as expected. Based on the pressure data and filni coverage, t h e s o f t cover failure s t a r t e d during the f i r s t launch-escape vehicle (LEV) tumble, approximately 1.5 t o 2 seconds after abort init i a t i o n . Recovery evidence indicated t h a t t h e hard cover w a s removed with t h e launch-escape subsystem ( E S ) as planned. Figure 5.4-2 shows t y p i c a l p r e s s w e conditions f o r t h e SC-002 f l i g h t . As can be seen, t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure across the cover i n the areas of instrumentation w a s i n a direction t o press t h e cover t o the CM surface.
S i x calorimeters were located on t h e command module, f l u s h with t h e boost protective cover, t o measure t h e heat f l u x r e s u l t i n g from LES motor plume impingement during t h e mission abort. A l l six calo-

rimeters had ranges from 0 t o 100 Btu/ft /sec (see f i g . ll.2-10 and t a b l e 11.2-1). An examination of the f l i g h t data indicated t h a t the boost protective cover received considerable heat flux from the LES motor plume, which expanded much more than on previous f l i g h t s because of t h e high-altitude abort conditions. Reference 1 ( f i g s . CAR-145, CAR-146, CAR-147) contains t h e measured keat flux on the boost protect i v e cover. The following t a b l e shows t h e heat-flux maximums measured.

i
*C
~~ ~

~xinum heat flux sec

Btu/ft2/sec

Time,

(4
2

28

59
48

2
2

34 48 34
a

3 3
<1

Time a f t e r U S motor i g n i t i o n

5-98
The flight times shuwing high static pressures due to plume impingement during the tumbling of the LEV after abort initiation (see section 5.2) correlated with the measured heat flux impingement. The period of heat f l u x impingement was less than 6 seconds over the entire command module, which compares to the major thrusting period of LJ3S motor burn (see section 5.6). Visual inspection of the CM after recovery shared it to be scorched and covered with soot. However, the condition did not indicate any problem f o r the heat protection subsystem for a power on tumbling boundary abort. The temperature measurements on the CMheat shield underneath the boost protective cover did not indicate any change during the entire flight, thus indicating that the simulated cork heat shield provided , adequate insulation (ref. 1 figs. CAT-189, CAT-190, CAT-191, and CAT-192).

5- 99

e
S

rd

0 0
0 .In v, .-

P
(d

2 0
0

aJ

0
0

>

v,
0

5-100
NASA-S66-3862 APR 15

(a) T 4- 25 seconds.

fb) T

+ 3 6 seconds.

40

80

12 0
fc)

160

200
seconds.

240

280

320

Peripheral location,+, deg

T + 73

Figure

5.4-2.- Mission A-004

soft boost protective cover static pressures.

t

7-101

5.5

Mechanical Subsystems

- Components of t h e mechanical subsystems flown on Mission A-00 included t h e canard subsystem, the uprighting subsystem c a n i s t e r s ( w i t h packed bags), the deployment mechanisms f o r the recovery aids, the lztching mechanisms f o r the side pressure and side ab:Lative hatches, and a modified latching mechanisnc f o r the astro-sextant door. A l l components performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . The following paragraphs des c r i b e each component and i t s performance.

Canard subsystem.- Mission A-004 was the fourth mission t o use the canard subsystem. The subsystem consisted. of two deployable aezodynamic surfaces located between the forward end cbf the tower-jettison motor and the &-ball assembly. A d e t a i l e d description of t h e subsystem i s presented i n references 4 and 10. The sequence of events of the canard Subsystem was as planned and compared favorably with the sequences of &he previous f l i g h t s . The eanards functioned properly. The canard-deployment relays i n t h e mission sequencer closed approximately U. seconds (~+84.76 sec) a f t e r abort i n i t i a t i o n , a c t i v a t i n g the cartridges i n t h e pyrotechnic t h r u s t e r . Postf l i g h t examination of t h e t h r u s t e r revealed t h a t both cartridges had i8.8 f i r e d . Canard deployment s t a r t e d a t T - 4 7 seconds, and the cmards reached t h e full-open position by ~+84.99 seconds. (See f i g . 5 - 5 1 . ) The 0.21 second required f o r deployment WES well within the destgn l i m i t . Photographic coverage of the launch-escape subsystem showed t h a t the sec). canards were open u n t i l e a r t h impact (~-1-266 The strain-gage outputs from both actuator l i n k s were approximately
the same during canard deployment and are presented i n figures 5.5-2 and 5.5-3. The time-history p l o t s of these strain-gage outputs during canard deplqment were as planned and a s previously experienced (.refs. 4 and 10. At the time of f u l l canard deployment, dynamic pressur? was 2 2 -5 134 l b / f t as compared w i t h a maximum of 1 8 l b / f t for Mission A-003, 2 and 175 l b / f t f o r Ivlission A-002. A f t e r fvll deployment, t h e load osc i l l a t e d f o r 0.20 second a t approximately 31 cps, which is esseAtially t h e n a t u r a l frequency of the canards i n the open position. A s i m i l a r

i n e r t i a l o s c i l l a t i o n w a s a l s o observed on t h e previous f l i g h t s . During the time t h a t the launch-escape vehicle was tumbling, t h e l i n k loads varied very slowly between +1300 pounds arid -1500 poxads u n t i l .tower j e t t i s o n ( f i g s . 5.5-4 and 5.5-5). Uprighting subsystem canisters. - Two c a n i s t e r s were flown on SC-002 t o v e r i f y compatibility with the e a r t h lariding subsystem ( E X ) . They were not scheduled t o operate for t h i s mission.

5-102

The canisters contained the inflatable bags of the uprighting subsystem. The double-bag canister was attached to the +Z side of gusset 1 on the CM upper deck, and the single-bag canister was attached to the -Y side of gusset 2 (figs. 5.5-6 and 5.5-7). Both canisters were inspected in place after the flight. There wzs no evidence of contact with the ELS during parachute deployment. However, the deployable part of the double-bag canister shifted dawn (in the X-axis direction) approximately three-eighths of an inch (fig. 5.3-7). The canister was still latched satisfactorily and appeared to have slipped at earth impact. Recovery aids deployment mechanisms.- The deployment mechanisms for the postlanding recovery aids included those used with the two VHF antennas, the flashing light, and the sea dye markerlswimmer umbilical. Although the antennas and light were required to deploy, they were not scheduled to function on Mission A-004.
The deployment spring-operated mechanisms for the antennas and flashing light were identical. When the main parachutes were deployed, the pull on the lanyard attached to the parachute caused the mtivation of the 8-second time-delay cutter device, which released the springoperated deployment mechanisms. The deployment springs used on SC-002 were not representative ofthe springs to be used on future flights. Stronger springs are scheduled for all future spacecreft beginning with The antenna elements were not actual flight hardware, but were SC-009. H of nonrepresentative materials and were shorter in length. One V F antenna was located in the forward compartment on the inboard +Z side of gusset 1 while the other antenna was located on the inboard -Y side , of gusset 2 (figs. 5.5-6 and 5.5-7). The flashing light was located on the inboard +Y side of gusset 4 (fig. 5.5-8).

Postflight inspection of the VKF antennas and flashing light confirned that all three systems erected as planned. The weak deployment springs allowed some "play" in the mechanisms when erect and the antenna elements (of nonrepresentative materials) were badly bent, as expected. (See figs. 5.5-6 and 5.5-7.) Examination of the mechanisms revealed no apparent damage during the flight or at impact.
The sea dye rnarker/swimmer umbilical deployment mechanism consisted of a rectangular canister which was spring-loaded on a deplqment platform located in the -Z bay of the CM upper deck (fig. 5.5-8). The canister contzined the swimmer inter-phone connection p l u g and tzi simulated sea dye cake. The canister was n o t scheduled nor fitted for There was no evidence of contact with ELS deployment on Mission A-004. components during the mission.

Side a b l a t i v e hatch latching mechanism.- The s i d e a b l a t i v e hatch was located on the -Z side of the CM conical surface outer structure. The latching mechanism, mounted on the inner face of t h e hatch, could be manually operated from either inside or outside t h e CM a s indicated i n f i g u r e 5.5-9. A n a b l a t i v e plug i s normally i n s e r t e d i n the clearance hole {for a 7/16-inch hex head male 0peratiz.g t o o l ) which permits access t o t h e mechanism from t h e outside. For t h i s mission the plug was omitted. lvIanual ro-tation of the actuating shaft and kandle caused r o t a t i o n of t h e r o l l e r l a t c h e s which engage the rzmp-type s t r i k e r p l a t e s on the heats h i e l d s t r u c t u r e frame. A override spring retained t h e lztches i n n e i t h e r the latched or unlatched condition. A a u x i l i a r y plunger with a n strike f a c e located i n the forward compartment, operating between the heat-shield s t r u c t u r e and inner structure, supplied an a l t e r n a t e means of e x t e r n a l l y releasing t h e h%tches a f t e r landing.
The side ablative hatch latching mechanism performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y on t h i s f l i g h t . The mechanism retained t h e hatch i n place during f l i g h t and was operable a f t e r landing. Preflight torque required t o l a t c h t h e mechanism was 240 in.-lb; postlanding torque required t o unlatch The mechanism w a s 150 in. -1b. (Latch torque l i m i t i s specified as 260 i n . -1b. ) Visual examination of the mechanism indicated no damage.

Side pressure hatch latching mechanism.- The s i d e pressure hatch was located on the -Z s i d e of the CM and rel.ied on the inside cabin pressure f o r the "hard" s e a l against t h e CM inner s t r u c t u r e ( f i g . 3.3-10). The latching mechanism, mounted on the outer face of the hatch, was used t o hold the hatch i n place and t o obtein the i n i t i a l "soft" s e a l for t h e cabin. The nechanism could be manually operated from e i t h e r inside o r outside the CM by r o t a t i n g a drive s h a f t which penetrated the hatch through a hermetically sealed gear u n i t . A pinion gear on the ouxput
side of t h e u n i t operated a drive bar by means of a rack.
Parallel-

operating hook-type latches on t h e a f t edge of the hatch were driven by l i n k s attached t o the drive bar ( f i g s . 5.5-1.0 and 5.5-11). The hooks were engaged by cam actioq with roller-type s t r i k e r bars mounted on t h e CM inner structure. A f t e r the hooks were el;.geged, t h e a d d i t i o n a l travel of t h e hooks caused a limited "pull down" wedging a c t i o n t o produce i n i t i a l sealing contact on t h e hatch O-ring sealing surfeces. F u l l sealing of the hatch is dependent upon the pressure d i f f e r e n t i a l between lsabin pressure and ambient. The present sealed drive unit/pinion gear design was proven unsatisfactory during grome. handling. A new design w i l l be incorporated on SC-011 and subsequent vehicles. T'ne present pinion i s torque limited t o 100 in.-lb before f a i l u r e . The s i d e pressure hatch l a t c h i n g mechanism performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y f o r t h i s mission although cabin pressure was not maintained. The hatch remained latched s a t i s f a c t o r i l y during f l i g k t ; however, i n t e r n a l pressure of t h e command module apparently leaked. past t h e two hatch O-ring

5-104
seals. Figure 5.5-12 shows the evidence of s e a l leakage discovered when the hatch was inspected during recovery operations. Impressions f r c m t h e two O-rings could c l e a r l y be seen i n t h e surface of t h e tape located on t h e hatch -X and 3.Y edges. This tape had been applied to a l l t h e hatch edges t o eliminate p r e f l i g h t gaps between the hatch seal surface and frame seal surface. Only i n t e r m i t t e n t impressions were vis3.ble across t h e 4-X edge, and no seal impressions w e r e v i s i b l e along most of t h e -Y edge. In addition, sooting w a s v i s i b l e along most of t h e -Y hatch edge and portions of t h e +X edge. These soot deposits w e r e inside the f i r s t O-ring and portions of t h e deposits were inside t h e second O-ring.

The l a t c h i n g mechanism w a s torqued t o 295 i n . - l b a t p r e f l i g h t hatch i n s t a l l a t i o n and required 120 in.-lb torque t o unlatch a t recovery. (Latch torque l i m i t i s specified as 100 in.-lb.) Visual. examination of t h e mechanism after recovery indicated no damage w a s incurred during
flight.

On f i n a l p r e f l i g h t i n s t a l l a t i o n , one tooth on t h e pinion w a s broken off, but t h i s d i d not prevent p o s i t i v e l a t c h i n g of t h e hatch. Two more t e e t h were broken i n recovery area operation.

Astro-sextant door mechanism.- The astro-sextant door mechanism of t h e command module i s used t o l a t c h and to deploy t h e doors during manned missions. For t h i s mission, only t h e l e t c h e s were used and they were not required t o be operable a t any t i m e during t h e f l i g h t . The two l a t c h e s held the doors i n place during t h e f l i g h t .

0 0

4
5
0 .m m .S

0
W

E In
W
(0

n
W

-I

rl

Ln
Rz

a
cv
rl

9 9

930 ' I N 3 W A O l d 3 0

OYVNV3

I v)

4 v)
a z

5-106

4 0
0

=x

2s
_.

.VI

0 .VI

0
0

n .

- ; 0

m 0
I

.>
S

2
rl

+
m
I
S

In

a
rl

3 9

n
N

Y VI 4 VI

a i

n
I

. .
0
I

n
L

:$ :
I

NO I S N 3 1

NOlSSJtld NO3

'>(NIT

aavNw3

NI

awoi

a z

a
S

5 n
0

tu

51

tu

C Y

n
N

0 r4

.,

..

n
I

0
L

n
1

NOISNZIL

NC)I S S 3 H d W 0 3

,?

d0 0

4
S

u
w
W
10
8.

i-

n w
cn

D
0 Y S

a
w

>

co

4 m
a z

2
4
E
0

0
0 .VI VI .-

a
n
0

Ln
d

CL

1 1 1 , 1 1 1

fl

n
N

. .

n
I

.. ,
n

I - 0

N
I

00

NOISN32

NO I S S 3 M d W O 3

a i x ~ t i a v N v 3 N I avo1 a

5-irc
NASA-S-66-3728 APR 15

VHF antenna deployn~ent

niechariisiit

Figure 5.5-6.-

Uprighting system canisters and VHF recovery aids, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-Ul
NASA-S-66-3732

APR 15

Figure 5.5-7,- Uprighting system canisters and recovery aids, Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 .

5-3.12
NASA-S-66-3736 A P R 15

. .
Figure 5.5-8.Sea dye canister and flashing light recovery aids, Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 .

0
0

.h .8

.-

VI VI

U S

m
z
0
.d I

x
5 ._ u W

u
v0

W
VI

I n
I 4

LT
I

LE:
l i

2t

! n

NASA-S-66-3748 APR 15

Figure 5.5-11.-

Unlatched side pressure hatch after recovery, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-u6
NASA-S-66-3752
APR 15

Figure 5.5-12.-

Side pressure hatch postflight inspection, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-117

5.6 Launch-Escape Propulsion Subsystem

The launch-escape propulsion subsystem for Apollo Mission A-004 consisted of qualified launch-escape and pitch-control motors and a conditionally qualified tower-jettison m o h r . The configuration and instrumentation of the subsystem were the same as those used for Mission A-003 (ref. 4 . ) The launch-escape propulsion subsystem satisfactorily performed its intended purpose for Mission A-004. A . instrumentation functioned u satisfactorily, and the performance of the launch-escape and pitchcontrol motors when corrected f o r motor grain temperature was approximately as predicted. Thermocouple landline data indicated that the temperature of both the launch-escape motor and the pitch-control motor w a s 35G0 F at the time of launch.
A summary of the individual motor performance is presented in table 5.6-1. Figures 5.6-1 and 7.6-2 present the vacuum thrust time histories for the launch-escape and pitch-control motors, respectively.

7-118

u5 L A

rl

P
h

-P

._
0

ff -. -P
m
-P

m
I

a,
0

rl
Q,

rl

() I

Q,

a ,
h

: : k
9

F. -P

F!

u)

-P

rl

a 3

d-

III
;1

u
in

E
IU
III

i n

Irl

$4 .J

s
cd

3 0

>

r5
I

8.
0
v)

a ,
I
0 S 3

cd

5-120

0 ..v)

v)

c u
I

3 9
9
I

LL

2 3 m .-

5-121

5.7

Pyrotechnic Devices

There were five pyrotechnic devices on S C - 0 0 2 being f l i g h t - t e s t e d f o r the f i r s t time: t h e recovery a i d s l i n e cutter, t h e apex-ccver thruster pressure cartridge, t h e CM-SM umMlical g u i l l o t i n e , t h e standa r d Apollo c i r c u i t i n t e r r u p t e r , and t h e main parachute disconnect guill o t i n e . Four of these were Block I configuration. The type VI pressure cartridge (apex-cover t h r u s t e r ) w a s an i n t e r i m design.
The recovery a i d s l i n e c u t t e r w a s ac.tually an additional e9plicat i o n of t h e Block I reefing-line c u t t e r configuration which performed successfully on bission PA-2 (ref. 11).

The main parachute disconnect g u i l l o t i n e w a s previously flown on Mission A-003 as an i n e r t device.

The apex-cover thruster cartridges were similar t o those used on Mission A-003 with the following modifications:

(a) The t o t a l pressure buildup was decreased by the addition of an end closure welded i n the base of the cartridge below the main charge pellets.
I

(b) The curing cycle t i m e f o r t h e p;yrotechnic mix w a s increased by an additional hour a t 3000 F f o r b e t t e r control of the pressure rise time.
The CM-SM umbilical g u i l l o t i n e used on Mission A-004 was t h e standard Block I configuration. The g u i l l o t i n e design provided redundant opposing blades on each side of the umbilical. I n i t i a t i o n of t h e explosive t r a i n w a s provided by two Apollo standard detonators wkich f i r e d a mild detonator fuse (MDF) crossover manifold t o a l l four blades. The crossover manifold insured t h a t a t least me blade on each side of t h e umbilical would fire. Figures 5.7-1 and 5.7-2 i l l u s t r a t e t h e general configuration of the guillotine.

Four electrical c i r c u i t interrupters were used on Mission A-004 t o deadface e l e c t r i c a l connections between the CM and S j u s t p r i o r t o M severance of the umbilical. Two l8-pin a n d two 104-pin connect-ors w e r e i n s t a l l e d with dual Apollo standard i n i t i a t o r s t o provide posit4ve elect r i c a l i s o l a t i o n of hot e l e c t r i c a l circuits f o r IES abort and normal The e l e c t r i c a l c i r c u i t interrljpters used on MisCM-SM separation. sion A-004 were of t h e Block I configuration. Figure 5.7-3 shows a cutaway drawing o f a t y p i c a l c i r c u i t interrupter.

5-122 The main parachute disconnect consisted of t w o pressure-cartridgepropelled g u i l l o t i n e s . (See f i g . 5.8-3. ) h e g u i l l o t i n e was provided for each of t h e two parachute harness legs. The c a r t r i d g e u t i l i z e d was t h e type 200 pressure c a r t r i d g e (ME 453-0005-0232).
O f the o-ther pyrotechnic devices which had been f l i g h t - t e s t e d previously, all were Block I configuration except the type V I pressure cstrtridge (apex-cover j e t t i s o n ) . The Block I pressure cartridge, type VI, w i l l be flown on SC-009.

The pyrotechnic devices and the functions performed on Yission A-001; are l i s t e d i n t a b l e 5.7-1.

A l l pyrotechnic devices used on Ptission A-004 functioned s z t i s f a c torily and i 3 proper sequence. Visual inspection of the recovered pyrotechnic devices ( a l l were recovered except the CM-SPI umbilical gu-illot i n e ) v e r i f i e d t h a t each device had been t o t a l l y expended. Inspection of 5he cleanly severed umbilical on t h e commmd module indicated t h a t t h e g u i l l o t i n e f b c t i o n e d properly. A l l separation systems severed cleanly and i n ?roper sequence.

5-123

r----Function Tower separation Drogue parachute deployment

TmLR 5.7-T.

- PYROTECHNIC DEVICES FOR MISSION A-004

Nmber required 2

(SC-002) Device Serial number 0017 0005

Explosive component and part number I g n i t e r c a r t r i d g e , type I (ME 453-0014-0091)

Lot
AJJ

Ini -t i a t o r AFH AFH

AFT? AFH
ANX AM(

Lot

I
Launch-escape motor ignition Pitch-control motor ignition I g n i t e r c a r t r i d g e , type I (ME 453-0014-0091) I g n i t e r c a r t r i d g e , type I1 (ME 453-0014-0092) Explosive b o l t assembly (ME 111-001-0026) 2 2

Serial number 0029 0007 0021 0018 0040 0024 0405 0441 0047 0034 0296 0423 0415 0409

AJJ
AJJ A JJ
ARW ARW

0013
0012

Tower- j e t t i s o n motor ignition

0035
0074 0009
0005

APB
APB APB

AKN
AKN

ALH

ALH
0011

AKN

APB
Pressure c a r t r i d g e , type I (ME 453-0005-0081)

0012 0025 0026 0058 0002

00 15

m
AKN

AJN
AJN AJN

m
P i l o t parachute deployment Pressure c a r t r i d g e , type I1 (ME 453-0005-0082)

ACU ACU ACU ACU ACU ACU ACU ACU ACU ACU AFJ AFJ

0311 0053
0054 0156

0315

AJP AJP AJP AJP AJ-P AJP

0079
0059 0018 0059 0052 0109 0094 0050 0011 0266 0126 0005 0007

0135
0172 0001 0117 0121 0408 0412

Apex cover j e t t i s o n Drogue parachute disconnect

Pressure c a r t r i d g e , type V I (ME 453-0003-0056) Linear shaped charge cartridge (V16-576260-61.) (V16-776260- 71) Detonator c a r t r i d g e assembly (ME 453-0021-0005)

ACU
ACU

IDTl LOT1

P-CS ACE AFJ AFJ

AGG

2 2 2

ACV
ACV

0261 0294

Canard deployment Main parachute disconnect

Pressure c a r t r i d g e (VU-59220- 41) Pressure c a r t r i d g e , type 200 (ME 453-0005-0232)

AAB AAB
ALL

0503
0029 0097 0161

0054
0088

ALL

AV F

TABU

5.7-1.- PYROTECHNIC DEVICES FOR MISSION A-004 (SC-002) - Continued

ice In ato -i t i- r Seria: nurdbei -

Function

Explosive component and p a r t number Linear shaped charges

Number required

Serial number

CM-SM separation

system tension t i e cutters

(m7-590049)
I

LOT1 LOT 1

j LOT
!

u34 1235 1240 1241 1236

1237

0463 0322
0321

Detonator c a r t r i d g e
(ME

i
i

AX C

453-0021-000>)

ACX
I?CX ACX

0153
0056

oog;
0039

ACX ACX

0204

0139

0172 0397 0268

CM-SM separztion system

Umbilical guillotine Electrical circuit interrupter Detomtor c a r t r i d g e (ME 453-0021-0005) Type I

0203

0143

0335 0321 0168

0082 03-23

(ME )I 53-0010-0001)

- 104 pine
-

m e
Recwery aids Flashing l i g h t Longeron no. 1 antenna release Longeron no. 2 antenna release Disreef afogue parzchutes

1 1 1 pins 8 (ME 453-0010-0005)

0205

0214 0157
0104

0131

Line c u t t e r (ME 901-0001-0024) Line c u t t e r (ME 901-0001-0024) Line c u t t e r (ME901-0001-002lc) Reefing l i n e c u t t e r

071.5

0667

0666 0631 0608 0618 0583 #

0538

(NV-5844-8)

0639

0640

0662 #:

0675 0680 0764

5-125

TABLE 5.7-1.- F'YRGTECHMC DFVlCES FaR MISSION A-004 (SC-002)

Function

- Concluded
Initiator
nwr-ber

1
Lot
M C

Explosive component and part number

Reefing l i n e c u t t e r

Plumber required

number

Disreef main garachutes

1 8

(NV-5844-8)

AAC
AAC AAC AC A AAC AAC

AAC AAC AAC

AAC

AAC AAC AAC AAC AAC

AAC

AAC

5-128
NASA-S-66-3772 APR 15

Direction of movement

Circuit closed
I

Contact

C ircuit open

Figure 5.7-3.- Apollo electrical circuit interrupter.

5-129

5.8 Earth Landing and Impact Attenuation

5.8.1 Earth landing subsystem.- O f tke major components and assemb l i e s of t h e e a r t h landing subsystem (Em), the main parachute harness with a t t a c h fittings, t h e sequencer controller, and t h e drogue parachute subsystem disconnect were Block I configura.tion and had been successfully f l i g h t - t e s t e d previously on Mission A-OO3 ( r e f . 4). The main parachute disconnect was Block I and had been flown Xreviously (Mission A-003) as an inactive component. The nain parachute disconnect i n e r t i a l switch was Block I configuration and w a s being fli.ght-tested f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e . The drogue parachute subsystem, p i l o t parachute subsystem, and the main parachute subsystem were very near the Block I configuration.
Drogue parachute subsystem: The Missj.on A-004 drogue perachute subsystem ( f i g . 5.8-1) d i f f e r e d from Block I (ref. 2) and from t h a t previ1 ously flown on Mission PA-2 (ref. 1 ) a s follows: Reefing l i n e c u t t e r A-004 PA-2 Block 1 Cutter lanyard Lanyard k n a t
Two half hitches
T o half hitches w

c-6200-8
B- 61108

650 :~b
250 : b L

c-6200-8

650 .Zb

Chinese finger

P i l o t parachute subsystem:
was not Block I.

The Mission A-004 p i l o t parachute sub-

system w a s t h e s a m e as t h a t previously flown on K s s i o n PA-2 (ref. 1 ) 1

and differed from Block I (ref. 2) i n t h a t t h e metal lid/foam r e t a i n e r (See f i g . 5.8-2. )

Nain parachute subsystem: The f i s s i o n A-004 main parachute subsystem d i f f e r e d from Block I (ref. 2) and :from t h a t previously flown on Mission PA-2 (ref. 11) as follows: Retention flaps A-004 PA-2 Block I

Deployment bag Hard pack Loose pack Hard pack

Nylon
Nylon Nomex

5-130
&in parachute harness disconnect: The Mission A-004 disconnect ( f i g . 5.8-3), a Block I configuration flown a c t i v e f o r t h e f i r s t time, i s discussed i n section 5.7 of t h i s report. b i n parachute disconnect i n e r t i a l switch: The Mission A-004 ine r t i a l switch (see section 5.7) was E 3g t o Sg water-landing Block I configuration.
ELS performance: F l i g h t data and p o s t f l i g h t inspection indicate t h a t a l l components of the ELX functioned properly and effected t h e safe recovery of t h e command module. A s planned f o r t h e m s s i o n A-004 abort mode, an e l e c t r i c a l arming s i g n a l from the mission sequencer applied l o g i c power (at Tt87.7 sec) t o t h e e a r t h landing subsystem sequence c o n t r o l l e r (ELSSC) 3.0 seconds a f t e r canard deployment. Closure of t h e ELSSC high-altitude baroswitches i n i t i a t e d tower j e t t i s o n a t an a l t i t u d e of 23 055 feet m.s.1. (T-t-193.8 sec) Simultaneous w i t h closure of the high-altitude baroswitches the 0.4-second apex-cover j e t t i s o n delay timer of the mission sequencer and t h e ELSSC 2.0-second drogue mortar f i r e delay timer were s t a r t e d . Apex-cover j e t t i s o n was i n i t i a t e d a t Tt.194.2 seconds (O.b-sec t i m e delay) a t an a l t i t u d e of 22 860 f e e t m. s. 1 .

Drogue mortar f i r e was i n i t i a t e d a t T-t-195.8 seconds (2.0-sec time Drogue disconnect and p i l o t delay) a t an a l t i t u d e of 22 063 feet m.s.1. mortar f i r e were i n i t i a t e d by closure of t h e ELSSC low-altitude baroswitches a t an a l t i t u d e of 10 480 f e e t m.s.1. (T+237.6 sec). A nominal descent t o landing followed (rate of descent w a s 27.1 f t / s e c a t a pressure a l t i t u d e of 5000 f t ) , with t h e CM coming t o rest i n an upright position after the i n i t i a l rocking action which followed touchdown. Main parachute disconnect was i n i t i a t e d a t touchdown by t h e ELE impact i n e r t i a l switch. Both the high-altitude and low-altitude baroswitches operated with, i n t h e barometric pressure a l t i t u d e ranges specified. Reefing-line c u t t e r s f i r e d and c u t t e r lanyards were undamaged. Both main parachute harness l e g s were cleanly cut ( f i g . 5.8-4) although t h e p o s t f l i g h t inspection showed t h a t t h e c u t t e r blade on l e g no. 2 was broken ( f i g . 5.8-5). The ELS event t i m e s ( t a b l e 5.8-1) were obtained from onboard tape recorder H. The m.s.l. a l t i t u d e s corresponding t o t h e event t i m e s were obtained from t h e WM radar tracking plots. Cloud cover i n t h e recovSR e r y area obscured o p t i c a l and v i s d reference t o EM performance u n t i l after main parachute f u l l i n f l a t i o n .

Postflight examination of the ELS an5 CM upper deck stPucture showed that there was no contact of the drogue parachute steel cable risers with the airlock lip, indicating that the CMwas stabilized in a favorable heat-shield-forward attitude zt the time of drogue parachute deployment. Minimal contact of the main parachute harness lege with %he drogue mortar cans and no evidence of undue abrasion between the main parachute deployment bags, uprighting system canisters, longerons, or airlock, indicated a favorable main heat-shield-forward attitude at the time of main parachute deployment. The absence of apparent cortact between the ELS components and the CM uppr deck structure was an indication of satisfactory sequential deployment of the E D . (See f i g s . 5.8-6 to 5.8-10. ) Although postflight examination indicated no contact between the apex cover and ELS components, the indication of reddish scuff marks (fig. 5.8-6) on the -Z pitch motor panel of the simulated CM RCS correlates with the red RTV sealant used on the apex cover around the RCS cutout.
A 2-inch split was found in the +Z main parachute fibergkss retention strip (fig. 5.8-11). No evidence of scrapes, impact, or abrasion on the strip o r surrounding structure was observed. Prelaunch photographs do not show this split.

5.8.2 Impact attenuation subsystem. The purpose of the impact attenuation subsystem on SC-002 was to provide support and impact attenuation for the equipment platform installed in place of the crew couches on this unmanned earth-impact mission. This was the first flight test for the impact attenuation components, and they were not instrumented. However, stroke measurements were made before and after flight. Additional measurements and analysis by the contractor at Downey, California, were not complete at the time of publication of this report.
The impact attenuation system consisted of four crushable honeycomb ribs mounted in a 128 sector of the +Z section of the CM, and eight impact struts. (See fig. 5.8-12.) The X-X and Z-Z stru2; stroking loads were developed by the combination of a frictional device and the crushing of aluminum honeycomb. These struts could stroke in either tension or compression. The Y-Y strut loads were developed by the crushing of aluminum honeycomb alone and operated only in compression. The struts and ribs used in SC-002 were similar to the Block I type but were modified for higher load values for earth impact since the equipment on the platform was capable of withstanding greater accelerations than those acceptable for m. In addition, the X-X struts

5-13?
were l e f t i n t h e high-load locked condition throughout t h e f l i g h t . The lockout provision on manned missions prevents undesirable stroking during selected periods.
Figure 5.8-13(a) t o (a) illustrates the predicted load stroke A f t e r an i n i t i a l stroke of either the X-X or curves f o r Mission A-004. 2-2 struts, i n e i t h e r tension o r compression, t h e r e t u r n load i s supplied only by the f r i c t i o n device u n t i l honeycomb core i s again encountered. This process can continue u n t i l t h e available honeycomb core i s e n t i r e l y crushed and, therefore, t h e f r i c t i o n a l load alone i s predictable. The i n i t i a l high load indicated i s due t o t h e lockout feature. A s shown i n t h e figure, t h e Y-Y struts use only honeycomb crushing and operate only i n compression. Although t h e impact attenuation subsystem was not instrumented,

s t r u t action can be evaluated on the basis of f i e l d measurements of

stroking (see t a b l e 5.8-11). Strokes were measured i n t h e f i e l d t o an accuracy of approximately @./l6th inch. Impact loads information w a s not available from f l i g h t data. However, loads on t h e X-X struts d i d not reach t h e l e v e l required t o break out the lockout device, and only l i m i t e d stroking of t h e Z-Z and Y-Y struts was indicated. F i e l d inspection indicated t h a t no stroking of the crushable ribs occurred.

5-133

TABLE 5.8-1.

- EARTH LANDING SUBSYSTEfM EVENTS FOR MISSIOPS A-004

Time fron. l i f t - o f f , sec Planned

Eyent

Dynamic pressure,
lb/sq f t

Ibort i n i t i a t i o n (reference )

78-65 89.65 92.65 92.65 189. o 189. o 189.4

73.7
84.9 87.9 87.8 1.93.8 3-93.8 1-94.2 2-95. g

73.7 84. a 87.9 87. a 193.8 193.8

2anard deployment (reference )

E L S sequencer A start,

r e l a y s A and B
ELX sequencer B s t a r t ,

relays A and B rower j e t t i s o n (reference) Baroswitch lock-in, close A and B relay

CM apex cover j e t t i s o n (reference )

136. o
195.8
No data

Drogue parachute deployment, r e l a y close A and B Drogue parachute deployment shear wire Drogue parachutes 1 and 2 l i n e stretch Drogue parachutes L and 2 disreef Drogue parachute release p i l o t mortar fire, r e l a y A and B Main parachutes o f f deck Win parachutes disreef

146.0

195.8

No data N data o
N o data

No data
No data

2379 6

237.6

237- 6

43.0

No data
No data

Main parachutes full- open

No data

TABLE

5.8-11- - APOLLO

MISSIOW A-004

FIEZD MEASURENENTS OF INPACT STRUT STROKES

S t r u t and locat ion
X-X head

Length before,

in.

Length af'ter, in.

Stroke,
i c.

+Y s i d e
-Y s i d e

3$
36z

3 e

x-x foot
+Y s i d e -Y s i d e
Z-Z s t r u t s

3 4

8 compression
1 tension

3 4
3% 3%
Measured gap Measured gap

CY s i d e

1 1

3$
3%

compression

-Y s i d e
Y-Y s t r u t s

1 tension 2

+Y s i d e -V s i d e

No data No data

compression
1 compression 2

Note:

Measurement tolerance approximately

J $ .

1 6

in.

3-13?
NASA-S-66-3776

APR 15

Drogue mortar

Steel cable riser

Drogue mortar

Figure 5.8-1.-

Drogue parachute subsystem (Block I), Apollo Mission A-004.

5- 136
NASA-S-66-3784 APR 15 Foam ring arid metal cover assembly

Figure 5.8-2

.- Pilot parachute subsystem (Block I) except for metal cover,

Apollo Mission A-004.

5-137
NASA-S-66-3764 APR 15

Figure 5.8-3.-

Vehicle harness attach fitting and vehicle harness disconnect, Apollo Mission A-004.

5- 138

ln
rl

IY

U 0

Q,

S
0

.-0
-0 8

0 In

I n

rt

I n

c e

a
co

0 0

3 9
9
v)

Q, a
z

5-140
NASA-S-66-3788 APR 15

Figure 5.8-6.-

Parachute (-Z) quadrant showing drogue mortar no. 1, Apollo Mission A-004.

NASA-S-66-3796

APR 15

Figure 5.8-7.- Parachute (-Z) quadrant showing drogue mortar no. 2, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-142

d
0

Y S

u m

5
3

F
f

rt;

Ly:

5-143
NASA-S-66-3832

APR 15

Figure 5.8-9.- Main parachute (+Z) quadratit, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-144
NASA-S-66-3792 APR 15

Figure 5.8-10.-

Main parachute (-Y) quadrant, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-145
NASA-S-66-3816 APR 15

(a) External configuration.

Figure 5.8-12.Command module attenuation subsystem, ApoIlo Mission A-004.

5-147
I

NASA-S-66-3820 APR 15

+X

rBearing plate

-Y

Bearing plate

(b> Internal configuration.

Figure 5.8- 12.

Concluded

5-148
NASA-S-66-3848 APR 15

6972 6028

Nominal friction alone

I
I I
I

f
-0

. m
0

13 15 0

F
I
4

-1315
0 .VI
VI

Nominal friction return

K
-6159
-7000
e Core and friction

E,

I I
-1

5
Stroke, in. (a) X-X foot strut.

16

5501
0 .VI
8

44 10

l -

aJ

i'
C

Maximum breakout Core and friction

I

k l / 8"

Nominal friction alone

I
I

a_
-5 m

I
I
I

3
0 .VI
VI

8 14 0
8

-8 14

E
0

1
Nominal friction return Core and friction Note: Total stroking loads are maximum values to be expected under dynamic conditions

-4992 -6000

t i
-1

16.5

Figure 5.8-13.-

Stroke, i n . (b) X-X head strut. Impact attenuation struts, Apollo Mission A-004 predicted load-stroke curves.

5- 149
NASA-S-66-3828 APR 15 6844
5978

Core and friction

1 I
I

2250

r-I

I I

Nominal friction alone

73

m 0

.
0 .VI VI
1 -

0
Nominal friction return

-2250
c

a ,

-5917
-10

Core and friction 2 5 Stroke, in. (c) Z-2 strut.

-5

18.5

2000

I
'

I I

' I

I I

Core only Note: Total stroking loads are maximum values to be expected under dynamic conditions

-8727
3

-4.5

5 Stroke, in. (d) Y-Y strut. Figure 5.8-13.- Corcluded.

-2

18.5

5-1-50
5.9 C r e w S t a t i o n Acomtics
Description. A third-order objective f o r Mission A-004 was t o obt a i n acoustic data a t a crewman's s t a t i o n . The environment of i n t e r e s t w a s the noise generated aerodynamically during the region of maximum dynamic pressure and the noise during abort. From the available windt w n e l data (ref. 19) c o l l e c t e d on the Apollo spacecraft configuration, a maximum o v e r a l l sound pressure l e v e l (SPL) of 168 decibels (dB, re: 2 0.0002 dyne/cm ) had been predicted on the CM-SM i n t e r f a c e f o r a nominal Saturn t r a j e c t o r y . Sound pressure levels of 167 CIB and 1-69 w e r e a~ measured a t the CM-SM i n t e r f a c e of the instrumented b o i l e r p l a t e spacec r a f t on Missions A - 0 0 1 and A-002 (refs. 20 and 10). Two microphones were mounted i n t h e crew compartment on the equipment platform i n SC-002. (See f i g . 5.9-1.) The measurement CKOO34Y microphone, located a t X,50.0, Y -0.5, Z -18.0, had an SPL range of

U O t o 150 dB, and t h e measurement CKOO33Y microphone, located a t X 50.0, Y 0.5, 2 -19.0,had a range of 100 t o 140 dB. The xicrophones
C

sensed the crew s t a t i o n noise and vibration, but a compensating accelerometer, operating i n opposition t o the microphone, removed t h e vibrat i o n component; therefore, only t h e noise was recorded. P r e f l i g h t c a l i b r a t i o n s showed that the microphones and t h e i r terminal equipment were l i n e a r with SPL and had a f l a t frequency response (fl dB) from Both measurements were recorded on the wide-band F M 20 t o 7 kc/sec. tape recorder. A more complete description of the acoustic i n s t r m e n t a t i o n system can be found i n reference 21. Performance.- Acoustic data a t the crew s t a t i o o were obtained and t h e results a r e presented i n figures 5.9-2 t o 5.9-4. The recorded data were reduced i n an analog format using a r m s meter, octzve band enalyzer, and X-Y p l o t t e r . The data, consisting of overall SPL and onet h i r d octave band SPL t i m e h i s t o r i e s , were reduced from data from microphone CKOO35Y only because microphone CKOO34Y f a i l e d a t T+@ seconds. Up t o t h a t time, the instruments were giving the same readings. Figure 5.9-2 shows t h e o v e r a l l SPL time h i s t o r y of crew s t a t i o n acoustics for the period from T-10 t o T+9O seconds. A f t e r launch veh i c l e engine ignition, t h e noise reaching t h e crew compartment increased t o a m xm l e v e l of 11-7 d a t T-tO.6 seconds. A s the vehicle accelerai m B ated, the SPL i n the crew compartment decreased and became i n s i g n i f i c a n t a t approximately "4-4 seconds. A t Ti-23.2 seconds, t h e aerodynamic noise became predominant i n the crew compartment and continued t o increase u n t i l r+38.8 seconds (&ch number of 1). The noise remained intense thrmghout the high dynamic pressure region u n t i l abort. A t Ti-73.5 seconds, t h e acoustic measurement saturated f o r 0.5 second; the data are d i f f i c u l t t o i n t e r p r e t from T-t.74 seconds t o Ti-78 seconds because the

i n t e n s i t y and t h i s 4-second ~evels as low ~-1-88 seconds, stmentation the flight.

frequency are changing period w a s 132 d , which B as 96 d~ w e r e also recor t h e noise l e v e l s at t h e c r range and were not sign t o r i e s were used t o calculate spec9-

dynamic These d w a s recorded and t below 500 cps. F i w74.3, 9375.6, 14the high q abort design for comparison.

ing abort a t ues based on figure 5.9-4

dI

0
0

0
( r

co

rr\

>-

0
0

0 b

0 Y

.0

v)

0 3
0

c) v)

0 .&

c) l n

2 0
Y-

E
O

I n

u
W

*a;
-i

E .-

0 N
W > 0

0
4

m
r .-n LL

0
? I

0
N
I +

0
rl

0 0

r l

5-154
NASA-S-66-3836 APR 15

120

110

100

90

80

70

Overal I

20

50

100 200 Frequency, cps

500

1000 2000

Figure 5.9-3.- Spectrum sound pressure levels (SPL per cycle) for CK0035Y at T438.8 (Mach 11, T+41.5 (max q), and T+73.3 (prior t o abort) for Apollo Mission A-004.

5-155
NASA-S-66-3808APR 15

140

E !efere ;ID 6:
-+76 r-t-75

130
h

>
a S ,
i ? -5

1 20 r+74 T+7 8

0
0

5 110
M
-0

aJ

..

aJ > a , 2 100 3
v) v)

2 p .
3

-0 C

0
u)

90
I .

-Y

*1 .,

Q W

v,

80

70

,era11

50

100

500 200 Frequency, cps

1000 2000

10 10 000

Figure 5.9-4.-

Spectrum sound pressure levels (SPL per cycle) for CK0035Y at T+74.3, 75.6, 76.6, and 7 8 . 8 sec during abort for Apollo Mission A-004.

5-156

5.10 Sequential Subsystem

Description.- The sequential subsystem i n s t a l l e d on SC-002 included a mission sequencer, a separation sequencer, a tower sequencer, an impact switch box, an abort backup timer, a d an ELS sequence controller. (See f i g . 5.10-1.) Functions performed by t h e f i r s t three sequencers mentioned a r e those t h a t w i l l be performed by t h e m a s t e r events sequence c o n t r o l l e r on f u t u r e Block I spacecraft. The mission sequencer, tower sequencer, abort backup timer, and i m pact switch box were R and D u n i t s i d e n t i c a l t o those used on W s sion A-003 (BP-22, ref. 4 with t h e following exceptions: )
(a) Both t h e BP-22 and SC-002 mission sequencers included c i r c u i t s t o i n i t i a t e CM-SM umbilical deadfacing and separation, but because SC-002 used a Block I CM-SM umbilical for t h e firs%t i m e the separation sequencer was added to SC-002 to delay umbilical separation until 0.4 second a f t e r deadfacing. Since BP-22 did not use a Block I CM-SM umbilical, the output wiring harness f o r t h e umbilical deadfacing and separation c i r c l i t s was not i n s t a l l e d i n BP-22.

(b) The BP-22 impact switch box included fuses t h a t simulated t h e pyrotechnics used t o disconnect t h e main parachutes. Live pyrotechnics were used on SC-002.
The Block I e a r t h landing subsystem sequence c o n t r o l l e r (ELSSC) consisted of two independent redundant u n i t s and w a s i d e n t i c a l t o t h e Block I c o n t r o l l e r successfully t e s t e d on BP-22. A pyrotechnic v e r i ficetion box w a s i n s t a l l e d i n t h e CM of SC-002 t o permit v e r i f i c a t i o n of the pyrotechnic c i r c u i t s p r i o r t o launch. Spacecraft 002 was t h e f i r s t spacecraft t o have t h i s box i n s t a l l e d . Performance.- The sequential subsystem operated properly during t h e f l i g h t and all time-delay r e l a y s operated within acceptable t i m e Figure 5.10-2 shows l i m i t s . Event times are l i s t e d i n f i g u r e 2.0-2. t h e fuses which were blown during t h e pyrotechnic bus voltage excursions discussed i n s e c t i o n 5.U.

NASA-S-66-3844 APR 15

Figure 5.10-1.-

Relation of events controlled by sequential subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004.

5- 158

z e
4

8 0

0 .U

W
W

Q W
in

13
in

cn I H
0

v)

I W
0 S

rd

v)

3 cc TS

ll -

I n
I

a
b

cv
0
A
I

r-

3 9
9

I n
I

7.U

E l e c t r i c a l Power Subsystem

Description. The e l e c t r i c a l power subsystem (EPC) provided p m e r f o r t h e instrumentation and communications subsystem, t h e sequential smsystem, and pyrotechnfc loads as shown i n figure 5.U-1. The EPS included six silver-zinc batteries: two main b a t t e r i e s , two l o g i c b a t t e r i e s , and two pyro batteries. A l l batteries w e r e successfull.y f l i g h t - t e s t e d on Apollo Mssion A-003 and are described i n reference 4. The two pyro batteries were Block I configur2t E l e c t r i c a l power f o r t h e t w o camera systems w a s provided by two camera batteries MAR 4090-llA; each b a t t e r y included an additional 13-volt t a p f o r camera operation. Performance.- The e l e c t r i c a l power subsystem operated properly during the f l i g h t . There were no abnormal variations i n either current o r voltage of instrumentation buses A and 13; those s l i g h t variations noted r e f l e c t e d the vzrying instrumentation loads. The lowest i n s t r u mentation bus voltage recorded w a s 27.9 v o l t s on bus B, which w a s recorded a t Tt-200 seconds and was accompanied by a 3-ampere t r a n s i e n t increase i n t o t a l instrumentation current. This time coincides approximately with t h e malfunction of t h e onboard tape recorder discussed i n section 5.32. Records of t o t a l i n s t m e n t a t . i o n d i r e c t current and voltages from main bases A and B f o r the f l i g h t are shown i n f i g ure 3.U-2. The variations during f l i g h t of logic buses A and B voltages are shown i n figure 5.11-3. The normal decrease i n voltage from abort i n i t i a t i o n u n t i l impact was caused by the increasing sequencer l o g i c load
during this period.
Bus voltage semainecl w i t h i n the range expected.

Variations in pyro buses A and B voltages during f l i g h t are shown With t h e exception of t h e t w o excursions discussed i n figure 5.U-4. i n t h e following paragraphs, variations were within the normal range. Other than these excursions the lowest voltage recorded was 30.1 volts, which occurred a t '33193.8 seconds (tower j e t t i s o n ) .
A major decrease i n bus voltage occurred simultaneously on both pyro buses a t W73.7 seconds (abort i n i t i a t i o n ) . Bus A dropped t o 5.0 v o l t s and bus B dropped t o 7.5 v o l t s . However, both recovered withi n 1 second. This decrease i n voltage indicated an extremely low resistance short i n t h e pyro i g n i t i o n c i r c u i t which was immediately removed as fuses F and F i n t h e mission sequencer blew. A p l o t of L 2 bus A voltage during thus incident i s shown i n figure 5.U.-5, and fuse locations are shown i n figure 5.10-2. Postflight bench t e s t i n g of the command module associated c i r c u i t r y and simulations with groups of init i a t o r s of t h e same type have indicated no apparent f a d t i n the CM

5-160
c i r c u i t r y and associated components. It i s possible that the magnitude of e i t h e r t h e f i r i n g current o r pin-to-case leakage cmrent during firi n g could be s u f f i c i e n t t o cause t h i s e f f e c t when fuses are used i n the c i r c u i t i n l i e u of f u s i s t o r s w i t h t h e i r current-:Limlting a b i l i t y . Furt h e r examination has s h a m t h a t conditions e x i s t on the spacecraft wliich could account f o r t h e shorting conditions. An example of t h i s i s i n i t i a t o r wires which were frayed back 2 t o 3 inches from t h e end by explosion and wind whipping i n several i n i t i a t o r locations. It should be noted t h a t the shorting conditions do not c o n s t i t u t e a failure of e i t h e r the power or sequencer systems since the fuses were i n s t a l l e d i n anticipation of s h o r t s of t h i s nature occurring i n the pyro subsystem. These fuses functioned properly.
The second major drop i n pyro bus 13 voltage occurred a t 'lIt.237.6 seconds ( p i l o t parackute deployment) when pyro bus R dropped t o 30.1 volts. Recovery occurred i n approximately 5 seconds with data indications that a f u s i s t o r i n t h e earth landing subsystem sequence c o n t r o l l e r (ELSSC) removed the heavy load. An expanded p l o t of bus voltage during t h i s incident i s shown i n figure 5.11-6. Fusistor locations are shown i n P o s t f l i g h t t e s t i n g by the contractor revealed t h a t a l l f i g u r e 5.10-2. f u s i s t o r s a r e s t i l l functional which leaves the anomaly unexplained.

Camera b a t t e r y performance i s indicated i n section 5.12.

5- 161

Y 0

-0

a
3 l n

a
D
VI 3

m
w

u .-

0 4

UY

g"
0 TJ

21 3 P

l-i

U
-0

I
r(
I I

>

a 3

cu

co
N

>

co

>

5-162

(u
U

m > M
m
u )

rn

73

*
m

w * 0
t

P
0 U

> t n n 0
U

uuuuu mmmmu)
wwwww
0
N N

rl

a :

n n

n
ff

Cl

022gN z r

J- 1 O A

3a

' s n o A

m
10

m
0

*
m
W A

w * u
I -

$
U

>
0 0 0 U

n n

n,

n
N

0 1

Da s ~ i o ~

*
u)

L b !

>

v) W

-1

w < e
c

-1

I=
0

0 U

>

0 0
b
U a

ar

a
m co co

n D

n
N

0 N

3a

SL-~OA

zIa S L l O A

3 Q
9
I
v) v)

a 2

5-166
NASA-S-66-3868 APR 15

40

36

32

28

24

16

12

0 73.0

73.4

73.8 74.2 Elapsed time, sec

74.6

75.0

Figure 5.11-5.- Pyro bus A voltage, Apoilo Mission A-004.

m d u a
Q
rl

Lo

5-168

5.12

Spacecraft Instrumentstion and Comqmication Subsystem

S m r y . - Pertinent data were obtained from 237 of t h e t o t a l 242 onboard measurements. Failure of t h e single Dperational-type scimitar antenna following abort caused a l o s s of both radio-frequency telemetry l i n k s a t T+74.7 seconds. However, d a t a trmsmitted by these l i n k s were recorded on t h e onboard tape recorders, as planned, such t h a t s i g n i f i cant information was recovered f o r t h e mission evaluation.

Description.- The SC-002 instrumentation and communication subsyst e m was a standard PA.M/FM/FM system similar t o t h a t flown on t h e previous b o i l e r p l a t e f l i g h t s , but it employed upgraded components q u a l i f i e d t o higher environmental levels. The subsystem consisted of two 15-channel PAM/FM/FM telemetry links, s i g n a l eo-nditioners, and transducers t o measure and monitor vehicle performance. Two 14-track onboard tape recorders provided a d d i t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s f o r recording highfrequency data, as w e l l a s providing back-up recording of t h e telemetered data. Figures 5 . 1 2 - 1 t o 5.12-3 a r e block diagrams i l l u s t r a t i n g t h e telemetry systems, F tape recording system, and H tape recording system, respectively. A complete description of t h e instrumentation and communication subsystem i s contained i n reference 21. Performance. Loss of telemetry signals occurred a t T+74.7 seconds because of t h e failure of t h e single scimitar antenna (the second antenna w a s non-functional) a t t h e t i m e of t h e abort maneuver. Visual inspection of t h e antenna a f t e r command module recovery revealed a crack around t h e f a i r i n g of the antenna base, indicating t h a t the antenna had been struck with a s i g n i f i c a n t force. (See f i g . 5.12-4.) Soot i n the crack established t h a t t h e impact occwrred during the period of launchescape motor burning. T h i s w a s the f i r s t f l i g h t t e s t f o r t h e operat i o n a l scimitar antenna. P o s t f l i g h t f i e l d inspection of t h e antenna cabling revealed that t h e coaxial conductor, which w a s permanently attached t o t h e antenna, was loose and could be moved i n and out of t h e antenna approximately 1/16 inch. In-line w a t t meter checks gave a normal reading of 1/2 w a t t r e f l e c t e d power and 10 watts forward power with t h e cable pushed in. W i % h t h e cable moved out, the r e f l e c t e d power increased t o 6 w a t t s , indicating a f a i l u r e of t h e i n t e r n a l connection. SLibsequent examination of the a n t e m a and l e a d wire a t t h e contractor's f a c i l i t y at Downey, California, indicated t h a t t h e antenna l e a d wire had parted a t t h e base plate/exterior epoxy i n t e r f a c e because of motion at the i n t e r f a c e a f t e r bond failure. The F tape recorder jammed a t T+209.5 seconds, between t h e t i m e of drogue parachute deployment and main parachute deployment. This d i f f i c u l t y had a l s o been encountered during p r e f l i g h t checkout of the

spacecraft. Approximately 12 feet of tape $vasunwound on the take-up side of the recorder, indicating that rmvemmt of the take-up reel had been restricted. A postflight functional c;neck confirmed normal recorder operation and that no component failme had occurred. Playback of the 50 kc tape recorder compensation data, which is a measure of tape speed variation, indicated that both rworders were severely stressed from ~ + 7 6to T-l-77 seconds. In addition, there was evidence thzt the take-up reel momentarily stopped at T-i-190 seconds ana then recovered, causing a distinct variation in tape speed. Service module RCS engine nozzle vibration measurement (SAOs26D) and sector VI vibration measurement (SAO952D) malfunctioned at r+38 seconds and ~ i - 3 6 seconds, respectively. Oscillograph playbacks indicate that the data are valid up to time of malfuiction. The instrumentation f o r these measurements were not recovered for failure analysis; however, the abrupt change in the data at these time; and the character of' the succeeding data indicated failures of the coaxial cable between the accelerometer and amplifier. located Command module strain measurements CA16OlS and CAI-~O~S, on longeron 2, exhibited an intermittent condition for varying periods prior to and during abort. After m-80seconds the measurements responded normally. Postflight investigations revealed no malfunction or intermittent condition in either the amplifier o r cabling. Service module aft bulkhead vibration measurement SA0993D had indications of noise at lift-off and for 4 seconds at Ti-34 seconds. Data between these times were valid. Since the instrumentation was not recovered, no failure analysis on the specific units could be performed.
kboratory tests simulating failures which would produce similar re-

sults indicated that a broken accelerometer connector could be the cause. Command module acoustic measurement CKOO34Y, located on the crew couch p l a t T o m at X 30.0, Y 0.9, Z - 8 0 responded normally until 1., C ~ 4 seconds. It was erratic from T+48 seconds until abort where it 8 again responded normally. Postflight analysis of this acoustic Eeaswrement system revealed no component or equipment malfunction. Also, the flight recorder was evaluated in conjunction with the acoustic measurement system. No malfunction or intermittent condition of the flight recorder was observed. The most pro'Dable cause is a loose connection.

The two C-band transponders used on the command module to aid in tracking were interrogated satisfactorily by three FPS-16 radars during flight. Satisfactory return signals were received from both transponders.

5-170
Two 16-mm motion p i c t u r e cameras were i n s t a l l e d on SC-002 with photographic coverage as i l l u s t r a t e d i n figure 5.12-5. The tower camera operated a t 64 frames per second and ran from l i f t - o f f through launch-escape tower j e t t i s o n . The command rnodule camera, which viewed t h e left-hand rendezvous window f o r sooting, operated a t 16 frames per second, covering the period from T+7O seconds t o approximately W240 seconds. Both cameras operated as programmed. The tower camera provided good coverzge throughout t h e powered phase. A s i n previous f l i g h t s , coverage was limited a f t e r launch-escape-motor burning because of l e n s sooting from motor exhaust. Soft boost -protective cover separation i n t h e f i r s t tumbling revolution allowed sooting of the rendezvous window from the burning U S motors but useful data were obtained from the comand module f i l m .

NASA-S-66-3721 APR 15

m
signals Rate gyros

vco
5

TM A composite
tape recorder F

Pitch rate gyro output CKOOOlR

Roll attitude gyro out no. 1CK0050H

L

Roll attitude gyro out no. 2 CK005 1H

I

SC X-axis accel high CAOOOlA

' I

SC Y-axis

awe1 CA0005A

Oiibaard timer CTOOOlW

L

Tower Z-axis accel L A 0 0 1 2 A

Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned

M
10.5kc 14.5kc

237.8 M c

Vibration sensors

Amplifier

d
I

Strain gages

Amplifier

DPDM
9 0 X 10

Oc current shunt

'lo tape recwder H track 1 2

To t a x recorder F track 9

Amplifier

3 -

b
Amplifier

Yaw rate gyro output CK0002R Roll rate gyro output CK0003R Pltch attitude gyro out CK0016H

I ,

1-1

Resistance

'" I'
Ca lormeter5 Amplifier

1.3kc
Yaw attitude gyro out CKOOlBH

SC X-axis accel low CA0002A

IKlG 9
SC Z-axis accel CA0007A

- lRlG 1 0 5.4kc

Mixer

GSE hardline Unassigned 14.5kc

Canard displacement

(1)
411 Okc

T M B composite tape recarder H track 11

Figure 5.12-1.

Telemetry subsystem block diagram, Apllo Mission A-OW.

0 0 cc 0
J, -

5-173
SM vibration seclor V (11 SA09400 S vibration radial beam 5 SA09940 M
Radial vib

SM RCS eng nozzle SA0998D

modulatioi

SM strain niernbrane stress axial SA08655

packale F

IKlb 13

30 mOkc

SM

vibration sectorm (6) SA09450

pressure
S
I

n
1

a
d
I

r sensom
I

b
U

t
I
0
~

Amplifier

n b
0

TM E coniposib CT0023V Conimutator A OPOM CTOO2llV

__

Figure 5.12-3. - Onboard tape recorder H block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004.

5- 174
NASA-S-66-3866 APR 15

Figure 5.12-4.-

Scimitar antenna damage, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-175
NASA-S-66-3864 APR 15

LES tower camera (64 frames per s e d

Rendezvous window

(16 frames per s e d

Camera field of view

k
/

Figure 5.12-5.-

Tower and CM camera installation, Apollo Mission A-004.

5 ~ 7 6

5.13 Environmental Control Subsystem Cabin Pressure Relief Valve

Description.- The partial environmental control subsystem (ECS) installed on SC-002 consisted of a modified cabin pressure relief valve and steam duct. The remainder of the ECS, including CM pressure regulation and cooling equipment, was not included in SC-002. The cabin pressure relief valve provides positive pressure relief of the cabin during spacecraft ascent and negative pressure relief during descent. Specification requirements for positive pressure relief are 6(+0.2, - . ) psid and 0.36 to 0.90 psid for negstive pressuze relief. 04 The SC-002 valve was similar to the qualification test unit except f o r the manual controls and locking position, which were not installed on the valve in SC-002. A section of teleflex cable was utilized to lock the valve in the normal, or automatic, position in lieu of the mcnual controls. The relief valve w a s mounted on the steam duct in the left-hand equipment bay. The steam duct penetrated both the inner pressure wall and outer moldline of the heat shield. Two pressure sensing lines, attached to the ambient sensing ports on the valve, penetrated the pressure wall and sensed ambient pressure in the unpressurized wea, providing an ambient reference pressure for the valve diaphragms. Flight performance.- Postflight analysis of the SC-002 flight data and subsequent postflight tests conducted at the contractor's facilities at Downey, California, indicate that CM interior pressure control was not achieved during Mission A-004 due to an excessive CM leakage rate. Figure 5.13-1 indicates that the CM interior pressure began to decrease inmediately after lift-off and continued to decrease until a minimum pressure of 0.86 psia was attained at T+147.5 seconds into the flight. The predicted minimum CM interior pressure of 6.33 psia and predictec?. CM interior pressure profile (fig. 9.13-2), based upon negligible CM leakage and a nornally operating cabin pressure relief valve, were not attained due to the excessive CMleak rate. ?he cabin pressure relief valve did not actuate during ascent since the valve requires a differential pressure of 5.6 to 6.2 psid, sensed between the aft compartment and cabin, to provide pressure relief of the cabin. The maximum differential pressure obtained between the aft compartment and cabin was 2.45 psid, which was insufficent to cause valve operation. Figure 5.13-2 indicates that the cabin pressure relief valve opera e during spacecraft descent, since the differential pressure between ;d the cabin and ambient pressures renained within the valve specification range of 0.36 to 0.90 psid. However, a quantitative estimate for the degree of valve operation relative to the CM leakage is undetermined.

Postflight testin.t.- Postflight t e s t i n g was conducted on the ECS cabin pressure relief valve a t t h e contractcr and subcontractor f a c i l ities, respectively, t o check the positive m d negative r e l i e f pressures, and t o learn whether the valve was sticking i n the open position. & l o r t o checking the relief pressure, contractor personnel v e r i f l e d n t h a t the valve was closed by applying a vacuum of 29.2 i . Hg t o the ECS steam duct. A vacuum l e v e l of t h i s magnitude toad not be obtained i f the valve were in the open position. Positive pressure w , applied t o the steam duct t o t e s t f o r regaas tive pressure relief. Negative pressure r e l i e f occurred a t 0.60 :psig d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure. Insufficient checkout equipment at the contract o r f a c i l i t y prevented completion of the positive pressure relief tests, so t h e valve w a s removed from SC-OW and delivered t o the subcontractor f o r completion of the tests. The valve w s i n s t a l l e d i n an altitude chamber f o r launch p r o f i l e a testing. Results of the three launch p r o f i l e tests indicated t h a t positive pressure relief occurred a t d i f f e r e n t i a pressures of 6.1, 6.1, and 6.2 psig, respectively, denoting satisfactory performance of the valve. Before removal of the cabin pressure relief valve from SC-002, a cabin leak t e s t was performed by the contractor. T e s t results indicated that the major portion of cabin leakage occurred a t t h e inner hatch inner structure interface seal. During the testing, it w a s demonstrated t h a t the inner hatch could be improperly installed, preventing t h e effective sealing of t h e hatch. The lack of an effective inner hatch seal would result i n premature l o s s of cabin pressure. ResuZes of the postflight t e s t i n g of the cabin pressure r e l i e f valve and cabin leakage indicated that t h e valve would have operaked s a t i s f a c t o r i l y during Mission A-004 i f the c!abin leakage r a t e past the inner hatch had been reduced t o an acceptab.le l e v e l prior t o f l i g h t .

5-178
NASA-S-66-3867 APR 15

Differentia I diaphragm

Ambient sense port (senses aft compartment presswe)

Different ial metering valve

Manual control cable (locked in automatic

Outflow valve

Overboard discharge through steam duct

1 discharge t o ambient Cabin

Figure 5.13-1.-

ECS cabin pressure relief valve, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-179

N
0 0 I

u
m

5-130

5.14 Crew Windows

Description. The command module (CM) window subsystem i n s t a l l e d on t h e command module w a s Block I configuration except the antiglare and r e f l e c t i v e coatings were omitted from the glass surfeces.
The CM window subsystem consisted of one hatch window, two side windows, and two rendezvous windows (see fig. 5.14-1). The hatch window was approximately 1 inches square and w a s located i n the -% axis. 2 The side windows were approximately 7 by 1 0 inches and were loccted symmetrically 59" from t h e -Z axis. The rendezvous windows were l o cated symmetrically 320 from the -Z axis and were approximately 6 by I 2 inches and set approximately 325' from the Y-Z plane.

The three panels i n each side and rendezvous window used i n t h i s f l i g h t were i n s t a l l e d as follows: two panels, each 0.20 inch thick, w e r e i n s t a l l e d w i t h a 0.175-inch a i r space between t h e m i n t h e pressure cabin structure; the t h i r d panel, 0.70 inch thick, was i n s t a l l e d i n the heat s h i e l d structure, approximtely 1 inch from the inner panels. The glass f o r the inner panels w a s aluminosilicate (Corning code 1723); the g l a s s f o r the outer panel w a s amorphous fused s i l i c a (Corning code 7940 ( o p t i c a l grade quartz)). None of the panels were coated.
A 16-r~mcemera w a s i n s t a l l e d a t t h e eye l e v e l point of the planned position f o r the command p i l o t behind the l e f t - s i d e rendezvous window and was directed approximately normal t o t h e window surface. The camera stibsystem was independent of the spacecraft subsystem, and was powered by a camera battery.

Performance.- A t i m e r w a s started by an i n e r t i a l switch a t l i f t - o f f which i n turn s t a r t e d the camera at T-1-70 seconds. The film speed w a s

16 frames per second and operated f o r approximztely 170 seconds (from T+7O t o W240 sec). In frzme 44 (T+72.8 sec) tl?e pznel of the s o f t boost protective cover is seen t o disappear f o r a c l e a r view through the window.
In frame 53 (T+73.3 sec) two soot spots are seen i n the center of the window, and i n frame 60 (T-I-"3.8 sec) l i g h t deposits a r e seen t o form i n the corners of t h e panel. The deposits continued t o build up throughout t h e abort sequence. This deposit resulted i n a translucent condition around t h e window and covered approximately 20 percent of the window area. (See figs. 5.14-2 and 5.14-3.)

The v i s i b i l i t y through t h e remaining 80 percent of t h e window changed only s l i g h t l y during the time period from frame 60 t o frame 259 (T+86 sec) , a t which time two large and six smaller black soot spots appeared scattered throughout the center portion or' the window. Cloud formations and t h e horizon were s t i l l r e a d i l y discernible, indicating acceptable window visibility.

5-181
A vapor trail w a s e a s i l y detected through the window approximately

42 seconds after abort (Tt.ll.6 sec).

Stabilization as a r e s u l t of canard deployment w s noticeable by the decrease i n o s c i l l a t i o n rate of the a shadow from t h e edge of the window across the viewing field.

a Tower-jettison-motor ignition w s obsemed as an orange f l a r e , and the v i s i b i l i t y through the Window deteriorated rapidly w i t h d e f i c i t i o n of e x t e r i o r image a c t i v i t y ceasing after a nomentary glimpse of drogue parachute movement a t approximately Tt.196 seconds. Camera c o v e r q e ended before the comnaayla module emerged below t h e cloud cover.
Postflight inspection showedthat a l l windows were covered with a layer of gray material which w s considerably darker around the edges of a the window tbm i n the center area. The preliminary examination of the window indicated that the high l o s s of v i s i b i l i t y through the windows would make it extremely d i f f i c u l t , i f not impossible, f o r the crew t o detect horizon o r ground landmarks. The white l i g h t transmission loss a through the window w s greater than 85 percent.
A f t e r the windows were remwed, they were subjected t o a s p e c t r a l transmission test, and emission and infrared analysis of the gray deposit a t Atomic's International, Canoga Park, California. The results of the emission analysis of the gray deposits are l i s t e d i n table 5.14-1. The results of the infrared analysis are not available a t the time of publication of t h i s report.

In swmnary, it appears that the r e m m l of the boost protec1;ive cover did not affect t h e v i s i b i l i t y through the comrnand p i l o t rendezvous window during launch-escape-motor burn although some soot appeared, mainly during t a i l off. The g r e a t e s t v i s i b i l i t y loss did not appear until t i m e of tower jettison. From the t l m e of tower j e t t i s o n UntriZ command module landing t h e window v i s i b i l i t y l o s s increased t o t h e extent that postflight subjective v i s u a l tests indicated that no difference could be seen between t h e horizon l i n e and ground landmarks.
The s p e c t r a l transmission was performed at two locations on t h e left-hand rendezvous window. Point 1 w a s the l i g h t e r center area of the window. Point 2 was the very dark area a t the left-hand corner edge where sooting from the LES started after soft boost protective c t m r break-up. The readings w e r e taken normal t o the glass surface. The s p e c t r a l transmission through point 1 of the l e f t rendezvous window w s 10 t o 60 percent i n t h e infrared. (9000 t o 16 000 angstroms) a and 2 t o 20 percent i n the visual (4000 t o 7000 angstrom). The t m s missions through point 2 was 1t o 10 percent f o r infrared and less than 1percent f o r the visual. The results of t h e emission spectrographs are shown i n table 5.14-1.

5-182

o o n 4 -

rl

0 0

o m r c \ n
4

0 0

0 0

0 0

n
L
+

o rl
Q
n

n
O O
Y

o
O

rl

o n l n l n

d d r l c u

cd a, k

cd

4 P I
m
cd

k
0

k
0

NASA-S-66-3733 APR 15

Figure 5.14-1.- Command module after landing showing general condition of windows, Apollo Mission A-004.

5-184

E m .-

5-185

2
c1:

8 c ? m
I

4 z

6-1

6.0 LAUNCH VEHICLE: PEEP9RMANCE

6.1 Propulsion
Description.- The propulsion subsystem. f o r the L i t t l e Joe I1 launch D o vehicle consisted of f o u r Algol I M d 1 and f i v e Recruit TE-29 rocket motors. The f i v e Recruit motors and two of t h e Algols {positions 2 and 5 ) were used as f i r s t - s t a g e propulsion, and t h e re i.ng two Algols (positions 1 and 4) acted as second-stage propulsion. The motors were bolted t o the sLx peripheral rings and one center retaining r i n g i n the t h r u s t bulkhead of the vehicle afterbody, and the Algol motors were l a t e r a l l y supported by the bulkhead a t vehicle s t a t i o n 34.75. Figure 3.2-1 shows t h e location of the motors. A d e t a i l e d description of the Algol and Recruit motors i s presented i n reference 10.
The propulsion f l i g h t i n s t m e n t a t i o n consisted of one chamber pressure measurement f o r each Algol motor. Data from t h e pressure transducers were sampled 20 t i m e s per second. A i instrumentation functioned s a t i s f a c t o r i l y u n t i l abort. Recruit motors were not instrumented.

Landline i n s t m e n t a t i o n indicated t h a t t h e Algol motor temperatures were approximately 700 F a t time of lrunch. Performance. - Examination of the chamber pressure data indic:ated t h a t t h e general performance of a l l Algol motors was satisfactory. Deviation of the s p e c i f i c performance of the individual motors from the predicted performance based on average t h r u s t f o r a respective period of t i m e i s as follows:

Motor position

The f l i g h t t h r u s t t i m e h i s t o r i e s a r e Fresented i n figures 6.1-1 t o

6.1-4.
P o s t f l i g h t examination.- The motors remained attached t o t h e vehic l e u n t i l ground impact. They were not returned t o the assembly area 2nd no d e t a i l e d inspection was made.

6-2

d
I

0 0

d .

hf
0
S

9
m
w
d

N
L

rm .LL

2 S

6-3

. .
I

3
2

.
5
n
I
L

g
L

3; c. m m

E 0 m a

C Y

0 1 3

0 n

lL

2 3 m .-

d0 0

6)

m 4
m
I
S

m
I

V 6)

3 9

9
i

v ,

C C
(u

k cn
a 2

*
c

C
c

.
t

c '

c i

N
L

i
0

C
C 0

C
N

rn .LL

E !

6-5

4 0
0

E .-

6-6
6.2 Launch Vehicle Pyrotechnic Devices
Description.- The launch vehicle pyrotechnic devices consisted of i n i t i a t o r s and motor i g n i t e r s for ignition of the Algol and Recruit motors, and the range safety subsystem pyrotechni A l l devices were the same type as used on e a r l i e r Apollo - L i t t l e For a detailed description of the launch vehicle pyro s, see reference 10.

The Algol motor i n i t i a t o r s were Holex AGC, p a r t no. 360871, l o t no. 332602, and the R e c r u i t motor i n i t i a t o r s were Space Ordnance Syst e m s , sol-266-6, l o t no. 25. Lot no. 25 i n i t i a t o r s have been used f o r the Recruit motors throughout t h i s program. The i n i t i a t o r serial numbers were a s follows: Algol motor 1
AZgolmo-t;or 2

......... Algol motor 4 . . . . . . . . . Algol motor 5 . . . . . . . . . S e r i a l nos. Recruit motor 3 . . . . . . . . Serial nos. Recruit mo-t;or 6 . . . . . . . . S e r i a l nos. Recruit motor 7 . . . . . . . . S e r i a l nos.
Recruit motor 8 Recruit motor 9

.........

Serial nos.

513 and 529 Serial nos. 314 and 301 S e r i a l nos. 512 and 549
509 and 530 12053 and U1k1

12066 and

12.092

12074 and 12080

. . . . . . . . Serial nos.

........

12332 and 12052 S e r i a l nos. 12302 and 12064

Performance.- All i n i t i a t o r s and i g n i t e r s functioned properly. One bridge of each i n i t i a t o r of the f i r s t - s t a g e motors w a s expended by system no. 1before the redundant second system was activated. I n i t i a t o r bridges i n the Algol motors were expended within 3 milliseconds, and those i n t h e Recruit mo%ors within 1millisecond. The i n i t i a t o r s weze not removed f o r postflight inspection. The range safety subsystem was armed a t l i f t - o f f , but was not required t o function because of the nominal f l i g h t of the launch vehicle.

6-7
6.3 A t t i t u d e Control Subsystem
Description. The a t t i t u d e control subsystem ( f i g . 6.3-1) f o r t h e Mission A-004 launch vehicle w a s i d e n t i c a l t o t h e one used on Mission A-003 (ref. 4) with t h e following exceptions:
( a ) The radio-frequency command pitch-up capability w a s included since t h e r e w a s a requirement f o r a pitch-up maneuver on t h i s f l i g h t . The p i t c h command s i g n a l w a s equivalent t o a vehicle a t t i t u d e e r r o r of 29.50 with a time constant of 0.52 second.

(b) The pitch-dawn s i g n a l commanded by the p i t c h programer was set a t 1 deg/sec t o be i n i t i a t e d a t T+20 second.
( c ) The reaction control subsystem w a s aeleted because there was no requirement f o r t h i s system on t h i s f l i g h t .
launch were as follows:

(a)

The autopilot gains f o r aerodynaniic control s e t a t time of

Attitude, control surface deflection/ vehicle angular displacement, deg/deg Pitch Yw a

Rate, control surface deflection/ vehicle angular r a t e , deg/deg /se c

1.5

Roll

1.5 0.4

1.5 1.5
I
0.2

Performance. The a t t i t u d e control suSsystem performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y throughout t h e f l i g h t , including the c r i t i c a l phases of l i f t - o f f , staging ( i n i t i a t i o n of the second p a i r of Algol engines), and pitch-up. The vehicle was launched a t an i n i t i a l p i t c h a t t i t u d e of 840, and a t "4-21seconds t h e p i t c h programmer w a s i n i t i a t e d , which caused t h e veh i c l e t o p i t c h over a t the planned r a t e of approximately l deg/sec throughout t h e remainder of t h e f l i g h t (TLgs. 6.3-2 and 6.3-3). A t l i f t - o f f , normal i g n i t i o n t r a n s i e n t s caused outputs from t h e p i t c h and roll rate gyros of 11.8 deg/sec (peak-to-peak) and 4.8 deg/sec (peakto-peak), respectively, a t 20 cps; however, t h e duration w a s less than 0.5 second. The disturbance i n t h e yaw axis w a s negligible. seconds and had no noticeable e f f e c t Staging occurred a t ~ 3 6 . 4 on t h e control system as shown by t h e rate gyro outputs ( f i g s . 6.3-3

6-e
and 6.3-4). Pitch-up w a s i n i t i a t e d a t Tt7O.8 seconds and the body elevation angle was increased from 360 t o approximately 540 as planned. ( f i g . 6.3-2. ) A expected, the l a r g e s t a t t i t u d e e r r o r s occurred s h o r t l y a f t e r s l i f t - o f f (from T+4 t o Ti-10 sec); however, these e r r o r s were rapidly reduced t o a s m a l l value and remained small throughout the remainder of t h e f l i g h t . Figure 6.3-5 shows that the vehicle s t z r t e d t o roll i n a positive d i r e c t i o n a t l i f t - o f f (counterclockwise looking a f t ) , and reached a maximum excursion of approximtely 3" a t TI-4 seconds; however, t h e vehicle had f u l l y recovered a t WlO seconds. A t T+3 seconds the vehicle began t o p i t c h up ( f i g . 6.3-6) and reached a m a x i m u m excursion of approximately 3" a t T+g seconds; however, t h i s e r r o r had been elimjnated by T+l3 seconds. A t Tt-4 seconds t h e vehicle begzn t o yau i n a p o s i t i v e d i r e c t i o n ( t o t h e left, looking a f t ) and reached a maximum value of approximately 2 . 5 O a t Fi-9 seconds. By T+l5 seconds t h i s a t t i t u d e e r r o r had been eliininated (fig. 6.3-5).
The steady-state e r r o r (approximately lo) i n the y a w and roll axes during much of t h e f l i g h t was not abnormal and was probably caused by thrust misalignments or winds, o r both. In t h e p i t c h a x i s , a steadys t a t e e r r o r of approximtely 20 i s normal as the vehicle l a g s behind the commanded a t t i t u d e . This e f f e c t has been v e r i f i e d by simulation studies

During pitch-up, the vehicle r o l l e d approximately 5 O ( f i g . 6.3-3) because t h e control system gains were not p e r f e c t l y balanced, which i s a normal s i t u a t i o n f o r t h e system. Figure 6.3-7 shows t h a t elevons 1 and 4 a r e displaced approximately 200 counterclockwise, and f i g u r e 6.3-8 shows t h a t elevons 2 and 3 are displaced approximately 19 clockwise. The net difference i s i n a d i r e c t i o n t o cause p o s i t i v e roll of t h e vehicle. The roll a t t i t u d e w a s corrected before abort. Performance of t h e hydraulic system was correct i n a l l aspects throughout t h e f l i g h t . Figure 6.3-9 shows hydraulic pressure p l o t t e d against t i m e u n t i l abort of t h e payload. Approximately 1 5 cu in. of 7 hydraulic f l u i d were used by each f i n out of approximately '710 cu in. available f o r each f i n . Figure 6.3-10 shows t h a t launch vehicle system power (28 V dc) was normal throughout the f l i g h t .

6-9

L L

S .-

dLL

.-

rl

I n

Q
rl

e n

0
oc)

3 'v) L:
9

v)

6-10

S .m

I n

a
03

Ln

? m
v)

3 9

6-XL

0
v)

6-13

v)

SI

aJ

.m

U U 4

-a

m L

...
W

c c

c
c
1

r!
L

.;
N I
0

3,
0

ILn

rn

...
n n
N

n
(Y I

n I

6-14

S S

0
v)

> W

a ,

IO

4 J

01a

NOIIISOd

61 -6

u
w
w
u)

I I-

3 3 a NOIIISOd

6-17

v,

v, v, W L Q

a
0

.3 e K
W

>
W
n

a ,

0 .I

I 2
S
0

9
3

rn L

t-

E .-

VISd ' 3 Y n S S I Y d

6-18

n
W

a
V

?
0 *

E
a
U c

4
0

E
c
C

6-19

rl

Ln
I Y

a
Q

rl

d 03

3 9 ?
30 ' S l l O h

6-20

6 4 Launch Vehicle Aerodynsmics .

The variation of power-on drag with Mach number of the Little Joe I1 launch vehicle is a function of altitude, thrust level, number of each type of motor, and the base arrangement. Since no power-on windtunnel drag data were available, the preflight drag estimte for the Li5tle Joe I1 launch vehicle model12-51-3 was based on drag data from previous flights of Little Joe IT and other launch vehicles which had va-ious combinations of the above-mentioned factors that affect the drag. The estimated maximum and minimum power-on drag zoefficients shown in figure 6.4-1were used in preflight performance predictions. Figure 6.4-1also includes the actual drag coefficients computed from the longitudinal high-range accelerometer data (ref. 1, fig. CAA) , the flight weight (fig. 3 . 3 - 7 ) , flight thrust {figs. 6.1-1to 6.1-4), and the flight dynamic pressure. A s indicated in figure 6.4-1,flight drag values were within the estimated drag envelope during the launch ex

cept for the period of overlap of stage 1 and stage 2 motor burning

(c &h

. .) numbers from 0 8 to 1 1 .

The launch vehicle wzs controlled and was statically stable from li3-off to zbort. The vehicle had a positive static margin of 0.055 body diameter (diam. = 1 4 in. ) at lift-off and 0.2 diameter at 5 abort. Performance of the control system is discussed in section 6.3.

6-21

0
6-4

I n

cv

a z

6-22

6.5

Launch Vehicle Structures

The L i t t l e Joe I1 launch vehicle w a s a f i n - s t a b i l i z e d airframe, and was s t r u c t u r a l l y t h e same as t h e launch vehicle described in r e f e r ence 4. The airframe consisted of the vehicle body and four f i n s . Hydraulically operated aerodynamic c o n t r o l elevons were attached t o t h e t r a i l i n g edges of the f i x e d portion of t h e f i n s . The body consisted of a forebody and an afterbody section of semimonocoque construction f a b r i cated from truncated-form corrugated alwninum sheets s t a b i l i z e d by r i n g frames. Each f i n was of a monospar s t r u c t u r e with t h e skin s t a b i l i z e d by r i b s and chordwise s t i f f e n e r s . The elevons of e s s e n t i a l l y the same coastruction were attached t o t h e t r a i l i n g edge of each f i n by four hinges. For a d e t a i l e d description, see reference 6.

The only s t r u c t u r a l l y oriented i n s t m e n t a t i o n w e r e accelerometers mounted on t h e forward and a f t bulkheads and oriented t o measure the Y and Z components of acceleration. These accelerometers w e r e ranged primarily to d e t e c t possible e x c i t a t i o n of body bending modes. D a t a from these accelerometers, together with the l i n e a r accelerometer data from t h e s p m e c r a f t and IXS, show amplitudes of t h e f i r s t body bending mode a t l i f t - o f f t h a t were small enough t h a t t h e r e s u l t i n g body bending moments were small. Based on these data and engineering films of t h e f l i g h t , t h e L i t t l e Joe I1 launch vehicle proved s t r u c t u r a l l y adequate and performed t h e required mission with no problems. The films a l s o show t h e t t h e launch vehicle remained e s s e n t i a l l y i n t a c t u n t i l earth i m p a c t .

6-23

6.6

Launch Vehicle E l e c t r i c a l Power Subsystem

Description.- The launch vehicle e l e c t r i c a l power subsystem cons i s t e d of two independent power sources: (1) instrumentation power, and (2) vehicle power f o r autopilot functions. Except for the incorpor a t i o n of a separate control f o r each of the two sources when o p r a t i n g f r o m e x t e r n a l power, t h e subsystem was i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t on L J I1 described i n reference 4. Performance.- Telemetry data indicate that t h e e l e c t r i c a l su'bsystem performance w a s s a t i s f a c t o r y throughout the mission.

6-24

'I

6.7 Launch Vehicle Instrumentation Subsystem

Description.- The launch vehicle instrumentation subsystem was similar t o t h a t used on Mission A-002 ( r e f . 10) mid consisted of a s i n g l e PAM/FM/FM telemetry l i n k , s i g n a l conditioners, and transducers. w The performance of t h e launch vehicle s ~ s y s t e m s a s monitored during f l i g h t by 39 telemetered measurements. During p r e f l i g h t checkout through l i f t - o f f , the launch vehicle performance w a s monitored by 33 l a n d l i n e measurements.
A block diagram of the instrumentation subsystem i s shown i n figt h e l a n d l i n e measurements are shown i n figure 6.7-2. The measurement l i s t and the transducer locations are included i n sect i o n 11.2 of t h i s report. For a d e t a i l e d description of the launch vehicle instrumentation subsystem, refer t o s e c t i o n 3.0 of reference 20.

ure

6.7-1, and

Performance.- Telemetry reception and recording w e r e of good quali t y . A l l 39 measurements functioned properly and acceptable telemetry signals were obtained from l i f t - o f f u n t i l termination of launch vehicle telemetry transmission a t T+73.7 seconds, following abort i n i t i a t i o n .
A t approximately T+3O seconds and continuing throughout t h e durat i o n of the launch-vehicle f l i g h t , a baseline d r i f t was observed i n t h e FAM output of t h e 90 by 10 commutator. Reference and data pulses d i d not d r i f t ; thus a l l commutated &ta were recovered with no l o s s i n accuracy.

The performance of t h e l a n d l i n e instrumentation was s s t i s f a c t o r y .

6 -25
NASA-S-66-3849 APR 15
B60035R roll rate BB0036R pitch rate BB0037R yaw rate
Attitude

BB0122A fwd hlkhd accel Y-axis

(4)

S
I

J
I1

a I

BBOOOlH pitch attitude 6B0002H yaw attitude BB0003H r o i l attitude

inst svs voltase vehicle voltaye F i n 1act hvd uress

BB0024V BB0025V D n BB0027P 1 BB0028P i t BB0029P BB0030P I 0 660033V n BB0034V i n BB0038H g 6B0039H BB0040H I1 0 BB0041H
X

_I 4
-1
9( X
i r

Fin 2 act liyd press F i n 3 act livd ,mess ,

F i n 4 act liyd press Quad E command signal l Quad E command signal F i n 1cont surf position F i n 2 cont surf nosition F i n 3 cont surf position F i n 4 cont surf position

. ~ m
ni
l i

iynition

BB0042X iiiissile lift-off BB0043V ret battery voltage

c
0

F i n position command

BB0044P BB0045P BBOO52X BBOO53X BB0054X BB0055X BB0057V BBOO58V BB0124P BB0125P BBO126X BB0127X

Algol motor no. 2 chanibzr press

pitch-up relay no. 1 pitch-up relay no. 2 abort relav no. 1

Algol motor no. 5 chambtr p c s s * t

t t

a
0

abort relay no. 2 calibration 0 volts calibration 5 volts Algol motor 110. 1chamber pess Alaol motor 110. 4 chamber uress
2nd stage ignition relay no. 1

2nd stage iyiiition relay no. 2 3801281-1 siiiii oitch attitude & oitch oroa

-I
L

'-I

Figure 6.7-1. - Launch-vehicle instrumentation subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004.

62 -6
NASA-S-66-3853 APR 15

Power building
r-----------

Eighteen motor firing currents

I 1

Ignition firing i , signal 1

1I I I

V is ic order

Twelve Algol motor temperatures

I 1 ,
1
Brown recorder

I I

I I I 1

I Three air conditioning temperature monitors I

I I

I I

Figure 6.7-2,-

Launch-vehicle landline instrumentation block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004.

6-27

6.8

Radio-Frequency Comroand Subsystem

The radio-frequency (RF) command subsystem, shown i n figure 6.8-1, consisted of two independent, ide i c a l , redundant c i r c u i t s t o i n i t i a t e the pitch-up and abort sequence a coded ground transmissio subsystem was e s s e n t i a l l y the same as t h a t employed on vehicle X!-?l-l (Mission A-002); however, it d i d not include i n t e g r a l back-up timers and the abort hot-line was not wrapped around t h e range safety subsyst e m primacord. An additional "abort only" command function was included f o r use i n the event the pitch-up maneuver w a s not desired because of f l i g h t conditions.
The RF command subsystem performed the pitch-up and abort functions seconds, the pitch-up command was receiied, as intended. A t ~+70.81 i n i t i a t i n g the pitch-up maneuver. T h i s signal a l s o s t a r t e d the operation of a 2.8-second time-delay relay which actuated a t T4-73.7 seconds, i n i t i a t i n g the abort sequence. Telemetry data verified t h a t both c i r cuits operated a t these times.

6- 28
NASA-S-66-3654 APR 15 (RF command console)
L

Blockhouse controls and monitor

_I
Antennas

Block ouse

!-I

receiver
I

relay assemb I y

~1

Launch vel c le Battery

Pitch up/ control relay ass9 Pitch-up signal t o control system Pitch-up/abort signal to instrumentation Pitch -up signa 1 to control system

--____-----------_------__________-____
~

Abort signal to LES sequencer

Pitch-up/abort signal hot linest o instrumentation

-Abort

-Command module

Abort signal to LES sequencer

Figure

6.8-1.- Launch-vehicle RF command subsystem block diagram, Apollo Mission A-004.

6-29

6.9 Range Safety Subsystem

The range s a f e t y subsystem ( f i g . 6.9-1) provided t h e means f o r terminating launch vehicle t h m s t by s p l i t t i n g the Algol motor cases w i t h pyrotechnics i n t h e event of a range s a f e t y requirement. The system was controlled by t h e WSMR Range Safety Officer and could be actuat e d by ground s t a t i o n transmission of a coded radio-frequency corrmand. Other thzn controlling t h e t h r u s t termination of four, rather than six, Algol motors the subsystem was e s s e n t i a l l y -the same as t h a t emplcyed on vehicle 12-51-2 (Mssion A-003). Range s a f e t y action during the f l i g h t vas not required. Recovery of both safe and arm blocks after t h e flight indicated t h a t t h e u n i t s were properly armed a t l i f t - off

6-30

NASA-S-66-3658 APR 15

To grolrnd control and

Algol motor

............................ ..........
n........ ........

Upper primacord
i

Li near shaped charge

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

Lower primacord
Ping

Safe and arm unit

To ground control and monitor unit

&--Launcher

Figure 6.9-1.-

Range safety subsystem, Apollo Mission A-004.

6-31
6.10 Launch Vehicle Ignition
The launch vehicle f i r s t - s t a g e and second-stage i g n i t i o n systems f o r Mission A-004 f i g . 6.-10-l(a) and ( b ) ) were similar t o those used f o r Itission A-003 see r e f . 4, section 6.9).

I g n i t i o n of both stages w a s s a t i s f a c t o r y ( a t T-0 and ~ 3 6 . 4 see). The visicorder record i n t h e power building indicated t h a t f i r s t - s t a g e i g n i t i o n w a s i n i t i a t e d by timer 1 a t 8:17:03.625 a.m. m . s . t . Fixedcamera coverage of f i r s t - s t a g e ignition indicated no appreciable variation i n Recruit motor burn-outs and no ap-psrent hang-fires. Timer 1 l e d t i m e r 2 by 0.5 second, indicating that the i g n i t i o n of t h e second-stage Algol motors w s i n i t i a t e d by timer 1 This was a . the f i r s t two-stage i g n i t i o n on a L i t t l e Joe I1 f l i g h t , and the f i r s t successful i g n i t i o n of Algol motors f o r a second stage.

6- 32
NASA-S-66-3662 APR 15

Control console

-I

Arm relays

First stage ignition batteries

Arm relays

--

Power building .------

Launch vehicle

(a) First stage ignition system. Figure 6.10-1.Apollo Mission A-004 launch-vehicle ignition subsystem. Typical for each motor.

6- 33
NASA-S-66-3666 APR 15

Control console

P P
Fire relay

--.

Fire relay

Arm relay

SJB-5 checkout and

final arming
1----

no. 1 Ino. 2

Algol initiator two per motor

(b) Second stage ignition system.

Figure 6.10-1.Concluded.

7.0

RECOVERY OPERATIONS

Recovery teams f o r t h e command module (CM) and the launch-escape subsystem ( U S ) were prestationed a t radar tracking s i t NE30, whereas the recovery team f o r the launch vehicle (LV) w a s a t s i SE~O. (See fig. 7.0-1 for a map of t h e area. ) The ground teams first obsewed t h e CM a t approximately 9500 f t m. s. 1 descending through an overcast; sky . on a l l t h r e e main parachutes. Descent w a s steady with very l i t t l e sideward motion and w i t h t h e CM in normal descent a t t i t u d e . bkin parachute disconnect was observed a t the i n s t a n t t h e CM first contacted t h e ground. Immediately following disconnect, t h e C M w a s seen t o rock back and f o r t h t o a maximum angle of approximately 6W from v e r t i c a l before combg t o rest i n an upright position. The drogue parachutes touched down approximately 3000 f e e t northe a s t of the CM. There w a s no damage to t h e drogue p r a c h u t e s , no fraying of cables, and no evidence of riser cable kinking. !The apex cover w a s observed f a l l i n g 2000 feet e a s t of the CE4. The cover w a s i n excellent condition and there were neither cracks nor chips from impact.

7-2
NASA-S-66-3690 APR 15

0 Predicted CM landina
point with wind

120

15 0

90

75

5 L
z
a i d
m
0

1
Range road 271

348029'

/ ,&'
I
I

A RCS quad

= M )

P
0

5 a

I
\

ARCS quad

A s

?I1

\ \

45

30

15

L Y
\
Figure 7.0-1.-

/i
Q

Legend

Radar tracking sites Major components A Minor components Estimated SM dispersion -.- White Sands Monument boundary

\ Launch complex 36
East

West Location of recovered components, Apollo Mission A-004.

7-3
7.1 Command Module
On-scene inspection of t h e CM revealed t h e following: (a) Almost t h e e n t i r e CM conical surface w a s discolored and sooted. (b) The three main parachutes were a t f u l l suspension-line length, one toward the north, one toward t h e south, and one toward t h e southeast.
( e ) The main heat s h i e l d w a s s h i f t e d approximately 1/4 inch toward t h e -Z axis. A 4-foot-long piece of the cork a b l a t o r w a s broken o f f t h e +Z axis (approximate location of first conta.ct with t h e ground). The .-) underlying s t a i n l e s s s t e e l structure w a s a l s o damaged ( f i g . 7 1 1 . Two

f i n e - l i n e cracks were observed, each 1 f o o t long and epproximately 2 f e e t from the outer edge. One crack was between t h e -Y and +Z exes, and t h e other betxeerc -Z and +Y axes.
( d ) A l l windows were covered with soot,, reducing l i g h t transmission t o approximately 20 t o 30 percent of normal ( f i g . 5.14-1).

( e ) The -Z a x i s scimitar antenna w a s s h i f t e d toward t h e -Y a x i s and soot was found i n the crack marks a t the base ( f i g . 5.12-4).
( f ) The outer hatch ( s i d e a b l a t i v e ha2,ch) was not sprung and required a 1 r ) O - l b torque wrench pressure t o release. (See section 5.5.) Sooting hsd penetrated t o t h e inner door thyough t h e hatch r e l e a s e socket hole. The inner door ( s i d e pressure hatch) w a s i n good c o r d i t i o n and required a 120-lb torque wrench p r e s s w e t o release. (See seit i o n 5.5.) A tooth of t h e inner door sprocket w a s broken off during r e m o n l . Another t o o t h w a s broken off w h i l e ! t h e inner door w a s being replaced f o r transport back t o t h e Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB).

3/4 inch of sideward (Y-Y) movement.

Pins were replcced, as planned, t o secure the p l a t f o r m for t r a n s p o r t back t o VAB. S t r u t stroke measurements m d e i n t h e recovery area are presented i n section 5.8.

(g)

The platform inside t h e CM w a s swxging free w i t h approximately

( h ) Pressure p o r t s were clean except f o r a s m a l l amount of potting compound on the e x t e r n a l surface. The insick? of the ports w a s blackened with soot.

(i)

The C - M umbilical w a s cut c1ean:Ly by t h e g u i l l o t i n e . MS

(j) The flashing l i g h t w a s deployed, but n o t t o t h e f u l l vertical position. P r e f l i g h t adjustment of t h e s t o p screw, made necessary because of t h e weak deployment springs, r e s t r i c t e d t h e extent of f u l l d e ployment. (See s e c t i c n 5.5. )

7-4
(k) The W antennas were deployed, but not t o the v e r t i c a l posit i o n . P r e f l i g h t adjustment of t h e s t o p screw, made necessary because of weak deployment springs, had r e s t r i c t e d the extention. The V antenna a t the -Y axis w a s cracked half-way through a t t h e base and w a s bent tuward t h e center of t h e CM. The other VHF antenna ( a l l copper) a t t h e +Z axis w a s bent but w a s not cracked. Potting a t the base of e i t h e r antenna w a s not cracked. These antennas are not representative of a c t u a l f l i g h t hardware. (See s e c t i o n 5.5.) (1) Red apex cover s i l i c o n sealant s t r a i n s were noticed on t h e CM a%ove the hatch door.

(m) Main parachute disconnects were severed cleanly. One c u t t e r blade was broken. The c u t t e r l e f t heavy grooves on t h e pins. (See fig. 5.8-n.)
(n) All tower separation b o l t s were f i r e d , leaving edges clean. The expander body b o l t p r o t e c t o r s which cover t h e sharp edges of the sheared b o l t s were removed and replaced by bolts t o accommodate t h e 3-point c a b l e - l i f t i n g sling.

The c a n i s t e r holding t h e uprighting bag on t h e +Z side w a s (0) j a r r e d downward 3/8 inch (see s e c t i o n 5 . 5 ) .

(p) Drogue cans were clean and indicated no damage during deployment. One drogue can w a s s l i g h t l y bent during plck-up by t h e recovery lcop ( f i g . 7.1-2). Figure 5.5-8 shows the drogue can before t h e CM w a s l i f t e d b y t h e reccvery loop.
(q) Drogue disconnects were c u t cleanly. One connector of a drogue disconnect ( C - 2 0 SQ7 P-1) w a s broken due t o the i n i t i a t o r charge.

(r) A l l apex cover t h r u s t e r s were deployed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y .

None of the t h r e e p l l o t parachute cans were damaged. f i g s . 5.8-8 t o 5.8-10.)
(s)

(See

t h e 3 s tilt angle ( f i g . 7.1-2), could not be aligned properly f o r loading on t h e MM-1 t e r r a c r u i s e r . Therefore, t h e a l t e r n a t e 3-point s l i n g was used (fig. 7.1-3). The CM w a s loaded on t h e t e r r a c r u i s e r and departed f o r t h e VAB by Ti-4hours.

(t) The CM was f i r s t l i f t e d by t h e recovery loop but, because of

7-5

ln

rl

P aJ
0 V

>

0
0

2
e
Q

cu 1
r(

a
d .I Q

0 0

d:

7 2 Launch-Escape Subsystem .
cape subsystem (IXS) fell in a nearly horizontal upon impact which was observed by the ground reposition and b covery crew stationed at NE3O. Impact was approximately 3300 feet west of the CM landing point (fig. 7.2-1). Following are observations of the recovery team: (a) The U S camera was found in place but the protective covering was knocked loose during impact. (b) The launch-escape motor, tower-jettison motor, and pitchcontrol motor were completely expended. There was no evidence of hot spots on any of the remaining intact parts.

(c) The aft section of the launch-escape motor and the phenolic exit cones were sheared off on impact (fig. 7 2 1 . A l l four nozzles .-) contained their graphite throat inserts when recovered.
(d)

The tower-jettison motor showed no abnormal erosion marks.

(e) The pitch-control motor remained with the canard section and was in good condition.
(f) The canard actuation system contained residual gas pressure in both cylinders. This gas pressure was released and shorting plugs were installed in the initiators as a precautionary measure.

(g) The &-ball external structure was in one piece, whereas the internal parts were scattered.

(h) The tower was broken upon impact. (i) Each of the four explosive bolts indicated a clean break.
( ) The tower structure, camera case, and hard boost protective j cover exterior surfaces were discolored and sooted but not badly bumred.

7-9

v)

W J U

0
0

= i
I
0 ..VI

VI

7-10

er abort and pieces f i g . 7.0-1). e dispersion il T+2 days.

cluded the following:

(b)
(c)

One section (2 f t by and 5 )

4 f t ) of

an S M r a d i a l beam (sectors 2

O e CM support beam and tension t i e (V 1 @ 0 1 1 ) n + 0 - 1

O e s i g n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n box n

(a)
(e)

(1.9.1.1.2)

O e tape module (3.11.1.1.1) n

( f)
(g)

Nineteen amplifiers
Other small pieces of s k i n and r a d i a l beams.

The SM-LJ I adapter r i n g was found i n one piece except for i m 1 pact damage. The f i b e r g l a s s bulkhead w a s shattered with only the jagged edges l e f t i n t h e mating ring.

7.4 b u n c h Vehicle
The launch vehicle w a s observed by the :recovery crew t o be f a l l i n g i n t a c t , a f t end first. Impact w a s approxim-tely 7200 f e e t northwest of s i t e SE3O j u s t inside t h e White Sands National Monument ( f i g . 7.0-1). ?&ximum dispersion .of t h e launch vehicle was approximately 100 yards ( f i g . 7 4 1 . Immediately a f t e r impact t h e :Launch vehicle started. .-) burning, and it w a s Wl3O minutes before the recovery team could e n t e r the impact a r e a because of the intense heat. The launch vehicle separation a t the top r i n g w a s indicated by t h e clean shear of t h e r i v e t s . T h i s was v e r i f i e d when the bottom r i n g of t h e servjce module w a s found 2.days later. The following observations w e r e made by the recovery teams:
(a) Seven of the eight nitrogen tanks were ruptured. tank was not located.

The eighth

(b) Two safe and arm destruct mits used t o detonate t h e l i n e a r shaped charge f o r destructing the Algol motors were found i n the armed p o s i t ion.
(c)

Other i t e m s recovered were:

Launch sequence timers (only one w a s returned t o VAB)

RF command receiver
Logic and control u n i t (found i n three pieces) Pitc'l. programer Fin, including p a l l e t and actuator These were the only items requested for recovery. All remaining launch vehicle items were disposed of by Amy Ordnance Disposal.

7-12

N A S A - S - 6 6 - 3 6 8 6 APR 15

Figure 7.4-1.-

Apollo Mission A-004 Little JoeIT

launch vehicle impact area.

8-1
8.0

POSTFLIGW TESTING AND AITOMALY SUMMARY

8 1 Postflight Testing .
Planned postflight testing f o r analysis of subsystem performance and the resolution of anomalies occurring 6uring the flight of NLSsion A-004 have been completed and the results analyzed. Each item is discussed in the area where testing occurred as noted in the section referenced in parenthesis.

1 Scimitar Antenna -The scimitar antenna was field inspected, . and then removed from the spacecraft. A radiation bench test was conducted on the antenna, and X-rays were taken to observe structural condition. The final test involved completie sectioning of the antenna for analysis (section 5.12).
2. Pyro buses A and B -Electrical continuity checks of pyro buses A and B were conducted in the spacecraft with the sequencers in place. Bench tests were conducted on the sequencer after it was removed from the vehicle (section 5.11).

3 . Cabin Pressure Elelief Ualve Tests -Pressurization and -vacuum tests were conducted on the cabin pressure relief valve while it was still installed in the spacecraft. The vaLve was removed and shipped to AiResearch M-anafacturing Co. where further pressure and vacuu! tests were conducted (section 5.13).
4. Command Module Leak Tests - All cracks in the aft bulkhead of the command module pressure vessel were bagged and a vacuum was applied to the bagged area p r i o r to a complete CM pressure check. The cracks were sealed and a pressure check was cortdwted on the total CM through the vent port on the crew access hatch -prim to the removal of the cabin pressure relief valve (section 5.13)

5. Crew Window Tests -The crew windows were removed at the contractor's Downey facilities and shipped to Atomic International for visibility, transmissibility, and chemical analysis {section 5.14).
6. Instrumentation Measurements (5) Tests Postflight electrical continuity tests were conducted on a l l questionable instrumentation measurements prior to removing any equipment from the vehicle. Calibrations were completed on those measurements requiring such action (sectior,5.11).
7. Flotation Bag Canister Test -The flotation bag canister was removed from the spacecraft and shipped to MSC for testing. Operational tests have been completed on this item (section 5.7)

8-2

8.2

Summary of Malfunctions and Deviations

The flight test of Mission A-004 did not reveal any malfunctions or deviations which could be considered a serious system failure or design deficiency. However, 1 deviations did occur and are summarized 0 here for documentary pwposes. Corrective measures were recommended for some of the items listed. These are marked with an asterisk. Each item is discussed in the area where the deviation occurred as noted in the section referenced in parenthesis.
1 RF telemetry was lost, starting approximately 2 seconds after . abort due to scimitar antenna failure (section 3 1 ) .2.
2.

At abort, p ~ r r obus A and B voltage dropped to approximately

5 volts for approximately 0.2 second (section 5.11).

3 . Cabin pressure relief valve did not control cabin pressure during ascent because of excessive inner hatch seal leakage (section 5 1 ) .2.

4 A l l windows on the command module sustained severe sooting . during the flight (section 5.14).
5. There was damage (pitting) to the aft heat shield in the area of the CM-SM tension ties (section 5.2.4).

6. The onboard tape recorder F jammed at T+2Og seconds (section 5.12).

7.
Five measurements yielded questionable data (section 5.12).

8. The flotation bag canister shifted during flight (section 5.5). 9. Pyro bus B voltage dropped to approximately 30 volts at the time of pilot mortar/drogue disconnect firing (section 5.11).
1 . One drogue parachute disconnect cutter blade was broken during 0 flight (section 5.8.1).

''

9.0

CONCLUDING REMcLRfls

Mission A-004 demonstrated t h e s a t i s f a c t o r y performance and structural i n t e g r i t y of t h e Apollo launch escape vehicle Block I type airframe s t r u c t u r e during a power-on tutribling abort. The desired d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure (U.L f 1.5 psid) loads on the command module s t r u c t u r e were not achieved because of t h e combination of higher than predicted a f t compartment pressure and lower than expected plume impingement pressure. The Block I type service module a i r f r a m e s t r u c t u r e performed during t h e launch phase and pitch-up maneuver as required. Arter canard deployment, t h e spacecraft 002 launch escape vehicle with s p e c i a l l y configured mass c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , quicELy oriented from a high t m b l i n g rate t o a s t a b i l i z e d , main heat s h i e l d forward a t t i t u d e . The boost protective cover performed during t h e launch phase and pitch-up maneuver as required. The s i n g l e scimitar antenna w s broken during t h e first tumble and a s o f t boost protective cover break up a f t e r abort i n i t i a t i o n . Improper i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e inner hatch r e s i l t e d i n excessive cabin a i r leakage. With t h e exceptions already noted, a l l Block 1 type spacecraft 002 subsystems performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . Dynamic loads and s t r u c t u r a l response values determined f r o m t h e f l i g h t data were within design limits and predicted values. The desired f l i g h t measurements were obtained, although they were incomplete from drogue deployment t o landing because one onboard tape recorder jammed. The L i t t l e Joe I1 launch vehicle place3 t h e Apollo launch escape vehicle within t h e planned altitude-velocity t e s t region.

10-1
10.0 APPENDIX A
10.1 Test Vehicle History
The launch vehicle was assembled a t t h e contractor's plant cnd tifter acceptance w a s disassembled and shipped t o Launch Complex 36 a t White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. The checkout of assemblies and subsystems and the integrated subsystem tests were performed i n accordance with operational checkout procedures (OCP's). Significant OCP's a r e l i s t e d i n table 10.1-1.

Launch vehicle t e s t i n g was divided i n t o four phases: manufa.cturing acceptance evaluation (MAE), pre-delivery acceptance t e s t (PAT), f i e l d test, and integrated system tests. The MAE was completed en July 1 1965, the P T was completed on Octo-3er 7, 1965, and the post, A PAT acceptance review w a s held on October 8, 1963. The launch vehicle was shipped from San Diego, California, on October 1 , 1965, and arrived 1 a t White Sands T e s t F a c i l i t y on October 14, 1965. Assembly of the spacecraft command rnodifie, service module, and launch-escape subsystem s t r u c t u r e was completed a t the c o n t r a c t o r ' s plant on September 16, 1365. A f t e r completion of subsystem and i n t e grated system tests (Sept. 30, 1965), t h e SI-cecraft was f o r m a l l y ac, cepted a t t h e customer acceptance readiness review (CARR) on October 1 1965, and. shipped t o t h e Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) at t h e White Sands T e s t F a c i l i t y (WSTF). The service module was shipped October 6, 1965, and received a t the V B on October 7, 1965. After pre-mating preparations, t h e service A module w a s moved t o the launch pad and mated t o the.launch vehicle on October 23, 1965.

The command module was shipped on October 8, 1965, and received a t

t h e VAB on October

9, 1965. It was moved t o t h e launch pad on October 29, 1965, and mated t o t h e launch vehicle/service module stack.

The launch-escape tower was shipped on October 7, 1965, and received a t t h e V . on October LO, 1965. Launch-escape subsystem (US) build-up was completed on October 20, 1965. The hard boost protective cover and U S were mated t o t h e command module on October 30, 1965. On November 22, 1965, t h e s o f t boost protective cover w a s i n s t a l l e d t o complete t h e assembly of the spacecraft. The simulated countdown w a s completed on November 30, 1965. A t the F l i g h t Readiness Review, December 3 , 1967, the spacecraft and launch vehicle were declared ready f o r a December 8 , 1965, launch, pendizig

10-2

investigation o f a reported f a i l u r e of a ZJ II a t t i t u d e control subsystem logic and control unit.

The subsequent investigation revealed f a u l t y solder connections. A s a r e s u l t of this, on December 4 t h e launch w a s cancelled and re-

scheduled f o r December 18 i n order t o correct and requalify L J 1 . 1 W i n g a telephone Flight Readiness Review on December 17, t h e
F l i g h t Readiness Review Board w a s advised t h a t t h e L I1 launch vehicle J w a s unacceptable f o r f l i g h t , and t h e scheduled Decenber 18 launch was

cancelled. A f t e r a series of planning zeetings between the lzunch veh i c l e contractor and IVSA, the launch was rescheduled for Janwry 18, 1966. A chronological h i s t o r y of a c t i v i t i e s relzted t o t h e launch veh i c l e logic and control units i s presented i n t a b l e 10.1-11.

At t h e Flight Readiness Review conducted January 14, 1966, the spacecraft and launch vehicle were declared ready f o r launch. On January 18 launch w a s rescheduled for January 20, 1966, because of bad weather. Launch was s a t i s f a c t o r i l y completed January 20, 1966, a t 8:17:00.776 a.m. m. s. t.

10-3

TABLE 1 . - . 011

OPERATIONAL CHECKOUT PROCEDURES FOR M I S S I O N A-004

Title
Spacecraft

3CP number

Date completed

A-9030
A- 2013

GSE i n s t a l l a t i o n an3 checkout

LES build-up LES weight and balance
SM receiving inspection

O c t . 13,
Oct.
oct.

1965

20, 1.965 16, 1 9 5 .6 19, 1 9 5 .6

1.965

A-3038

Oct.

SM build-up

Oct. 22, Oct. 23, Oct. 9,

Oct.

A-3023

SM-LV mate
CM receiving inspection

195 .6

1565

A- 3027

Top deck build-up

21, 1 9 5 .6 22, 1 9 5 .6

A-3035

Horizontal weight and balance V e r t i c a l weight and balance Thrust vector alignment
Quality control shakedown

0c.t;.

A-3036
A-

oct. 25, 1-365

Oct. 27,

3039

1965

oct. 2 , 1-965 8
oct. 30,

A-3015

E;M-CM-LES mate

1963

Antelnna checkout

Nov. 5, 1%5
NOV. NOV.

A-10002

Cable up f o r SC checkout

4, 1965

Open i t e m review

4 1965 ,

A-0100

Spacecraft systems checkout I n s t a l l BPC

Pyro checkout and no-voltage cheek

Nov. 8 1965 ,
Nov. 22,
Jan. 5, Jan.

1965

1966

Tape recorder checkout

6, 1 6 96

10-4

TABLZ 10.1-1. OPERATIONAI, CHECKOUT P O E U E R CD RS

FOR MISSION A-004

- ContirLued

A-10002

P r e p r a t i o n of systems checkout Systems checkout

Jan. 6, 1966 Jan.

7, 1966

Data review
Quality control shakedown

Jan. 10, 1966

Jan. 1 , 1

16 96

Battery preparation

Jan. 14, 1966

~~~~

& c i l i t y i n s t a l l a t i o n and checkout Receiving inspection Flight component t e s t i n g Vehicle build- up Fin checkout and i n s t a l l a t i o n Open item review Launch vehicle systems checkout

J d Y 30, 1965

oct. 15, 1965 Jan. 18, 1966

Oct. 22 and
NOV.

18, 1965

Oct. 28, Nov. 12, and 17,

1965
Receive and functional t e s t instruct i o n L & C and 799 monitor box Checkout sensors and L & C u n i t k t e g r a t e d checkout a t t i t u d e control system Jan. 7, 1966 Jan. 9, 1966 Jan. 10,

1966

10-5
TABLE 10.1-1.

- OPEMTIOTXL CKECKOUT PROCEDURES

FOR MISSION LO04

- Concluded

h u n c h vehicle

- concluded
Jan. 12, 1966 Jan. 12,

Data review
Q u a l i t y control shakedown and open item review

196 .6

12-83116

Service f i n s Battery preparation

Jan. 12, 1 9 6 .6 Jan. 1 , 1

1-966

Spacecraft-launch vehicle
A-10002

T n t e r f a c e / i n t e g r a t ed preparations
Interface/integrated t e s t

Nov. Nov.

19, 1 9 5 .6 22, 1-96?

A-10%

A- 1099

Data review
Q u a l i t y control shakedown Open i t e m review Simulated countdown

Nov. 23,

1-965 1-965

A-1099

Nov. 24, Nov.

NOV.

29, 1 9 5 .6
30, 1-965

m
Simulated countdown
Data review and FRR

Dec. 3 , 1$5

Jan. 13, Jan. Jan.

1966

14, 1 9 6 .6 16, 1 9 6 .6 196 .6

Final systems checks

Closeout Countdown (rescheduled) Countdown

Jan. 17,

Jan. 1 , 1966 8 Jan. 20,

196 .6

10-6
TABLE 10.1-11.

- FROBl2M HISTORY OF LAUNCH VEHICI;E

U n i t stti t u s

NOT.

D8te

30, 1965

Logic and c o n t r o l (L@) u n i t S N - 6 f a i l e d f m c t i o n t e s t inspection (FTI) et WSTF.

Dec. 2, Dee. 3 ,
3 9

1965

L& u n i t SN-6 failure verified a t San Diego.

FRR conducted a t WSTF.

1965
1965

Failure a n a l y s i s of sN-6 completed a t San Diego.

NASA informed of f a i l u r e a n a l y s i s results.

Dee. 3 , 1965 Dec.

5 , 1965

Method of failure r e s t i n g resolved and r e v e r i f i c a t i o n required on SN-4.

L&C u n i t SN-4 removed from the lzunch vehicle and exhibited t h e same problem as SN-6.

Dec. 6, 1965 Dec. 7 t o

9,
'

1965
Dee. 10,

F a i l u r e cause and corrective a c t i o n accomplished. L&C u n i t SN-4 repaired and r e v e r i f i c a t i o n tests started.

1965

L u n i t S N - 4 r e v e r i f i c a t i o n completed and t h e unit & returned t o WSTF for FTI.

L&c u n i t S N - 4 i n s t a l l e d i n t h e vehicle, OCP 1283133 s t a r t e d , and an i n t e r m i t t e n t f l u c t u a t i o n noted.

Dec. 1 , 1964 1

Dec. 12, 1965 Dec. 13,

j
I

Troubleshooting started with no s i g n i f i c a n t conclusions. Troubleshooting appeared t o i s o l a t e t h e problem t o t h e YEW a t t i t u d e ernplifier. After replacement, another i n t e r m i t t e n t f l u c t u a t i o n was noted with different characteristics. Troubleshooting appeared t o i s o l z t e t h e problem t o t h e L! unit 615 V dc power supply and L& u n i t & SN-7 w a s shipped from San Diego.

1965

Dec. 14, 1965

I

10-7
TABLE 10.1-11.- PROBLEM HISTORY OF LAUNCH VEXICL;E
Date Dec. 15, 1965 Dec.
D~C. D~C.

Continued

Unit Status
Parts of SN-4 and SN-7 i n s t a l l e d i n SN-7 which w a s r e v e r i f i e d and r e i n s t a l l e d i n the vehicle. OP C

16, 1965 17, 1965

12-83133 s t a r t e d and successfully completed.

Pre-count successfully zompleted.

17, 1965
1965

FRR held by telephone; xission postponed.

NASA-Contractor meeting a t MSC; rescheduled mission for mid-Januarywith ninimum rework t o l o g i c and control u n i t and instrumentation system. NASA-Contractor meeting a t MSC; scheduled mission for January 19; defined d e t a i l tasks t o be accomplished.

Dec. 18,

Dec. 22, 1963

Dec. 23,

1965

New launch data. or' January 18, 1966 establisked.

Instrumentation wiring :heckout completed.
TZ-5 box modification, amplifier f a i l u r e , and. TZ-5 box function Ecceptanze.

Dee. 28 and 29,

1965
D~C.

29, 1965 t o Jan. 7, 1966

Jan. 6, 1966

L&c u n i t SN-m received a t WSTF, and FTI com@ete.

OCP 12-83132 completed.

Jan.
Jan.

7, 1966
8, 1966
1966

OCP 12-83133 s t a r t e d an4 799 box power supply probl e m fo-md.

Jan. 9,

Jan. 9, 1966 Jan. 10,

OCP 12-83131 completed, but review of data disclosed improperly adjusted r o l l gains.
OCP 12-83133 rerun and successfully completed.

1966

OCP 12-83131 successfully completed.

lG-8

TABLE 1 . - 1 PROBUM HISTORY OF LAUNCH VER1CI.E 011.

- Concluded

Date

Unit status Complete data review confirmed successful complet i o n of t e s t i n g . Simulated comtdown s u c c e s s f u l l y completed. F i n a l 'FRR conducted a t WSTF.

Jan. 1 , 1966 1 Jan. 13, Jan.

1966

14, 1966

10-9
10.2 h u n c h Procedure

F i n a l preparation f o r launch, including countdown, w a s divided i n t o three operations as indicated i n figures 10.2-1 t o 10.2-4. "he overall operation i s shown i n f i g u r e 10.2-1. The f i r s t operation included f i n a l system checks, stray voltage checks, and i n s t a l l a t i o n of a l l vehicle pyrotechnic i n i t i a t o r s . The second operation included close-out of the command module, service module, and launch-escape subsystem, and the hydraulic and gaseous nitrogen servicing for the L i t t l e J o e I1 a t t i t u d e control subsystem. The t h i r d operation included arming of the t o t a l vehicle, gantry removal, launcher positioning, and t i e terminal portion of the countdown. The terminal portion o f the c m n t down was stopped approximately 1 hour before launch on January 18, 1966, because of bad weather. The launch w a s rescheduled t o January 20, 1 6 . 96 Operation 1.- The f i n a l system checkout; included detailed telemetry checks, C-band radar beacon checks, launch-vehicle autopilot checks, range-safety and RF command system checks, and f i n a l l y , a simulated mission with all onboard systems active (see f i g . 10.2-2 and OCP-0010). A l l support radars and transmitters used f o r f l i g h t were turned 03 and directed toward t h e launch pad. The results of t h i s t e s t i n g were s a t isfactory. The power-on s t r a y voltage checks of a l l vehicle f i r i n g l i n e s with a l l systems, radars, and transmit;ters on were satisfactory. When t h e absence of s t r a y voltage had been v e r i f i e d , t h e ordnance i n s t a l l a t i o n began. Algol and Recruit motoi- i n i t i a t o r s were i n s t a l l e d , and shorting plugs were connected t o a l l un?.ts. A l l spacecraft i n i t i a t o r s were i n s t a l l e d and f i r i n g l i n e s were connected t o t h e m , except f o r the i n i t i a t o r s for the tower-jettison and launch-escape motors.
Operation 2.- Spacecraft closeout began immediately a f t e r comple, t i o n of operation 1 and was completed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . (See f i g . 10.2-3.) The servicing of launch-vehicle Major tasks are l i s t e d i n t a b l e 10.2-1. systems following spacecraft closeout progressed without incident. The gaseous nitrogen top-off concluded operation 2.

Operation 3.- Upon v e r i f i c a t i o n t h a t controlled raditition was of a safe l e v e l , tower-jettison and launch-escape motors were armed (see f i g . 10.2-4 and OCP-0010). The f l i g h t safel;y crew (WSMR personnel) then closed out the range s a f e t y system. No problems were encountered and the launch pad w a s cleared. The launch vehicle crew then armed t h e second-stage motors, finished the operation on schedule, and a l l personnel cleared the pad area f o r a complete vehicle power-up. After system checks, a l l power was turned off and the gantry was removed. Power was applied t o t h e launcher and t h e launcher w&s 'rot a t e d t o t h e f i r i n g position of 348.290 aziriuth and a launch angle

10-10
of 840. The lzunch pad w a s then cleared for launch vehicle parer-up and f i r s t - s t a g e arming.
F i n a l checks of the spacecraft and launch-vehicle systems continued through T-15 minutes, a t which t i m e a hold w a s c a l l e d because of bad weather. A t 8:30 a.m. m. s.t. on Jz,rmary 18, 1966, t h e mission was rescheduled f o r 3 : O O p.m. m . s . t . t h e same day. Later t h e mission w a s rescheduled f o r 8 : O O a.m. m . s . t . January 20, 1966. Launch vehicle ordnance -personnel then i n s t a l l e d shorting plugs t o a l l i n i t i a t o r s , and f l i g h t s a f e t y personnel disarmed the range s a f e t y system. The spacec r a f t remained i n ready condition. Launch procedure w a s resumed on January 20, 1966 ( f i g . 10.2-4). The count proceeded s a t i s f a c t o r i l y u n t i l T-3 minutes. A t t h i s t i m e t h e range c a l l e d a hold because two of t h e seven telemetry ground s t a t i o n s were unable t o support launch. With f i v e telemetry s t a t i o n s supporting t h e launch, the count w a s resumed. h u n c h w a s completed a t 8:17 a.m. m . s . t .

'

10-11
T B 10.2-1.- MAJOR TASKS OF SC-002 SPACECRAFT CLOSE-OVT Am

(a) Remove instrumentation o r i f ice covers (b) Quality control final review

Cornmand module close-out

(a) Install batteries and safety wire switch (b) Remove instrumentation orifice covers
(e)

Install CM camera system

(a) Quality control final review

(e)
Install CM hatch
(f) Install boost protective cover hatch

(g) Pot screw holes in boost protective cover Launch-escape subsystem close-out (a) InstaU. camera system

(b) Remove nozzle covers

(e)

Instan and pot remaining tower leg covers GSE securing and pad clean-up

I
(a) Remove pyrotechnic simulators (b) Stow or remove all loose items from gantry

(e)

Sand bag junction boxes

(a) Clean up pad and gantry

10-12

b' 0
0
I

..VI

S O

10-13

I s
0 O E
C V n

..

c;' E . f rl

0 0
P I

..

0 03

..

o f

Q m

51
U

0 .

"f

rl

t .-

E
L

0
rl

L)

v)

? .

0 d
I

10-15

m '

d C
0 .c

E
0

10-16
10.3
Real-Time Data System

The configuration of t h e White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) realtime data system (RTDS) t o support f i s s i o n A-004 consisted of the f o l TWO

~~s-16 raaars a t

C station

TWO FPS-16 radars a t s i t e King 1

A IBM 7094 I computer and i t s output display devices i n n 1 building l5U

D i g i t a l data l i n k s f r o m t h e radars t o t h e computer Lift-off s i g n a l from the launcher t o the computer Timing signals t o t h e computer and t h e radars
WSMR Telemetry Ground Station, Jig-3

Displays provided t o the Flight Dynamics Officer f o r control of t h e mission included four plotboards, one d i g i t a l panel, and one sweepsecond-hand "plus time" clock. The plotboards displayed the following information: (a) Flight-path angle p l o t t e d against a l t i t u d e ( plotboard A)

(b) 'Dynamic pressure plotAed against Mach number (plotboard B) (e) Crossrange plotted against downrange (plotboard C) Altitude plotted against downrange (plotboard C )

(a)

( e ) Acceleration (RTDS) plotted against time (plotboard D)

( f ) Acceleration (telemetry) -plotted against t i m e (plotboard D)

The d i g i t a l display panel indicated t i m e , a l t i t z d e , %ch number, dynamic pressure, and flight-path angle. The sweep-second-hand "piu.s time" clock, which was s t a r t e d by a l i f t - o f f s i g n a l from the launcher, provided elapsed time.

Checkout and qualifica%ion t e s t i n g of t h e real-time data system

for support of Mission A-004 was conducted from the f i r s t p a r t of

October, 1965 t o the end of November, 1965. The system was requalified during the f i r s t week of January, 1966. The Computer Augmented Trajectory Simulator (CATS) program provided a method of t e s t i n g the

10-17
c

real-time data system under conditions closely approximating the expected t r a j e c t o r y of Mission A-004. Final t e s t i n g of the RTDS was conducted during the launch countdown a t T-45 xinutes, u t i l i z i n g fly-by a i r c r a f t equipped with 6-band beacon. The a i r c r a f t made three passes and completed the prelaunch t e s t i n g 3 minutes p r i o r t o the a l l o t t e d time

The RTDS was the prime reference f o r i n i t i a t i n g the pitch-up maneuver during Mission A-004. A l l phases of the real-time data system performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . The data were a l s o used i n connection with the quick-look and f i n a l analysis of the f l i g h t (see section 4.0).

10-18

10.4 Range Operations

The White Sands mssile Range (WSMR) provided communications, range timing, radio-frequency radiation controls, o p t i c a l tracking, radar tracking, telemetry, documentary photography, meteorological data, and geodetic survey i n support of Apollo Mission A-004. Support similar t o t h a t given previous Apollo abort CSM developmental missions included the following: The range cormnand ready-hold network provided the formal communication channel between range users and range operating personnel f o r transmitting range readiness and countdown informtion.
The telemetry network linked a l l range telemetry stations w i t h the telemetry systems controller and a NASA representative located i n

the blockhouse a t h u n c h Complex 36 (LC 36). Prelaunch calibrations and telemetry requirements w e r e a l s o coordinated over t h i s network.
The flight-control network consisted of f i v e s t a t i o n s linked together t o r e l a y launcher positioning coordinates, real-time data syst e m performance, meteorological conditions, and i n f l i g h t events observed by the V1'~;uiiL observers.

The missile f l i g h t surveillance network included intercommicat i o n s between personnel i n t h e LC 36 blockhouse, FRW-2 transmitter, radar display room i n C station, data display room i n technical center building 1512. The network was used f o r checkout of the abort commands and the range-safety subsystem. Extension radio and telephone f a c i l i t i e s were provided f o r recovery and general support of the mission.
A tape recording of t h e Time Announcer, T e s t Director, Flight Dynamics Officer, and the spacecraft, launch vehicle, telemetry, and range i s o l a t i o n networks was made on a 9-channel tape recorder located i n the blockhouse. The recording w a s retained a t WSTF.

Range-timing d i s t r i b u t i o n s t a t i o n s f o r IRIG timing was provided t o L 36 on a 24-hour basis. The test vehicle l i f t - o f f signal triggered C t h e start of t h e "plus" t i m e from l i f t - o f f clocks and r e s e t the frame counters on cinetheodolite cameras i n order t o c o r r e l a t e the data film easily. The timing system performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . The times recorded by t h e timing generator a t l i f t - o f f were as follows: 20 days 15 hours 17 minutes 0.776 second, G.m.t.
20 days

8 hours 17 minutes 0.776 second, m. s. t.

10-19
Radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic radiation control was maintained during the interface-integrated test, simulated countdown, f i n a l systems checks, and countdown t o prevent interference with the F sysP tems of the mission, and t o prevent a concentration of KF' energy on the launch pad during i n s t a l l a t i o n of pyrotechnic devices.
R a d a r support w a s provided f o r the real-time data system, interface-integrated %e&, simulated countdown, f i n a l systems checks, and countdown. FPS-16 (C-band) radars located throughout the range were used t o support the mission f l i g h t requirements. Four radars were used t o t r a c k the beacons and one each t o skin-track t h e launch vehicle and the XS. Figure 10.4-1 shows the location of the radar s t a t i o n s used t o support the f l i g h t .

Telemetry support was provided by WM f o r the integrated-interface SR t e s t , simulated countdown, f i n a l systems checks, and f o r the f l i g h t . Real-time and playback telemetry information was provided during the f l i g h t by range telemetry stations. Seven range s t a t i o n s were used. Data were provided by a11 seven stations f r o m T-2 t o T+75 seconds, a t which t i m e t h e spacecraft telemetry antenna failed.
A t T-3 minutes during the f i n a l countdown t o launch, a hold w a s called by WM because of an amplifier f a i l u r e a t telemetry s t a t i o n SR J i g 56. Both J i g 56 and J i g 3 were tinable t o support the mission. ( J i g 56 w a s a relay s t a t i o n f o r J i g 3 ) . W I reported t h a t the duraSm t i o n of the hold would be approximately 5 minutes. Both s t a t i o n s were ready t o support t h e mission p r i o r t o the a c t u a l launch.

In addition t o the range telemetry stations, t h e NASA telemetry s t a t i o n located a t I C 36 a l s o recorded fliglit telemetry.

The o r i g i n a l telemetry tapes, and a copy of each, were forwarded t o MSC-Houston f o r data reduction.
Two television cameras, one located approximately 2000 feet southe a s t of the launcher and the other located on Mule Peak approximtely 40 miles northeast of t h e launcher, provided real-time tracking information t o three monitors i n the I c 36 blockhouse and a t MSC-Houston. ; The t e l e v i s i o n monitors and cameras performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . Clouds hampered tracking; therefore coverage w a s intermittent throughout the f l i g h t . Television camera locations a r e shown i n figure lO.&-2. Pref l i g h t and p o s t f l i g h t documentary photography f o r engineering analysis was supplied by t h e range. Various 16-IIXU fllm copies and s t i l l p r i n t s were furnished.

Optical coverage w a s limited during po:rtions of the f l i g h t due t o cloud cover which prevented some stations from complete mission tracking. Generally, s t a t i o n s downrange were unable t o obtain coverage.

10-20

A t the t i m e of a c t u a l launch, an o p t i c a l l i m i t a t i o n of 70 t o 80 percent d e t e r i o r a t i o n was reported by WM f o r t h e launch area. The opt SR instrumentation systems which were used and t h e evaluation of t provided are presented in tables 10.4-1 t o 10.4-III. Optical s t a t i o n locations are shown i n figure 10.4-2.

General weather f o r e c a s t s were reported a t UYhour i n t e r v a l s and 1-week s p e c i f i c f o r e c a s t s were provided as described i n section 10.7.

The U.S. Coast and Geodetic Suwey made l o c a t i o n surveys of impact locations of t h e recovered components of the vehicle on December 20 and 21, 1965.

10-21

;t
caz
H
Pa,

a
d
0

I I

0
P-

d a3
4

sc
P

0 P
\D

3
rl

t o

ri

0 c, 0

M a3 0
f.'

cu

O P

2E

a $%

rl

k 0

0 V

0 rl

8 I n
I n

3
I n

10-22

c,
P h .rl

L
P

c, k 0

.,
W

3%
0

a m

clzw
~

2 H

a,

0
H

(u

v3

v3

6 3 % w

Pis
rl

o Gg ac

ha,

1023

I I

-0

0 0

"

0 k d 0

O k S
v
0

S
d

$
v
0

5: cu

8 5 N:

8 N

10-24
T P B E 10.4-rI.

R N E WALUATION O FILM AG F

C O P I D FOR M3C

'~

Station

Focal length, mm Fixed camera

~-

80

Color

Lif't-off Lift-off Lift-off

Film j a m and break Film jam

80
80

Color
Color
Color

Poor
Timing poor

80
5
0799 a t 1197F 1099-1F a'

L5 It-off
Lie-off Lift-off Umbilical retraction Elevon 4 action Flame Flame

0 t o 2.2

Good

Zood ;ood
;ooa

Color Color

Timing jumbled
0 t o 2.0

Good Good
Too hazy on launcher

14

Color

mi98
1099-2F a t F- 1198 0499 a t ~--196 0799 a t F-1197

I
1

Good

14
6

Color
Infrarei Infrarei

0 t o 1.7

Good Fair

;0Od

I
Askania Askania Askania Askar,ia Askania Askar-ia Askaria

Jumbled

Fair

Cinetheod o l i t e s 47 47

G- 5

5, 1 "

Black & white

white

w
CM

I1

No t i m i n g

G- 34
G-37

5 , la Black R 5, 1 "
5, la 5, 1 "
Black k white

37 t o 231

small
X zy a
Fair Fair

Dark Fair Dark Fair Wir

47
47
47

LES

16 t o 229
13 t o 229
131 t o ~ 2 9
12 to 228 Hot usable
L _ _ -

G-38 G-39
G-40
G- L1

Black C white
BUck & white Black & white Black & white

LES
CM

47
47

5,

la

out of
focus

5, 1 "

LES

a5 frames/sec t o 225 seconds.

A r t e r 225 seconds, t r a ? k CM a t 1 f'rame/sec.

10-2.5
FABLE 10.4-11.- RANGE EVALUATION OF FILM NOT COPIED F R MSC O

Continued

G- qJ
G-45
G-50

Askania Xskania Askania !skania fl-skania

P skania P slcania

47
: 4

5, 1 " 5, 1 " 5, 1 "

3, la

Black P, white Black 8 white Black p. white Black 5 white

\ Black 9 white

LJ I1

Too much cloud cover

110 t o 128

u I1
L I1 J
LES
LES

Poor
Blurry
3 ir

hir
Ehir Dark
Fair

47 4.?
47

60 t o 125
2 to

G-177 G-138
G-149 G-150 G-32

65

5, 1 " 5, 1 "
15, la

223 t o 3'13

% i Sr

47
L7 L

Black 9 white Black 9 . irhite Black 9 whi2e Black 9 vhi;e Color Color Color

01

68

t o 22>

Yazy, blurred

Fair

CM

Contraves Contraves

50

30

CM

1.1 to 114.0

%all, faint .a! %l, fairt

Light
Dark

G-81 G-105
F-111

60

I
j

20

CM

1.0 to

316.0

20
20

L IT J
04

F- 152

F i l ? break

Film break
0 t o 16 0

2o

CN

%all, blurred

Fair

Telescopes
T-2 a t T- 2
250

Color Color Color Color Color

2 q to 261

Fair

Dark

T-7 a t T- 7
T-11 a t T-11 T-12 a t T- 12

250

film break
260 t o 407 288 t o 411 2.3 t o 80.0 Good Good Good
Good

250
60 60

T-126 a t

kir

T-1~6
a5 frames/sec t o 223 seconds.

Fair

A f ' t e r 225 seconds, t r a c k GM at 1 frtune/sec.

10 26
TABm IC.4-11.

- RA1\JGE EVALUXTION OF FILM NZP

COPIED FOR WC

Continued

Telescopes r-126 a t T-126 r-128 at T-128 60

20

- continued
C M

70 t o 159
0 to hir

60
500

Black 8. white Color Color Black & white

Color

iair bir
?air
:ooa

u I1
u I1
Test vehicle
C M

37

air
'oor

r-128 a t
T-128

48
24

60
500

0 t o 89
2.0 t , 37.0 ~

r-155 a t
T-155
r-156 a t

:00?

L8 24
100 300

60
250

50 to b l 2
103 t o 183

'oor

-Ia ZY

T-156
r-156 a t
T-156 r-16'f a t
BATE
r-167 a t BATE T-197 a t Black & white color Color Black 8. white
CM

Vo images
3ml1, blurry
hir

30

m
CM

3 t o 80

30
30

3 to 80

;mall, blurry
?o0r focus

Fair

180

CM

Poor

T-197

T-199 a t
T-1%
W 1 1 at -

1-99
40 71

96
250
60

Black &
white

CM

Blurry

Poor

Color
Color

w
CM

I1

Poor timing

T-2
M 1-2 at T T-2

351 t o 409
294 t o 311

Fair :ooa FBir

Dark Dark Fair

MT 1-3

40
ai

250

Color
Color

LEX/S4
LEVp4

T-2
R 1-3 E
T-2 M T !

96
40

60
250

62 t o 82
Poor timing

1-1 ai
T-12

Color
Color
Color

u I1
IJ I1
cM/ZEs
'

MT 1 1ai T- 12

80
72

60
60

No images

m-45 a t
T-12

Film ,jam

No images

--

TABLE 10.4-11.- RANGE EVALUATION OF FIIM NOT COPIED FOR MSC

1

- Concluded
Quality

g/ I
24
24
24

Object tracked

Time

Film

ewerage, sec

Images
.F i gr

Film

Telescopes

- concluded
LJ I1

MT-127 a t
T-180

Color Infrared Infrared

Fair

MT-127 at
T-180

L 11 J

17.0 t o 108.0
Film jam
0 to

F i gr

Fair

MT-151 at T-6 MT-151 a t T-6 MT-152 a t

T-321

LJ I1 LJ I1
LJ I1

60

Black & white

Color

37

2ood

:0Od

9 6
40

Did not run momt trouble Did not run mount trouble

MT-152 a t
T-321

Color

LJ I1

:ma
3ff frame
Fbir
>OOd

MT-153 a t
I

90
40

Color Color
Color

CM

T- 12

246 t o 360
37.0 t o 79.0

MT-173 a t T- 318
MT-173 a t

CM

Fbir

60 48

CM

T-318
MT-19 a t

3.6 t o 84.6 64.0 t o 117.0

Fair Fair

T-318

Bhck & white

-.

u I1
-

kZY,

blurry

10-28

TABLE 10.4-111.

FILM EVALUATION O F BEST

MOTTON PICTURE COVERAGE ?FOR W l? S E! C

Events
Algol i g n i t iori

Best a v a i l a b l e films f o r events

G- 1 1 T-198/T-l98 0,

R e e r u it i g n i t i o n
Algol burn

T-198/T-198
G- 101, T- 198/T- 198, RP- 080

Lift-off

L I1 fin p o s i t i o n J
Test vehicle p a i n t p a t t e r n
Launch phase Staging Pitch-up G-101, G-102,

T-l9!3/T-198,

G-109, G-110, MT-90/T318, RP-OEK)

MSC 4969, TIP-080

G-101, T- 155/T-155, T-198/11-198, W-080

G-101,
G-102,
G-110,

Tg/Tg,

T-l54/T-154, T-l55/T- 155 T-198/T-198, m-190/318, RP-080

Soft boost p r o t e c t i v e cover break- up

G-109

LES motor i g n i t i o n
SM break-up

LEV tumble

Z-

109, G- 110, T- 154/T- 154, T- 198/T-198, TIT- 190/T-318, MC 4969, RP-080 S

T-198/T-198,
T- 190/318

Canard deployment
LEGT descent

P-l54/T-154,
C-198/T-198,

T-9/T-9

10-29
TABI-8 10.4-III.

- FILM

EVALUAlCION OF BEST

MOTION PICTURE COVERAGE FOR I3VEXCS Events

Concluded

Best a v a i l a b l e films for events MT- l-l/T-2, MT- 1 2/T-2 -

W I1 booster descent
C on drogue parachutes X

T- 198
4972

Drogue parachute disconnect

CM on main parachutes

T-9/T-9, T-198 T-198, WW1-2/T-12, M"-k'j,/T-12, 972, RP-080

MT- 1-2/l?- 12, M"-45/T- 12
M!F-1-2/T-12, FP-080 4972, R2-080 T- 9/TMT-45/T- 12, 4972,

CM paint pattern
CM landing

Main parachute disconnect

LES tower descent

9, MT- 45/T-12, IJIT-153/T-12, ~-198/~-198

4972

LES tower impact

Apex cover descent

M!I'-45/T-12, 4972 4972 T-2/T-2

4yex cover impact

L J 11 impact
Recovery film

, MT-f-l/T-2,

MT-1-2/1-2

4972, PAO, S66-75

Note: The following events were not photographed because of heavy cloud cover:

Tower j e t t i s o n Drogue parachute deployment

Pilot parachute deployment Main parachute deployment

Figure 10.4-1. - Telemetry, meteorological, and radar station locations, Apollo Mission A-004.

10-31
NASA-S-66-37 18 APR 15

12 24

36

4%

60

G Contraves and cinetheodolite cameras T - IGOR and telescope cameras C - Clock cameras TV-Te levis ion cameras MT- Telescopic camera

F - Fixed camera

Scale: thousands of feet

I
T-199

OG-50
T-12
T V at T - 4

G-43 O

MT-1-1

CM landing G-41

6-38

G-40
Q

Hwy 7 0 T - 2 0 OG-37

II
I

Range boundary

6-138

OG-5 OMT-152

Hwy 54

I I I 1 t f
li

I I

Figure 10.4-2.-

Camera locations, Apollo Mission A-004.

10-32
10.5

Weather Conditions

Continuous weather f o r e c a s t i n g s e r v i c e was provided t o NASA by the WM Meteorological Support Office during the f i n a l 2 weeks p r i o r t o SR launch. The T-24 hour f o r e c a s t f o r a January 18 launch indicated t h a t cloud cover would be 100 percent. The countdown i n i t i a t e d f o r an 8: 00 a.m. m. s. t. launch on January 18 was czncell.ed a t 8:3O a.m. m. s. t. because of weather conditions znd rescheduled f o r 8 : O O a.m. m . s . t . on J a n m r y 20. The T-24 hour f o r e c a s t f o r a January 20 launch indicated no Jleteorological r e s t r i c t i o n s . The T - l 2 hour f o r e c a s t of T = 0 cond i t i o n s indicated i: 0.1 t o 0.2 (10 t o 20 percent) c i r r u s condition. Approximately 15 minutes before t h e planned launch time of s. t . , WSMR reported t h a t a 20-percent d e t e r i o r a t i o n could t be expected i n t h e q m l i t y of t h e o p t i c a l data tk-Toughou% h e t r a j e c t o r y due t o 0.1 t o 0.2 (10 t o 20 percen?} c i r r u s cloud cover over the southern portion of the range. During the telemetry hold a t T-3 minutes ( w h i c h resulted i n a 17-minute lzunch Cielay) cloud cover w a s moving r a p i d l y i n t o t h e southern portion of the planned t r a j e c t o r y . The 0.5 alto-cumulus condition continued through launch.

8: 00 a . m . m.

Prelaunch wind, pressure, and temperature measurements as a funct i o n of a l t i t u d e were made from Rawinsonde r e l e a s e s Irom t h e S m a l l f i s s i l e Range (SMR) a t T-7 and T-4 hours and were provided t o N S AA :vkteorological C f f i c e r for tr8jectory predictions. These data were a l s o provided t o NASA F l i g h t Director Officer f o r use with t h e RTDS program. Additional wind measurements were provided t o NASA Meteorol o g i c a l Officer from P i b a l releases a t T-1 hour and T-30 minutes. Wind measurements from t h e 300-foot tower located a t Lc 36 and. two 30-foot towers l o c a t e d i n predicted spacecraft Landing area w e r e provided t o NASA Meteorological Officer as required f o r t r a j e c t o r y predictions m d final launcher adjustments. The T = 0 meteorological measurements f o r p o s t f l i g h t analysis w e r e reduced from data obtained by Rawinsonde released from the Small W s s i l e Range a t 8:2G a.m. m . s . t . and presented i_n Lncrements from the surface (approximately 4000 feet m. s. 1 ) t o 1 9 000 feet m. s . 1 Wind d i r e c t i o n . 0 . and velocity, temperature, pressure, and relative humidity were measured. (See figs. 10.3-1 t o 10.5-6.)

10-33

w 2
Y In

t
0
b)

c3

m
I+

L1L

0 0 0
A

0 0

co

0 0

0 0

0 0
N

qu 'arnssaid

10-34

10-35

rr\

0
d

co

-0 8
Y v)

3
m

0 b

0 43

c-l

0
N

0
d

lx n

1G- 36

10-37

m
l-i

co

0
h

0 9

0 I n

ffl
Y

3 . u .a
0

0
N

0
rl

0 0
0

0 9

0
N

co

0 d
N

0 0 N

m 0
d

X
0

03

s
l-4

0
b

rn

cu

0
rl

ll-1

11.0 APPENDIX B

1 . Mission A-004 Test Objectives 11 First-order test objectives.

(a) Demonstrate satisfactory launch-escape vehicle (LEV) performance f o r an abort in the power-on tumbling boundary region. (b) Demonstrate the structural integrity of the LEV airframe structure f o r an abort in the power-on tumbling boundary region. Second-order test ob.iectives.(a) Demonstrate the capability of the canard subsystem to satisfactorily reorient and stabilize the T;Fv with the aft heat shield forward after a power-on tumbling abort. (b) Demonstrate the structural capability of the production boost protective cover to withstand the leunch environment.
(c) Determine the static loads on the command module during the launch and the abort sequences.

structure

(a)

Determine the dynamic loading o ' the command module inner f

(e) Determine the dynamic loads and the structural response of the service module during launch.

(f) Demonstrate the capability of the command module forward heat shield thrusters t o satisfactorily separate the forward heat shield after the tower has been jettisoned by the tower-jettison motor.
( g ) Determine the static pressure imposed on the command module by free-stream conditions and launch-escape subsystem motor plumes during a power-on tumbling abort.

(h) Obtain data on rendezvous window visibility degradation due to launch-escape motor exhaust products f o r a power-on tumbling abort. Third-order test objectives. (a) Demonstrate satisfactory separation of the LEV from the service module.

11-2

(b) Demonstrate the s a t i s f a c t o r y operation and performance of the e a r t h landing subsystem with a spacecraft vehicle.
(e)

Obtain data on t h e s t r u c t u r a l loading o f t h e command module

during the e a r t h landing subsystem sequence.

(a) Obtain thermal data on t h e boost protective cover during a power-on tumbling abort.
(e) Obtain acoustical noise data a t an astronaut s t a t i o n inside t h e command module.

11-3
a

U.2 Test Vehicle Messurements

u-4

c
i )

0 *

'

0
i -

0
c

0
42

0 *

0
Y

0
Y

c
. .4

0
Y C

0
'

i . ' Y

0 4

0
Y

0
. J

.?

r ' + '

E
f

5 " "
i i

t +
c

.ti X

Pi I

.-I

e
f:

4-

r,

P
h w

u
r

g
W

b B c
U
W l(i

f f
E
W

11-6

v)

ti 1

F.
Y
Y

B
Y
a '
.r(

E E
d 3

d
m

N rl

0 N

ti

F
a '

ka
0

b :

m Q

s m

2 E

c
Y 4J
. ( r

11-7

.
r(

2 d 2 d ." --. < < --. G. F

r(

I-.

d
I

2l . i

r(

F
N W f
I' 0 -

y n
3

f a i

a f ,

.e 0
c N \

* 0
IC\ N

w
0

1
f

I N
f

d 4

.d

E 8 i3 8
f
I' 0 -

9
0

m
f
0

.e
IC\ N

I' 0 -

Y 0

Y 0

U 0

__~

8 E 8 8
f I f

% B
i J u

___

f I

-!

iJ

U- 8

r
i

I = c i

>

.s
c
. d 0

n = .

11-9

ir,
(\1

is

- . ---.
.d

2 2

2 2
I

. 3

a
0 0
1pI N

0,
0 0

8 x x x
c,
0 0
0 0

3.

2 2 d

. -. .
.A

. d

d .
.r(

2
d

2 .d

2 2 ---.. . . 2
.d

.rl

. n

2 --. 2
.. .I
.r(

-.
2 .n
L ?

E --.
.d

.1 d

.d

c Ti 1

8 L ?
U 0

s, 8 w
0

0 0 0 I n

8,
U 0

: :
0 0

a 8
u?
0 0
Y 0

w
0 0

3.

d w4

2 .rl

* I

E,
4 0

8
0 0

8
0 0

w
0 0

U 0

0 0

4 0

8 8 $
0

0 0

8 8 5: m w

8 c

0 0

W ,m d

'D M

01

4 %
.d E
? EI

W a TI

.I . .

ar a
4 m

4
4

ar

a 0
(D

W a

.l r

.r(

I
C

0 m

2
n c
-P m

n C

.d d 4 h

E"
0
W W

R
m
rl
.I ,

4 k

+
rl
ri
.d

E
+2

.d

-P m

E
rl

w4 c 4 m ri

-P m

+ '
r
.C

E
a

E
m
d
d

rl
.r( X

rl
.A X

s 2

c
rl
#

#.
a

4
0 c

rl
d
f C

3
D
k
h

1
N
71
f

X
f

2
C

.. XI .

m
0 e

0 c

c
h

F 3 4

*
F

f
rl
4

0" rt
E-

rl 5

8 E

g 6

F:
0

L
4 0

E
r? 0

L
0
r>

IW
C
r

F R
r-.

u-10

t3

P
.rl

P
C

c,
ri
* I

z
m

c, rl

e
.Pi

E
il

ll-11

--.\\\\\.
m m m r n m m m

4 4 4 2 4 4 1 :

0
d v r

u l

2i d % : E

+
C

ll-12

d c

VI c

"
r0

<

h
rl

a +
U rl

x
rl

i
J .
.rl

8 + E m
&
VI

-.

h
4

k c ,

a
m

a
h
0

r
Lo
.rl

c cI :

c Y
c

n
H

8 E-

2
c

t: cl

11-15

Pr

o j

m
rl

I
h

4 Iu 0

rl

J M
a
I

c,
Y

N Y

x
h

0 '
0

c,

x
rl

x
rl 0.

a
o

a w
Y Y

6
+

m W
4 n c,

.+

d u)
a
h

4 C

%
Y
$ .4 d

rl d

11-14

0'

h u 0

t :

4
v

c
RJ

&
C

f?
2

u
0

G
k
Y r(

: :

( u

k
.d

<

l n
m

11-15

a m

* (

.rl

m
F4

.rl l d

.rl

G 2 2 m +
* + + )
o o o

i n

m
0

84 8 I n
m
4

rn

c4

w m
4

0 0

t n m
0
+ ,

84 8 Ln
m
0
+ ,

< c c t &
a
e
0

V
0

!$

0 rl
0 + ,

6 3 I 2 14 3 I

e
f

8 0 *
0

m
0 +
0

cu

cu

r!

11-16

c-.

d
V

.. d

u-17

Number
1

Measurement identification A l g o l ' l grain temperature Algol 2 grain temperature Algol

Operating range

Response

32 t o 100' F
32 t o 100" F

2'

3 4
5

4 grain

temperature

Algol 5 grain temperature Algol 1 lower case tcmperature Algol 2 lower case temperature Algol Algol

32 t o 100" F 32 t o 100" F
32 t o io00 F

15 samples/hour 15 samples /hour 15 samples/hour

15 samples/hour

6 7

32 t o 1 0 0 0 F
32 t o 100" F
32 t o 100" F 32 t o 100' F

15 sainples/hour 15 samples/hour
15 samples/hour

4 lower

case temperature

a
9
10

5 lower case temperature

Algol 1 upper case temperature Algol 2 upper case temperature Algol

1 1
12

4 upper

case temperature

32 t o 1000 F 32 t o 1 0 F 0'
32 t o 100' F
0 t o 10 amps 0 t o 10 amps 0 t o 10 amps 0 t o 10 amps

Algol 5 upper case temperature Algol 1 i n i t i a t o r 1, bridgewire 1 Algol 1 i n i t i a t o r 1, bridgewire 2

15 samples/hour 15 samples/hour 15 samples/hour 15 samples/hour 15 samples/hour

50 50
50
CPS
CPS

13 14
15

A'lgol 1 i n i t i a t o r 2, bridgewire 1
Algol 1 i n i t i a t o r 2, bridgewire 2 Algol Algol Algol

CPS

16

50

CPS

17
18
19 20
21 22

4 initiator 4 initiator 4 initiator

1 bridgewire 1 , 1 bridgewire 2 , 2, bridgewire 1

0 t o 10 amps
0 t o 10 amps 0 t o 10 amps

50 CPS

50

CPS

50 CPS 50 CPS

Algol 4 i n i t i a t o r 2, briagewire 2 Rrcruit 3 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewire 1 Recruit 3 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewire 2 Recruit

0 t o 10 amps
0 t o 1 amps 1 0 t o 11 amps

50
50 50

CPS

50 CPS
CPS

23

24
25

6 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewire 1 Recruit 6 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewire 2 Recruit 7 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewire I

Recruit 7 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewiye 2 Lift-off signal Ignition timer f i r i n g signal

0 t o 1 amps 1 0 t o 1 amps 1 0 t o 1 amps 1

0 t o 1 amps 1
0 t o 28

50 cps
CPS

26
27 28
29

50 CPS

0 to

v 28 v

dc

loo cps
100 cps

dc

Range timing -TRIG Recruit 8 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewire 1

--

--

30 31
32

0 t o 1 amps 1

50

CPS

33

8 i n i t i a t o r s I and 2, bridgewiye 2 Recruit 9 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewiye 1 Recruit 9 i n i t i a t o r s 1 and 2, bridgewii-e 2

Recruit

0 t o 1 amps 1
0 t o 1 amps 1 0 t o 1 amps 1

50 50
50

CPS
CPS

CPS

11-18
NASA-S-66-3750 APR 15

9 0" +Z
4I '

-6

-7
8-7 9-

-2 270" Cross-sect ion at XL2 6 0

10-

c Launch -

escape motor

-11

Measurement Q-ball 1 LK0023H . 2. LM0024H 3. LK0025H Accelerometer 4. L A O O l l A 5. LA0012A

Location XL399 XL399 XL399 XL380 XL380

YO YO

YO
YO
Y6

zo zo zo
Z6

zo

+12
I

Motor chamber pressure 6. LDOOl2P XL345 7. LD0013P XL290 Motor temperature 8.* LD2070T XL260 9.* LD2071T XL260 lO.*LD2072T X, 260

YO YO
180" 180" 180" 6 0" 300"

Z -13

zo

Far side

Interior

Figure 11.2-1.-

LES motor and Q-bail measurement locations, Apollo Mission A-004.

N A S A - S - 6 6 - 3 7 5 4 APR 15

-Z
Figure 11.2-2.Apollo Mission A - 0 0 4 canard strain and

deployment instrumentat ion

11-20

NASA-S-66-3758 APR 15

+X

3-d
+Y

+Z

d:: =:
-Z
I

-Y

Typical tower leg installation

Measurement
1 . 2. 3. 4.

Location XL5.5 XL5.5 XL5.5 XL5.5 Y23.4 Y23.4 Y-23.4 Y-23.4

LA0215G LA0216G LA0217G LA0218G

225.3 Z-25.3 225.3 Z-25.3

Figure 11.2-3.-

Launch-escape tower measurement locations, Apollo Mission A-004.

51-21
NASA-S-66-3762 APR 15

+z

9 0"

3-Y

'

0"

BPC surface

o BPC-CM irtterface

-Z
270"

Measurements
1.

Location
89.5'

Measurements 22. CA0259P 23. CA0260P 24. CA0262P 25. CA0265P 26. CA0267P 27. CA0268P 28. CA0269P 29. CA0271P 30. CA0272P 31. CP0273P 32. CPO274P 33. CPO276P 34. CA0300P 35. Ck0301P 36. CA0302P BPC-CM interface 37. Ck0309P 38. CA0310P 39. CA0311P 40. CA0312P

Locat ioti

6PC surface pressure CA0228P xc35 2. CA0229P Xc30 3. CA0230P Xc30 4. CA0232P Xc34 5. CA0233P Xc30 6. CA0234P Xc25.4 7 . CA0235P Xc30 8. CA0237P Xc30 9. CA0238P Xc30 10. CA0239P Xc30 1 . CA0241P Xc50.5 1 12. CA0242P Xc71 13. CA0247P Xc71 14. CA0248P Xc50.5 15.CA0249P Xc54 16. CA0250P Xc50.5 17. CA0252P Xc50.5 18. CA0254P Xc50.5 19. CA0255P Xc71 20. CA0257P Xc71 21. CA0258P Xc71

68.5" 49.25' 267" 242" 228.75' 203.5" 156.75' 131.25" 114.5O 68.5" 48.084" 131.25" 114.5" 86" 49.25" 228.75' 131.25' 68.5" 203.5" 156.75'

Xc71 Xc65 Xc76.7 Xc7 1 Xc50.5 Xc25.4 Xc3 0 Xc40 xc34 xc34 xc 102 xc102 xc74 xc74 xc 102 pressure X 50.5 X'83.25 XE50.5 Xc50.5

114.5"
8 6"

266" 323" 299" 323" 299" 200" 0" 177" 93" 273" 3.5" 178.7" 3"

90"
292' 0" 180"

Figure 11.2-4.- Conical surface pressures, Apollo Mission A-004. (Location of BPC surface and BPC-CM interface pressure measurenetits)

11-22

11-23
NASA-S-66-3766 APR 15

Xc80. 75--

Figure 11.2-6.-

Forward sidewall longeron 4 command module inner structure forward sidewall, Apollo Mission A-004.

11-24
NASA-S-66-377 0 APR 15

Measurement Axial strain 1 CA1608S .

2.
Xc 113.6

tocat i on
Xc71.5 Xc69.1 Xc52.0 Xc50.4 Xc91 Xc91 223" 223" 223" 223"

3.
4. 5. 6.

Tower longeron gusset

CA1609S CAl6lOS CA1611S CA2617S CA2618S

223"
223"

Figure 11.2-7.

Strain gage locations on longeron 8 command module, Apollo Mission A-004.

11-25

NASA-S-66-3774 APR 15
fvleasurement
Axial strain

Location

:I. CA1512S
CA1513S Xc 113.6 3 . CAl600S 4. CA1601S 5. CA1602S Tower longeron CA1603S 6. gusset
2.

Xc91 Xc91 Xc71.5 X,69.1 Xi52.0 Xc50.4

3 17" 3 17" 317" 317" 317" 317"

Section B-B

Xc42, 665

% :

Figure 11.2-8.- Strain gage locations on longeron 2 command modble, Apollo Mission A-004.

if-26 NASA-S-66-3778 APR 15

Measurement Axial strain 1. C A 0 5 1 0 S 2. C A 0 5 1 1 S

Location
Xc61.7 Xc61.7

293" 293"

Section A-A

Figure 11.2-9.-

Strain gage locations on right-hand beam of main hatch, Apollo Mission A-004.

11-27

.I
v)

v)

>o

+O

2
v)

2 3
(d

Ln

0
rl I

N
1

11-28

u a J
.-

I
v)

cv

9
b

co

r(

3 9
9

cv ri
rl

d I

c n

m .LL

11-29
NASA-S-66-3790 APR 15

+X

-Y

9 0" -2

Location

e Near side 0 Far side

+Z 270"

1 CA0280P . CA0281P 3. CA0282P 4. CA0283P 5 . CA1075T 6. CA1076T

2.

Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom Bottom

0"

5 0 rad

90"
180" 270" 90" 270"

50rad 50rad 5 0 rad 71rad 39 rad

Figure 11.2-12

.- Base pressure measurement locations, Apollo Mission A-004.

U- 30

5
H u
c

E!
Y

ffi 0

11-31

i n
rl

11 32
NASA-S-66-3802 APR 15

2 rad

76.75 rad

Measurement Radial stress 1 SA0721S . 2. SA0722S 3. SA0723S 4. SA0724S

Location

-xs355
74.12 74.12 74.12 74.12
rad rad

Xs268 Xs340.5 Xs305 Xs218

rad
rad

Il

llll
lill

- 00 xs2
Service module

- beam 2

Figure 11.2-15.-

Strain gage locations, beam 2, service module, Apollo Mission A-004.

11-33
NASA-S-66-3806 APR 15

22

.7 5 rad

Measurement
Radial stress 1 SA0727S .

Location

I--

xs355

Xs305

74.34rad

-xs200
Service module

- beam 4

Figure 11.2-16.- Strain gage location, beam 4, service module, Apollo Mission A-004.

11 34
NASA-S-66-3810 APR 15

2
Measurement Radial stress 1 SA07255 . Location

5 rad

xs355 74.12 rad 74.12 rad 74.12 rad 74.75 rad 74.75 rad 74.75 rad 74.75 rad 74.75 rad 74.75 rad 22 rad

X 340.5
<268 Xs305 Xs2 18 Xs2 18 Xs2 18

2. 3.

SA0726S SA0728S

Membrane stress 4 , SA08655

5. 6.

SA0866S SA0867S

Bending stress 7. SA0868S

8.
9.

SA0869S SA0870S

Xs2 18 Xs2 18 X s 2 18
Xs275

Circumferential vibration

10. SA0994D

Service module

- beam 5

Figure 11.2-17.-

Strain gage and vibration measurement location, beam 5, service module, Apollo Mission A-004.

ll35
NASA-S-66-3814 APR 15

Measurement Axial vibration 1. S A 0 9 9 5 D 2. S A 0 9 9 6 D 3. S A 0 9 9 7 D

Location X 203 Xs355 Xz278 62rad 48rad 40rad

rad

172"

.xs355

Section A

-A
Vibration measurements, service module, Apollo Mission A-G04.

Figure 1 1 . 2 - 1 8 . -

11-3 6

rl

a a
m aJ
E

Ln
b

a
VI .I

.VI
0

L 0

F;1
ZJ

zj
U

v , tn

s a
*_

Ln
I

i 3
Pl
Y

pz
Ln

hl hl
(\I

aJ v ,
d E

B &
w U

ti

v ,

a J

n
*aJ

Ln

El
L

0
& I

v ,
N
0

m
Ln

A o 00 * '

. . . a. .+. . .
0
b0

0 .m

Iz

m aJ m

t 4
Y

i n

a ,

PI

H
Y

aJ a

m
S

8
0 a ,

m m
0

4-

v ,

Ln
b

m W m

'hlW

hl

11-37

(v.

rl

I -

0 N

n
X

IN

K h
co

."
N

-Nb ' N

&

?.
N

N
N
rr\

n
0

-7
Ln I -

co

0
d

n;m
d
0

2
NO

-+

NO

0 '

-$ b
0

mmmm QI-rnI3

Ln
I

I -

mmmm mmem

0000

m m
0

N-

.m

rmmmm
a S, . .

aaaa

i-Nm
I -

.
d

(u

co

N'

12-1
12.0

REFERlENCES

1 . 2 .

Data Processing Planning Office: Flight Data Report for Apollo Mission A-004 (SC-002). NASA Apollo Working Paper 1198, 1 6 . 96 Staff of North American Aviation: CSI4 Master End Item Specification (Block I . (Revised Feb. 1965:1. SID 64-1237North ) American Aviation, Inc. Staff of North American Aviation: End Item Specification for SC-002. SID 63-699,North American Aviation, Inc., Feb. 1965. Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report for Apollo Mission A-003 (BP-22). MSC-A-R-65-2, June 28, 1-96?. Staff of NASA Headquarters: Project Apollo Coordinate System Standard. OMSF Directive SE 008-001-1., June 1965. Staff of General Dynamics/Convair: Launch Vehicle Description Manual, Launch Vehicle 12-51-3, Little Joe 11. GD/C-65-145A, General Dynamics/Convair, Sept. 1965 Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Apollo Mission Rules
NOV.

3-

4 .
5 9
6.

7.

1 , 1965. 7

A-004.

8.

Rother, Melvin R.; and Heetderks, H. Richard: Project Apollo Mission A-004 (AFRM-002) Dispersion Analysis. W IN 65-FM-144, C oct. 1965. Staff of North American Aviation: Ae;:odynamics Data Manual for Froject Apollo. SID 64-174A, North American Aviation, Inc. Jan. 1963.

9.

1. 0
11.

Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report for Apollo Mission A 4 0 2 (BP-23). MSC-R-A-GT-:L, Jan. 22, 1-96?, Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Memorandum Report for Ago110 Mission PA-2 (BP-23A). 14%-A-R-65-3, July 29, 1965. Staff of %nned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report for Apollo Yission A-102 (BP-15). MSC-R-A-64-:5, Oct. 1 , 1964. 0 Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report for Apollo Kission A-101 (-3P-13). MSC-R-A-64-2, June 18, 1964.

12.

13

12-2

14.

Coe, Charles 3. ; and Kaskey, Arthur J : The Effects of Nose . 0 Bluntness on the Pressure Fluctuations Measxred on 15" and 2 0 Cone - Cylinders at Transonic Speeds. NASA TM X 7 9 1963. 7, Staff of North American Aviation: Aerodynamic Noise Measurements on a 0.075-Scale.Model of the Apollo/Saturn-IB Launch Vehicle. SID 64-1545,North American Aviation, Inc., Sept. 1 6 1 91. Coe, Charles F : Steady and Fluctuating Pressures at Transonic . Speeds on Two Space-Vehicle Payload Shapes. NASA TM X 503,

1. 5

1. 6

1961. 1. 7
Staff of North American Aviation: Airfra:ie 007 Service Module Environmental Acoustic Test Program. S D 65-1038,North American Aviation, Inc., Aug. 1965.
Staff of North American Aviation:

1. 8

Project Apollo Spacecraft 0 7 0 Command Module Environment Acoustic Test Program. SID 65-1193, North American Aviation, Inc., Nov. 1965.

1. 9

Staff of North American Aviation: An Investigation of Aerodynamic Noise Measured on a 0.055-Scale Apollo Saturn Vehicle in the NASA Ames lb-foot Transonic and 9 X 7-foot Supersonic Wind Tunnels. SIB 63-1480,North American Aviation,. Inc., Dee. 1963. Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report for Apollo Mission A-001 (BP-12). MSC-R-A-64-1, May 28, 1 6 . 94 Staff of Lockheed Aircraft: Airframe 0 2 Spacecraft Development 0 Flight Instrumentation, Mission A-004. IESD doc. 11-7, Lockheed Aircraft, May 1965. Staff of North American Aviation: Block I CSM Technical Specifi-. SID 63-313,.North American Aviation, Inc,, Feb. 1965. cation.

20.
2. 1

22.

1
DISTRIBUTION Addressee National Aeronautics and Space Aaministration Washington, D. C. 2O5& Associate Administrator Office of Manned Space Flight, M Apollo Program Director, MA Plight Operakions Director, 440 Program Control Director, M P A R e l i a b i l i t y and Quality Assurance Director, MAR Systems Engineering Director, M S A Test Director, M T A M F F i e l d Center Development Director, S Deputy Director, Saturn-Apollo Applications, MLD Deputy Director, Mission Operations, MO-1 Advanced Mnned Missions Program Director, MI! National Aeronautics and Space Administration Manned Spacecraft Center 2101 Webster-Seabrook Road Houston, Texas 77058 Director, AA Deputy Director, A B Special Assistaat t o t h e Director, AC Executive Assistant to t h e Director, AI? Chief of Center Medical Programs, AH:
O f f i c e of Patent Counsel, AL3

Number of ccpies

1
1 1

3
1
1 1
2

1 1 1 1 1 1

Addressee Center Medical Office, AM Public Affairs Office, AP Flight Safety Office, AR Assistant Director for Administration, BA Reproduction Services Branch, BF6 Forms and Publications Section, BF32 Field Test Branch, BH6 Security Branch, BM4 Technical Information Preparation Branch Records, BM5 j ' Technical Information Dissemination Branch, BM61 Technical Informtion Dissemination Branch, BI6 Attention: M P McDonough . . Assistant Director for Flight Crew Operations, CA AstroRaut Office, CB Flight Crew Support Division, CF

Number of copies

I
1
2

1 1

54
1

4 .
6
1 0 1

4
3
1
2

Assistant Director for Engineering and Development, EA Information Systems Division, EB Crew Systems Division, EC Instrumentation and Electronic Systems Division, EZ Guidance and Control Division, EG Propulsion and Power Division, EP Structures and Mechanics Division, ES Advanced Spacecraft Technology Division, ET

3
Addressee A A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r for F l i g h t Operations, F F l i g h t Control Division, F C Landing and Recovery Division, Number of copies
2

FL

2
2

Mission Planning and Analysis Division, F M Gemini

- Office
- Office

of Program Manager, GA

1
1

Test Operations Manager, GT Apollo of Manager, PA

NASA-RASPO, F'B Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation Bethpage, L. I., New York 1 n 14 NASA-RASPO, PC 12214 kkewood Blvd. Downey, C a l i f o r n i a 90240 Systems Engineering Division, PD

5
3

LEM P r o j e c t Engineering and Checkout IXvision, PE

C and S M P r o j e c t Engineering and Checkout

4
5
1 2

Division, PF

Mission Operations Division, P M

Program Control Division, PP
R e l i a b i l i t y , Quality, and Test Division, PR

Apollo Analysis and Reporting Team, PI& Resident Liaison Offices Goddwd Space F l i g h t Center Liaison Office, GSF-L Kennedy Space Center Liaison Office,

50

[All3

I
1

b k r s h a l l Space F l i g h t Center Resident Liaison Office, RL

4
1 ,
Addressee Libraries
NASA Headquarters Library, USS-10

Number of copies

A e Research Center Library ms F l i g h t Research Center Library Goddard Space F l i g h t Center Library

6 6
2

John F. Kennedy Space Center Library

6 6

L e w i s Research Center Library

mrshall Space F l i g h t Center Library

6
1

NASA A e Research Center ms Moffett Field, California 94035 Attention: Director

NASA Flight Research Center Post Office Box 273 Edwards, C a l i f o r n i e 93523 Attention: Director

N S Goddard Space F l i g h t Center AA Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 Attention: Director, 100 N S Langley Research Center AA Langley S t a t i o n Eampton, Virginia 23365 Attention: Director, 0.000
NASA Lewis Research Center 21000 Brookpark Road Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Attention: Director, 100 NASA George C. Marshall Space F l i g h t Center Huntsville, Alabama 35812 At5eention: Director, M-DIR

5
Addressee Number of copies

NASA
Electronics Research Center 565 Technology Square Cambridge, mssachusetts 02139
NASA MSC-White Sands T e s t F a c i l i t y Office of t h e Manager, RA P. 0. Drawer MM Las Cruces, Nw Mexico 88001 e

John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA N S Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899 AA
NASA Mwshall Space Flight Center Aero-Astrodynamics Laboratory, R-Aero-F Huntsville, Alabama 35812
NASA-MSPO Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e of Technology 75 Cambridge Parkway Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142
2

NASA-RASP0 AC Spark Plug Company Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53200

North American Aviation, Inc., S&CD Atten-bion: D. M Cole . Systems Engineering, Dept. 692 12214 Lakewood Blvd. Downey, California 90240 North American Aviation, Inc., S&El Attention: Dale D. Wers Apollo Frogran Manager 12214 Lalrewood Bl-vd. Damey, California 90240 Grumman A i r c r a f t Engineering Gorp. Bethpage, L. I., New York ll714
A r n o l d Engineering Development Center A t t e n t ion : General Goss ick Arnold A i r Force Station, Tennessee 37389

4
1