Re: Q: For Sy Liebergot (Yeah, it's new safe CT-free topic fodder!)

>>From Terrell Miller:
> Stuf4 wrote:
> > I also find this statement as curious:
> >
> > "The g-force was so great that the reactant feed valves
> > feeding Fuel cells 1 & 3 were shocked closed, causing both to fail
> > within about a minute."
> >
> > Was it g-force that caused the valve closure? My understanding is
that
> > the hardware was thoroughly ground tested to withstand more g's
than
> > even that experienced during launch vibration, to include harmonic
> > resonance analysis.
>
> <sigh>
>
> You missed the part where Sy says the ambient G-force was some *4000*

> times higher than normal. I kinda doubt that was in teh test specs,
y'know?
>
> Gotta work on the reading-for-comprehension thingy...

Let's be clear that impressive sounding stats can be thrown around
while meaning absolutely nothing. 4000 times higher than normal g does
not give any indication about the energy transfer.

As a further point of illustration...

The human finger can withstand 4000 times the normal temperature. Just
make the time interval short enough and the contact area small enough
so that the thermal energy transfered does not even leave a burn mark.

There could have been a lot more testing done to analyze the fuel cell
valve closures. A key stat I would be interested to see is how late
could Mission Control have caught the O2 tank overpressure and
responded with a relief valve vent so that all three fuel cells would
have remained functional.

....Not that all three were needed to press with a lunar landing
attempt. But this would have been interesting to learn none the less.


~ CT

.