Would Ares I use the five-and-a-half segment SRB?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lampblack

Guest
<p>Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I am curious:</p><p>If NASA adopts the five-and-a-half segment version of the solid rocket booster for Ares V, would the same sized SRB then also be used for the Ares I rocket? And would the lengthier SRB address the documented inadequacies in the Ares I design re: lofting the Orion capsule?</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
 
K

kyle_baron

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I am curious:If NASA adopts the five-and-a-half segment version of the solid rocket booster for Ares V, would the same sized SRB then also be used for the Ares I rocket? And would the lengthier SRB address the documented inadequacies in the Ares I design re: lofting the Orion capsule?&nbsp; <br />Posted by lampblack</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>As a side note, but still on topic:&nbsp; What is the point of Diminishing Returns for the number of segments in the Ares I SRB?&nbsp; They started at 4, went to 5, now they're talking 5 1/2 for the Ares V.&nbsp; Can you continue to use Brute Force, to increase thrust, because of the weight involved?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
<p>It seems that they will use 5 segment SRB for Ares 1... At least almost two weeks ago they have completed Ares 1 first stage review and it says 5 segments: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/ares/aresI_prelim_review.html</p><p>However I don't understand why they&nbsp;would use&nbsp;different SRB's for Ares 1 and Ares 5. From manufactoring point of view it should be cheaper to use the same design/model for both boosters. As well as it could give the much needed extra horsepowers to lift the Orion without reducing its properties any further.</p><p>Also because these SRB's are reusable I tought they would reuse used Ares 1 SRB's for Ares 5. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
C

Cygnus_2112

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It seems that they will use 5 segment SRB for Ares 1... At least almost two weeks ago they have completed Ares 1 first stage review and it says 5 segments: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/constellation/ares/aresI_prelim_review.htmlHowever I don't understand why they&nbsp;would use&nbsp;different SRB's for Ares 1 and Ares 5. From manufactoring point of view it should be cheaper to use the same design/model for both boosters. As well as it could give the much needed extra horsepowers to lift the Orion without reducing its properties any further.Also because these SRB's are reusable I tought they would reuse used Ares 1 SRB's for Ares 5. <br /> Posted by Zipi</DIV></p><p>there is no difference manufacturing and reusability wise between a 5 and 5 1/2 segment booster.&nbsp; </p><p>The main difference between 4, 5 and 5 1/2 is the number of casings*.&nbsp; Each segment is made of 2 casings.&nbsp; These casings can be interchanged.&nbsp; Once a booster is launched and recovered, it is broken down to the casings for refurbishments.&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p>&nbsp;*There is a difference between the propellant shape in all versions. &nbsp; Even when Ares 1 & 5 both use 5 segments, they would have had different propellant grain shapes.&nbsp; Also the aft skirts of the boosters may or may not be the same </p>
 
S

shuttle_guy

Guest
<p>
there is no difference manufacturing and reusability wise between a 5 and 5 1/2 segment booster.&nbsp; The main difference between 4, 5 and 5 1/2 is the number of casings*.]</p><p>&nbsp;As you say above in your second sentance&nbsp;there actually is a difference: the 5 and 5.5 boosters fly higher and return faster than the 4 segment there parachute recovery system must be redesigned.&nbsp;Also the forward skirt is totally different from the 4 segment. The recovery system is a part of the SRB.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp; Each segment is made of 2 casings.&nbsp; These casings can be interchanged.&nbsp; Once a booster is launched and recovered, it is broken down to the casings for refurbishments.]</p><p>&nbsp;A clarification: the SRB segments are broken down to the segment level (2 casings) at KSC before they are shipped back to ATK.</p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
D

DrRocket

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>there is no difference manufacturing and reusability wise between a 5 and 5 1/2 segment booster.&nbsp; The main difference between 4, 5 and 5 1/2 is the number of casings*.]&nbsp;As you say above in your second sentance&nbsp;there actually is a difference: the 5 and 5.5 boosters fly higher and return faster than the 4 segment there parachute recovery system must be redesigned.&nbsp;Also the forward skirt is totally different from the 4 segment. The recovery system is a part of the SRB.&nbsp;&nbsp; Each segment is made of 2 casings.&nbsp; These casings can be interchanged.&nbsp; Once a booster is launched and recovered, it is broken down to the casings for refurbishments.]&nbsp;A clarification: the SRB segments are broken down to the segment level (2 casings) at KSC before they are shipped back to ATK.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by shuttle_guy</DIV></p><p>There will be differences in the casting tooling and procedures for casting propellant in a 1/2 segment as well.&nbsp; There will also be differences in mass flow and the pressure profile along the centerbore.&nbsp; These issues are probably not insurmountable, but will need to be addressed.&nbsp; When the increase was made from&nbsp;4 t 5 segments it was necessary to add some grain chamfers so as not to have too large a&nbsp;pressure drop in some critical locations.</p><p>To answer an earlier question, additional segments will not run into a limit because of increasing weight alone.&nbsp; The increase in weight will be more than compensated by an increase in thrust.&nbsp; But you do run into limitations interms of how much pressure and mass flow the design can accomodate before structural limitations are imposed.&nbsp; <br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
L

lampblack

Guest
<p>So... if NASA adopted the 5.5-segment SRB for Ares V, then it would actually make sense to also use it for Ares I?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>
 
D

DrRocket

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>So... if NASA adopted the 5.5-segment SRB for Ares V, then it would actually make sense to also use it for Ares I? <br />Posted by lampblack</DIV></p><p>Depends on the needs and limitations for Area 1.&nbsp; You would probably get more thrust.&nbsp; But then you also get more g's.&nbsp; At some point you get short squat astronauts.<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
F

frodo1008

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>There will be differences in the casting tooling and procedures for casting propellant in a 1/2 segment as well.&nbsp; There will also be differences in mass flow and the pressure profile along the centerbore.&nbsp; These issues are probably not insurmountable, but will need to be addressed.&nbsp; When the increase was made from&nbsp;4 t 5 segments it was necessary to add some grain chamfers so as not to have too large a&nbsp;pressure drop in some critical locations.To answer an earlier question, additional segments will not run into a limit because of increasing weight alone.&nbsp; The increase in weight will be more than compensated by an increase in thrust.&nbsp; But you do run into limitations interms of how much pressure and mass flow the design can accomodate before structural limitations are imposed.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p>For the Ares I the weight of the over all rocket is no problem.&nbsp; However, I think that on another thread that Shuttle-Guy had stated that by going to a 5 and 1/2 segment Ares V, along with 6 RS68 engines in an over all center section of some 33 ft diameter the over all weight of the rocket exceeds the limitations of the current KFC handling equipment (such as the crawlers) by a considerable margin. &nbsp;</p><p>The weight of both the Saturn V (at some 6 million pounds) and the shuttle (at about the same or somewhat more) do not test the 10 million pound or so limitations of the handling and launching equipment at the cape.&nbsp; But from what the other thread seemed to be saying the new configuration of the Ares V would weight in at over 11 million pounds!</p><p>A crushing weight to say the least!!&nbsp;</p>
 
N

neuvik

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>For the Ares I the weight of the over all rocket is no problem.&nbsp; However, I think that on another thread that Shuttle-Guy had stated that by going to a 5 and 1/2 segment Ares V, along with 6 RS68 engines in an over all center section of some 33 ft diameter the over all weight of the rocket exceeds the limitations of the current KFC handling equipment (such as the crawlers) by a considerable margin. &nbsp;The weight of both the Saturn V (at some 6 million pounds) and the shuttle (at about the same or somewhat more) do not test the 10 million pound or so limitations of the handling and launching equipment at the cape.&nbsp; But from what the other thread seemed to be saying the new configuration of the Ares V would weight in at over 11 million pounds!A crushing weight to say the least!!&nbsp; <br /> Posted by frodo1008</DIV></p><p>How are they planning to remedy that?&nbsp; Are they going to build a larger crawler?&nbsp; Or just make the assembly silos also the launching silos?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">I don't think I'm alone when I say, "I hope more planets fall under the ruthless domination of Earth!"</font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff">SDC Boards: Power by PLuck - Ph**king Luck</font></p> </div>
 
D

DrRocket

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>How are they planning to remedy that?&nbsp; Are they going to build a larger crawler?&nbsp; Or just make the assembly silos also the launching silos? <br />Posted by neuvik</DIV><br />&nbsp;I must have missed something somewhere.&nbsp; What silos ? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
N

neuvik

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;I must have missed something somewhere.&nbsp; What silos ? <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p>Should have said Vehical Assembly Building.&nbsp; I suppose they would manufacture the pieces of the Ares at the Michoud Assembly Facility then truck them over for final assembly at the VAB? &nbsp; Would it cost more to retrofit that structure or build a new crawler?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If those are our only options, can't think of anything else at the moment.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">I don't think I'm alone when I say, "I hope more planets fall under the ruthless domination of Earth!"</font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff">SDC Boards: Power by PLuck - Ph**king Luck</font></p> </div>
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Should have said Vehical Assembly Building.&nbsp; I suppose they would manufacture the pieces of the Ares at the Michoud Assembly Facility then truck them over for final assembly at the VAB? &nbsp; Would it cost more to retrofit that structure or build a new crawler?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If those are our only options, can't think of anything else at the moment. <br />Posted by neuvik</DIV><br /><br />I cannot even imagine the amount of work, cost and needed modifications to VAB building if somebody wants to convert it to a launch site... I'm pretty sure that it would be cheaper to build all the cranes etc. needed to stack the booster to the current launch site rather than try to modify the VAB building. The forces during the launch of this size rockets are are just too big for any building I'm afraid. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
C

Cygnus_2112

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Should have said Vehical Assembly Building.&nbsp; I suppose they would manufacture the pieces of the Ares at the Michoud Assembly Facility then truck them over for final assembly at the VAB? &nbsp; Would it cost more to retrofit that structure or build a new crawler?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; If those are our only options, can't think of anything else at the moment. <br /> Posted by neuvik</DIV></p><p>The SRB's segments are not loaded (manufactured) at Michoud but Utah.&nbsp; They are the weight drivers.&nbsp; New crawlers and VAB mods are already planned for Ares V </p>
 
N

neuvik

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The SRB's segments are not loaded (manufactured) at Michoud but Utah.&nbsp; They are the weight drivers.&nbsp; New crawlers and VAB mods are already planned for Ares V <br /> Posted by Cygnus_2112</DIV></p><p>Well the first SRB segments are going to be manufactured arn't they?&nbsp; Then after that they will be refurbished and reused. &nbsp; A new crawler is awesome, I havn't seen anything about it in the news so I just threw out the first two assumptions that came to mind.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">I don't think I'm alone when I say, "I hope more planets fall under the ruthless domination of Earth!"</font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff">SDC Boards: Power by PLuck - Ph**king Luck</font></p> </div>
 
C

Cygnus_2112

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Well the first SRB segments are going to be manufactured arn't they?&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /> Posted by neuvik</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Nope, they are using the existing shuttle casings. &nbsp; This is a basic requirement.&nbsp; If there were to be new casings, they wouldn't be made at Michoud&nbsp;</p>
 
Z

Zipi

Guest
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;Nope, they are using the existing shuttle casings. &nbsp; This is a basic requirement.&nbsp; If there were to be new casings, they wouldn't be made at Michoud&nbsp; <br />Posted by Cygnus_2112</DIV><br /><br />I tought these new 5.5 SRBs were designed to utilize new carbon fiber based casings to get more payload... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
H

holmec

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;As a side note, but still on topic:&nbsp; What is the point of Diminishing Returns for the number of segments in the Ares I SRB?&nbsp; They started at 4, went to 5, now they're talking 5 1/2 for the Ares V.&nbsp; Can you continue to use Brute Force, to increase thrust, because of the weight involved? <br /> Posted by kyle_baron</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Diminishing returns?&nbsp; What are you talking about?&nbsp; Each segment is like a rocket in and of itself as far as weight and fuel (oxidzer included). I would expect a big problem with added segments is added internal pressure since more fuel is burnt at the same time.&nbsp; So more chance of casing failure, like the Challenger incident. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>
 
H

holmec

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere, but I am curious:If NASA adopts the five-and-a-half segment version of the solid rocket booster for Ares V, would the same sized SRB then also be used for the Ares I rocket? And would the lengthier SRB address the documented inadequacies in the Ares I design re: lofting the Orion capsule?&nbsp; <br /> Posted by lampblack</DIV></p><p>The newer moon video from NASA says Ares I will have the 5.5 segment SRB.&nbsp; I remember it had some anoucer voices in the video that said it.&nbsp; But they are not there now, wonder if they changed the video. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>
 
C

Cygnus_2112

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I tought these new 5.5 SRBs were designed to utilize new carbon fiber based casings to get more payload... <br /> Posted by Zipi</DIV></p><p>No, not yet. </p>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY