Dr. Phil Metzger Profile picture
Apr 22 22 tweets 6 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
We used steel plates for some of the Morpheus launch locations so we weren’t tied down to places with concrete. I analyzed the heating of the sheet and showed that the heat would redistribute fast enough that it would not locally melt on the surface, and… /1
2/ …that the steel plate was large enough to take the heat of the entire launch event without melting. To be conservative (because that’s what nasa does 😉) we also put paint-on ablative on the top of the steel. An ablative erodes under heat and thus uses up some of the heat…
3/ …keeping what was under the ablative cooler. (Partly we were just testing the use of ablative. It wasn’t just conservatism that motivated this.) So compare to Elon’s tweet about Starship. They plan to make their giant steel plate water-cooled. That way it doesn’t have to…
4/ …be large enough to take all the heat of the plume without melting, the way we designed the Morpheus steel plates. For such a large rocket that much steel would be excessive. And ablative would not be enough to solve this, either. Would the ablative need to be 3 feet thick?!!
5/ But he said it will be water-cooled, which is an awesome idea. The water will be taking heat out of the steel in realtime so it won’t melt. Simple, and it should be effective.
6/ We still had two concerns. One was that the vaporized ablative was hazardous to breathe, but the rocket exhaust would dilute it into the air so no problem. (I still had to show this with math to convince the team.) The second was that the plate might be too hot to walk on…
7/ …so you had to wait for it to cool before going onto the pad. We handled that with operational procedures. So we had the steel plates, the steel drop-in flame trench, instrumentation like cameras to record the launch, and lighting. We called this system…
8/ …“Launch Pad in a Box”. This concept was inspired in part when I was driving to Maine and passed a carnival ride folded up on a truck going down the highway. I had a vision of an entire launch complex folded up on a truck for transport so we could launch anywhere, anytime.
9/ We got a picture of the truck and I showed it to the Swamp Works team. I think Rob Mueller was already having the same idea. He and I started fighting to get the idea funded. Meetings, meetings, meetings. And we got the funds.
10/ We were already working on these technologies when we applied them to Morpheus. The two projects were synergistic. We also talked about portable lighting arrestor towers but never developed that part of the kit. Image
11/ So all that was just to say that I like the idea SpaceX is pursuing. I think it will work great to solve the plume erosion problem.

It will *not* mitigate launch acoustics. The flat plat will reflect the sound back up along the sides of the vehicle, shaking the structure.
12/ There very first “sound” that happens on launch is the shockwave from engine ignition. It bounces off the pad then runs up the sides of the vehicle, stressing everything. At nasa it is called the “Initial OverPressure” or IOP. The IOP almost ruined the 1st Shuttle launch.
13/ The reason there is a shockwave is because a converging-diverging rocket nozzle tricks the gas flow into going supersonic. The fuel burns in the combustion chamber and creates high pressure. The restriction at the throat causes the gas to “choke” at the speed of sound. Image
14/ As it goes downstream from the throat it expands, cools, and speeds up to go supersonic. But initially it has to push the ambient air out of the nozzle. The supersonic flow is ramming into the ambient air as it pushes it, creating a big buildup of pressure…the ignition shock
15/ That shockwave is slowly pushed down the nozzle (“slow” meaning a tiny fraction of a second). At the end of the nozzle it detaches then goes down and hits the launch pad. It then reflects and travels up to the rocket, running up along its sides, shaking the structure.
16/ On the first Space Shuttle launch the IOP deflected the elevons— the control surfaces on the wings — so far the engineers were worried they could have snapped. So they added the water deluge system to absorb and break up the IOP shockwave. Image
17/ After the IOP, the rocket exhaust continues to produce acoustic noise. It does this through turbulence. The noise is random — not like a coherent shockwave — but it is still a lot of energy that reflects off the pad and vibrates the rocket.
18/ We do not have great models of acoustic noise production in rocket plumes. NASA’s models are conservative, predicting more noise than there really is. Therefore we build rocket structures stiffer than they really need to be. This wastes the mass margin, reducing payload mass. ImageImage
19/ So it is important to keep researching rocket plume acoustics to make rockets more efficient. But also, it is important to design launch pads to reduce acoustics so we can save more payload margin.
20/ In the previous thread I told how we designed the portable flame trench for Morpheus to duct the acoustic energy away from the vehicle, because we think that acoustic energy is what destroyed the first Morpheus.
21/ So I have no idea of the acoustics experienced by Starship or it’s structural beefiness. It may not be a problem at all, for all I know. I’m just saying that a flat steel plate does not do anything to reduce acoustic energy from coupling into the vehicle.
22/ If the rocket doesn’t mind the shaking, then fine. But it is easy to design systems that reduce launch acoustics and give more margin back to the vehicle, so if SpaceX decided to do so then it could be done. End 🧵

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr. Phil Metzger

Dr. Phil Metzger Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrPhiltill

Apr 21
One thing that people probably forget when building launch pads is that there is gas pressure pushing up from under the pad. Dirt has air pressure in it. If rocket exhaust finds a crack, it pressurizes the dirt under the launch pad far more. This can lift concrete slabs. /1
2/ If a slab starts to lift, it creates a bigger crack, and the gas that hits its edge comes to a full stop, converting its kinetic energy to super high pressure. This pressure is right at the crack so it drives even more gas to the space below the slab, lifting it even more.
3/ Every disruption of the gas flow also creates high temperature. Concrete gets eaten away by high temperature. The sand grains and gravel thermally expand in random directions creating micro cracks that grow, so material fractures and sluffs off the surface at some rate.
Read 22 tweets
Feb 20
Coincidentally I just prepared a lecture for tomorrow where I will discuss one aspect of this. Please read this linked thread first then my additional thoughts are below. /1
2/ I have been worried about the same problem at the next step of the career ladder. How many PhDs are we graduating in astronomy/planetary compared to the number of jobs available? These plots indicate no growth of funding to support astronomers. (Cred: homepages.rpi.edu/~newbeh/WhyFun…) Image
3/ If there’s no growth in academic positions, then shouldn’t each astronomy professor graduate only *ONE* PhD student during their entire career? That is, a one-for-one job replacement. When I retire, one person gets my job. But we graduate far more than this.
Read 8 tweets
Jan 23
@JPMajor @cgruttke @ColB1Kenobe @its_the_Dr @BellFlight The combustion that creates light only happens where the gas is high pressure. In lunar vacuum, once it comes out of the nozzle is has been expanded, and the heat energy was converted into kinetic energy for thrust. Since it is relatively cool, there’s no combustion, no light./1
@JPMajor @cgruttke @ColB1Kenobe @its_the_Dr @BellFlight 2/ Here’s a simulation of the rocket exhaust flowing out of a nozzle. The temperature is far below combustion temperature at the wide end of the nozzle. Image
@JPMajor @cgruttke @ColB1Kenobe @its_the_Dr @BellFlight 3/ On Earth there is an atmosphere that keeps the rocket exhaust focused into a jet, so it cannot keep expanding and getting cooler. Generally, plumes will oscillate from too wide to too narrow as they try to equalize to the atmosphere. The oscillations create bright hot spots… ImageImageImageImage
Read 12 tweets
Nov 19, 2022
Unfortunately, lunar dust is not charged in just one polarity. Some will be positive, some negative, and in general the dust specks have patches of both positive and negative areas on their surface. However, this *can* be used in an electrodynamic system to remove lunar dust. 1/3
2/3 The trick is to put regions of both positive and negative (and neutral) electric field on your spacesuit, and then cause those fields to move across the surface of the suit dragging all the dust, positive and negative, with it. NASA has developed this: nasa.gov/feature/kenned…
3/4 They developed versions that are embedded in fabric, and other versions that are clear to go in windows. But even this technology is not a complete cure for lunar dust since it gets embedded in the fibers of spacesuits and is very difficult to get out. Image
Read 6 tweets
Nov 10, 2022
I am imagining, if the rocket is exposed to excessive winds, the effort that will ensue to redo the structural analysis and convince everyone to sign the waiver to let it fly. It’s gonna be a busy couple of weeks for NASA structural engineers.
2/ I went to many of those program control boards seeking waivers for things we knew were broken on the Space Shuttle but we argued were ok to fly. It is a normal part of launching since the vehicles are so complex and it’s impossible to have everything in spec all the time. But,
3/ some waivers are a lot more serious than others. There is always this in your mind: will we be able to justify our decision to an accident board or to Congress if we lose the vehicle in flight? In that situation, will they still think we made the right decision?
Read 11 tweets
Oct 20, 2022
This is article is a good overview of current thinking on SBSP. I will add a little about how I was changed from skepticism to cautious optimism to actual optimism. A short 🧵/1
2/ Maybe 20 years ago I was skeptical simply because I was always skeptical of every idea and especially those which come from enthusiasts, since enthusiasts are more likely to suffer cognitive bias. I was careful to *never* suggest that SBSP may be a benefit of space. But…
3/ …the skepticism of another skeptic shook me out of that funk because I could see he went too far. It was Pete Worden, former head of Reagan’s Star Wars program and later head of NASA Ames. Pete was never known for technological timidity, and yet he was a disbeliever in SBSP.
Read 23 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(