[net.columbia] More Challenger Theories

gardner@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU (02/01/86)

The SRB's burn from the bottom up.  The position of the flame front should
be directly calculatable by NASA.  The key question is:  Would the flame
front be near that joint at that point in the flight.

Michael Gardner	   
Computer Services Office - University of Illinois
Urbana, Ill, 61801	gardner@uiucuxc

kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery) (02/06/86)

[]

> The SRB's burn from the bottom up.  The position of the flame front should
> be directly calculatable by NASA.  The key question is:  Would the flame
> front be near that joint at that point in the flight.
> [Michael Gardner]

If I understand correctly, you think that the SRB fuel burns at a surface
that is at right angles to the long axis of the SRB.  This is not correct.
The SRB fuel is pierced all the way down the long axis by a star-shaped
hole.  Burning occurs on the surface thus formed.  Side note: the hole is
star-shaped to keep the surface area, and thus the burn rate, relatively
constant over the burn time.  A cylindrical hole would, as the SRB burned,
increase in surface area.

--
The above viewpoints are mine.  They are unrelated to
those of anyone else, including my cat and my employer.

Ken Montgomery  "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs"
...!{ihnp4,allegra,seismo!ut-sally}!ut-ngp!kjm  [Usenet, when working]
kjm@ngp.{ARPA,UTEXAS.EDU}  [Old/New Internet; depends on nameserver operation]

andrew@cadomin.UUCP (Andrew Folkins) (02/07/86)

In article <152800004@uiucuxc> gardner@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU writes:
>
>The SRB's burn from the bottom up.  The position of the flame front should
>be directly calculatable by NASA.  The key question is:  Would the flame
>front be near that joint at that point in the flight.
>
>Michael Gardner	   
>Computer Services Office - University of Illinois
>Urbana, Ill, 61801	gardner@uiucuxc

SRB's burn from the entire length of the booster from the inside out.  The 
solid fuel itself insulates the outer skin of the booster from the high 
temperatures within until the booster is almost burned out. 

A side note on booster destruct : the news last night showed this occuring
through blowing the nose cone and nozzle off and splitting the booster
itself lengthwise. However, I have heard frome another source (the net?) 
that only the nose cone and nozzle are blown off, and the exhaust is 
shot out the front and back of the booster.  Does anyone know which is
correct?

-- 
Andrew Folkins        ...ihnp4!alberta!andrew    
 
"We humans think of ourselves as being rather good at reasoning, but at
best we perform about a hundred logical inferences a second.  We're
talking about future expert systems that will be doing ten million
inferences a second.  What will it be like to put a hundred years thought
in every decision?  Knowledge is power."  - Edward A. Feigenbaum

brad@dcc1.UUCP (labasst) (02/07/86)

In article <2924@ut-ngp.UUCP> kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery) writes:
>> The SRB's burn from the bottom up.  The position of the flame front should
>> be directly calculatable by NASA.  The key question is:  Would the flame
>> front be near that joint at that point in the flight.
>> [Michael Gardner]
>
>This is not correct.
>The SRB fuel is pierced all the way down the long axis by a star-shaped
>hole.  Burning occurs on the surface thus formed.  Side note: the hole is
>star-shaped to keep the surface area, and thus the burn rate, relatively
>constant over the burn time.  A cylindrical hole would, as the SRB burned,
>increase in surface area.
>
>[Ken Montgomery]

   Ken, you have the right idea but your information isn't completely 
correct either. I have a copy of a shuttle manual ( missing title page
so I can't name the source) which says.


      The high thrust level during lift-off of the Shuttle
      results from an 11-point-star propellant
      configuration in the forward segment. After lift-off,
      thrust is reduced by the total burnout of the star
      points (at 62 seconds into flight) to constrain
      flight dynamic pressure. Thrust then gradually
      increases because of the design of the burning
      cavity. When the flame surface of the burning
      propellant reaches the liner surface, the thrust
      again starts to decay and continues to decay until
      burnout (about 10 seconds later).


   I wish I had the original source for this since it covers
all the shuttle systems in easy to read language with just
enough detail.

Brad Beach  ...!gatech!dcc1!brad

-- 
I did my own thing and now I have to undo it.
                                   
                                  Brad Beach     
                        ...!gatech!dcc1!brad      <=   Funny, this doesn't 
                                                          look like me.

lmc@cisden.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney) (02/08/86)

> The SRB's burn from the bottom up.  The position of the flame front should
> be directly calculatable by NASA.  The key question is:  Would the flame
> front be near that joint at that point in the flight.

No. They burn from a central cavity running the entire length of the SRB
from the center outwards radially. The pressures and temperatures would
blow any casing apart that was not protected by the unburned fuel.

Lyle McElhaney
...hao!cisden!lmc

kenner@acf4.UUCP (Richard Kenner) (02/09/86)

Interesting, it looks like the first appearance of the extra plume seems to
have occurred right around the time when the initial star configuration of
the SRB propellant is supposed to have completed its burn.  Coincidence?

paul@axiom.UUCP (Paul O`Shaughnessy) (02/11/86)

Good try on calculating location of the burnthru, but the SRB's do not
burn from the bottom up, but from inside out.  That makes the combustion
surface much larger and should (!) reduce the chance of burnthru.