Re: s.s.p. big branes, a call for a refresher course
- From: "Jorge R. Frank" <jrfrank@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:08:29 -0500
Unclaimed Mysteries
<theletter_k_andthenumeral_4_doh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:BF8Ge.18484$aY6.8352@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
> The EPA-foam issue has cropped up again on talk radio. (sigh) Let me
> know if I'm close to the following facts here.
>
> 0) At some time in the 1990s EPA policy called for the end of the use
> of freon in processes that affected the ET foam insulation.
>
> 1) There was a period in the mid-late 1990s when ET insulation was
> applied with a mix of old and new methods. Old school foam used in
> what were deemed most critical areas and the new freon-free foam in
> other areas.
>
> 2) Later analysis showed that both areas continued to suffer from foam
> loss. (What kind, and how much?)
>
> Columbia's ET was old or new type?
>
> Thank you. I'm trying to educate myself here. Researching this topic
> has been a mess on google. I've gotten people blaming/crediting the
> EPA going all the way back to Challenger O-ring putty. I've even
> gotten a WTF??!! whiff of an EPA-FDA-EPHEDRA-FREON DIABOLICAL
> CONSPIRACY!!! AIEEEE!
>From the report of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, Volume 1, p.
129:
"The foam loss problem on STS-87 was described as "popcorning" because of
the numerous popcorn-size foam particles that came off the thrust panels.
Popcorning has always occurred, but it began earlier than usual in the
launch of STS-87. The cause of the earlier-than-normal popcorning (but not
the fundamental cause of popcorning) was traced back to a change in foam-
blowing agents that caused pressure buildups and stress concentrations
within the foam. In an effort to reduce its use of chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs), NASA had switched from a CFC-11 (chlorofluorocarbon) blowing agent
to an HCFC-141b blowing agent beginning with External Tank-85, which was
assigned to STS-84. (The change in blowing agent affected only mechanically
applied foam. Foam that is hand sprayed, such as on the bipod ramp, is
still applied using CFC-11.)"
--
JRF
Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.
.
- References:
- s.s.p. big branes, a call for a refresher course
- From: Unclaimed Mysteries
- s.s.p. big branes, a call for a refresher course
- Prev by Date: Re: NASA grounds future shuttle flights
- Next by Date: Re: Can ISS survive another Shuttle grounding?
- Previous by thread: s.s.p. big branes, a call for a refresher course
- Next by thread: Salvaging X-33
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|