_7_-72257 :HE THIRD FLIGHT Unclas 00/99 2_77

>.i-,.:, _ y
/

SPA CE FLI6HT CHTER

/<

' ,g;,_

)
HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA

"Availabtm to U,S, Government k._enclei I_i. U, _ G_ver"_t Contractors Ord,lf-" ,.,_

RESULTSOF THE THIRD SATURN I LAUNCH VEHICLETEST FLIGHT __

SA "3
_rvals; ears

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS SPACE AND ADMINISTRATION

o<,--_'.
MSFC Form

-_
(Riv

_'-_- ,_,_
Febm*ary 1961)

_=--_

-_-;_7_ "_

774

SECURITY This document co'ms

NOTE the national defense of

informat!on_ecting of t_Espionage Tt_evelation

the United States within the_ning Sections 793 and 794 as amendS%, manner to an unauthorized pe_ted

/-,,,

Law, Title of its contents by law.

18, U.S.C., in any

GEORGE

C.

MARSHALL

SPACE

FLIGHT

CENTER

MPR-SAT-64-13

RESULTS

OF THE

THIRD

SATURN Flight

I LAUNCH

VEHICLE Group

TEST

FLIGHT

By Saturn

Evaluation

Working

ABSTRACT

This gineering performance with special

report presents the results of the Early Evaluation of the Saturn SA- 3 test flight.

EnThe

of each major vehicle system is discussed emphasis on malfunctions and deviations. was a complete success, with being accomplished. No major which would be considered a or design deficiency occurred.

The SA-3 flight test all missions of the flight malfunction or deviation serious system failure

Any questions formation contained be directed to:

or comments in this report

pertaining are invited

to the inand should

Director, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center Huntsville, Alabama Attention: Chairman, Flight Evaluation Working (Phone 876-2701) Group, R-AERO-F

GEORGE

C.

MARSHALL

SPACE

FLIGHT

CENTER

MPR-SAT-64-13

RESULTS

OF

THE

THIRD

SATURN

I LAUNCtt

VEHICLE

TEST

FLIGHT

SATURN

FLIGHT WORKING

EVALUATION GROUP

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Acknowledgement tories and elements Center for their the joint efforts integrated Saturn indebted major report is made of MSFC to the and various laboraOperations

Launch

contributions andassistance would not

to this report. Without of these elements, this have been possible. The Group is especially elements for their

Flight Evaluation Working to the following MSFC contributions : Laboratory Division and

Aero-Astrodynamics Aerodynamics Flight Flight sion Mechanics Evaluation

Dynamics

Division Studies Divi-

and Operations

Astrionics Electrical Guidance Inertial

Laboratory Networks and Control Sensors and Division Division Stabilizers Division

Instrumentation Computation Research sion Launch Vehicle

Division Laboratory

and

Development

Applications

Divi-

Operations E nginee Engineering and Propulsion ring and Instrumentation and Control

Electronic System s Electrical Systems Mechanical Propulsion Propulsion Structures Systems and

Guidance Systems

Vehicle Division Division

Engineering

Laboratory

and

Design

Integration

Division

TABLE

OF

CONTENTS

Page SECTION I. FLIGHT i. i 1.2 SECTION SECTION II. III. Flight Test TEST Test Objectives SUMMARY Results .......................................... ............................................ .............................................. ................................................. 1 1 3 5

INTRODUCTION

LAUNCH 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6

OPERATIONS Milestones Atmospheric

............................................ .......................................... Surface Conditions ............................

6 6 6 6 6 7

Summary Prelauneh Prelauneh Countdown Holddown Launch

..................................................

.................................................. ................................................... Complex and Ground Support Equipment .........................

SECTION

IV.

TRAJECTORY 4. i 4.2 4. 3 Summary Trajectory Actual 4. 3.1 4. 3.2 4. 3.3 4.4 4.5 Retro Water and Cutoff Thrust

.................................................. .................................................. Analysis Predicted Flight Powered ........................................... Trajectory ................................... ..........................................

9 9 9 9 9 10 I1 11 11

................................................ Decay ........................................... .......................................

Rockets Release

............................................... (Destruct)

SECTION

V.

PROPULSION 5. 1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Summary Individual Vehicle Pressurization 5.4. 5.4. 5.4. 5.4.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 Vehicle 1 2 3

................................................... ................................................... Engine Propulsion Performance System Systems Tank Tank Bearing .................................... Performance ......................................... ................................... ................................... ................................... ..................................... ....................................... .............................

12 12 12 14 t5 15 16 16 16 16 17 17 19 19 of Inertia ........................ 19 21 21 21 2I 24 2_ .............................. 25 26 26 28 28 Attitudes

111

Fuel LOX Control Air

Pressurization Pressurization System Supply Utilization

Pressure

Propellant

Hydraulic System ............................................. Retro Rocket Performance ....................................... CHARACTERISTICS Vehicle Vehicle Weights Center of .......................................... .............................................. Gravity and Moments

SECTION

VI.

MASS 6. 1 6.2

SECTION

VII.

CONTROL 7. i 7.2 Summary S-I 7.2. 7.2.2 7.2.3 7.2.4 7.3 Functional 7. 3. 1 7.3.2 7.3.3 7.3.4 7.4 Propellant

..................................................... ................................................... Analysis Plane Plane Plane and ........................................... ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. Control After Cutoff Pitch Yaw Roll Attitude

Control i

Analysis Control Control Actuators ST-124P

............................................ ......................................... ........................................

Sensors Computer

.............................................. Stabilized Platform ..........................

29 29

Sloshing

............................................

TABLE OFCONTENTS (CONT'D) Page SECTION GUIDANCE VIII. ..................................................... 8.I Summary ...................................................
8.2 Description 8.2.1 8.2.2 8.3 ST-90 ST-124P of Guidance Guidance Guidance System System System .................................... ..................................... ...................................

32
32 32 32 32 33 33 33 35 35 35 .................. 36 37

Operational Analysis ........................................... 8.3. t Guidance Intelligence Errors ................................. 8.3.2 8.3.3 Accelerometer Accelerometer Outputs Outputs (ST-90) (ST-124P) ............................... .............................

8.4

Functional Analysis ............................................ 8.4. 1 Guidance Sensors ......................................... 8.4. 8.4. 2 3 Velocity ST-90 Encoders Stabilized and Signal Processor Repeaters Platform ...................................

SECTION

IX.

VFtIICLE 9. 1 9.2

ELFCTRICAI_

SYSTEM

......................................

38 38 38 40 40 ........................... 40 40 40 41 42 43 43 43 ......................... 44 45 ....................... 47 47 47 47 52 52 52 53 53 54 55 55

Summary Flight

................................................... Results AND ................................................. VIBRATIONS ......................................

SECTION

X.

STRUCTUIIES t0.1 10.2 Summary Bending 10, 2.1 10.2.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 Longitudinal Bending Vibrations 10.5.1 10.5.2 10.5.3 10.6 Vehicle

.................................................. Moments and Instrumentation Moment Loads Loads Normal Load Factors ......................................... .........................................

............................................

Oscillations ........................................... ................................................. Summary Instrumentation Discussion Acoustic of Vibration of Vibration Measurements TE MPEt2ATURES .................................................. ................................................. Environment Compartment Heat and ....................................... ..................................... Flame Shield .............................. Base Engine Forward Data .................................

......................................... Measurements ................................... AND Pt_ESSUIIES

SECTION

XI.

ENVIRONMENTAL 11.1 11.2 Summary Tail 11.2.1 11.2.2 1t.2.3 ii. 11.4 3 Skin 11.4.1 iI. 4.2 Section

...................................................... Canister Canister Canister ........................................... Pressure Temperature ....................................... ....................................

Instrument

SECTION

XII.

AERODYNAMICS 12.1 12. 2 12.3 12.4 Summary Ratio of Gradient Surface 12.4. 12.4.2 12.4.3 t2.4.4 I

................................................. .................................................. Gradients of Normal Pressure Station Station Station Centaur 205 860 989 of Angular Acceleration Force Coefficient and (Stability Center of Ratio) Pressure ................ Location .........

55 56 56 56 57 57 58

............................................. Measurements and and 863 10t9 .................................. ............................ ...............................

Measurements ...................................... Pressures

Simulation

iv

TABIJ::

OF

CONTENTS

(CONT'D) Page

SECTION

XIII.

INSTRUMENTATION 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 Summary

............................................... .................................................. ........................ Analysis ...................................... .......................................... ............................................

59 59 59 6t) 60 6[) 61 62 B2 64

MeasuringAnaly_is Telemet15' System RF Systems Analysis I3.4.1 Telemetry 13.4.2 13.4.3 1.3.4.4 UDOP AZUSA C-Band

............................................... .............................................. Radar. .........................................

SECTION

XIV.

SUMMAI_Y SPECIAL 15.1 15.2 15.3

OF

MALFUNCTIONS

AND

DEVIATIONS

..........................

SECTION

XV.

MISSIONS Project Ilighwater Scanner Special

............................................... . ........................................... ............................................. Missions .........................................

66 66 66 66

tlorizon Other

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1-1 3-i 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 5-1 5-2

5-3
5-4 Saturn Countdown Booster Time Polarity in Chart

Title ........................................... .............................................

Page 2 6

Minutes

Trajectory Earth-Fixed Dynamic

........................................................ Velocity Pressure and ................................................. Mach Number .......................................

9 9 10

Longitudinal Individual Individual Chamber Outboard

Acceleration Engine Engine Pressure Engine Deviation Deviation Buildup Thrust

.............................................. from from Predicted Predicted Thrust Specific .............................. Impulse .......................

10 12 12 14 14

............................................. ....... ....................................

Decay

5-5

Vehicle

Thrust

and

Specific

Impu[se

.......................................

15

5-6 5-7 6-1

Vehicle Typical Vehicle Range

Mixture Retro Weight, Time

Ratio Rocket

and

Total

Flow Thrust

Rate

...................................

15 17 Moments of Inertia Versus 19

Chamber

...................................... of Gravity and Mass

Longitudinal

Center

.......................................................

7-i 7-2

Pitch Tilt

Attitude, Program

Angular and Pitch

Velocity Velocity

and

Average Angle

Actuator

Position

.....................

21 22

Vector

.................................

7-3 7-4 7-5

Pitch Pitch Yaw Yaw

Plane Angle Attitude, Plane

Wind Design

Components Criteria Velocity and (8

and

Free-Stream Operating

Angle-of-Attack with 7 Engine Position

.................... Tilt Program) ..........

22 23 23 24

Engines and

Angular Wind

Average

Actuator

...................... ......................

7-6 7-7

Component

Free-Stream

Angle-of-Attack

Roll

Attitude

and

Average

Actuator

Positions

.................................

25

7-8 7-9 7-I0 7-11

Comparison Roll Pitch Pitch During and and

of

Roll

Angle Rocket

Deviations Firing

for

SA-1,

SA-2

and

SA-3

......................

25 26 27 27

Retro Yaw Yaw

.......................................... ....................................... ......................................

Control Local

Accelerations Angles-of-Attack

7-12 7-13

Non-Control

Actuator

Loads,

SA-3

........................................

28

Representative

Actuator

I,oads

........................................... vi

28

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS Title

/CONT'D) Page 29 29

Figure 7-14 7-15 7-16 7-17 8-1 8-2 8-3 8-4 8-5 9-1 10-1 10-2 10-3 10-4
10-5 Hydraulic Attitude Source Differences Pressure Between and Level and

...................................... ST-124P ...............................

ST-90

Center Sloshing

LOX

Tank

Telemetered

Sloshing

Amplitudes

After

100

Seconds

................

30 31

Frequencies

.................................................

Guidance Guidance Telemetered

Velocity Comparisons, Cross

Comparison STRange

(ST-90) 124P and Guidance

(Telemetered System Velocity,

Calculated)

..................

33 33

.............................. ST-90 Guidance System ...........

Slant

Altitude

35

Incremental Simplified Distributor

Velocity Schematic Connections

Pulse of Cross and

Patterns, Range Unit

ST-124P Signal

Cross Processor Supply

Range

.......................

36 37 38

.......................... ............................

9 Measuring

Bending Bending Longitudinal

Moment Moment I,oad

and at

Normal Station

Load 979, 979

Factor

.................................... and Gimbal Angle vs Range Time ........

40 41 42

Angle-of-Attack, ..........................................

at Station

Maximum SA-3 SA-3 SA-3 Bending System

Dynamic

Response Trend First First Mode,

............................................ ........................................... Yaw Pitch (151 at Liftoff Yaw 152.5 ............................... (53 sec) to 57 sec) .....................

42 42 42 43 43

Frequency Mode Mode - First

10-6 10-7 10-8

Bending Bending Mode

Mode, Mode, Pitch

and to

............................

10-9 10-10 11-1 il-2 11-3

Vibration SA-3 Base

Fnvelope Vehicle Pressure Acoustics

of

Structure,

Canister

and

Engine

Compartment

Measurements

........

44 46

................................................ Ambient Pressure Versus Altitude .........................

Minus

47

Flame Ratios

Shield of Base

Pressure Pressure

Comparison to Ambient

Versus Pressure

Altitude Versus

............................. Math Number. .................

48 48

11-4 11-5 11-6

Comparison Total Heat

of Rate

Gas to

Temperatures SA-3 Base

on

Heat

and

Flame

Shield,

SA-2

and

SA-3

............

49 49

............................................

Total

lteat

Rate

to M-31

Panel for

Compared C77-5 with

to

SA-i

and

SA-2 Decay

Rates

....................

50 51

11-7

Comparison

of Cutoff

Decay

a Typical

.......................

vii

lAST

OF

II,LUSTRATIONS

(CONT'D)

Figure I1-8 11-9 Total Radiant Correction 11-10 Engine Heating Heating Rate on Flame for Shield, SA-3 Flight SA-1,

Title SA-2 and SA-3 ........................ and Inflight Data

Page 51

Rates

Comparing

Preflight

Techniques Compartment

................................................ Structural Temperatures ................................

52 52

ll-ll t1-12 11-13

Environment, Base Environment, Tank

Forward

Side Forward

of

Flame

Shield

.................................. ............................... ...............................

52 52 53

Side

of tteat at

Shield 745

Propellant

Skin

Temperature

Station

1t-14 11-15 11-16

Propellant Temperature Temperature

Tank

Skin

Temperature on on Dummy Dummy

........................................ S-IV S-IV Stage Stage and and Interstage Interstage .................... ....................

53 53 53

Measurement Measurement

12-1 12-2 12-3

Ratio Center Ratios

of of

Gradients Pressure

of

Angular Location

Accelerations and to Gradient of

Versus Normal

Range Force

Time

.................... Versus ................ Maeh Number.

55 56 57

Coefficient Maeh Number

of Surface

Pressure

Ambient

Pressure

Versus

12-4 12-5

Ratios

of

Surface

Pressure

to

Ambient

Pressure

Versus

Maeh

Number

................

57

Ratios Pressure Pressure Simulation

of Surface Coefficient Coefficient Panel

Pressure Versus Versus

to

Ambient Maeh Vehicle

Pressure on

Versus Centaur

Maeh

Number

on Panel on

Interstage .............. Centaur -

......

5g 58

12-6 12-7

Number Station

- Simulation Math Numbers

at Various

....................................................

58

13-1 13-2

Telemetry Telemetry

Signal Signal

Strength Strength

(Cape (Green

Telemetry Mountain

2) and

................................ Mandy) ..........................

60 61

13-3 13-4 15-1

UDOP Azusa Picture

Signal and

Strength Radar Signal of

................................................. Strength .......................................... Experiment .............................

62 62 66

Sequence

Project

tlighwater

viii

LIST

OF

TABLES

Table

Title

Page

1-I 4-I

Times Cutoff

of Flight Conditions

Events

.................................................

4 10

....................................................

4-II 5-I 5-II 5-III

Significant Engine

Events Ignition and

.................................................... Cutoff Information ......................................

l0 13

Engine Propulsion Retro

Cutoff

Impulse Performance Parameters

................................................. Deviations ........................................

13 15 18

5-IV

Rocket

..............................................

6-I 6-II 7-I

SA-3

Vehicle

Weights

..................................................

20

Mass

Characteristics Pitch Yaw Plane Plane

Comparison Control Control

........................................ Parameters Parameters ................................... ....................................

20 21 24

Maximum Maximum

7-II

7- III 7-IV 7-V 7-VI

Maximum Roll Moment

Roll

Plane

Control

Parameters

....................................

24 25

.......................................................

Thrust Peak

Vector Sloshing

Angularity Amplitudes

During

Cutoff

Decay

.................................

26 30 34

.............................................. ................................................

8-I lO-I

Guidance Maximum

Comparisons On-Pad Overall

Sound

Pressure

Levels

..............................

45

ix

ABBREVIATIONS

AND

SYMBOLS

Abbreviation AFC AGC AM ARDC FM GBI G&C GG IECO LPGG MFV MLV OE CO PAM PCM PU q RF RMS S-I S-IVD S-VD SPGG SS TM UDOP UHF VHF

Definition

automatic automatic amplitude

frequency

control

gain control modulation and Development Center

Air Research frequency Grand

modulation Island

Bahama

Guidance

and Control

gas generator inboard engine cutoff gas generator

liquid propellant main main fuel valve LOX valve engine

outboard

cutoff modulation

pulse amplitude

pulse code modulation propellant dynamic utilization

pressure

radio frequency root mean square stage of the Saturn I vehicle I vehicle

first (booster) second (dummy)

stage of the Saturn stage of the Saturn gas generator

third (dummy) solid propellant single sideband telemeter Ultra

I vehicle

High Frequency

Doppler

ultra high frequency very high frequency

CONVERSION

FACTORS MEASURING

FOR PREFERRED UNITS

MSFC

Quantity_. 1. 2. Acceleration Area ft/S in 2 [b-s2 2

By
-1 3. 04800xt 6. 4516x10 5. 25539x101 0 -4

To m/s m2 k k

Obtain 2

-s 2 -s 2

3.

Density

slug/ft 4. 5. 6. 7. S. Energy Force Length Mass Mass Flow Rate BTU lb in lb-s ft Ib-s ft lb/in F-32 ft/s gal ft 3 13. Volume Flow ft3/s gal/s (U. 2 2

5. 25539x101 2. 51996x10 4. 53592x10 2. 54000xl -1 -1 0 -z kcal kg m kg-s2 1x1 = TMU

1.48816 1.48816 7. 03067x10 5. 55556x10 3. 04800xi S.) 3. 78543x10 2.83168x10 2. 83168x10 3. 78543x10 -2 -2 -_ 0 -1 -3

kg-s
m kg/cm C ln/S m3 m3 hi3/s ivy3/s 2

9. 10. 11. 12.

Pressure Temperature Velocity Volume

-2 -3

xi

GEORGE

C.

MARSHAL

L SPACE

FLIGIIT

CENTER

MPR-SAT-64-13

RESULTS

OF

THE

THIRD

SATURN

I LAUNCH

VEtlICLE

TEST

FLIGHT

By Saturn

Flight

Evaluation

Working

Group

SECTION

I.

FLIGHT

TEST

SUMMARY

i. i

FLIGHT

TEST

RESULTS

systems the was 1962. the first launched The two any flight Saturn at 1245:02 testwas flight The sysessentially However, ent. ullage. expected

functioned propellant hydraulic All

properly, load systems

with to

good

results Block well

from II gas within

increased

simulate operated

Saturn hours EST

space on

vehicle

SA-3 16,

November

limits. control the the system same control were loading vehicle mass to as for theSaturnvehicle that gains maintain as on SA-1 attitude those to almost SA-2, of the was SA-3 ttowever, ST-124P hydraulic satisfactory. vehicle was flown without for systems of active both was the actuators and the conused (a o and because the and angles, on in SA-I b o) of same SA-2. and SA-1 angles-ofand The pitch plane SA-2 win(! as SA-3 and were the was SA-2. differ-

a complete tests. or tem The failure deviations

success, flight which or design test

as were did not could

reveal

maKunctions a serious

be considered

deficiency.

These the

changed

increased correlation

SA-3 arrival uled 16,

was

launched S-I stage count at 10:45 countdown

approximately at Cape began was hours Canaveral. at EST 0200

eight EST

weeks The

after schedone gen-

propellant with

of the ten-hour 1962. hold

November Engine attackwere flights magnitude experienced Operations trol computers The path Saturn deflections, less primarilydue was on than observed

The

continuous

exceptfor

45-minute eratorpower sequencing Launch

due to a ground

failure, processes

All automatic

propellant loading tolerances. and

the trajectoryshapc. the same in the

were within expected execution

preparations, as expected

of the countdown,

launch were

and successfully the ground

demonstrated equipment and support expected guidance, and passengerhardwarc guidance capabilities flight a trajectory of flight. as

the compatibility

between

support

and the space vehicle.

The

launch complex

equipment suffered less damage than was from the low liftoffacceleration of SA-3.

The Slightly range ered be

actual lower less but than the at

flight

path

of

SA-3

was

close the time

to nominal. altitude during and powboth to Deof

ST-90 onboard guidance The ison eration neering

(Prototype) the operational in dataas the well Saturn as

acceleration thannominal a longer expected dummy seconds

caused at any powered at times stages range for time

to establish equipment

to be flight,

environment. comparthe an ST-90 The opengi-

flight after at

caused burnout. an

telemetered indicatcd system of test, Erroneous the

greater

satisfactory throughout ST-124P was quite

performance powered guidance satisfactory. from on the the cross system,

structof occurred 167.2 kin.

SA-3 292

Project

Highwater altitude

guidance

The very cent performance of

performance for averaged

of this

the flight

propulsion test. engine deviations tank The approximately

system total one

was cluster perwas ometer noted cross

outputs mounted ignition. measurement flight. from the

range platform

accelerwere the signals were

satisfactory predicted. with noted.

system before range

ST-124P

within

No correctionwas contained These telemetered extraneous

madeand extraneous signals

Individual no major The

performance from

satisfactory values being

predicted

throughout eliminated

propellant

pressurization

accelerometeroutput

(.)

_J 0

_q

o o _q

bQ

\
I _J

and the

valid

cross

range

information

was

deducted

from

Third

Objective

Vehicle

in FliFTht

measurement. (a) The flight two data indicated similar flights. that to those the SA-3 recorded vibration during istics, with The 10 bending at vehicle both pitch at liftoff for accelerometers frequencies bending. and on yaw the These in the flown range frequencies with of on of SA-3 first were a maxi0. 016 g's viding through Determine the and controlling other (c) The base region to Radiation with and I, Block are that environment encountered heating values considered I vehicle. of 607 flight measurements were flown on these measurements, fourteen were comsix were partially usable and one was rates on during on on the the the two SA-3 are for SA-3 flight Verify airframe, specification 3uring stress, tent A total Of ture, bending bration overall occurrences. strain, which bending body maybe curve flight. vibration atvarious so that the by the structural integrity theoretical with to and throughout increments and be the effects, to determine flight. and Control the capability and of the G & C to peroperational to spacevehicle velocity determined. to define presence and Achieved. conditions determine the to of the Block and I correlating requirements Specifically, levels, locations dynamic may may response Evaluate bending used during calculations encountered the frequency vehicle the shear inflight construcand vithe desired Structural balledengines, the Prove proper that the thrust booster to stage propel the is capable the Block requiredvelocity. of all the data. four propellant Achieved. eight outboard engines, gimof proI vehicle that (b) Confirm correlating encountered Propulsion values predicted in flight. of aerodynamic stability and characterperformance Aeroballistics

levelswere the previous

generally Saturn

Achieved.

showed and present mum

response

second in amplitude

direction nose cone

the desired the inflight

trajectoryat performance of cutoff,

single amplitude a forced response curred sponse at is

first mode of 2.0 of 0. 095 g's single frequency on SA-2 of before 2.7

cps. At amplitude cps.

OECO ocre-

movements engines' propulsion and

a coupled lower than

The

utilization,

OECO.

Mechanical

was flights.

similar

previous in good Saturn the Sat-

agreement flights urn

obtained

previous

representative

associated

SA-3. pletely

moments environment structural

be calculated

component Measure dynamic excessive

unusable,

questionable. except C-Band values.

The signal strength radar, was very

of all RF systems, close to the expected

critical of any accumulate shape

data of the

the mode

1.2

TEST

OBJECTIVES

(d) the Saturn SA-3 flight testwere system form the sequence prove fixed attitude signal.

Guidance To

as

The objectives follows:

of

demonstrate ST-90 control, Block

(a modified required for that the coordinate and the

stabilized guidance, tests. I flight establish for accurate

platform) Specifically,

First

Objective Prove the

- Booster propulsion thehigh system, thrust structural booster. design, Achiev-

system will reference an

an accurate determining coordinate

andcontrol ed.

systemof

providing

Achieved.

Second

Obiective Prove the launch special

- Ground operational facilities propellant arms, and

Support concept for systems,

Equipment of the class launch associated vehicles; checkout pedestal and handling

Fourth

Objective A water cloud upper into

Project experiment

"Highwater" (similar will be 87,329 by rupturing kg to the experiby lb) altitude stage._ an inof

supporting which with include holddown equipment,

Saturn

ment jecting water

conducted the ballast

on SA-2) stages' the 167 upper km,

accomplished (192,528 at the upper

automatic necessary

instrumentation, other

atmosphere,

of approximately with primacord.

launching

equipment.

Achieved.

Achieved.

TABLE TIMES 1-I. OFFLIGHTVENTS E Event

Ignition Command Thrust Launch First Commit Commit Motio_

Actual Range Predicted Act- Pred Time (sec) (sec)

-3. -0. -0. 79 49 08 0. i0 0 -3.57
\

-0.22

0o 10 0.33 Device) 10. 33 68. Pressure 10

Liftof[ Signal (Start Program Begin Mach Tilt I Reached Dynamic Engine

68.03 78.28 140.34

0.07 0.32 1.32

Maximum Inboard End

78. 60 141.66 144. 149.09 152.78 153. 292.00 66 25

Cutoff Decay

of First Thrust Engine

Outboard End Retro

Cutoff Decay

147.95 150.48 152.34 292.00 292.00

1.14 2.30 1.32 0 0

of Second Rockets

Thrust Ignite

Project Loss

"Highwater" Signal

of Telemetry

292.00

* Reference

point

for

compa_'ison

SECTION

II.

INTRODUCTION

Saturn ESTon plex Florida. in of sion 590,000 the this 34,

space Atlantic SA-3

vehicle 16, was the Missile

SA- 3 was 1962, third program. the lb) system, thrust Range, vehicle

launched Cape to The

at Launch

t 24 5:02 Com-

with

special

emphasis

on

malfunctions

and

deviations.

November

fromSaturn

Canaveral, tested uation atives the

This from

report all

is publishedby Group, Marshall report whose Space represents This report should or wholly of the report

the Flight

Saturn are Center the will

Flight

Eval-

be flight major of the

Working

members

representDivisions. MSFC followed analq

Saturn test system, kg was

I R&D control ( 1.3 million

objective propulof

to evaluate

designs and

Therefore,the position ysis at this new here reports by a similarly and/or

official not the be continued

structure booster.

time. integrated evidence partly will,

unless prove wrong. major

conclusions Final by the evalMSFC and/or

presented This report presents of each major the the SA-3 vehicle results test of flight. the early The en peruation gineeringevaluation formance of

however, somo

be published

Divisionscovering special subjects as

systems

system

is discussed

required.

SECTION

III.

LAUNCH

OPERATIONS

3.1

SUMMARY

November SA-3, November on of that 100 scheduled 16, date. degrees 28. 1962, The for launching was launched was 3.3 at November

14, 1962 16, 1962

RP-I Launch ATMOSPHERIC

fuel loaded

Saturn 1200 at hours i245:02 on

Vehicle EST hours an 34, Longitude scheduled 16, hold on

EST, azimuth Geodetic 80.

vehicle East

PRELAUNCH CONDITIONS

SURFACE

launched from North

of North degrees

complex and The

Latitude 56136 degrees countdown The hours

52153 West.

Genera[ eral at the were was at 0200 was The hold resumed loading tolerances. and 3. 4 a

weather time

conditions were

around

Cape

Canavgood. visi, reladegrees degrees

of launch

exceptionally The

t0-hour 1962. at 1045

hegan was There

There pressure tive

no clouds 16 km 764mm 36 percent, Surface (10

along the flight path. miles) of mercury and winds or better. ( 1018.5 temperature were from

EST, except

November for one

count EST.

continuous

bility was humidity

Barometric mbs) 24.7 215

groundgenerator continued for at li30 hours

power failure 45 minutes and EST. All

at this time. the count was propellant

centigrade. (SW) at 3 m/s.

automatic

sequencing Launch

processes

were withinexpected execution

preparations, as expected

of the countdown,

COUNTDOWN

launch were

and successfully the ground

demonstrated equipment Launch at 0200 EST except erator 3-i). countdown on November began at T minus 600 minutes

the compatibility

between

support

and the flight configuration. The equipment suffered less damage from the low liftoffacceleration

complex and support than was expected of SA-3.

16, 1962 and was

continuous

for one 45-minute hold caused by a ground genpower failure at T minus 75 minutes (Figure The events of the hold were as follows:

3.2

PRELAUNCH Date

MILESTONES

September

19,

1962

S-I

stage

arrived on

at Cape Saturn

Cabarge

naveral "Promise" S-Ibooster pedestal

September

21,

1962

erected at pad 34.

on launch

September

24,

1962

Dummy

stages

S-IV,

S-V, to the
70

and payload assembled S-I booster.

October

19,

1962

Service for RF

Structure check.

removed
SO

October

31,

t962

Fuel S-VD ted.

test water

completed; loading

S-IVD comple-

40

_0

November

2,

1962

LOX

loading

test

completed

20

I I

lO

November

6,

1962

Overall

test

4 completed
, q

November

9,

1962

Retro completed

Rocket

installation

November 6

13,

1962

Simulated formed

Hight

test

per_IGURE 3-1. COUNTDOWN TIME IN MINUTES

Holds Network generator number 2dropped out,apparentlydue totheover-voltage sensing circuit,causing the hold.The nominalvalue foractivation oftheovervoltageevice a7volts;however,was d is it found that the over-voltage sensing deviceorthis.generat0r f had shifted 35 volts (approximately to the terminal voltage
of the generator device for bubbling of the was all at the replaced. generators complete") countdown moment The were of dropout). over-voltage energized juml)ered further at 1130 for difficulties hours then resumed _normally to avoid The senat the sing eircuit "LOX remainder bypass

3.6

LAUNCH EQUIPMENT

COMPLEX

AND

GROUND

SUPPORT

All normally failed to did not

items

of ground

support

equipment

functioned which retract space

with the exception of the LOX fill mast, retract on command. This failure to with the subsequent failure to failure })last breaking forward liftoff retraet of the the motion of the

interfere

vehicle. resulted because mount,

However, the in the ultimate of the with the vehiele

on command LOX fill mast mast cylinder upper

subsequent

of the

mast assembly. Post launch of the mast failure to retract Sequence the mast and to event retract records was

investigations have been show that and the

of the cause inconclusive. command to for by

in this area. The EST and continued

count was until launch.

received

responded

the solenoid box. The Automatic Countdown resulted the The by the command thanthe time tank the lant from was automatic command (Tminus firing difference pressurization smaller loading onSA-I sequence available gas for ullage this andSA-2. records. due eommand in LOX time 0). countdown a6a. on tank This sequence 45 seconds is 10.55 due shorter SA-2, was prior primarily The on the shown output SA-3 full to the were for was seconds initiated to ignition later to due propelpartial read events the LOX to firing valve test launch tion. strongly cylinder of pressure. bilities. of the nections retraet

valve actuation in the

in the LOXfill mast assembly of this solenoid valve should application which mast. was 1 day. of lmeumatic would The The cylinder during result during were thepost so pressures in the of the mechanical verified launch far, that to the be due to

valve have to

cylinder, of the T minus to the

ultimate solenoid conprior investigato

retraction on

response correct

to command

demonstrated

components

retraet

pressurization.

and The to

reverified post a to This The first cylinder regulato launch theory

analysis, which subsequent could be

points the two

most retract possi-

assoeiatedwith as The compared times

indicates

vehiele

failed

stroke, failure would

application

loading

No digital

ameehanieal"freezing" within that of its a eylinder. failure have in a net the fill of "button" leaked. force retract mast can be The the

to a computer

malfunction.

retract

piston would be that one

second 3.5 ttOLDDOWN "cushion" valves, Either Engine engines in the gas blockhouse redline start and transition ignition were were ignition system. within smooth from a with LOX all lead toward position. failure the taken from The several the times This four (one source) move wired cause noted were the the sequence Retract about 500 ms records Pressure after all show irOK" enon of ation tude The damage of than most to receiving a positive

possibility used of these the for forward The to retract likely, prevent its

r, or remote

of the two-way could result rather of and the what than LOX to steps

coupling,

possibilitieswould position

circumstances are cause being of failure recurrence.

generator measurements

All critical the established

investigated

determine

values.

Two regular switch

events signals.

"Support

cycled

complex than was SA-3. either

and Film 3.2 of

supl)ort from coverage

e(luipn)ent the low to shows longer l)revious flame SA-3

suffered liftoff that reach Saturn accelerSA-3 93

less took

gines were running. one or more of the these at the four switches

could be due to vibration switches. The function on each is to support show arm that assembly pressure arm. on This any

expected seconds the

approximately is

m alti-

pressure to were would

two

vehicles. cease to in close longer would be

available switches switch

support cycling in

retract andvibration noted.

The one possible

in series early taken signal

At this altitude, the "flare out." Fherefore, eontact than expected with either from the SA-I pad, or SA-3.

exhaust since

and jets remained 30 percent

approximately SA-2, more pad

problem was these switches The other

the Saturn out of the that

program and cutoff circuit. the LOX bub-

damage

irregular

showed

bling valve staye d open for expected 60 seconds. This error ture this since in the long other tanks bubbling parameters and time. at the

t37 seconds is considered (such pump as inlet)

instead of the a measuring LOX temerpareflect {lid not

Examination equipment, revealed the damage that after the

of the

the

launcher of of

and Saturn a level

ground vehicle

support

launch

sA-a,
tc SA-2 7

damagewas

comparable and

observedaftcr

the launch

of SA-1

Theonlyohserved damage readily ttribu tothe input but possibly will be reused, subject to qualificaa 'table lowliftoff acceleration wasincreased damage tothe tion testing. torusringretaining and bands anoticeable inlarger crement offlame deflector warping. damaged A area Fuel Loading Mast. This mast should be subject of interest asthetubing w ontheexposed ofthe to refurbishment wall with a majority of the mechanical umbilical towerbase room.Thistubing asripped components w being reusable. Flexible hose assemblies. loosefrom thewalland severely distorted. Although electrical harnesses, and the retractable coupling are this tubing damage didnotoccuronthelaunches subject to replacement. of SA-Ior SA-2,it would bedifficulttoassoeiate the. damage withany launchharacteristic c peculiar toSALOX Fill Mast. This sustained major damage, 3. It is believed thatthisdamage resulted fromthe with very few components, other than the steel base mountingystembeingweakened s duringprevious and the valve box assembly, subject to salvage. launches. Saturnehicle A-3 thefirst touse v S was an umbilical swing arminsteadf thelong o cable mast Retractable Support Arms. These support arms assembly. long The cable assembly essen- sustained mast was minor damage consisting of random IMlure tially destroyed during theSA-Iand SA-2 launches. of tubing which is exposed nearly directly to the blast. Theumbilical swing rminstallation toservice a used SA-3 sustained veryminor amage thelaunch d during tlolddownArms and Associate Valve Panel. This and be reused with minor refurbishment. can equipment sustained minor damage consisting primarily to The following individual GSE Short Cable is a detailed items. Mast should and Tail assessment of damage away. /Vlame Cable Mast Assemblies. with a pronounced warpage is not its usefulness. Deflector. increment considered This of so can be reused. It suffered however, as to compromise this of tubing and flex hose assemblies being burned

warpage; severe

This equipment a majority

be subject to refurbishment components

of the mechanical

being sal-

vageable. The umbilical swing to refurbishment with minimum disconnect The bungee plate sustained cord redundant

arm should be subject effort. The umbilical to one ejection pin. used on The damheat vehicle

The

launch and the

again ground

proved support

the

compatability In

of addition,

the

darnage

equipment.

retract

system, burned

the umbilical umbilicalarm age.

discmmect service

plate, was platform

away.

it also proved that a vehicle tion {11.4 m/s 2 compared flights) cessive would amount. not damage

with low liftoff accelerato 13.6 m/s 2 for normal the launch complex an ex-

sustained minor evidenced

Electrical

cabling,

in general,

SECTION

IV.

TRAJECTORY

4. I SUMMARY

at IECO. the difference

About

0. 255

km

of this of The small

deviation

was

due

to

in alignment VIII), and lateral is due is winds. to other presented

the platform 0. 110 remaining effects. J.

and vehicle km difference The nomwas

The inal and both out. 292 powered to be Water seconds

actual

flight lower be less but a than

path

of

SA-3

was caused

close the time flight after

to nomaltitude during caused burnat

(Section caused (0.045 inal by kin) trajectory

approximately

Slightly range to flight, greater

acceleration than nominal at 167.2 longer expected of

at any times km.

powered Highwater)

in Reference

release at an

(Project altitude

occurred

_t.r

L.L..., /

At the 18.4 4.2 range m/s

IECO, was greater

the 1.8

actual km than

altitude longer, nominal.

was and

1.4 the

km velocity

higher, was

Cr*., a,_, _, (_)

TRAJECTORY

ANALYSIS

The

electronic

tracking

data obtained were somewhat two vehicles. UDOP about Azusa and the were flight. entire to were /20

for estabpoorer The acnot usable Acusable FIGURE 4-1. TRAJECTORY

o 40 60 l=0 t60 (zoo) z_o =BO 320

S,O z.O LO 0

lishing a post flight trajectory than that obtained on the first celeration prior celeration prior to available data stations. from any The "Close-in" and Mark of was to 35 components seconds components 75 or during or from after from

seconds. not

were

80 seconds, the remaining during sitesprior

intermittently FPS-16 Radar flight were not 50 from seconds. of all less the m/s was is The than maximum 2 lower 18.4 shown

intermittent Acceleration the radar

longitudinal expected than m/s 1.3

acceleration during nominal. the The expected, The later. 4-2.

was power velocity since

about flight; was

1.2

m/s

components

usable

40 or

however, only 0.5 cutoff cutoff velocity

longitudinal more seconds than

acceleration

postflight

trajectory Fixed

is a

combination

at first actual

and "regular" II Azusa transients, t60 The seconds maximum from

Camera, with

Theodolite, telemetered comat 292

occurred

earth-fixed

tracking

data;

in Figure

data using puted from

and a ballistic trajectory through water release

seconds.

difference

between

the posiand

tion components

this synthesized

trajectory

the tracking data during powered 4. 3 ACTUAL 4.3. 1 PREDICTED FLIGHT

flightwas

about 20 m.

AND

TRAJECTORY

POWERED

The was (ll. was mum t. 38 11.36 27 m/s2).

initial m/s 2 The than to that

longitudinal which initial on g's as was

acceleration very acceleration close on due to

on this

SA-3 flight

nominal

lower propellant g's on

previous This compared

flights initial

to maxiis

loading. i. 16 previous flights.

acceleration to approximately

equivalent

Actual range tude the range (Ze) and second

and are range cutoff

nominal shown were

altitude, in Figure essentially 4-1. the 4-1). was 0.41

range, The same left The km

and actual until actual

cross altiafter cross FIGURE 4-2. EARTH-FIXED VE LOCITY

(Figure (Ze)

displacement

of nominal

Actualandnominal Mach number dynamic and pressures arcshown inFigure 4-3.These twoparameters were calculated using measured meteorological
data 33.4 to an altitude 47.0 km of approximately altitude, to 1959 the 33.4 measured km. Between data were and gradually adjusted above which the peak kg/cm dynamic 2) than the 1959 ARDC ARDC was used. atmosphere, The actual (0.006

TABLE

4-1.

CUTOFF

CONDITIONS

_lt

ttude

(_n)

,M. _*_.

,big, )0

1,34,

7_

'gL t_)

IN

pressure nominal due

was slightly less to a lower velocity.

_ioftr _taeh _. Vyaal_c _re,sure

! Ve, l(_r

EIl_ti<la

(leg)

_,B.]?

I'_

_fi

'I

e,l,ll

8 .3_------F

--

F_

.... I r

Kach

(N_._I)

.Z2

--

....

"_Tb::.;;....

1;/ ...... .......

0 40 80 120 Itange t6o Time (lee) 200 540 l_ 320

FIGURE

4-3.

DYNAMIC NUMBER

PRESSURE

AND

MACIt
_,,l_z I _11

to 4. 3.2 CUTOFF

A comparison ters shown at in both Table inboard 4-I. range gxeater two and level _, Since was 7.61 of the 0.2 At

of and

actual OECO, 1.8 times for burning less actual

and the km

nominal engine actual

paramecutoff altitude and time seconds The was is was FIGURE for acabout IECO the vevt,,t _tt., i_,. r_ c,.,) Range Time {_e(.]

outboard

i. I km higher, was val the 21 and locity about mean nominal of the the il. 11.9 actual, m/s m/s betweenthe

was than cutoff seconds both actual second

longer, The 7.43 nominal. nominal time was the

velocity inter-

4-4.

LONGITUDINALACCELEIIATION

predicted.

TABLE

4-II.

SIGNIFICANT

EVENTS

celeration

and

between

OECO

than

nominal, to

comparison would be 4 m/s between IECO that the velocity 9 m/s expected difference

expected and OECO. between be 14.4 4-4

change by This would actual and

kit tt,ae C_)

at OECO observed. level during resulting

would Figure

m/s, indicates

instead that operation veloc-_ -_._ -o6

acceleration than

outboard in an

engine increasing

is less ity

nominal, from

deficit

predieited. of event actual times are and nominal in parameters Table 4-II.

Comparisons at significant 10

given

4.3.3

THRUST

DECAY

rockets. 13) during

The

measured retro of rocket

longitudinal operation

acceleration is shown in

(F7the to the ap-

The thrust gain tion, decay was the

actual was m/s. since of

velocity 7.9 LOX actual m/s

gain and

during the

outboard nominal of the two In be in

engine velocity has from error no a addi-

lower retro mately Block plies

part rocket the to the

Figure operation loss

4-4. was

The velocity about 9 m/s Deviating this velocity SA-3

loss due or approxifrom loss

7.6 time

A comparison depletion OECO trace, was which

velocity entire

predicted.

significance, commutated

occurred. obtained may

1I separation

sequence, unseparated)

vehicle.

telemetry

by as much as + 83 ms. This lent to a 1.7 m/s Lmcertainity 4.4 RETRO SA-3 ROCKETS

time error is equivain the velocity gain.

4.5

WATER Water

RELEASE release vehicle than

(DESTRUCT) at 0.45 km 292.0 higher seconds and range 3.76 km

occurred was was

time. _vas the first Saturn vehicle to use retro further

The

in range

expected.

it

SECTION PROPULSION V. 5.1 SUMMARY 3. The retrorockets ignited operated and satisfactorily attheend ofS-Istageowered p flight.

Vehicleropulsion p system performance throughouttheflighttestofSaturn A-3 wellwithin S was sat- 5.2INDIVIDUAL ENGINE PERFORMANCE isfactory limits. Performanceindividual of engines, hydraulicystems, propellant pressurization s and tank The performance oftheindividual engines onthe systemsidnotdeviateignificantly d s fromthepre- SA-3 flightwas satisfactory. maximum The deviation dicted values.Thevehiclelongitudinal thrustwas in engine thrust,between calculated that fromflight 0.15percent and lower specificmpulse.10 i 1 percent dataandpredictedalues, v wasapproximately 1.8 higher corresponding than predicted values. percent, occurring onengine positions 8. The 6and deviations theotherengines for varied fromminus All missions, including primary, econdary, s and 1.6to plus1.2percent ascompared tothepredicted special missions, accomplished. were Resultsfthe thrust(Fig_are The o 5-1). engine-to-engine deviation special missions ofparticular significance totheve- fromthe actual mean thrustwasfromplus1.5to hiclepropulsion system aredescribed below: minus 0.8percent 1. The propellant simulating full load BlockII Themaximum deviation enginepecific in s imullage volumes presented noproblem tothepropellant pulse, between thatreconstructed fromflightdata and loadingystem, s thepressurization system, en- thepredictedvalues, orthe wasapproximate|y plus2.6per = gine operation. cent,occurringnengineosition. The o p 2 deviations for theotherengines varied fromplus0.35toplus 2. The thrustOK cutoff foutboard o engines due 2.26percent ascompared thepredicted to impulse to LOX depletion, achievedsignificant a increase (Figure in 5-2). Theengine-to-engine deviation from propellant utilization ith w noproblems inenginehut- theactual ean s m specificmpulse fromplus1.8 i was downnd a vehicleontrol. c tominus .0percent. 1

FIGURE INDIVIDUAL 5-1. ENGINE DEVLA.TION FROM PREDICTED TtfRUST

7. 3 IIeviatRm from Predicted Specific lrnpu[se

:
FIGURE 12 5-2.

N
PREDICTED

Eng

Eng 7

Eng Predicted Specific Impulse

'
ENGINE SPECIFIC DEVIATION IMPULSE

V--'l
FROM

INDIVIDUAL

Engine ain m propellant opening valve

times are shown is shown in Table are signals eommutated by error When into chamber the impulse as much in the based for on the as impulse possible in Table 5-I, 5-II. Allvalues pressure engines could, which 6760 ms the decay trajectory error cutoff are and ms, of 83 and chamber outboard 83 decay. were therefore, represents kg-sec (14,900 in cutoff impulse in good information

and

closing

Paragraph All evaluated, operation position psi sensing subsystems measuring

4.3) engine and except 2, which The appears line (Section Detailed could power not supply subsystems and the data indicated for the gear the plausible to XIII be be analysis made feeding an Paragraph of due this case limit components acceptable pressure of 0.7 were levels on kgv/cm of pressure for adetailed position in the 5 engine 2 (10 this of

the cutoff impulse shown in Table 5-II The measured be in error a time values agreement (Section possible lb-sec). is taken from with IV cutoff on

channels

exceeded most

gauge).

explanation obstructed 13.2 engine

occurrence explanation).

consideration, pressure from

to a failure area.

TABLE

5-I.

ENGINE

IGNITION

AND

CUTOFF

INFORMATION

Ign. Engine After

Signal Ign.

ime mand i

GG

LOX Opening

MLV Time (ms) Opening

MFV Time (ms) Closing

MLV Time (ms) Closing (ms) Time

Lead

No.
1

(ms)
320

(ms)
10

260

750

250

1300

220

[0

200

670

300

1370

320

20

220

630

330

1250

220 I

20

280

600

300

1300

5 6

I0 120

I
i

10 I0

620

250 20O
200

600

290

1250

680

220

130D

i0

20

120

i0

700

300

1350

NOTE

Engines I00 ms

started difference

in

pairs in

with

predicted as GG biLY

LEGEND

starting

time

follows:

Gas Main Main

Generator LOX Fuel Valve Valve

No. No. No. No.

5 6 2 1

and and and and

No. No. No. No.

7 8 4 3

MFV

TABLE

5-II.

ENGINE

CUTOFF

IMPUI,SE

Engine Position l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Engine C=to ff Impulse (kg-sec) (Ib-sec) 32,997 28,817 24,725 see Note see Note see Note 3 72,746 3 63,530 3 54,510

C_parl_on (kg-sec) See See See

with

Nominal ([b-gec) 5 5 5 NOTES: I. 2. 3. The nominal cutoff impulse 18 32,400 _ 2400 kg-sec (71,400 5200 Ib-sec) for a one sigma confidence level. All values are based on chamber pressure decay data. The cutoff signal for engines I, 2, and 3 was c_tated and could be in error by 83 mB, which represents an error in cutoff impulse of 6760 kg-see (14,900 Ib-sec) or 21 percent. The cutoff impulse for engine 4 could not be calculated due to measurement failure; however, tutor[ of engine 4 appears to hav_ been normal. The LOX depletion cutoff comparison with nominal, on the outboard engines prevents a

Not_ Note Note

25,348 25,437 24,281 24,547

55,883 56,079 53,530 54,118

-7038 -6949 -8106 -7839

-15,517 -15,32l

4.

5. -17,870 -17,282

i3

5.3VEHICLEROPULSION PERFORMP SYSTEM ANCE

Inboard engines. was The modified 5-4).

iS) T O_m

engine slightly

shutdown engine by the

was

normal

on

all

four cutoff

outboard

cutoff LOX

characteristic depletion

Overall propulsion system performance, asre- ( Figure flectedinehicleerformance, verysatisfactory. v p was IECO occurred 141.66 at seconds range timeand OECO occurred.43 7 seconds laterat149.09econds. s
rh_,t tO0

(1000

l".l'u,t

(1_

lb)

IECO level OK"

signal sensor.

was

initiated by the signal came

LOX from

tank 04 liquid the "thrust depletion. 04. the by Engine thrust engine
L2o 6o ,I [ tbo 8O

OECO

switch on engine position position 1, period 3. engine of starting 2, 3 feeds and the 3 had cutoff from

3, due to LOX LOX tank entered was given

Engine positions decay position The values pressure position programed mum This

already signal

when

sequence Figure 5-3

was

within the

expected chamber pairs 1, The 3 with maxiof i and ap3. FIGURE by a

20 ....

tl
l
I
o' 14a.5 , 14_.o 1_%5 tso.o t50.5 I}i,0 151.5 15_.0 o

predicted. buildup number t00 40 of were ms in ms is limits. Pressure 2) all

shows The starting 4; and pairs.

engines. 5, 7; 6, between

8; 2, pressure between

delay chamber occurred within

deviation deviation

buildup engines engine-te-engine

proximately

expected

repeatability Chamber

5-4.

OUTBOARD

ENGINE Chamber

TIIRUST Pressure (psi)

DECAY

(kg/cm 5O

700

" 4O

_':_'

_'_"

'_-

600

l/
3O

is.ls"

"

if
(

"- "_ :_"

""7

;_"ZT-_ ........ > l .....

"_, 500

, 5
2O

/}/I

I
II
[

4-400

300

2OO I0

;,
1 0 .8 ,9 1.0 Time FIGURE 14 I.i After/_gniZion CHAMBER

I00

o 1.2 Co'and PRESSURE (sac) BUILDUP 1.3 1.4 1,5

5-3.

Actualand predictedehicle v longitudinal thrust, totalflowrate,mixture ratio,andspecific impulse areshown Figures -5and in 5 5-6.
_*t (lOOO kS) l'h_ml (Ic_o lb)

There vehicle method ments vehicle combustion

weru propulsion

two

approaches system

used performance. systera

to evaluate The

the first

compared

propulsion

inflight

measure-

to corresponding thrust curve chamber flow vehicle

predicted was calculated pressures. as,totM engine engine more

information. The from measured The propellant vehicle total

propellant
--

is defined to include

exlyended fuel flows, data delatter the flow deterflow the proused inputs the actual to

Predtct_

by the and
-tlo_

flows, flows are

lube

vented

GOX,

The

reconstructed

from and

flight parameters arc considered from are important The from simulation with will vehicle above. The flow

and discrete accurate

liquid level than the flows the of was

400 500 ]

9_ 1_o,

termined flows transients.

meters, for the specific and which correction the propulsion

tlowever, recognition impulse total is

1
20 40 aa_. Tt_ (..) leo 1_ 140 lb_

vehicle thrust

7_

mined described flight

propellant is through a computer precedure parameter

second

approach

method,

S_cLftc

Iemp_tH

(._)

gram obtain

a differential to produce

adjustments

"1 l......... ,o .
I" 26O

I
--Pved IctN

I:
p

whieh

a trajectorythat

matches

trajectory. The the from percent deviation accuracy approaches is from limitations shown in predicted, of each Table along parameter 5-III. with

estimated both

20

t,o

60 ]bts_a

gO Time (.ec)

10_

120

l_0

1/_

TABI,E FIGURE 5-5. VEIIICI_E IM PU I,SE TttI/UST AND SI)ECIFIC

5-IIl.

I)ROPULSION DEVIATIONS

PERF()llMANCE

Fligh{
*hlla M[itu_l _[[o (_/_ml)

Prol)ulsion Pel-cent -0. 15 _ 1 : i

Flig_qt

Simulation I)ercent 15 _ 0 25

Thrust Total
2,3 --

-0. -1.24 1. 5-IlI between is well

Flow

Rate

-1.63

_ 0.25 I0 _ 0.25

Specific Impulse

+1.5(1 _ 1 shown predicted largest 0.4percent, in Table from deviation which two methods.

2.4 i 2.2

The by predicted. proaches pected

dcviations The is only results

are and

computed dividing the two within by apex-

subtracting

actual

from

the

1.0 0 10 4O 60 tt_aB= T_m (_c) tOO 120 t40 160

5.4
Vehtclm Total Flu|It (kS/I) (tbt.)

PRESSURIZATION FUEL 'rANK

SYSTEMS PRESSURIZATION

5. 4. I
dtCttd 3000

....
]-1,,ooo
120 ' 140 0 160

The satisfactorily plied of as 205

fuel

tank during pressure

pressurization flight. Gaseous spheres, psi gauge) twotime at 77.3

system operated nitrogen, supa pressure and the first At decayed ( 1100 psi sphere

by 48 high kg/cm at OECO. showed between pressure increases through in flight

showed liftoff kg/em"

2 {2920 to During

Re_ohetrurted 100@

expected

approximately

gauge)
0 0 20 _0 _O]tu_e T_ (oa_ 10

intervals

pressure occurred seconds, small ferred time

slight increases. The 60 and 80 seconds. again in pressure the sphere little or increased resulted walls no gas to

increase 106 to if5 These heat transat a from 15

slightly. from the is being nitrogen used

FIGURE

5-6.

VEHICLE TOTAL

MIXTURE FI,OW RATE

RATIO

AND

when

thespheres. he T spheres showedrestpressuref a o 70kg/cm f 1000 psi gauge) at 160 seconds. 2

5.4.2 LOX TANK PRESSUI_IZATION

pressure proximately and which 209 was

supplywas 210kg/cm kg/cm within

maintained 2 ( 2990psi psi

prior gauge) for gauge)

to

launch for the the

at apST-90 2 (3200

2 (2970 the

ST-124P,

redlinelimits kg/cm air t'rom time low to

of 220kg/cm

psi gauge) minimum. LOX tanks, which prior from by the at a the to inof the psi) psi) at at ST-90 32 150 sequence by helium begun 39 was stopped seconds

maximum and i83 The low pressure decayed seconds seeonds. slightly range The constant

2 (2600 psi gauge) to the air Ixmrings 2.41 2.37 kg/em kgfcm supply 2 ( 34.3 2

Initial was to the ignition T tank final

pressurization function start timer, 115 in the was seconds

of the automatic provided was and at T minus

(33.7
to the

pressure kg/cm

a ground imately LOX

source. minus pressure

Pressurization switeh

at approx-

ST-I24P

remained

at 2.24

2 (31.8psi).

Specifications perature tained ords specified in the air 8.9 at show stated 25 that limits. bearing cycles i that

for 1 degree this

the the

air

bearing

inlet must Blockhouse maintained show

air be

temmainrecwithin

pressure time of pressurizing smaller creased

of 4.25kg/cm 76 seconds time initial propellant

2(60.4psi). was it seconds for Saturn on SA-2, SA-3

The pressurizing shorter than due eausecl primarily by the

temperature centigrade, was records temperature which inlet

temperature Blockhouse inlet per air minute, controlled

volumes loading.

a cycling of approxi-

mately LOX tank expected. this ling curves. Block flight the The caused The II vehicles, The tain a _mtboard essary depletion usable tial pressure pressurization differential LOX tanks. to LOX cause of the in the pressurization small some prediction based ullage problem of the technique on results throughout volumes LOX will in accurately tank flight associated pressure for was predieas with 5.5 the

was air

the heater.

effect

of

thermostatically

characteristics

VEHICLE

PROPELLANT

UTILIZATION

bc refined llight. to

of this is designed

C_,erali the flight of sults of the various of types

vehicle SA-3 test. was An

propellant one of the evaluation data, usable indicates

utilization

(PU)

for

system

main-

most significant reof the PU, utilizing that 99.4percent consumed of propellant engines being cutoff LOX should by tank have the deoc-

pressure between The differential depletion of tanks tank. the The

the center and pressure is nectank prior differenin the drop kg/cm 2 to of

of flight total flight. resulted deplete pressure

predicted

propellant

was

center required

outboard center

to prevent

trapping located pressure 0.09

during the utilization allowed "thrust pletion to OK" (gas

The high percentage from the outl.)ard the LOX switch. tanks Ix.fore Center which

is maintained interc'onneet orifices was than

by orifices lines. The approximately at IECO.

pressurizing across these (l. 5.4.3 3 psi) lower

break-through),

predicted

curred near IECO, occurred approximately ends after IECO, due to a 0.09kg/cm2 (1.3 than-predicted and outboard differential LOX tanks. pressure

0.7 seepsi) lowercenter

between

CONTIIOL

PlIESSURE

SYSTEM

The pected

control

pressure the SA-a

system flight.

operated

as

exdicates (8,581 end

An evaluation that lb) of outboard the 2145 of fuel

of kg engine predicted lb) lb)

vehicle (4,728 thrust

propellant lb) onboard decay. which lb) onboard, as is the extra the of the

utilization LOX This were of fuel. fuel, burning and cutoff on SA-1 after been thereby timer and IECO 4,765 and 3892kg vehicle

inat the

throughout

remained

compares 1454 kg

Blockhouse supply-sphere gauge) over onds. at psi) liftoff at 150 at flight liftoff. to and 144

records pressure This kg/cm pressure gradually This type

showed to be 195 psi 54.

the

high-pressurekg/cm 2 at kgJcm (2700 deeayed 150 secpsi) _ (7t;2 decay is 2 (775 psi

well (3197 3892 900 which extra suring been cutoff

with lb) kg

residuals 2248kg(4957 left

ofl.OXand

Of the part of of any ashad SA-2, and kg

pressure 2 (2050 was decayed absolute regulator.

gradually gauge) 5 kg/cm 53.6 pressure

kg (8,58t (2000 LOX LOX used would LOX and and cutoff. on in

of fuel was bias event as occurred residuals ff

approximately

loaded it was

Regulated

is considered the SA-3, have fuel 3443 depletion,

to ensure usable same used 6 seconds would lb)

to

seconds. a gauge

expected 5.4.4

with AIR

BEARING

SUPPLY

the

have

(10,504tb) The provide flow, of the purpose gaseous and ST-124P records and of the air bearing at a supply was to ing tion type

kg(7,591

respectively, for

showa deple-

a substantial

increase

in performance

clean temperature, ST-90 Blockhouse

nitrogen pressure stabilized show that

predetermined air bearings

to the

platforms. zation, the air bea ring high tank

In order twelve to indicate

to check liquid discrete

overall level probes

vehicle were prolxcllant

propellant located levels daring

utiliin each the

t6

flight.However, the
from the the flight end of flight. liquid level Various reliable level probe was Flow on the factory. obtain liquid

most

useful

information

obtained onboard flight, based satisto the at tank Fuel tem that results a

Data may level data. the

from be

the liquid used

level

probes PU system well level do This not probe

in the

propellant

the

weight information has

of propellant during not been

to compare data correlates LOX results seconds. since would where to diminish liquid eoiumn be the

performance. with data the PU sysindicated up to ap-

probe

probes, techniques continuous signals. utilization test,as of the

entirely

ttowever, PU might LOX of system 100

are flow

being investigated information from

correlate difference in dete error during column the end of density

proximately valid system would where

in system rm ining on the the first

be attributed density, results

to difficulty the liquid near greatest

A propellant on a the control th& SA-a system flight feature PU rate by the rar_ge The late mine

(PU) on SA-1 and Saturn that predicted.

system and first the

was 8A-2, and stage. propellant IECO 04at later to

carried deterwas Results conwas than ininot

PU and flight,

portion

flight, tend the

is highest, powered

performance

reliability,

is lowest.

from sumption tiated seconds dicted. sion engine loading

system was level time, cutoff cutoff

indicate close or to probe 1. a2 might parameters container

Overall was ment data. from to 5.6 considered was Some predicted

propellant

utilization

system although

performance some disagreelevel also be probe varies

in LOXtank seconds be attributed such pressures, as

141.66 pre-

satisfactory from system data; dispersion. SYSTEM the

prevalent PU

LOX discrete data may this

to dispervariables propellant in

performance however,

in performance calibration, and LOX densities.

attributed

performance tIYDRAULIC

container

AP

transducer differential during container

output pressure

indicated throughli0

a The that the telemetered operation W. All of remained data all from four within SA-3 hydraulic level, acceptable flight indicated was

higher-than-predicted out powered 135 seconds. put sure lated indicated flight except The fuel a highe

the time from AP transducer differential AP

to out-

systems and pressure

satisfaeto measurements limits. 5.7 RETRO

temperature,

r-than-predicted flight. The fuel container particularly ttowever, level to this and

pres-

operating

throughout from the below to 140 be

powered LOX and predicted, propellant attributed

ratio calcuAp data were in the period with and may,

generally of the 90 individual

ROCKET

PERFORMANCE

seconds,

correlates Ap data dispersion.

Four Saturn SA-3

solid

propellant ; these

retro retro

rockets rockets

were were

flown the

on only

therefore,

performance

vehicle

Thrust 20

(tO00

kg)

l'hrust

(i000

lb)

4O

Fin

III Retro Rocket-3O

16
Retro Rocket _--_._

Fin i0

IV-

-I

__?_

[-

Fin

II

2O Four _

10

0 153.0 153.5 15/*.0 154.5 155.0 Range Time 155.5 (sec) 156.0 156.5 157.0 157.5

FIGURE

5-7.

TYPICAL

RETRO

ROCKET

CHAMBER

THRUST 17

_A.

ii,

-"" 'T'__I_ --urements (Section and calculated retro are listed values. in "Fable IV Paragraph 4.4). rocket performance 5-IV, along with some Measured parameters predicted

active flight

part of testedon

the S-US-IV stage separation SA-3. The retro rockets were on the rocket stage spider thrust of beam vectors pressure. and Retro canted rocket rocket given at the were

system mounted top of the directed The rocket

90 degrees S-I stage. through motors from are mand uled, the

apart Retro S-I

center

were directed downward the vehicle centerline. shown in Figure 5-7.

12 degrees locations firhlg as comsched-

During (clockwise 4.3 deg/s retro gree beam rocket

retro viewed occurred,

rocket

operation, of

vehicle

roll

Retro

from the rear) and is attributed of

apl)roximately to an effective 0.3 de-

(153.66 seconds 12 seconds after

range time) was IECOon SA-3.

misalignment

approximately

for each rocket, caused by twisting and/or misalignment of the rockets The reached ST-90 platform roll range

of the spider to the vehicle limit time. of 15 deRetro to premis-

A typical Figure sure ance the 5-7. data and four

retro Telemetered

rocket

thrust retro rocket retro

curve

is shown presperformlevels of the

in

centerline. grees rocket vent was

chamber rocket

at 158.4seconds did not require on the SA-3. rockets S-I/S-IV of on SA-3 retro S-I/S-IV preventing separation.

indicated approximately retro

satisfactory equal The

performance performance limits from

for retro

speciIications roll moments of Proper vehicles be significant interaction retro

alignment The effective is not was rockets stage possible

rockets.

aliKmnent significant uled. Saturn will stage

considered not schedon future

rockets was within expected with total impulse as calculated ber pressures The is being performance, substantiated about

of the predicted, m easuredchamhigher from mechanical than pre-

because

separation

alignment scheduling in during

1.7 percent as calculated by flight

separation S-I/S-IV

dicted. pressures,

chamber meas-

TABLE

5-1V.

RETRO

ROCKET

PARAMETERS

Predicted* Retro Rocket I 2.15 (kg-sec) (ib-sec) (kg) (ib) 2.105 34,630 76,350 16,450 36,270 1.628 (m2_ 0.0103 15.904 (kg/cm 2) II0 1,560 18,300 40,400 98 1,400 153.66 2 2.065 34,100 75,200 16,520 36,420 1.628 0.0103 15.904 108 1,530 18,000 39,600 99 1,406 153.66

Actual 3 2.080 3&,300 75,700 16,510 36,390 1.628 0.0103 15.904 108 1,533 18,000 39,700 99 1,405 153.66

4 2.070 34,400 75,900 16,630 36,670 1.628 O. 0103 15.904 108 1,530 18,000 39,600 i00 1,416 153.66

Total

Duration Total

(sec)

Impulse

33,800 74,500 15,720 34,650

137,430 303,150 66,110 145,750

Average

Thrust

Nozzle Throat

OF Area

(inZ)
Maximum Pressure

(psi)**
MaxlmumThrust (kg) (ib) (kg/cm 2)

Average

Pressure

(psi)
Firing range Time (sec * ** 18
--_1_1 11ti.

Conmmnd time) of Pressure range time)

(sec

Build-Up

153.66

153.66

153.66

153.66

Propellant Excluding

Temperature Ignition Peak

15.5C

and

Altitude

of

76.2

km

li

l/"iL---

SECTION

VI.

MASS

CHARACTERISTICS

6.

VEHICLE

WEIGHTS

6.2

VEHICLE MOMENTS

CENTER OF

OF

GRAVITY

AND

INERTIA

The 500,137 proximately consumed ure6-1). events. kg

total

vehicle lb) kg the 6-I

weight at ignition

was

approximately command. of propellant of at flight Apwas (Figflight and These in Figure Longitudinal roll moments parameters 6-i. and of are radial inertia also center are plotted of given versus gravity in and Table range pitch 6-11. time

(1,102,614 348,219 during Table

( 767,692

lb) phase weights

S-Ipowered indicates

various

Vehicle 6 x 105

Weight

(kg)

Low_Itudlaal (callbers

from

Center St_bal

@_ Gravity station) 5.0

J1 o,_
4 4,0 f [

Jl
0 0 20 40 60 Range 80 Time (sec) I00

I!
3.0

l
120 140 (kg-m-sec 2) Roll

i II,
2.0 160

Pitch 6 x

Imertla 106

l_rtia

(Iq_-m-sec 24 x

2)
i

10 A i

End Pitch

of Decay

Thrult

l!
I 1

\1'
IP,

I
I I

16

,2
I | I

"4,
0 0 20 40 60 Range 80 Time (aec) 100 120 140 FIGURE 6-1 VEIIICLE MOMENTS WEIGItT, OF INERTIA LONGITUDINAL VERSUS CENTER RANGE TIME OF GRAVITY
_v|'q_lv |IIJlL-I_ | lJ"_ki,.,

I'
I
I

li
160 AND MASS

1.9

'FABLE

6-I.

SA-3

VEIIICLE

WEIGHTS

EVENT

IGq_ITION COMMAND

INBOARD FIRST MOTION ENGINE CUTOFF

OUTBOARD ENGINE CUTOFF

END THRUST

OF DECAY

Pred* RANGE TIME (sec) -3.57

Flight -3.79

Fred* C, IO

I /

Flisht 0.10

140.33

141.66

Pred* L47.90

Fllsht 149.09

Fred* 150.48

Flisht 152.78

w_i_rs
Dry LOX Fuel Gas Vehicle

(kg)
143,488 245,815 143,598 244,851 110,750 113 344 27 143,488 240,505 107,771 127 344 27 143,598 239,413 108,675 125 344 27 143,488 8,034 5,703 1,407 344 27 143,598 8,295** 7 26%** 1,403 344 27 1143,488 1,710 2,617 1,459 344 27 143,598 2,355 4,266 1,456 344 27 *_ *_ 143,688 1,450 2,248 1,46I 344 27 143,598 2,145"* 3,892** 1,458 344 27

in

LOX

Contalne:

109,788 116 344 27

GN 2 Kydraul TOTAL

Ie

Oil

499,578

499,683

492,262

492,182

159,003

160,931

149,645

152,0/_6

149,018

151,464

ws1_s
Dry Vehicle LOX Fue 1 Gas GN 2 ]{ydraul TOTAL" in

(lh)
316,338 541,930 242_042 Containel 255 758 60 316,580 539,804 244,162 250 758 60 316,338 530,224 237,594 281 758 60 I 316,580 527,815 239,587 276 758 60 316,338 17,713 12,572 3,102 758 60 316,580 18,287"* 16,015"* 3,094 758 60 1316,338 3,771 5_770 3,216 758 80 316,580 5,191 *_ 316,338 3,197 4,957 3,220 758 60 ! ,101,383 1,101,614 1,085,255 L,085,076 350,543 354,794 329,913 335,203 328,530 ] 333,922 i 316,580 4,728** 8,581"* 3,215 758 60

9,404"_ 3,210 758 60

LOX

ic

OiL

NOTES: I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6, 7. Flight dry weight includes includes for. 87,329 hg (192,528 kg (192,716 Ib) water Ib) ballast. ballast.

*Predicted

Mass

Characteristics and

are

those

Predicted GOX vented

dry weight accounted from

87,414

water

Reported in M-P&VE-ES-91-62 M-F&VE-ES-III-62. **Determined from Discrete

No GN 2 vented Ice acc_nulatlon Ignition Predicted Flight Fuel weight

fuel containers. (Approx. 453.6 kg not include based based on

Level

Probe

Data

(I,000

ib) prefill.

at

Liftoff)

not

included.

does

Jacket on fuel (0.50

propella_t propellant

w_ights weights 0.23

fuel

density of

of

808.1

kg/m 3

(50.45

Ib/ft Ib/ft 3)

3)

density Ib/sec)

806.6 fuel

kg/m 3 flow

(50.356 per

consumed

includes

kg/sec

lube

engine.

TABLE

6-II.

MASS

CtIAI{ACTERISTICS

COMPARISON

RANGE EVEI_f TIME Seconds WEIGHT Kg Lb 143,488 316_338 143,598 Flight Fred* Ignition Command Flight -3.79 _ i, i02,614 Fred* First Motion Flight Fred* Inboard Engine Cutoff Outboard Engine Cutoff Flight 149.09 0.i0 140.33 0.10 492,717 1,086,255 492,635 1,086,076 159,004 350,543 160, 932 354,794 149,646 329,913 152,045 335,203 149_019 328,530 Flight 152.78 151,464 333,922 are those reproted 1.6 1.6 1.2 _0 N/A I -3.57 316,580[ 500,032 1,102,383 I I 0.0 Dev

LONGITUDINAL C.G. (X-Sta) Dev

RADIAL C.G. Dev 0 0

PITCH OF Kg.M-S

MOMENT INERTIA 2 % Dev 0.4

ROLL OF Kg'M-S2 29,814

MOME3_T INERTIA I % Dev 0.3

Inches

Pred* Dry Vehicle j

N/A

0. I

27.96 ii00.6 27.92 1099.1 17.39 684.6

..... r I M .....
! 0.04 i.5 0.005 0.2 0.005 0.2 0.01 0.3 0.003 0.1 0.003 0.1 0.01 0.4 0.003 0. I 0.003 0. I 0.23 9.3 0.010 0.4 0. 005 0.2 0.33 13.0 0.010 0.4 0.005 0.2 0.34 13,4 0.008 0.3 0.005 0.2 and In 0.003 0.I 0.005 0.2 0.005 0.2 0 0 0 0 17.38 684.3 17.35 682.9 17.34 682.5

Inches

2,583,534

2,595,148

29,892

5,590,293

0.0

184,340

0. I

5,587,896

184,[93

5,583,505

0.0 181,130 1 " 0.3

5,581,354

181,696

25.86 1018.3 25.63 1009.0 27.08 1066.2 26.75 1053.2 27.17 1069.7 26.83 1056.3

3,262,713

2.0

38,175

2.3

3,329,594

39,052

Flight Fred*

141.66 147,90

2,875,358 [ 2,972,326

3.4

33,196

3.9

i
3.5

34,485

End

of

Fred*

150.48

2,846,605[

Thrust Decay

2, 947 ,-283[

l !

32,871 34,272

4.3

*Predicted NOTES:

Mass

Characteristics

in M-P&VE-ES-91-62 of water. water.

M-P&VE-KS-III-62.

Predicted dry weight include_ 87,414 Flight dry weight includes 87,329 kg

kg (192,716 Ib) (192,528 Ib) of

_vlll

Illl..ll

sill,.

SECTION

VII.

CONTROI.

7.1

SUMMARY

TABLE

7-I.

MAXIMUM PARA

PITCtt

PLANE

CONTROL

ME TE RS Magnitude Range (see) Time

The was

control

system the same as

for that

the used

Saturn on SA-

vehicle 1 and

SA-3 SA-2.

Parameter

essentially of SA-1

However, because maintain as on

the control the increased the and same SA-2.

gains (a o and bo) were changed propellant loading in order to with the vehicle mass

Attitude Angle-of-Attack (Free-stream) Angular Normal Actuator Velocity Acceleration Position

1.8(deg)

8s.5 115.0 101.4 2) 83.3 83.3

correlation

-6.8{deg) -l.0(deg/s) -1.1/m/s -2.8(deg)

The erated Trans tions by on

tilt bya

program synchronous which due

for

the motor

ST-90 driven

platform cam actuator as

was

gen-

onSA-2. deflecred occur

ients

appeared to a periodic the

in the pitch resistance tilt l)rogram

on SA-2, the cam SA-3.

cncounte did not

generating

Pitch prior 7-1). cam onds. eight engines order to 50

attitude seconds tilting to tilting the

deviations and was one after used prior

were 115 on to

essentially seconds by the at was 10. and

zero (Figure ST-90 based tilt on aa secseven

Vehicle (similar The engines to

initiated IFigure 20

Engine deflections, of-attack were less SA-2 The SA- 2. The flown "closed be rate tal used in for Statham operational indicated loop" "closed package effects proper loop" that operation. direction flights greatest and primarily, wind were

attitude than those due the to

angles, observed the

and angleson SA-1 and shape. pitch plane on

SA-2) 7-2) seconds of

program

trajectory in the as experienced

operating

speeds nearly

occurred same

operating minimize failure. cant cam

for the control Aecording by started

remainder requirements to the

the flight in in the event made program requested arrest tilted

of an engine of control study they operation aceelerometers, purposes should on be Statham for the which first were time for will control usual was cut the on ST-90 the

measurements actual from tilt the

LVOD, differing

on SA-3,

satisfactory The The not present package

tilt, beginning occurred at 44.28 degrees

around 90 seconds. 132.03 seconds, with from the launch

Final tilt the vehicle

accclerometers SA-4. properly. although rate in its gyro

vertical.

gTro with

alsopcrformed were filtering control present, if the sensor

vibration

detrimenlocation.

as an active

Angle-of-attack satisfactorily. sonic With have flight. The control The senger differences ST-124Pwas resolver SA-4. operations computer attitude platform which of were speeds this been used on the for

measuring An"upwash Q-ball into control effect"

systems was angle-of-attack account, up to the 100-110

performed noticed Q-ball seconds at subcould of sensor.

properlytaken

the

hydraulic

actuators

and

the

satisfactory. from the ST124P for fact that and done passome the the for FIGURE 7-1. PITCH ATTITUDE, ANGULAR VELOCITY AND AVEIL,_.GE ACTUATOR POSITION

measurements were are satisfactory explained accurately "trimmed"

except by the in azimuth as will be

notaligned chain was not

The cam device the time of initiation at zero 132.03 and of seconds, a maximum

provided at 10.33 with the occurred cam

continuous tilting front seconds, until tilt arrest tilt deg/s rate varying actuator did not between Periposioccur on

of 0.6 to the

at 85seconds. in the

7.2

S-I

CONTROL

ANALYSIS

odic tion SA- 3.

transients, SA-2 due

which

device,

7.2.1

PITCH

PLANE

21

Shown Figure in 7-3is acomparison ofthepitch component as a function ftime fromthree winds o sources:rawinsonde, rocketsonde, andangle-ofattack winds.The angle-of-attack winds _ solid line)
were determined measurements combined nents Science applying with from made trajectory attitude and angle-of-attack onboard the vehicle which were angles Local used and velocity compo(U. S. after upwash to an altime). in Fig-

from tracking. meters) were the of 33.3 appropriate

angles-of-attack for this calculation for obtained vehicle as solid winds are the up range points

correction winds were 3 seconds shown

FIGURE TILTPROGRAM PITCH 7-2. AND VELOCITYECTOR V ANGLE

factor. titude Rocketsonde ure 7-3. questionable

Rawinsonde km winds (114.

are

Themaximumctuator a deflectionf minus o 2.8 degrees occurred t 83.3seconds a (Figure 7-1)asa resultof a wind gradient 0.023/s of acting overan altitude increment m. Thisgust ad of390 h avelocity The maximum pitch plane wind component as increment 9.0m/sasdetermined of fromtheangle- measured by rawinsonde during the maximum dynamic of-attack compared m/sfromrawinsonde pressure winds to8.7 regionwas 30.9 m/sat 83.1 seconds (13.9 measurements. Thewind component variation with km). The free-stream angle-of-attack at this time altitudeorthepitch f plane vet5, was similartoprevi- was minus 4. i degrees. Approximately 51 percent of ous aturn S flightsinboth magnitude direction and (tail this angle-of-attack can be attributed to the winds. wind).Angles-of-attack engine and deflections were The remaining portion is attributed to the fact that the lower, owever, h duetothedifferent trajectory flown tilt program is based on seven engines operating during bySA-3 changed and control gains. this flight period.
Wind Velocity, Wx, (Positive from the Rear) (m/m)

The angle-of-attack after 117 seconds.

considered

lm
4o

ii..... nd-Rock deW

Angle-of-Attack Wind I -----_ _ _ _

30

20

10

a*. ....

"

-i0

50 Range

60 Time (see}

70

89

__

_0

l l]_k:t

4_r

ll0

120
J

Free-Stream

Angle

of

Attack,

Pitch

(deg)

l
r_From _cals J10 " 20 /, (F17-30, I I F19-30) I

Y-_0
;

60

7o
Calculated

_
osin

90
B Rawins nde

loo
Winds

no

_20

--

-2

-4

-6 Q -8 Ball (F23-30) ,.._'_%_

I
Calculated

Using

l
Roeketsonde

I
Winds

_r_
--_;.

-lOi * Teiemetery Calibrations _nge_me (see)

FIGURE 22

7-3.

PITCH

PLANE

WIND

COMPONENTs

AND

FREE-STREAM

ANGLE-OF-

ATTACK

Figure 7-4shows nestimate a ofthepitchangle designriteria eight c with engines operating on a seven
engine The were propellant steady-state to 'account rameters nominal tilt gains from program used the loading. winds, for have response gusts. been 11 for Drift for a flight time the Principle due by by of 70 design for to seconds. criteria the the full 2a establishing Minimum The has response, been Variations accounted percent, for increased

11

l:

25 percent pathe
o

in aerodynamic increasing

The criteria observed right are The of

solid as a values the

lines function

in Figure of the time, from

7-4 SA-3 are for

represent and the points flight. two bar

the Shown graphs

design are to the the

t _h't_ crtt*rl,

angle-of-attack of the considered budgeting were:

which factors.

estimates factors

the various

20

_ _Range

64_ Time t_'()

s0

I_

IlQ

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Seven Effect drift 2a

engine of minimum

tilt

program gains gains winds being different from

control

steady-state gusts ratio

Wind Stability

(CJB

variations
20 40 Range _0 Time (_e_) _ 100 120

cent the locity were

The actual flight values of the design values at maximum at well 70 dynamic seconds the below pressure was design

are approximately 70 seconds, which region m/s. All The

36 peris near windveFIGURE 7-4.

PITCH

ANGLE

DESIGN

CRITERIA WITH 7

20.1

parameters

condition.

(8 ENGINES OPERATING ENGINE TILE PROGRAM

;r,
*1

Yaw

Attitude

(H2-15)

(deS)

t
....... Range Time

IZCO

','
m

OECO

AnB_lmr

Velocity

law

(TL3"5)(d_g/a)

'"
.l "...... i
AvlraB Taw Actuator

LI
Range Position (G2-1, G2-2, G2-3, G2-4)

k"k
Time {set) (de$)

[
i

11!
',, _'-_

i ...... "_F-.... '_ _" _'r v'

.,'1'1t ]

__

"_I_IVIIIlII_H -_i ...... _!_ _:- 't _ _ .....

!l
Telemetry

i
Cilibrlti_

/
R

.. kJi"
ge T ( )

i
AND AVERAGE

il i

I
23

FIGURE

7-5.

YAW ATTITUDE, POSITION

ANGULAR

VELOCITY

ACTUATOR

7.2.2 YAW PLANE

very light wind good winds lines). in good altitude throughout coml)onent of t2.4 agreement (solid lines) km the was (79.6 flight. 13.2 m/s seconds). between the and The maximum the in the the left) pitch winds were and point unreliAs yaw at

TABLE 7-II. MAXIMUM PLANE ONTROL YAW C PARAMETERS Parameter Attitude Angle-o[-attack (Free-stream) Angular Velocity Normal Acceleration Actuator Position
Small yaw deviations

plane an plane,

(from

existed

angle-of-

MagnitudeRange Time Isec) -(I.41 deg) 80.6 1.3(deg) -0.6 (deg/s) 0.5( 2) m/s -l. 7(deg)
were 7-5). results observed Essentially of winds. oecurredaround deflection as altitude a result increment increment winds of was 79. 104.5 77.9 103.7 5

attack (dashed also

rawinsonde ( solid points) at the to be

Rocketsonde agreement winds. The with

winds both dynamic

angle-of-attack pressure

rawinsonde where able 7. 2.3 TABLE

the angle-of-attaekwinds (122 seconds) PLANE MAXIMUM PAF{AMETE ROLI, RS was 0. 026

appeared kg/em a.

I/OLL 7-III.

PLANF

CONTROI,

throughout all Comparof ] I Parameter Magnitude Range Time

the powered flight (Figure these deviations were the atively seconds. t.7 m. m/s pared degrees of as to Yaw This wind determined 12.4 plane from wind gradient large The at (I.02/s gust actuator largest 103.7 over had from

_sec) Attitude Angular Veloeity 0.7 (deg) -0.6(deg/s) -0. of the vehicle the 1 (deg) was maintained control 142. 143. 80.0 1 0

movements actuator seconds an

100 minus of 670 13.5 comRoll ferentially attitude hydifengines in deflecting and yaw. outboard of a wind

a velocity angle-of-attack winds.

Effective Engine Deflection

rawinsonde components

(Figure

7-6)

were

both

pitch

Wind

Velocity,

Wz,

(Positive

from

the

left)

(m/s)

*
0

-tO _---Angle -20 of Attack Winds

-30 10 20 30 40 50 Range 60 Time (secj 70 80

Free-Stream 4

Angle

of

Attack,

Yaw

(deg)

2 I 0 From Locals (F16-30, FIg-30)----&x _j{__(_._ Ilia1 . __,_,_-.

-2

-4

-6

-8

-tO 10 * l'tll_tcy 20 Calt.brattoul 30 40 50 Range 60 Time (see) 70 80 !10 100 ii0 120

FIGURE 24

7-6,

YAW

PI.ANE

WIND

COMPONENT

AND

FREE-STREAM

ANGLE-OF-ATTACK

Theroll attitudend a average rollactuator positionsarc shown Figure in 7-7. The rollof'SA-3 exhibited hats n'ow w i obviouslycharacteristic a pattern forthe Saturn vehicle. he T observed roll attitude represents turtxanee" to the shown in the in Table in an average Figure period 7-IV. cutoff equilibrium moment and engine 7-7. are between the control deflections The disturbing for compared some torque in the :ill unknown corresponding i'oli three direction in roll flights moments "dis-

from roll as is The t.5 tion. (prior Maeh fect.

that attitudes a function almost increase can The to

of

the for of

first the Maeh

two three number and

vehicles, flights arc

llowever, plotted 7-8)

if the together

(Figure

: the

trend

identical in variaticms Math 1.5) roll

indicates the with roll most CW the

a close direction) longitudinal 60 and

correlation. after Math

(in in are

be

correlated

accelera90 seconds with ef-

between closely possible

correlated aerodynamic

number,

indicatinga

The an level possible roll ness the are with an tial inthe inertial

roll

after effect. in

Math This the roll of system The

1.5al)pears is hias this may and be of directicm inertial of the by with also very

to

be

more

likely in the One trend a softengines to

apparent each the cutoff. basic with of the

changes

after is that structure gravity

explanation servo

in the CW direction actuators. offset in the the softness angular pressures

associated

associatedwith

center

proper and the

such load, thrust the this

that, coupled it could cause vectors. differenhypothesis. The

misalignment loads, as arc measured consistent

actuator

actuator

The tional pursued 7. 2.4 FIGURE 7-7 R()LL TUATOR ATTITUDE POSITIONS seconds TABLE Vehicle 7-IV. Prior to /kg-m) SA-3 SA-2 SA1 155:_ 2140 149 0 IIOLL IECO MOMENT pitch The Prior to OECO _kg-m) 928 713 672 As SA-I had similar and SA-2 characteristic a different angle for trajectory, SA-awas followed the roll also same angle trajectory time histories. and mode root mode agreement tween
___ sA.3

roll

deviation

clearly of the

does

not but

affeet analysis

the funcwill be

performance further ATTITUDE from

vehicle,

a general CONTI:OL

interest AFTER

viewpoint, CUTOFF

AND

AND

AVERAGE

ACThe and yaw cutoff at of the outboard first frequency in yaw Bending after until After planes. decays, the that the first bending region. thrust which of the such to an There increased and system. angularity in future three Saturn 25 of itself 0.6 is instruthat that the in not be A the in which ignition this, engines ben(ling was of 2.6to at mode 149.09 in both 2.7 cps.

excited

the vehicle a coupled bending damping. seconds, constant seconds. in both thrust approaches indicated be flight. mounting of the

damping

approximately in pitch the of initially amplitude the retro was

2 percent damped remained rockets essentially

of critical until at 151 153.66 normal the engine almost

damping

coupled root locus analysis in pitch canister feedback At the effects. in of the structural serve zero effect. damping piteh with and

unstable at zero

SA-a flew of the roll

and the time history somewhat different

would the yaw

slightly There

unstable,

is a difference

be-

constraints the platform, was would this by 0.5 give

ment control piteh. damping explain other enee lag

"_ o L_ 15 2 _ _ _ _ 0 _ _0 _

containing gain thrust, However, observed Some system in

yaw this

increasing would must phase other

in yaw. might in yaw, amplitudes, complete vector

possibilities damping at small in the of the thrust deeayisof obtained

be a differ-

possible Since

non-linearities the effect

FIGURE

7-8.

COMPARISON DEVIATIONS SA- 3

OF FOR

ROLL SA-I,

ANGLE SA-2 AND the

engines values

during have

thrust been

interest for all

design,

vehicle flights. Thelargest thrust ector ngularity v a during anyportion thedecayeriod of p thathasbeen considered occurrednSA-1, ndwas0.38degree o a during 10percent the to0percent thrust ecayeriod. d p Thevalues obtained theSA-3 for flightarelisted in Table 7-V. All values rewellwithin a thedesignna gularity onedegreellowedor intheS-IVstage of a f separation design.A largedegree uncertainty of (estimated be 0.75degree) to exists(Table 7-V) inthemeasurements due tothesmall eviations d being analyzed. TABLE 7-V. THRUST VECTOR ANGULARITY DURING CUTOFF DECAY

httltudt

Io|l

(I_-15)

(htl) Y

Striated

/
15 ,9 16

Range

Time keg/i)

(8_}

Averaging 100 to 10

Period Percent Thrust

Pitch 0. 21 0.08 0.12 flown for

(deg)

Yaw

(deg)

Angular

Vel_lt_.

Roll

(F14-15)

0. 08

10 to 100 to

0 Percent 0 Percent

Thrust Thrust

0.14 0.08 the first prior on for Block the alignment that time on

Retro SA-3 use hicles. were waived to test for

rockets their Close for

were functional the alignment this flight

performance SI-SIV stages tolerances and there measured

to their II veretros is
l 6 1 15

separating

questionable. LOX since beam sult cross same data. stud

However, became a load

is a possibility at retro ignition,

the' and
Range Time (see)

path

the LOX centerline, from beam direction twisting

studs are 3.8 inches off an effective misalignment of as the spider The that results observed beam from

of the spider would reoutside of the in the FIGURE 7-9. be ROLL FIRING

DURING

RETROROCKET

network.

would

telemetered 7.3. 1 CONTROL SENSORS

At onds)a rocket locity obtain four the cant

the sharp

time roll

of

retro deviation

rocket began.

ignition At , the the roll

(153.66 end of

secretro veTo of all to any yaw or

7.3.1. I

CONTROLACCELEROMETERS

burning had this retro angle they roll at platform 158.5 roll

(155.73 to rate, of the angle reached seconds. and no planes of were

seconds) 4.3 deg/s an was retro and its average

angular 7-9).

Two and yaw) were for the first time tions ment (Figure during

Statham

control

aecelerometers

(pitch purposes acceleraequip-

increased rockets

(Figure misalignment

flown for on SA-3. show These

operational study The telemetered proper would operation have been

0. 285

degree

perpendicular If there inthe not on be the the pitch ST-90 stop attitude Figure event same of ST-90 were determined. stabi-

7-10) flight.

of the

required. rockets could mechanical forced vehicle this

acceptable

misalignments planes, The lized grees reference mation was attitude

small

for "closed A comparison tion and that

loop" operation made between calculated from

in the flight control system. the telemetered acceleraindependent agreement, error limits flight less of the measthan 0.2 reduced amount oscilless

measured This usable after (dashed rocket

15 deout infor7-9 using with diof

urements gives m/s 2, which is data of used high in the

satisfactory within the comparison.

in yaw

A considerable i0 to 15 cps)

obtained

event.

frequency

(approximately

shows the simulation the telemetered retro a misalignment in the roll of

line) of this chamberpressures, rocket degrees.

lations thanwere flown type loop" attack

appear on the experienced in the same

measurements, but they are from the Edciiffaccelerometers onSA-i will in place of and be the SA-2. flown local

each plane

retro of

in the

location

Statham in "closed angle-of-

rection 7.3 26

0. 285

control

accelerometers SA-4,

FUNCTIONAL

ANALYSIS

control on transducers.

.,0

FIGURE

7-11.

PITCH

AND

YAW

LOCAL

ANGLES-

OF-ATTACIt

FIGURE 7-10. PITCH YAW AND CONTROLACCE RATIONS LE 7.3.1.2RATE GYROS Rate gyropackages located were inboth the instrument canister 3-axis (a Minneapolis Honeywell control package) inthetail oftheS-Istage and (a2axisKearfott"measuring" forpitch yaw). package and A 3-axis largemeasuring (+ 100 deg/s) rate range
gyro analysis properly. two to sets the tinuous package Some 6f low telemetry basic was also All vibration range rate channels, onboard of the effects gyros, but With be employed loop. for were which were proper as not vehicle evident were filtering, an active on failure operated in the con"_ the conif required. instruments

From attack sonde from mete was meters from wind the

the data local

comparison rawinsonde (solidpoints) meters,

of the (square and it can be

calculated points) the concluded

angles-ofand that rocketthese

angles-of-attack

rs functioned greater than is probably

properly when the dynamic 0.026 kg/em =. Information unreliable its measuring after limit this of

pressure from these time. 10degrees the

pitch meter reached at 117 seconds.

Shown are the tween attack the Q-ball the from direct

in

Figures measurements

7-3

and of

7-6,

as

dashed

lines, from be-

angle-of-attack is obtained and the

indicator. Q-ball the locals

Good after

agreement approximately

angle-of-attack

angle-of65 seconds Math the

detrimental

information. could control

"control" package trol sensor in the

(Math l) and up to 105 seconds. 1 there is probably an upwash measurement The telemetered namic pressure These of about The good degree remainder with the Q-ball the very time, well from an of angle-of-attack angle-of-attack individual correction are shown agreement from up starts, the direct prior deviation as was

At speeds below effect influencing from also the Q-ball. from and

calculated pressures as the measured points direct where which time. to 105 between the calculated starts. The Q-ball

the dythe

differential factor circled with the and of the

by in Figures measure-

7.3.1.3

ANGLE-OF-ATTACK Four active Science) device, used U.S. for Science control were

METERS local used on to purposes. were mounted surface inthe of radially at station pitch plane the two pitch are located upwash. corin angle-of-attack SA-3. the one A Q-ball used on

Q-ball. 7-3and7-6. ment plane of

angle-of-attack 0.25

in the continues yaw of seconds. the

pitch for plane angleAt direct angleThe

meters

(U.

S.

is quite

to 65 seconds,

a deviation

angle-of-attack SA-2, was The 90 degrees 1841. Two and two

similar

measuring meters

essentially agrees of-attack this

measurement

apart in the payload body of these meters measure plane. and 7-11. they local and are meters 7-6. the The two influenced for upwash, average yaw these

increasing from

measurement of-attack latter locals from follows and the

the Q-ball differential the

and

intheyaw

the

pressure angle-of-attack

measurements shown on the in Figure body, the 7-3

measurements meters by the are resulting are body from presented

essentially winds.

from

the

Since

Free-stream recting Figures

angles-of-attack,

The be attributed comparisons,

deviations the

prior use of

to

105 the

seconds Q-ball

may Basedon

possibly these 27

to telemetry

inaccuracies.

angle-of-attack

system api)ears tobefeasibleptoatleast 05 u 1 seconds. 7.3.2 CONTI{Ot. COMPUTI']F{

pl'eSSUl'e val ties were yaw. (Figure just less The

values arc than 7-_2).

just r ignit 250 kg on The

l)rior ion. this on all

to engine Thrust actuator actuators

igniti,m except was :it)out

from engine 435 direction (Section appears the roll el" the

the 2 kg net

m isalignment

[o rees

force

indicated

direction

in roll Theoperation thecontrol of computer onthis till'LIst misalignment flightwasentirely satisfactory. Conlparisons ofthe to explain tile systematic telemetered outputsfthecomputer calculations Paragraph o and 7.2.3), Itowever, ofthe output values hasdon tilestaticcontrol equation unsatisfactory with regu rd gives anagreement _0.6degree betteror viations were so similar within or f (Figure 7-_). As yet, it allthree axes, swas a expected. the magnitude of the

is ill a e,msistent roll this tothe in has all not deviati-n explanation fact three been thai Saturn

VII deif

llights

determined

misaligmment

is suftieient.

7.3.3 ACTUATORS
The differential actuator kg) oceurFed loads pressure of each the due acceleration centel' of up pressure h)ads just to 699 region _)I the engine to the of gravity prior kg of ol measurements 1,433 to IEC() appeared flight. engines p kg ((lesign i Figure during The the center is displaced 2<) Fhe with on a loatt indicate load 7-13) high ot .

Theoperation tile hydraulicctuators of a was satisfactory. n investig:ttion actuatoroading A of l during tileflightwasmade yanalyzing"actuator b the differential pressure easurements. reeler m Thrust misaigmmtsand ialloads e i en inert w redetem for r ined all actuators. Aninvestigation ofcurtain gimt_tl and friction torques asnotmadeince w s reliable was data notavailable forperiocls these when torques be could isolated. Thrust isalignment asdetermined m forces, from thedifferential pressure easurements, m areshown in theupper portion l FiKure o 7-12.These ere w determinedby subtracting thetelemetered differential
_tt_tor Laid (Iql)

maximum 5,230 Variable dynamic gravity radially era,primarily increasing this each The ertial gram imam was liftolf offset ol the increase Ioatl ill the inertial 970 are kg.

outboard centei" tile turbOl)um

trom

line,approximately assembly. coupled puts vehicle, ]oeatio_l,

engines tending to in actuator loads (:an readily portion loading be obser_'ed of

swing them to counteract in the 7-12. prior effects curtain rements

outboard. this invector The prior loads interfere tolECOand to and dianlax-

lower

Figure just loading since m easu

occurred indicated oi tile Ap

Gravitational

not clearly zero point determmatiun.

the exact with the

"_lt xl..n_i.t _torI Vector _ Act_or LO_4 _

_,00 I_tlI _,oad _.i

I_rttil Xc.l.r.tl_

f
o 3

I"I(]UI{E
i I o 4

7-13,

tlEI_IIESI<NTAI'I_q'] IA)AI)S

ACTUA'FOI/

eotBl

v.t_

"File
4_

maximum the 90 deg/s. 1 deg/s. to

denlands 104 The seconds peak

on the time deflection

actuators period, rate of

occurred where demands demand all of was

during actuators 4.5 to

6c_

experienced 5,5

nominal

level

8oo

less

than

After FIGUIIE 7-12. NON-CONTI{OI, SA-3 ACTIIATOR LOADS, first stability mode of

OECO bending this

there mode

were

several were by

periods excited. the

where The movement

oscillations is influenced

28

ofthecontrol engines. theengines When areswiveled in response control ommandsthefirst ]node to c at bending frequency ata zero and thrust ondition, c the inertiaeffectof theengines to decrease tends the bending ode m stabilitygas discussed in Section VII
Paragraph move the curves OECO. draulic OECO SA-3, decreasing 7.9.4). actuators. for This pressure and energs_ the this one typical indicates occurred time, eould stability. be for fed This swiveling requires power Figure 7-14 shows representative engine that atlgS. the into hydraulic complete Sseconds. control system supply depletion after of hyBetween used oseillation, on to

0.3 percent) made.

impedance

mismatch

error

has

been'

A_titude

Pitch

ST-90

Rlnus

Attitude

Pitch

ST-12/_

(de$)*

_PitCh

dfffe_o_c_

_rretld

lot

l_daace

/-7 .``.+`.. ..... ,...,,.

llnngl

Time

l_et) fro_ L_unci_ Sp_ce-flxed _ertlcl[

a bending

_lliured Attitude Yaw ST-90 Minus Attitude _w

ST-_24

"r

'

!
+

.... _ " - Y"_

_'_

A _ _

./'%/v'*"w

" _V m

vv "" _

bo

Attitude

Roll

sT-go

Mfnul

Attitude

Roll

S_-12_

(dll)

....

!
t
fIYI)t{AUIJC ANI) I,EVE L

+
+-,v I
J
SOUI1CE
2 0

it

t
FIGUI_E PI{ESSURE To platform substantiate forSA-4was buildupasthetilt a tilt angle will out platform the be for 7-15.

t{_tnge

rrmm

(s{,_

ATTITUDE DIFFERI+_NCES TWEEN ST-90 AND ST-124P the tested of 44 mismatch and degrees to found assumption, to was have run

BE-

the a simin. to 0.25 The 1.75 demis-

7. 3.4

ST-I24P STABILIZED ATTITUDES

PI,ATI:ORM,

ilar error

error

program

amounted less portion than

degrees. The model) 124P will be ginning was is planned flown with ST-124P flown for as use stabilized a passenger on the loop" on platform on Bloek SA-3. /prototype The STand be7.4 PROPE gree match by before

This balaneing

reduced the major

of the

is flown.

operational

vehieles II vehicles

in "closed SA-7

LLANT

SLOSHING

A comparison the two platforms in all deviation, measurements misaligmment through VIII gear reduction impedance difference tematie titude the

of the (ST-90 three shown

attitude and (Figure between the two ST-124P

measurements ST-I24P) 7-15). the yaw and shows The roll

from some sysatto outer again at

The

same

baffle tanks effective

eonfigurations as used

were on SA-2. sloshing oseillations engine being

used These

in

the

propellant proved low levels frequency amplitude positions

baffles at positions. the

axes

in keeping some noted 145

amplitudes

However, were of at

from of the the

platforms platform as additional backlash and larger angles resolver telemetry

is due azimuth

sloshing Apeak actuator by OECO.

in the

i 0.2degree seconds,

oeeurred

in the damped

pitch out

reaeting, Seetion differences servo data an differenee

vehicle

tilting,

mentioned

in small in the and to

Paragraph 8.3.3. The are felt to be due to excess trains errors. between mismatch error and the in the ST-t24P The pitch in the mueh attitude ST-I24P

Sloshing measured ments. LOX ments

in three

of the

nine

propellant pressure made tank F2. and

tanks

was

systematic is due chain.

by means of differential Slosh measurements were LOX (in tank center 04 and LOX on fuel

measurein the center MeasureD6-04 ( LOX

tank, D6-OC

This pitch angular pedance mismatch angle (i.e. ST-124Pouter ure angles 7-15 after _0eshows

(_Pe) is a function of the imthe sine of twice the resolved is The the tilt dashed angle line in the of the in Figpitch

tank)

M sin 2). pitehresolver. the remaining for

tank 04) channels.

were

telemetered

continuous

telemetw

differenee a 1.3

All properly

of

the

measurements most of the

apparently flight except

functioned during the 29

a correction

f_ lapproximately

during

first fewseconds, is characteristic. first which The apparently information obtained valid was atthetimes indicated thetablebelow.Comparable for in times SA-2 arealso shown.
Start Times of Valid Slosh SA-3 D4-F2 D5-F2 D6-04 D7-04 D6-OC D7-OC 0 sec 0 8 29 0 18 3 sec 20 18 15 14 Measurements SA-2

the best ground uring sion methods. The around seconds). amplitudes

results tests system

to be of this are

obtained slosh

at

this

time. pressure

Presentl5, measconverexact more

differential analyzed used or to to

being being

verify develop

the

procedures

largest the time Table observed 7-VI, of

amplitudes maximum 7-VI on PEAK compares SA-3

of

sloshing the those peak of

occurred pressure SA-2 (80 sloshing

dynamic with

TABLE

SLOSHING

AMPLITUDES Peak-toAmplitudes SA-3 15 8 24 20 10 10 13 l0 11 11 10 Peak (cm)_ SA-2

Tank The must sloshing tion the ing, peilant shown tained on the sensitive the in by of tank, and telemetered height many in sloshing by a conversion centimeters. acceleration, of oscillations. heights 7-16. channel. parameters, inthetank shown here for The D6-OC The the best This including differential factor factor the liquid propellant The center which results especially and are the was are the converted LOX tank was telemetered extremely height freto be of to pressures obtain level dampproare obered center around surface amplitude The flight tank. 120 went most was the in is a func,_uel Fuel LOX LOX Center Center 2 2 4 4 LOX LOX

Plane Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw Pitch Yaw

Meas. D4-F2 D5-F2 D6-04 D7-04 D6-OC DT-OC

No.

be multiplied

parameters,

longitudinal frequency slosh Figure

information

noticeable detectedon Apronounced seconds, below

sloshing regular which the was

near

the

end of

powin the

measurement to many

measurementD6-OC oscillation before (Figure 4 1 cm the

continuous

started propellant The time

propellant The

surface results

exciting believed

baffles

7-16). up tothe

quency.

amounted

to onlyabout

12

A_iitude,

Yaw

(DT-OC)

(ow)

-8
Range Time (see)

FIGURE

7-16.

CENTER AFTER

LOX t00

TANK

TELEMETERED

SLOSHING

AMPLITUDES

SECONDS

3O

thefluidsurface beLow went theslosh probe nd a the measurement The ended. dashed linesin Figure 7-16 show theenvelope oftheslosh amplitude observed in thecenter onSA-2.Thishas referenced tank been to thelocation theendofthebaffles, at since thetime history ofthetwo flights different totheprowas due pellantoading differences. The sloshing irithecenter l
tank was similar in magnitude on SA-2 and SA-3. However, earlier on it appeared SA-3. that sloshing started somewhat driven more Also, frequency the vehicle was as mentioned

Figure frequencies compared after IECO accelerometers, being tions SA-I, frequency forced also the

7-17

shows

a comparison in the sloshing The square

o[ some

of the

detected

measurements points shown of the was

to the predicted. are bythe indicated vehicle of the

frequencies detected which indicate that sloshing. this. appears propellant, Whether time. this to The In this rather pitch case, than

in some the vehicle actuator in contrast at at the some or

posito counot, is natural

be driven

al the sloshing than SA-2.

previously,

pled frequency. not known at this

is consistent

Outer

LOX

Tank

Slosh

Frequency

(D6-04,

D7-O4)

(pm)

A A A_
/hA .'/_ AO

OI

20

40

60

80 Range Tim

I00 (see)

120

140

16(

Predicted Observed from Accel.

outer Fuel Yank Slosh Frequency

(I)4-F2, D5-F2)(cpm)

_&

zaA
tk Q ee A

0 0

20

40

60

80 _tJnge Tim (aee)

loo

120

140

160 A _aw
Fitch

Oenter

LOX Yank Slosh Frequency

(D6-OC, DT-OC)(cpl)

\
2O 4O t20 160

60 l_e

80 Tim

i00 (ue)

140

FIGURE

7-17.

SLOSHING

FREQUENCIES

31

SECTION GUIDANCE VIII. 8.I SUMMARY 8,2.2 ST:I24P GUIDANCE SYSTEM

The Saturn A-3vehicic flown S was without active The ST-I24P is a four gimlxal system utilizing path guidance orvelocity utoff.However, c passenger two AMAB-3 integrating aceelerometers mounted on hardware bothST-90 for andST-124P (Prototype) the stabilized element. Platform orientation is mainguidance systems onboard was toestablish opera- tained by three AB-5 stabilizing gyros. The accelerthe tionalcapabilities theguidance of equipment the ometers were oriented to measure the vehicle velociin Saturn flightenvironment. Thetelemetered as ties in the vertical and cross range directions. data The aceeleromeLer was aligned along the local wellasatrajectoryomparison c cmffirm satisfactory altitude performance ST-90uidance ofthe g equipment through- vertical at launch; the cross range axis lay in the outpowered flight. launch horizontal plane and normal to the firing azimuth, This orientation remained element was essentially forced fixed out of in its

Erroneous outputs fromthecross range ccelera ometer system mounted ST-124P onthe platform were noted efore b ignition. ocorrection made nd N was a the crossrange measurement contained extraneous signals throughout be eliminated output from flight. from These extraneous the telemetered range information signals could accelerometer was deduced and valid cross the measurement.

space frame

until the stable of reference, Mechanical limits indicated Mechanical

and stops

times are

when listed

both below: Time

platforms

reached

the

(see) Record 158.4 158.9 159.4* to

Platform ST-90 ST-124P Roll Yaw

Stop

Limit *15 deg

Computed 158.4 158.54

The on isons indicated m/s at corrected The rate seconds. reached 158.4seconds ance data after the

output both

of the

altitude was

accelerometer satisfactory. and the scale ST-90

mounted Comparguidance data 0.2 was

ST-124Pplatform with a end for Saturn ignition Both their past calculated

or

:_11 deg

X-gimbal * Indication gyro pickup of loss of platform reference (HI9-I2) from occurred

velocity of thrust, a 0.09 SA-3 of the

difference after percent vehicle the ST-90 rctro

of approximately altitude velocity factor error. a high at about platforms approximately

the

yaw

measurement period. was flying

during

a calibration experienced rockets and limits were ST-124P at invalid. roll 153.6 mately Therefore, Guidform axis X-axis The vehicle 45 degrees the

at from of

an

angle

of

approxiX-axis. the plat-

measured component to roll about

the platform about vehicle

mechanical and these 159.2seconds points

motion the

respectively.

due

longitudinal

is approximately

given

by: t

8. 2

DESCRIPTION

OF

GUIDANCE

SYSTEM

0y

_ -

sin

45

f
to

_rolldt

8.2.

ST-90

GUIDANCE

SYSTEM at

A rotation 158.54

of ll degrees was for integration The yaw

about

the by

ST-124PX-axis inserting equation time signal shift to full of the teand retro

seconds values the ignition. Hi9-12)

computed _roll in the from gyro that during seconds, from that the

The flown element altitude, accelerometer on celerometers and

ST-90

guidance (Reference

system 3). were

was Three mounted

similar integrating on The the slant direction

to that acstable slant range and

lemetered performing rocket urement

above the

SA-2

(AMAB-3) to measure cross was velocities range oriented

servo a bias

(measscale period at which should longer obfor

in the directions. in the

slant firing

range,

indicated occurred and 159.4 departs

measurement between 158.9 this be measurement the true

a calibration The time its normal platform level

41 degrees up from altitude accelerometer vertical; the cross the launch horizontal handed coordinate

the launch horizontal; was 41 degrees from range measuring plane and This direction completed

the slant the launch was in a right remained out of

indication

is no

space-fixed. served times

The difference in the computed and is due to truncation of the equation

system.

orientation was

fixed during flight until the platform its frame 32 of reference

forced seconds. _tkl

0y, errors indata used ol the various telemetry ware components - -ll'_ I-

in the computations, response channels, and prototype hardthe ST-124P system.

in roll at 158.4

for

l-a rtrL
_ ._ _.

,-P.
ii

It form limits t24t) 8. 3

should was only existing equipment

be an

emphasized engineering system flown

that test will in the

the model, not

ST-124Pplatand to gimbal the STment locities 8. 3.2 apply

The in

errors measuring are

made the

by tile

ST-I24P and

guidance cross Paragraph (ST-90)

equiprange ve,_.3.3.

vertical in SeetionVIII

in this to be

discussed

Block

II vehicles. ACCELEItOMETER OUTPUFS

OPERATIONAL

ANAI,YSIS ace ele The inertial velocity outputs rometers represent the vehiele guidance 124P with hardware The of small errors. prior several angular to the system. guidanee corresponding data. were eomparisons data, especially observed data The ignition. time points, may reduction, The velocity assumed The systems Ideal data velocities aligmments for the of the integrating mot ion as sensed both the and of the guidance ST-90 comfrom gui(tcalcuagreesystem. to and were errors hardmoni-

8.3.1

GUIDANCE

INTELLIGENCE

ERIIOHS

by the The deviations

[rOll]

from

guidance in the and

intelligence guidanee aecelerometer guidance

errors measurements errors, system

are

definedas resulting and may be

:rod STpared external anec lations. meat The in the ware tored over eter

we re

redueed computed

platlk)rm the The vehicle errors

tracking

f(mnd with

by eomparingthe trajeetory. presented intraeking hardware errors, level and shown one

measurements

indieated for be

a favorable the ST-.()0 attributed tracking, outputs errors, to

in and

Figures data ST-90 8-l,

8-1 guidance are

and as

8-2 well

inas

errors

clude gniidance genre noise

errors

reduction

telemetered

errors. in Figure sigma

intellithe data

aeeelerometer

within

averaged accelerom-

hardware

errors.

corresponded of:

misalignments

ST-90

7 T ii; I
_,o., ........

Slant

Range Altitude Range angle platform with one roll at sigma about represents

+0. 003 -0.0(t2 -0. 009 a no

deg (leg deg output reference greater until refer-

I
/,L

[
/

?
_

i
I

I
I

:
,

[[i t
I;, } where error. established than enee Slant the

Slant Cross

,|

i!:i

a positive The ST-90 at liftoff established lost in Veloei

positive in its errors

remained essentially 158.4 deviations,

was Range

seconds.

.ty (ST-90)

The compared earth-fixed of

outputs with

of

the

slantrange data

aeeelerometer values computed ideal These portion zero for

were from alib,mment differences of Figure the entire are the the one

corresponding and aceelerometers. time in oscillate

trajectory versus errors

assuming the upper around

the platform

are plotted 8-1. The powered results sigma

flight. of errors errors of

The small errors observed in the data compared and the guidance hardware,

Cross

Range The cross

Velocity range system, of Figure notedon from

(ST-90) velocity, is plotted 8-3. the minus the The I Fin data Ill This telemeter 2.82 were of launch and azimuth as Extraneous trace seconds manually the 100. ST-90 of degrees difference 33 381 position measured versus of time the by in the the

ST-90 upper outputs range seconds. with form vehicle East of

guidance portion were velocity little and

incremental cross 3.9 platthe

to about

However, difficulty. the were North Fin 100.01t

reduced

degrees

respectively.

alignment

produced the accelerometer velocity range profile wind

cross range velocity observed and the externaltracking. also reflects the changes

by both t_e The overall in the cross

range of the

velocity guidance

errors hardware.

are

within

the

usual

noise

level

velocity.

Slant

Altitude The

Velocity

(ST-9_)_ slant altitude velocity was the

telemetered

Cross 2.2 attack The m/s From creased The term m/s at control cross at40 this to

range 40

guidance seconds coefficient) of

velocity flight entered increased 3.0 cross m/s to

was when the

about control minus 85 engine loop

minus loop. 2.2 and incutoff. at lt5

b o {angle-of-

actual velocity as sensed by the ST-90 guidance erometer. The lower portion of Figure 8-3 the telemetered plotted and versus lower tilt arrest, than preaaleulated time. slant Telemetered values, from

accelpresents ve-

altitude

range seconds relatively time minus b o was of flight

velocity to the 7.5 taken time. minus constant ST-90 m/s out

from at about range

locities was cularly 1.2 extra was

velocity parti-

50 seconds seconds. velocity

generally after percent tilt. 1241.4 The

precalculated resulting

remained

approximately degrees velocity

at outboard of the control

lower flow rates and about 0.28 At end of thrust, the slant altitude m/s, differences altitude portion the good presents some guidance around very 8-I at or 12 m/s between velocities of Figure zero lower than

precalculated. and versus differences _ 0.3 m/s, calcutime

seconds

telemetered are reference of the plotted g-1. The within data

Differences lated time ences 70 ST-90 in cross

between range

the

telemetered are

and plotted

calcuversus

lated in the oscillate

slant middle

velocities

the lower portion of Figure 8-1. oscillate around the zero reference From minus constant zero no due to bias guidance this time the differences and The and in tracking the

The differuntil after increase remain pracgo profile are than cross to

indicating Table velocities etered from The cussed

agreement

compared. guidance Telemcalculated agreement. are dis-

seconds.

to about tically essentially presents probably the ST-90

0.5 m/s

at 90 seconds

a comparison significant velocities flight and

of the events. those

to 130 seconds. by 140 shifts seconds. definite trend equipment.

differences The data error rather the differences

ST-90 external deviations in

tracking data in the ST-124P VIII Paragraph

are in close measurements 8.3.3.

However,

Section

TABLE

8-I.

GUIDANCE

COMPARISONS

ST-90

ST-124P

Flight

Event

Slant Vel.

Range (m/s)

Slant

Altitude

Cross Vel.

Range (m/s)

Altitude Yel. (m/s)

Cross Vel.

Range (m/s) 0

Vel. (m/s)

First

Motion

Telem

Calc

Precal

Inboard

Engine

Cutoff

Telem

2601.7

1227.5

-7.2

2630.4

-11.8

Calc

2601.2

1227.0

-7.2

2632.2

-7.2

Precal

2571.8

1237.9

-0.25

2621.5

-0.25 H

Outboard

Engine

Cutoff

Telem

2762.6

1240.6

-7.5

2745,6

-12.4

Calc

2762.3

1239.7

-7.3

2747,3

-7.3

Precal

2740.4

1252.6

-0.26

2743.2

-0.26

End

of

Thrust

Telem

2770.5

1241.4

-7.5

2752.0

-12:4
-7.3

Calc

2770.7

1240.7

-7.3

2754.2

Precal

2748.0

1253.3

-0.26

2748.7

-0.26

34

A was utes

scale inthe

factor vertical

error

of about aceelerometer

minus

0. l percent about 90 minwould

noted priorto

launch. observed factor

An

error

of this

magnitude

produce for the the two

the scale

velocity error. error, the altitude are

After correcting velocities from indicating the ST-124P

guidance of about circled

systems proper its Z-axis. points difference of 0.09

in agreement, of

maintenance platform The the factor

orientation

shown for percent.

in an

Figure

8-2

represent scale

velocity error

aceelerometer

Cross

Range Much

Velocity

(ST-124P) was experienced valid with guidance on are this time, of to about the lower essentially 5.0 m/s. values the same system. portion zero in reducing obtained. This of until This comFigure about differalignmeasurement the

difficulty data; were by is the

cross These as 8-2. until ence ment parison

range data sensed The IECO may of be the

however, compared ST-90

were

presented differences From to a value

80 seconds.

the differences

increased

attributed ST-124P

a difference and the

of azimuth ST-90

platform

platform. aligned referenced to

The ST-124P platform was not azimuth as wasthe ST-90. Instead, to a vehicle The FIGUI2E 8-3. TELEMETEBED SLANT ALTITUDE GUIDANCE 8.3.3 ACCELEROMETER Measurements ance The hut cross Section Altitude The ences system vertical much range VIII were CROSS RANGE VELOCITY, AND ST-90 the SA-4, ment OUTPUTS made by the (ST-I24P) ST124P guidThe constant the in The sentially or Y axes its reached cross azimuth range velocity difference platform South no platform after mechanical until of the retro limit. was optically firings, rotations this platform will on will Fin azimuth could not be SA-4 be no I of Fin the not for possible will problem be the for be the III position. ST-I24P optically

optically it was

is acceptable aligned. to mounting as Block SA-3. be

since Precise flown arrangeHowever, on

azimuth

alignment

ST-124P, the same the

SYSTEM

since

II vehicles. shows platforms. a

in the vertieal telemetered difficulty outputs. Paragraph was

and eros s range directions. data were easily reduced, experienced This 8.4.2. difficulty in reducing

comparison between the oriented aligned occurred when

ST-124P

approximately ST-90. about the Esthe X

is discussed

0.27degree

platform

Velocity

(ST-124P)

upffer portion of Figure the telemetered differences From

8-2 and

presents

differaltitude until 8.4 8.4. FUNCTIONAL l GUIDANCE The operation (three items ANALYSIS SENSORS of the five AMAB-3 two was on STas guidance t 24P) acflown with

between The

calculated

velocities. about minus 40

are essentially this time,

zero

seconds.

the differences

increased

until the end

of thrust

to a value of about

2. I m/s. A similar comparison vertical values was aeeelerometer determined made between (ST-124P) the slant on the in in the system the outand range STthe inal-

celerometers, as passenger

on ST-90, on SA-3, the cross platform. pickup

expected,

puts of the corresponding and 90 slant platform. portion an

from

the single on the STurements ometer at about Tminus

exception of 124P stabilized of the servo

range aceelerometer Telemetry measforthis of the accelersystem

altitude This of of error

aceelerometers comparison Figure 8-2. approximately from the

carried is Both presented

voltage oscillation

indicate

a continuous from before

middle dieate titude

comparisons 2.5 m/s

60 to 65 cps 140 seconds)

lfftoff of flight.

(approximately Laboratory 35

to the

end

velocity

telemetered

ST-I24P

tests following flightindicate thegain the that adjustGround recording, inflightclemetl and t 3,records ment oftheservo arnplifier probably was setina cri- showed disturbedonditionftheST-I24P a c o cross ticalarea, here w thesystem isstable unlessubjected rangeelocityystem, appeared s v s which toindicate that toafairlylarge electrical mechanical or disturbance: theaeeelerometer wandering was randomly. Thishas ata setting thiscriticalarea,once in therequired shown beincorrect to afteradetailedtudy f s o disturbance occurs, thesystem intoaself-sus- been goes thegroundndinflight ecords, a r thelogic networkt o tained oscillation. hecriticalareaof gain T setting the sigmal processor, and the 65 cps oscillation obisjustbelow themaximum capability gain oftheservo servo loop. amplifier.Thescrvoloop signals fortheremaining served in the accelerometer aceelerometers normal. were Oscillation of the accelerometer system would
normally result velocity for one actual De logic in velocity signal increment, pattern occur as as changes shown both positive which change. used the shown in the in and cancel However, sensing would the output in pattern even negative each with increother polarity be a contin8-4. pulse patterns exa loss of

8.4.2VELOCITY ENCODERS SIGNAl, AND PROCESSOR RE PEATERS Theoperationf theaecelerometer o velocity encoders satisfactory. encoderswere was Five flown, threewiththeST-90ystem s aceelcrometerstwo and withtheST-124P system accelerometers. TwoGuidance Processor Signal Repeaters were flown onSA-3, for eachtabilized one s platform.The processor theST-90ystem for s operated satisfactorily throughout theflight; hesecond t unit,fortheST124Psystem, failure buffer mplifier tage, hada ina a s causing lossof oneof theDClogicsignals in used sensing polarity fthecross the o rangeelocity v increments. Thismalfunction occurredarlyinthecounte down. second A disturbance inthisprocessor occurred intermittently both in channels during thetime period from113 125 to seconds. disturbance The is believed bedue to tovoltage transients ontheprocessor +line. B

mental cept of the uous As patterns

pulses,

velocity pulse the

1 of Figure intermediate

system

position,

numbered

of Figure etry record tinct red. three pattern,

g-4. When the changes from a velocity patterns

pulse pattern on the telemone pattern to a second disof 0. 1 m/s has occurof

change result

The pulse conditions:

from

a combination

1, 2, 3.

A small

true

acceleration. servo logic signal loop oscillation. in the signal proc-

Accelerometer Loss essor. of one

The

lower

portion as properly.

of Figure they should

8-4shows occur

the if the

incremental system was

veloeitypulses operating

lse 1

Pattern

Number 2 3 4 5. 6 7 8 1

illllllll

Jl

I1 II I I !

I I I11
0.1

J]

g_

KrlTFVT-T-T
0.2

_0.3

i_k_L

Ill,Ill
0.4

_fA: 0"0

tual Velocity Acctmaulatlon r Positlve Acceleration (m/s)

I
should

I
occur

Incremental velocity pulses as they if system was operating properly

FIGURE 36

8-4.

INCREMENTAL

VELOCITY

PULSE

PATTERNS,

ST-I24P

CROSS

RANGE

("_k!y!

pr__'T'

A '-

It one DC eireuil:s, true of etry pulse tual 124P processor seconds proper locity

was logic

concluded signal combined

from input with output, the

this to the 65

study rotation eps

that

the sensor

loss of patterns telem8-5).

of the

pressure and 0.98

relatively to

constant pressure 14.0 psi).

at

2.4 yawing

kga/cm from

2 (34 1.10

psi) to

logic

modulation the on 8-4 eonelus to reduce from to from 1to the and ion.

the comparlmcnl kg/em 2 (15.6

accelerometer incremental and ground tests velocity

could

produce

pulses the were range intermittently and was

observed {Figure above used velocity disturbance characterized for

The arrest t_'ndect ST-lg4P 44

final was degrees

tilt ,14.28

angle degrees (Section

of the as VII

ST-90 compared Paragraph

platform with 7.2.

at tilt the l). in-

recordings confirmed sectuences cross The second

l,aboratory pattern

The acSTsignal

the the the to by

telemetered system. range shifting indication occurred

The solvers, circuitry), gineering

ST-124P and

system associated

(consisting mechanical

of

t}latform, and eleetric:d or

re-

125 imve-

time, of the

flown test be for

on high flown of

SA-3,
Many

was of

a the

prototylx_ comlxments not

enwere

bias cross

w)ltage range of to bias be the

the

coarse channels.

model.

in both

altitude

Short term on the B+ extraneous of the

voltage transients line are believed switching of the could either in the signal not on

fairly large amplitude be the source of this flip-flop. determined, D21 buss, power The but in the supply. source could static

not optimized as those to the first flight

accuracy, on BlockII this syslem

and are vehicles. (also

the same SA-3 was flown on

test

to be

transients originated or

have inverter,

SA-4). The primary were the obscrvalion familiarization with serve operation quite systems of the sat isfaetory. in an

l_st objectives of its functional the resolver chain operational as an

of the system ot.ration and and the 5 kc/s The test was

processor

environment. engineering

system

I ':

;:2,".2

,:::, :;.2

IdIra_

,,__

The not :::": t .... must resolver

resolvers

used therefore The angle. data is

with

the

s'r,,rr.r

124 P syskml in output thcir of the with, the

we re output pitcl_ proin and effect. used on

trimmed; t_ expected. is

some error of, and

in the iner,_'ases

a funeti_m

l,'lGbI{l';

8-5.

SIMPlJFIFD IIAN()t,] SIGNA

SCIIEMATIC 1, PI_()CESSOll of the bias

OF

CI/()SS

grammed pitch pitch attitude ST-90 systems test indicated this SA-3 system (Sccthm

The incremental obtained from primarily the the at_mt STerror attributed 121P

differences the ST-124P to this to pitch be the

A laboratory The not cause improper any error switching in the flip-finp did values. SA-4 for on 8.,t. 3 ST-90 The utilized form STABILIZED ST-90 stabilized the PLATFORM platform and systems exception AbIAB-4 the air bear flown as that on SA-3 incremental velocity

of that was

system for a s that 7. :',. t).

resolvcr

the same

experienced

Vii

I):_ra_,-_qph

was ment (1,1.7

During flight, the qir a constant 2.2 kg/cm was air to 14.0 centigrade. 2,t. (; degrees varied psi), while pressure

Ix aring air supply 2 (:';2 psi) and the centigrade. from the 1.03 temperature The

pressure air temcomparta was 24.7

similar flown on

components SA-2, with replaced properly,

the platAMAB-2 unitS. ing All supply

perature

to 0. [18 kg/em

aecclerometers syste ms operated

the usual with

deg_'ces

37

SECTION

IX.

VEHICLE

ELECTRICAL

SYSTEM

9. I

SUMMARY

The corresponding networks of performed measuring satisfactorily supply number 5, ex-

voltage buss amps, flight or Figure distributors.

and

current were of shows 898

for

battery at

D20 28.5

and

its

(D21)

constant amp-minutes 33.9 percent connections

volts used the 9

All cept 9.2 for

vehicle the

and for

165 the

A total 9-1

was of for

failure

approximately the

battery

capacity. FLIGHT RESULTS inflight

28vI_

28

VDC

Battery

DI0

1
I

Battery

D20

, SuuDlv

Voltage ontrol

I
60 VDC

To Control

115 V AC 3-Phase

Distributor

IIIIIIII
I I I I ml,.4 i I_,_

I ', i i,_ I I ,, __ ; I i i i ,iii_ilL .......... _I -_ ......... 1 u-!

DII Ii in Distributor I in-D'stri_n_]'n_

'II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III III I , , , , I l

VDC Innut s D21 in . Distrzbutor

I
19A4

_
uz_ _.

Ff-_Xs. vDcO_fPol-----S?eBelo. fo_

_SgUAPply I Supply Assembly

D83,

84,

87

and

88

Busses

_Measuring

Supply

No. 5
Unit 9_

/
FIGURE 38 9-1. DISTRIBUTOR SUPPLY CONNECTIONS

-.o.ori::g:;r Supp,y

AND

UNIT

9 MEASURING

Thevariable
sponding to vary volts, currents when heaters 95 buss from amps v _:'_. (Dll) 27.6 at as

load

for

battery

DI0

and

its

correcurrent to 28.0 volume pounds, vehicle consists and

The

measuring of approximately and above of input is located the eight filter. Five

voltage in the

supply thrust isolated

assembly weighs area The power contains were through frame

has 7.05 of the supplies seven ultraEn-

caused the voltage and volts, 165 amps at liftoff end of flight. expected, with lights off. and

208 cubic (Figure9-1). power seven

inches,

These voltages and 0.4 volt increases the angle-of-attack

firewall individually Each of the

assembly

the continuous were switched

one

supply transistors obtained

transistors. high-reliability precision eps of over the inverter the caused inverter flight by on SA-3 period. ignition

type Magnetics The Fairchild tests (EM tests in

transistors from two type indicate measuring are being

The was The was All

frequency to frequency minus 400.

of the 225 cps

gineering Incorporated. sisted type. ductors cause of

Pacific remaining and that one the

Semi

Conductors conCon-

399,788 usual within frequencies

transistors Texas Pacific was the supply to this Semi

disturbance 0. 202 within allowable

of one Shaker type

Instrument probable number determine type of

frequency.

were

tolerances.

113531)transistor voltage

failure

Measuring busses distributors, limits, which except supplies DSl

voltages through operated for D85. buss D85,

of D88, within

the

eight the

"slave" in the 5 volts 5

units measuring percent

off

5. more

Additional detailed will fuel

conducted However,

located

information. be and and replaced LOX closed) on valve

transistor 5, Main open, open, at the exception measurements measuring Cutoff nals by were LOX

SA-4 position signals (start with

Measuring supply number failed before liftoff.

operated A6-5 because 5. and

satisfactorily

Measuring minus period nition to 2. 17 seconds is of associated the

supply prior with failure indicate period.

number to the with

5 liftoff. initial this

failed Since shock have time

on

SA-3 this

time to ig-

of measurements were lost supply signals as expected. number (inboard)

and A11-5. These of the failure of

due been

engines, the tests this

investigations

made Simflight cutoff sequence was siginitiated

correlate shaker during

period.

ulated failure

a possibility

of transistor

Outboard

depletion.

39

SECTION STRUCTURESVIBRATIONS X. AND tO.I

SUMMARY The instrumentation on which were The the truss andyaw at for SA-3 included and and on the strain LOX

relatively dynamic ure at 10-1 the members moments various well

high loads the gauge between bending 10-1,

moment occurred and were available (Figure gauge this moment normal reading is the moment station strain load from is 979. gauge distribution, factor flight.

reliable 10-i). by

aeroIn Figa cross and shown with the in

strain location,

shown Good moment Also

measurements pins forces times. values. from

agreement

pitch computed results

longitudinal flight predicted

existed predicted Figure the

significant with

compared

compared

aecelerometcr

Instrumentation consistedof stations. frequencies bending. and liftoff for of first 0. 095 before yaw on tenbending The These the mode g's of in the directions, nose of 2.7 OECO. 2.0 cps. single

for

detecting accelerometers

vehicle showed

body at five

bending vehicle at vehicle pitch at

Readtnge

accelerometers range with cone cps. The of of a At first were 0. 016 frequencies

rcsponse second amplitude in both

and present g's occurred

maximum OECO, response

single a forced is lower

amplitude response than on at a coupled

amplitude

frequency SA-2

The levels ing the

flight previous

data two

indicated similar Saturn

that flights.

the

SA-3

vibration dur1200

were

generally

to those

recorded

10.2

BENDING FACTORS

MOMENTS

AND

NORMAL

LOAD

800

.....

10.2.

INSTRUMEI_TATION

Instrumentation ments gauges strain truss at and normal main on the 979. were stud very obtained also of in load on the gauges at station

for factors compression tension In

determining consisted members members eight of

bending of eight and LOX five The Flight of tank the

mostrain sixteen studs eight and

the interstage

addition,

station869 tank offered were and

gauged. were as digitized little

However, lost prior information. decommutated forrn. the the

LOX hence data traces consisted

gauges

to ignition telemetered oscillograph evaluation load yaw axes

determining

instantaneous pitch and

and for F1GUHE 10-1. BENDING LOAD Because (70 inch) LOX five of the MOMENT FACTOH eightstud 869) and gave 979. with gauges were yaw the some These of lost, axes three check three the no 1.8 bendbe the m AND NOI_MAL

bending numerous 10.2.2

moments about time slices. MOMENT LOADS

tanks about

(station the pitch

Maximum curred Math gram 1. could at At 69.2 Mach not be loads strain A vehicle at time gauge

bending seconds 1,

moment range

at time, bending since

station moment there

979

ocdiano the

ing which

moments at functioned moment found

could gauges on

approximately were

calculated

that

station. properly at station

However,

a vehicle

constructed data

bending were

gauges values.

aerodynamic highest time. strutted 4O

available. were

However, observed

to be

in agreement

predicted

moments

at this was conanother at The station vehicle 979 bending is shown in moment about the 75 to 85 the pitch axis seconds range

bepding moment diagram point 81.6 seconds, where

time interval inFigure 10-2.Alsoshown onthisgraph aretheangle-of-attackand (ee) gimbal ([_)about angle the pitch axis.Close greement a infrequeney ofoscillation between thethree values evident. is 10.3 LONGITUDINAL LOADS

mand, dynamic forces ariseinthedeflecting masses of the system.These forces canbeamplified nd a cause largevibrations thevehicle.Astaggering of timeof 100 msbetween pairswas engine expected to keepthe vibratory force lower or equal to 20
percent presents of the the maximum of an static thrust. Figure made to 10-4 see if results investigation

times of the engines still keep Multiplication oftheactual telemetered strain the actual staggering bythecalibration faetoresults r intheloads shown the vibratory in force below the above value. The freby potentiomFib,rare (circled 10-3 points). he T solidlineinFigure quencies of the system were measured I0-3was obtained byusingthe differential strains and eters (YL-1, YL-2) located on the support arms. adding thei01,290g(223,300 k lbs)ofload which as From these frequency w measurements and from single lostwhenthe gauges settozero.The were caleulated engine thrust curves, the mmximum vibrating force load as w determined SA-3hrust nd from t a acceleration was obtained as shown by the maximum theoretical response (calculated) on Figure 10-4. These results data theoretical data. and drag show that the maximum static response thrust. was sixteen percent

During firingoftheengines, before launchome

Strain l4omeut (10000_)

of

the

maximum

4ooI
1
300

;I
I II i i i i

"\I
I L

200

.
rl

I/.
fl f o

_/

100

V
75 Angle -4 v---Angle of Attack (Free-l_ream) 76 (deg) 77 78 79 Range 80 Time (sec) 81 82 !

.
83 _ 85

-3

(Op3) -2

GOI-OO3-

([3p2) 0 _,,_ _

-I (gl_,) (_p%) GOl-OO4cOl-OOl-

V:
J
77 75 76 78 79 Range FIGURE 10-2. BENDING ANGLE MOMENT VERSUS ATSTATION RANGE" TIME

O_mbal

Angles

1
80 Time .(see) 979, ANGI.F:-OF-ATTACK,AND GIMIkAL 81 82 83 84 85

4t

The slightly within

frequencies in accuracy, cps.

presented but all

as are

flight

results

vary to be

considered

0.15

The oscillographs content flight, two the about of with engine natural 17 approximately increases cutoffs. frequency cps. In

showed 12 in This of addition

a predominant to 20 cps at possibly

frequency throughout liftoff be and caused which frequencies, in the control the the by is

amplitude could the

accelerometers to the high

FIGURE 10-3.LONGITUDINAL ATSTATION LOAD 979

analysis of the data showed frequencies and propellant sloshing range. The first mode trend of the from 10-5), shown frequency by second After is present due 7.2.4) to engine vehicle SA-D and in first tests is further Figures trend mode

mode for

follows similar substantiated

the fill

trends (Figure

conditions by The cannot amplitude frequency a VII forced Paragraph the

mode second be

shapes mode

10-6 is shapes

and

10-7. but to low

present, due

shown of of

response. 2.7 cps

OECO, (Figure

a predominant 10-8) and (Section is

response

gimbaling

. i o 7"'7 7").
FIGURE 10-4. MAXIMUM DYNAMIC RESPONSE 10.4 BENDING OSCILLATIONS

all

Other frequencies of which cannot of the

be system.

were present in the analysis, identified with known natural Some structural and vehicle is available of these response, bending frequencies coupled modes for

frequencies can tank, which be

attributed vehicle no

to local torsion,

comparison

data

Vehicle

Station

All properly

accelerometers have polarity

appeared as reported

to have before

responded flight.

2000 E6T-30 1800 .5 4.5 2.0

and

_eq_acy 1600 Sa-D --

1400 E65-20 1200 E63-20 8 I000 E67-30 E65-20 E63-20 g61-10 E252-9

G's 0164 0 .007 .0164 .0074

In .0_014 0 .01713 .04014 .018114

mm 1.02 0 0.44 1.02 0.46

800

",' If

6OO

d_

4O0

2DO

I_252-%

2 0 -i.0 0 2O T_ (see) P_alative 0 Amplitude 1.0

FIGUI]E FIGURE 42 10-5. SA-3 SYSTEM FREQUENCY TREND

10-6.

SA-3 YAW

BENDING AT LIFTOFF

MODE-

FroST

MODE,

Vehicle

S_tlon

Vehle_ 2000, i

Station

E67-30

Fre

-3 1600-

14oo16I

sA-3 si._te
G's

_
In mm 0.55 0 G,24 0.33 laOO[ E67-30 E63-20 E6l-[O E252-9 G's 01458 0065 .0110 .0052 In .02282 .01017 .017218 .008139 _ 0.57 0.26 0.A4 0.21

1200

E_-20

-_

E66-30 E64-20 g62-20 E251-9

.O139 0 .0060

.02176 0 ,00_392

12OO" E63 . 20

LOOO

.008315.01Z015

IO00-

_00

z60-_o E6_-20

E60-10

.0C_9

.OO7670

O, 19

8oo_
600.

_61-io_
Yaw

t
200 1

!f
E251-9

,itoh

4OO* On 200, E252-9 fuel tank 0l

O" -i.0 Relative 0 Amplitude 1.0 -I.0 Relative A_plitude 1.0

FIGURE

10-7.

SA-3

BENDING

MODE-FIRST

MODE,

PITCH

AND

YAW

(53

to

57

sec)

10.5
Vehicle 2000 S t:,ltCion

VIBRATIONS 1 SUMMARY OF VIBRATION DATA

10.5.

_0

The tion levels the 3). are a.

E62-20

flight were previous

data generally two

indicated similar Saturn

that to flights observed

the

SA-3 (Reference in the

vibrarecorded 2 flight

those

1600

during
151.0 _=3 152.5 sidle am_ 2.7

1400 L Z_-20 1200 _

and data

The major summarized Three

deviations as follows:

combustion erratic data.

chamber

dome

measure-

IOO0

_I _* r k__L__

E_-20 E62-20 E60-10

.005393 .04A994 .OO6503

.OO7452 .062175 ._1898

0.18 1.57 2.38

ments

contained

8OO

E60-lO

_51-9

.024575

033959

0.86

b. feeds

A measurement engine position

on the fuel suction eight indicated

line which

significantly

6O0

higher c. urements,

vibration Transients for

levels than previous were observed

flights. in sever_i[ meashas of to deternot the

4OO

which

a satisfactory An intensive

explanation analysis in order

200 0 "_0 0 1.0 E251-9

yet flight mine

been

determined.

data is presently in progress the causes of these transients. INSTRUMENTATION

I0.5.2
Relatlve A_litude

FIGURE

10-8,

BENDING PITCH (151

MODE to

152.5

FIRST sec)

MODE,

with were

40

The SA-3 space vehicle vibration measurements. by two telemetry

was The

instrumented vibration data systems. Five 43

transmitted

canister rea measurements a weretransmittedn o FM/FM channels data witha frequency varying range from to330 0 epsor0to1050ps, epending the e d upon specificelemetry t channel. remaining The 35measurements transmitted were bySS-FMith w anapproximate datafrequency range 50cpsto 3 kc. The of eight ydraulic h actuator vibration easurements m were transmitted time-shared withfourmeasona basis urements oneach oftwo telemetry channels. 10.5.3 DISCUSSION OF VIBRATION MEASUREMENTS
Structural Five during spider ably, Mach Vibrations structural SA-3 beam being 1, max flight. (E99-11 much to Q, the measurements The and more events and two were measurements varied than flight (i.e., firing). during both monitored on considerthe This engine ignition, same the

Increased lowed available dome considered

vibration immediately only longitudinal

levels by a

were decay on

noted to the zero.

at cutoff, Data

folwere

intermittently measurements, partially

thrust

chamber the 5, were

therefore successful.

to be only

-20

20

_0

80

1_

tl0

lao

_o

El00-11) sensitive of retro

measurements

cutoffs, was

characteristic flights.

experienced

previous
-20 0 20 _0 _0 so 1oo 12o t_o l_

The (E40-1 ignition, level. stant their responding

engine and then E40-7)

gimbal immediately measurements the like location.

point

support high decayed remained of level to

measurements transients the matnstage concutoff, due to

0=20 0 20 _0 _0 _ i_ 120 l_O I_

displayed

at

4O

These throughout

relatively flight until

remainder engine

,ol
a FIGURE 10-9. VIBRATION TUIIE,

.m
ENVELOPE AND OF STI1UCNTS flight except which to CANISTER ENGINE COMPARTMENT MEASUI1EME data SA-1 on SA-3 and from SA-2 line flight as SA-3 data, long't), compared failure is being high levels. measurement and minimum in the that the lower measurepart

much

measurements

near-engine

The maximum to a very

heat

shield

measurement then

(E47-t) decreased

showed gradually flight

buildup low level

at ignition, at

approximately

95 seconds

time. This measurement vibration level at Maeh flight.

did show a slight increase in 1 and max Q similar to SA-2

All compared measurement

engine very twice

vibration well E45-8 as high to

(fuel

suction

The upper part mum and minimum structural envelope point ment, constant envelope, merits, region of

of Figure acceleration

10-9 The

displays the time histories upper data portion from shield to have beam the

maxiof the of the

was SA-2 was made

about flight. indicated to was

However, in determine of the high not included time this

no evidence area. the cause of

of structural these

measurements. was established measurements were previously flight. increase max Q. by

An investigation

the and The

gimbal

support which

heat noted spider vibration lower

measureremained of in the the measurelevel

Because E45-8

levels indicated, in the maximum as shown

throughout characterized shows Mach an 1 and

portion

acceleration

histories Itowever,

by the in

of Figure 10-9. ment is valid.

it is felt

Component Propulsion Twelve monitored showed ignition, There levels 44 was during System engine Vibrations The vibration measurements were rocket ment panel

Vibrations

hydraulic number 1, in canister

actuators, canister 14, by and a

ST-90, 14 lower propulsion total

ST-124P, support, unit of 22

retro instrudistri-

during the considerable followed no by

SA-3 flight. These measurements buildup at or immediately after a decay to a steady engine of powered state level.

butor were measurements.

monitored

vibration

significantchange the mainstage

in the portion

vibration flight The hydraulic actuators were instrumented with

eight ibration easurements. only v m The erraticdata were recorded fromthe actuator yaw measurement on engine four.Vibrationmplitudes a appeared tobevery similarto thedata recorded during previous flights. The centerart p
lope from erratic of the RMS the canister transients As area 1 _md of Figure 10-9 presents an enveacceleration area. This which the time histories envelope does occurred envelope recorded on indicates, buildup obtained notreflect some of all the the

urements The on fin inflight line

(XL24-9, measurement IV and 10-:[0). was this type of was

XL25-9, was the preliminary obtain data, the followed The to

XL26-11, located general at

XL27-13). station 889 trend of this data. of the the expected

(Figure measurement To obtain

purpose acoustic range were

"inflight" calibration db; data

recording higher

system

120 to 140 acoustic

consequently,

level "on-pad"

sacrificed

for the inflight data. The at 138.8 Section ment inflight seconds X Paragraph to appear source of unusual this measurcmentrecorded range time 10.5.3) disturbance (see and component caused the is rest the a disturbance vibrations measureflight. at this of the

measurements. canister the Mach

measurements max Q region.

during

Quasi-periodic out recorded flight ST-124 appear sients measurements. on were all the recorded on

transients on the These six ST-124

were ST-90

recorded gimbal transients and

throughon did the not Tran-

throughout

The time.

unexplained

measurements. by the

intermittently

three range

The recorded

trailing data This acoustic

wire between period data.

acoustic minus was The are

measurements 3 and plus levels 6 sufficient maximum presented

on

SA-3

measurements and 126 seconds, mounting frame.

the ST-124 roll gimbal between 110 but were not observed on the ST-124 An example of this is shown below.

seconds recorded :[0-I.

time.

to obtainusefui in Table

"on-pad" on these

measurements

TABLE
Vibration l_onl _ ST-124 Gtmbal

10-I.

MAXIMUM SOUND

ON-PAD PRESSURE

OVERALL LEVELS

V_braU,_

_cord

_)_

S'r-124

M,)_tmg

Fr_e Star_ _ T_.leat

Meas. XL

No.

Location Inside Sta. II toward Shroud 167 off Fin Shroud :[67 off Fin on Fin I Fin to Fin I

Max

OA-SPL

(db)

24-9

A relatively onds canister spider the cause Retro three inidcated and max although amplitude on the beam. of 14,

high ST-90 and these rocket

transient gimbal, at the

was two canister study

recorded panel 14

at

138.8 on

secin the XL 25-9

149.0

Liftoff

measurements support to determine

Outside Sta.

Additional

is required

transients. number measurements. increase effects at the The were sudden time data were cause of to 1, was instrumented The the noted increase of retro noted these vibration of in firing. with levels Mach cutoff, vibration Several the is The time XL 27-13 I

II toward XL 26-11 Sta. 889

157.5 -

vibration a gradual Q. an No

periods at engine

IV Adjacent Canister 13

149.5

",

Liftoff and 6 sec

expected erratic

occurred

Sta. 889 Canister

Inside 13

132.0

periods of measurements. presently One propulsion very retro smooth firing.

on all transients

under vibration unit

investigation. histories part of these measurements I0-I0. The are shown maximum measurement distributor. indicating 60 seconds only and This a at was located on the was at and in the lower of Figure

measurement slight engine buildup cutoffs

overall sound measurements the shroud

pressure levels (OA SPL), recorded on XL 24-9 and XL 25-9, indicated that a noise reduction XL 25-9 of about 8.5 db fairly of data during in the field.

approximately

provided

at liftoff.Measurement constant during the

then remained time duration somewhat to a change sound

remaining

acquisition, while XL 10.6 VEHIC LE ACOUSTIC MEASUREMENTS the acoustic wire r_casThe difference last 3 seconds

24-9 decreased of data due

spectral The measurement SA-3 vehicle and had four one inflight

characteristics

of the external

(L10-1I)

trailing

in the

maximum

overall

sound 45

pressure 27-13

levels indicated

of

measurements reduction

XL across

26-11 the

and wall

XL of

canister throughout

13

of

17.5

db.

Tltis

noise which

reduction data were

existed obtained.

a noise

the period

during

Overall 160

Sound

Pressure

Level

(db)

_:

0.0002

Dyr, ee/e_

T
(Sta.

I
IV)

Telemetered $g9 on Fin

150

,_
--Clilmped Data

d
I,,,4

/,
130 140 II II H ! ! I _-T,tansieat

120

\
I
80 100 (see) RE: 0.0002 Dynes/cm Outsloe 2 120 140 160 Time

II0 0 20 40 60 Range Overall 160 Sound ltressure Level (db)

f.

150

I I t

"1

Shroud

Outside_

Cein_Stee

/[

I
_-lnside Shroud

//
140

!I,
_Inside _ ..-------._ Canister

130 Sta. 889 I69 o_ Fim off Fin IV ll--_Fin I

120

/
Trailing Wires

....

Sta.

Ii0 =6 -4 -2

I
0 _ange Time (see) 4 6 8 i0

46

FIGUI_E

10-i0.

SA-3VEHICLE

ACOUSTICS

SECTION

XI.

ENVIRONMENTAL

TEMPERATURES

AND

PRESSURES

II. i

SUMMARY

aft

of

the

heat

shield. failed just

This after of

pressure ignition a power

differential and unit prior supply to

measurement flight vious considered vehicle. ment shield SA-I, shield material heat the shield M-31 the base The base was similar flights. Absolute after thermal SA-2, which 90 at region to that Radiative representative values seconds this time. insulation environment encountered heating for of the of The scheme the total flight heat was rates Saturn heating are shield the during on the on the two SA-3 I, Block environconsidered and same flame for SA-3 preare I The pressure presented heat pressure observed in the value km and of The cated a pressure measurements pressure on SA-3 across indithe than slightly higher gradient (90 shield difference for in liftoff, (Section due IX). to

malfunction

between the heat ll-1.

base shield All

pressure and measurements with flight. 0.03 (60 seconds

and flame

ambient shield on is the

both Figure

questionable

were the at an differential

generally powered altitude of of

consistent phase minus 6 kan of

each kg/cm

other _ was

throughout

A minimum of flight) 17

andSA-3, except for one panel was insulated with the Block Measurements the panel to temperature which be failed entirely made

on the heat II insulation of the on

(M-31). (except insulated

forward measurement prior adequate.

area between of 0. 03kg/cm seconds

the outboard 2 was observed of flight) between

engines. at an the

A maximum altitude of engine

to liftoff)

outboard

indicated

insulation

the engine a higher indicated

shroud. pressure on

There gradient

appears across flights.

to be an indication the Although heat shield this oc-

previous

heat shield than indicated on previous results from error band. all three

flights. However,

currence trajectory flights attributed are

may be a direct consequence followed by SA-3, results within to telemetry the error error. margin

of the different from all three which can be

flights are within the telemetry

Skin generally to the temperatures fairing except where centigrade Skin

temperatures lower higher indicated on on the no conical skin degrees in were the SA-3 propellant

on

the level S-IV of

propellant on previous in stage the the and

tanks flights tanks.'

were due Skin rises fairing

than

dummy portion

interstage

significant

temperature interstage of were of the 71 S-IV

on

maximum to t59 temperatures

temperatures centigrade the vicinity expected

degrees indicated. stage

Attltude (k_)

protu})crance

within

levels. FIGURE ll-J. BASE PRESSUPE MINUS AMBIENT PRESSURE VERSUS ALTITUDE magnitude occurred values ranged of 2.5 The in two area 3 and expected base At pressure this time, to km to of base pressure shield 0.15 2at minus region kg/cm 17.2km a was in dein (61.5 11-2). a slight 2

within out

Instrument the required The

canister level canister both

Pressure (0.7 to 1.2 temperatures range (10 and guidance to

was kg/cm were 40 during platform

maintained 2) throughmaintained centiBoth comparttemperature flight. The ambient where at an largest

flight. an

within grade) the ment range 11.2 ll. 2.1 ST-90

aeepetable and

degrees

during

prelauneh

pressure extreme altitude ii-i). behavior

in the from 0.37

flame minus kg/cm data

the ST-124P were

temperatures (25 2 degrees

in an acceptable centigrade)

(Figure different observed At the an

telemetered the flame Saturn stabilized 17 level. no this kin. shield flights 3 km,

indicated than pressure only it rapidly decrease at IECO conclusions phenomenon ( Figure

at lifteff.

region the

on the first altitude shield between to the star expected. drawn data any reason

TAIL BASE 1

SECTION ENVIRONMENT PRESSURE

of approximately

flame

with Then A sharp

decrease creased the kin) center as

11.2.1.

BASE

occurred definite unusual Close center suspect star the

Absolute

base pressure

instrumentation

on

have in the

been the pressure

ih regard shield pressure. in the to

SA- 3 was identical to that on SA - 1 and SA- 2. In addition, one instrument was installed on the SA-3 vehicle to measure the pressure (forward difference between the lower the region

flame

investigation region telemetry has

of not or

revealed measurement.

compartment

of heat shield) and

47

Fl_e 1.2

Shield ....

Pr,ssure

{kg/c_2) 7

I
0,8

during gas in factor these

the

SA-2 bands

flight from because

at the the of

same the

altitude. flight necessary are not

Measured included of the correction

temperatures required however, compared

SA-I

to compensate the corrected well with the

for SA-1 SA-3

the

shielding gas temperatures

0.4

gauges; "'_" .... '-_--_- .... "t .... . . also

measurements.

.....
Altitude _km)

[.. ! .....

heat FIGURE li-2. FLAME PARISON Stt_'LD VERSUS PRESSURE ALTITUDE COM-

The maximum shield, 1150 25 this was The engines, and degrees measured labeled the SA-3 gas

gas degrees km the near (or same the

temperature centigrade, 103 as heat seconds the measured shield, reached SA-3, of SA-2. outboard 11-4,

measured occurred range

on the at aptime measured for the the of 50 and tae

proximately SA-3); on SA-2. to and inboard shroud 700 degrees tures shroud,

maximum and

temperature

between between

Average ambient flame number the Rocket

values

of pb/Pa

the

ratio both are Wind AEDC,

of base the plotted tunnel are heat test also

pressure shield data shown

pressure, shield in (center Figure Test

, for star)

outboard centigrade

engines on that the in Figure below

a maximum approximately High engine did not tempera-

versus

Much from for

11-3. Facility,

centigrade

between SA-2 flight.

comparison.
Ratio L2 of 8use to Ambient P_6_d_e I

appear

during

,
8 / ( q

i
,

The appears flame latter ability

gas to be

temperature the and indicate the result circulating that base the

in in

the the

heat gases base tend

shield leaving region. to lose 20

region the The their

of reversed

shield would to flush

scoops above

region

15 or

kin.

-SA-3 1,2 Much 1.6 N_ber 2.0 2,_

Heat 2:8

Shield 3.2

The FIGURE 11-3. RATIOS AMBIENT MACH The compartment, measurements, for these power measuring failures supply. The ambient expected. ward forwarct pressure The compartment except maximum pressure minus 0. 023 at difference and ambient kg/cm 2 at an pressure altitudes below between pressure altitude lagged 2 km, the the as forwas of 21 compartment absolute pressure D27-5, D143-2, the are difference failed attributed pressures, and OF BASE PRESSUI_E NUMBER measurement four differential D144-9, lower loss of the prior to and in the lower PRESSURE VERSUS TO 25 km thermoeouple these real

slight

decrease be to measure

in the attributed the low

gas true

temperatures to the gas inability temperature rather

above of the at than a

can

possibly altitudes

high trend.

and

densities,

pressure D145-9, and upper All inboard of the

Surface shroud's lowest stringer

temperatures stringer band in temperature and skin is history trends heating. covered on a SA-2, since On the however, with a Figure

of 11-4.

the

outboard are the

engine shown shroud as

D143-4,

respectively, Although structural of the both SA-3 show the two are vehicle, aluminum a trend stringer was the

between

to lfftoff.

measurement, measurements subjected these tape. measurement 100 similar to the instruBoth to that

the temperature-time show same similar base

mentswere measurements, measured reaching degrees

by reflective

compartment

maximum, lower

which than

approximately SA-2 maximum.

approximately km. 11.2.1.2

centigrade

BASE

TEMPERATURES

Shown measurement, in the SA-3 of unshielded distributed base region thermoover the shield. mately maximum to 1650 as the and associated SA-3 flights measured with those are areas shown during measured Beyond gas centigrade ber This

also gas

in Figure C67-7, temperature the

11-4 which

is the was probe of

gas extended

temperature on the flame approxishield. probe this flame 1500 engine The (1600 value period. shield degrees cham-

located

Gas was measured

temperature with a series

8 cm below degrees measurement approximately

surface measured

the flame by this

couples. The thermocouples were area to ensure valid information.

temperature centigrade) went

is only off 15 to scale 20 constant 50 percent

an estimated during kin, the at of

The of in the 48 thebase Figure SA-3

bands 11-4. flight

of gas Gas compare

temperature SA-2 and temperatures favorably

regionfor

temperature

remained

(approximately indicating

temperature),

a choked

flow

condition.

2000 Total Mea _urements SA-2 aid SA-3

kI
1600 1200

8O0

400

10

20

30 Altitude

&0 (km)

50

60

70

FIGURE

11-4.

COMPARISON AND FLAME

OF

GAS

TFMPERATUIRES SA-2 AND SA-3

ON

HEAT

SHIELD,

11.2.

1.3

ttEATING

RATES

on calorimeters base. were and Saturn flown as Two mounted one I, an Block were of lothese the the heat good

the

S,_-3 on

flight. the flame

The shield.

remaining

calorimeter

was

mounted Four cated on the total SA-3 C76-3 aftof (M-31) mounted heating vehicle and the heat flush which 60 C63-1 shield on the was _5_tal

The SA-3 flux

total flight

heat is

flux C76-3 shown by with

(radiation and in these that C63-1 Figure two

plus

convection) during The the total show SA-1 11-5.

to

calorimeters, mately C77-5 shield 26 cm was panel

approxiILl heat

calorimeters measured

measured calorimeters during

calorimeter, experiment

agreement

measured

}{eat l_te,(kr._l/m2-..sac)

Measurements 4O I

C76-3

and

C63-I

2O

J
10 20 3.Q FIGURE it-5. TOTAL [IEAT RATE

SA-3

_JA-I

and

SA-2

40

50 Altitude (km)

FO

SA-3

BASE

49

and SA-2 flights uptoapproximately Between utilizes laboratory 16kin. a calibration method determine to 16and25kin, these measurements indicated heating the inflight corrections. ratesapproximately twotimes thatmeasured onthe This particular calorimeter, even though it SA-1 nd a SA-2 flights. From25kmuntilOECO, the efficiency as calorimeters SA-3 eating were higherhan h rates also t thosefSA-I showed almost identical o and SA-2. C76-3 and C63-1 in laboratory calibration, had a loss
after cutoff (based on the temperature-time history) on C76-3, C63-1, Thetotalheatflux measured C77-5,the of almost twice the rate encountered by measurements calorimeter mounted with panel flush the insulated with or on previous flights ' total calorimeter M-31,is shown Figure in 11-6. ith W theexception (Figure 11-7). of a high transient justafterliftoff,theSA-3 fluxin heat this areaagrees, sexpected, a withSA-1 8A-2 and A second degree polynomial was used to smooth data shown in Figure 11-7. heatfluxupto 32kin. The relatively ide flux through the temperature w heat bandrom kmtocutoffs the f 32 i resultofapplying two The heating decay does not appear to be affected by independent calibration techniques. technique One con- OECO; i.e., there is no inflection point in the temsiders nly temperature-time following o the decay cutoff perature decay. This indicates that the major heating forthe determination calorimeter coefficient source at high altitudes is either the inboard engines ofthe loss to beappliedhroughout t flight. The otherechnique or the turbine exhaust ducts. t

Total i00

Heat

Rate

(kcal/m21sec)

8O Measurement I SA-3 SA-I 6O and SA-2 C77-5 C77-5

@ )

4O

2O

................
_ !':':'::"":-

-2O 0 i0 20 30 40 50 " Altitude FIGURE 50 11-6. TOTALItEAT RATE TO M-31 PANEL COMPARED TO SA-i AND SA-2 (km) RATES

Temperature

IECO

OECO

slightly flux where fluenced lower imately

Typical Decay

higher measured the by on SA-3 25 km heat

than at flux than on exhaust

that appears jet

of

SA-1 to or be

or

SA-2. (the was Beyond flux most

The strongly

heat in-

approximately flow

8 km reversal) SA-2. the heat

altitude slightly approxremained

SA-1 IECO,

until

relatively

constant.

l_ta_. 3OO

Heat

I_:[

(kca1/m"-s.m)

C77-5

25[_

Time

200 FIGURE 11-7. COMPABISON FOR At this time, C77-5 OF WITH as CUTOFF A TYPICA to the cause DECAY L DECAY of this
150

(:

no explanation decay the heating the not laboratory a convective at cutoff

___.L a

rapid temperature evaluation indicates difference exists, cutoff possible indicated a possibility calorimeter in whereby is possibly conduction by the of the

is available, following and cooling

but preliminary possibilities: 1) cycles obtained entire flight source exist. method, flight, higher and possibly after

correction valid losses for during

factor the

2) than 3)

5O

calibration cooling could

m_

hittingthe

0 0 10

I
20 Altttu_ 30 (_) 40 50

surface

Differences and SA-2, should reached Even higher insulation and be as though on in SA-3

existed the

between immediate before

the

height, of These

mounting, the SA-I, are rates. to shield the these be 26 Two cm aft calorimeters two inboard thermal of the were engines These radiation heat shield located in calorimeters calorimeters on the SA-3 an between approximately differed were vehicle. outboard symmetrical considerably located Both and FIGURE 11-8. TOTAL SHIELD, tIEATING SA-1, RATE SA-2 AND ON FLAME differences

vicinity firm

calorimeters. comparison heating did not rates

SA-3

considered to the relative the SA-3, total this

conclusions of heating appeared the heat

influence

forward side temperature same as SA-I and SA-2. measurements a truer loss will coefficient.

which was approximately Further evaluation of in an effort

positions. in design. Thermal

be performed

to obtain

radiation

levels

which

were

measured Correcdifferent

In on the values, possible sources end to of the to whether

general, heat since error could flight, calorimeter shield

the preliminary

total should

calorimeter only evaluation be has

heating used as indicated

values relative the

on the SA-3 flight are tions were made to the techniques, sing was and to data temperature obtained measuring obtain was the both of

shown in Figure 11-9. telemetered databy two which the consider The data calorimeter the in the slug history The the lower losses

calorimeter upper heat of band input the slug band after of en-

sources conceivably one should

stated above. As these error become significant near the not attempt or cooling a conclusion was dominant as heating

history. by varying

the temperature-time proper by correction. evaluating

convective

surfaces.

corrected

The

total

heat

flux

measured in Figure

by

the 11-8.

flame The

shield SA-3

calorimeterC78-8 inflight ment

is shown

gine cutoff using the defining a heat balance second method assumes constant will be cycles. this time, throughout the same However, and for

temperature-time assuming no heat that the correction i.e., the the heating has not loss and been

slope and input. This factor is coefficient the cooling proven calibration 5t at

heat flux to the with that measured and absolute heat flux

flame shield is in good agreeduring the SA-I and SA-2 are considered near liftoff on valid. SA-3 The was

flight; both

flights, maximum

values measured

this based

point on the

laboratory

)eraEurm

(o)

technique, losscoefficient this variesthroughout flight.

5o I
25

............. -.ii/ii_

Apoint finterest o concerning thetwo methods is thatvalues btained bothliftoffandcutoffagree o at within theaccuracy ofthedata.At liftoff,thiswould beexpected sincethecalorimeter losses shoulde b FIGURE negligibleompared thesensibleeatinput.At c to h cutoff,t appears i thatthetwotechniques yield also approximately thesame results.Intermediate values 11.2.3 between liftoff andcutoffdifferclue themethods to utilized.
-25 50

11-10.

FNGINE TURAL

COMPARTMENT TEMPERATURES AND FLAME

STRUC-

FORWARD

HEAT

SttlELD

Figure flame shield area is

Two 11-11;

other temperatures measurement strut, support. and C21-5,

are C20-5, attached

also shown attached to to the level

in the

support seal as

flame in this

The

temperature

expected.

Lc_

Radiant I00

Heat

Flux

(kcal/m2-aec)

FIGUItE

11-11.

ENVIRONMENT, FOI1WARD OF FLAMF SHIELD recorded are shield of SA-1 presented and SA-2, on the as a forward band on ranging The during explained; shield high the however, that temperature. in SA-3 from

SIDE

Temperatures the
60

side Figure agree minus

of

heat with to plus

shield The those heat

11-12. well
ght calibralion

measm'ements

25 ture

25 degrees by 3) SA-1 cannot and of SA-3 the

centigrade. C70-7 be heat results,

temperaSA-2 flight based it is not The

measured the

_Q

(Reference upon characteristic maximum measuredduring

_rrectLot based on 11 flight losB deter_tnitl_

it follows

temperature the SA-3

of 25 degrees flight, indicated

centigrade, that the heat

shield failure
60

insulation was more of the measurement the relative cannot be

than adequate. Due to the in back of the M-31 insulated of the two insulation

20 Altitude

30 (km)

4O

5O

panel, materials RATES FOR PREDATA COR*o

adequacy assessed.

FIGURE

11-9.

RADIANT SA-3 FLIGHT RECTION

HEATING AND

FLIGHT

COMPARING INFI,IGHT

TECHNIQUES

11.2.2

ENGINE

COMPARTMENT

FIGURE The treme Ambient measured, grade indicated. temperature flight (Figure 52 or engine compartment experienced each no ex11.3

11-t2.

BASE SIDE

FNVIRONMENT, OF IIEAT StIIELD

FORWARD

temperature environment air temperature within and below The of no upper SA-3 11-10}. temperature minus limit was 50 of the slightly

during the flight. engine area was 0 degree centigrade centiwas

SKIN

above degrees engine

The the propellant

skin

temperatures tanks for the

at various SA-3 vehicle Generally, the SA-3 the

positions were the flight and meas-

on

compartment that of SA-2

below

ured by temperatures lower than

ten

thermocouples. measured during indicated during

skin were SA-2

those

SA-1

flights(Figure11-13), dueto thehigher propellant levelnthe i tanks; however, measured the temperatures were within anticipated ofskintemperatures. the range Shown inFig_are aretheskintemperature 11-14 measurements fueltank, 50-F3, the shroud ofthe C and LOX atstation35.The 8 lattermeasurements ingood were agreement withthose oftheSA-1 SA-2 and flights.
T_r+ture (C)

FIGURE
sA-i _ sA-2 I

11-15.

TFMI)EI/ATI!RE ON DUMMY INTERSTAGE

S-IV

MEASUREMENT STAGE ANI)

--

-20O

-300

k o 20 ao 6O _.ngl 80 Ttmt (see)

1
too t2o 140 160

FIGIJIII';

11-13.

PIIOPELI_ANT PERA'FUIIE

AT

FANK SKIN TEMSTATION 745

T_persrure loC

(c) r ............... LO x

I Stl

I _)5

[ I ]

FIGUIIE

11-16.

TE M1)E I{ATUItI.: ON DUMMY S-IV INTERSTAGE

Mt.:ASUI_E STAGE

MENT ANI)

---.....

__--j:-_-_ -_,.,__--4+__

S_r_d

I
The 153 heating seconds from in retro the Figures (Figure increase centigrade at to 161 determine

-too

rockets range retro 11-16) during at seconds). any nearby time, 11-15

were and and rockets'

ignited the plume 11-16. the rocket seconds An

at response

approximately due to the is tem(from degrees is being (thermoetc. skin ) 10 impingement Measurement maximum firing to 315

.200

......
_o ao

2tLI
60 Range go Tim* (*ec) IOO 12o Iao 16o

shown C127-11 perature degrees centigrade

indicated retro 154

investigation effects members, of the

FIGURE

11-i4.

[)ROPEI,[,ANrF PEI_A'FUI_E temperatures stage 18 stage and by at the

TANK SKIN TEMAT STATION 835 various interstate Twelve were the vicinity other located retro of six positions fairing of located analytical the on deteron the

made couple that

secondary structural an indication

attachment, may have prevented

The dummy measured moeouptes dummy mination and on skin the

skin S-IV by S-IV

actual

were therthe

temperatures. Temperatures protuberance heating theory rate was were of encountered. in the vicinity expected twice of the that S-IV predicted stage a by

thermocouples. DAC) to supplement in the The were during fairing rise

(requested of structures regions. interstage

within

levels,

although

protuberances measurements to monitor any

approximately

separated

temperature

rocket

firing.

Further the factors indicated

analysis which by these may

is beingperformed have influenced

to determine the temperatures

measurements. CANISTER

No aerodynamic ical skin degrees indicated in Figures

significant heating of the centigrade (measurements 11-15 and

rise was interstage prior to

in

skih fairing

temperature except where rocket ,and centigrade C133-11

due on the firing conof were shown maximum

to 11.4 INSTRUMENT

indicated, to 159 retro degrees

portion

temperatures

71

11.4.

CANISTER

PRESSURE and guidance components lo-

C128-11 11-16).

Instrumentation cated in the canisters

requircd

the canister

pressure 53

to

be

maintained Three

between canister and gave within

0.7 pressures

and

1.2

kg/cm

2 during measured pressure pressure 150 sec-

able degrees ceptable

range range

of

canister All at liftoff. call ST-124P

temperature canisters were

was within

10 the

to

40 ac-

flight.

were that the Canister 2 from 0 to

centigrade.

during flight was maintained decayed onds range

indications this range. 0.1 kg/cm

approximately time.

Specifications in the ments ST-90 to ST-90 The be and

for

ambient guidance

air platform

temperatures compartcentigrade. compartrange rature stayed ST-90 flight. measwithin ambient at

controlled and STST-124P were

at 25 in

i the

2 degrees platform acceptable tempe

11.4.2

CANISTER

TEMPERATURE

Both ment liftoff. urement the

guidance

temperatures

Temperature by an arm. there external After was no the

in the

canisters

was on was

controlled the swing retracted accept-

124 P compartment that not the

cooler package mounted umbilical swing arm canister cooling.

indicated range was

temperature flight, during

acceptable

throughout monitored

additional

The

temperature

54

SECTION

XII.

AERODYNAMICS

12.1

SUMMARY

pressure behind static stability and from were the in the the ratio, center SA-3 gradient of pressure telemetered with preforce for results values the of 12.2

region

(Cp

= minus

I. 74 at roach 0.7) region. ANGULAR RATIO}

right

the shoulder RATIO OF

in the subsonic GRADIENTS OF

Aerodynamic normal location data. dicted coefficient SA-3 from of flight previous force were The values. and had determined results However, the flights, and

coefficient,

ACCELERATION

(STABILITY

flight

agreement

b_'adient

of normal location than due to did lower

The ratio of the gradients tion (stability ratio CI/B ) was average and telemetered

of angular determined

accelerafrom the (tip)

center error

of pressure margins

larger

pitch plane engine angle-of-attack

deflection

as expected, dynamic data for surface

the free-stream

(C_p).

angle-of-attack Surface as pressure a ratio SA-3 tunnel

pressure. the SA-3 flight are prepressure to ambient agreed well with data The and time was (79.6 values of values 12-1). at the time compared of C1/B obtained well for when value the SA-3 plotted of value margin shown minus of vehicle versus 0.58 minus in the in Figure pressure

sented

of

predicted (Figure obtained seconds) An estimate

agreed

pressure. from wind

pressure tests.

data

A minimum of mmximum

dynamic

to a predicted the possible ratio error is also

Pressure shield results. are The in

data

on

the

simulated affreement

Centaur with wind

weather tunnel low

0.55.

excellent flight results

indicate

a maximum

flig_at-deter 12.1.

mined

stability

SA-3 lllii --_ 0.2 Ratio of Gradients of Angular Accelerations (C Error

Telemetered Limits on

Data Telemetered Data

Predicted /B )

i##/#

,I

t.

o
-0.2 -0.4

o
B / CI = angular _p acceleration angle due to unit of attack,

B O

angular due to engine

acceleration outboard deflection

-0.6

"/1

-0.8 Range Time (sec)

I 1
ACCELERATIONS VERSUS RANGE TIME 55

FIGURE

12-1.

RATIO

OF

GRADIENTS

OF

ANGUI,AR

12.3 GRADIENT OFNORMAL FORCE COEFFICIENT CENTER PRESSURE AND OF

LOCATION The gradient of the normal force coefficient were

All 205 on SA-3

four were

surface located to the

pressure on the fillets extreme

pick-ups

at Station

of the flared-out portion Figure of 12-3 the is

region fuel and

adjacent LOX

lower to SA-2.

tanks,

similar

(C z') and the center of pressure location ( C P/D) obtained using telemetered values of angle-of-attack, normal acceleration, and engine deflection.

a plot of surface-to-ambient-pressure Maeh number for all four individual Also this shown station. are their approximate

ratio versus measureJ_ents. radial locailfll_s at

Calculated agreement with results 12-2). SA-1 lower and limited supersonic as well the 12.4 12.4. 1 error or when

values predicted plotted

of

Cz' and CP/D are values and previous Mach number error to

in fair flights' (Figure

Except rose Mach mum steadily number pressure

for

measurement above of ambient

D7_-10, at this 0.4, 1.5 at also data.

the station reaching

pressures after amaxiExcellent with SA-2 a

versus

approximately ratio of

SA-3 data has SA-2, which

a broader is attributed and trajectory. data at to

margin than the generally pressure unreliability numbers and low

Mach shown

2.

values wide the as

of angle-of-attack on scatter SA-3 region. SA-I margin the SA-3 of analysis In and of the this SA-2 SA-3

dynamic The Mach transonic

agreement values and

(Figure 12-3)is wind tunnel test

experienced

higher the

The had results other SA-3 been

validity

of

the datafrom questioned it differed the consistent As some

measurement after widely trend shown validity D78-10 the from in was SA-2 wind Figure very to the

D78-10 flight tunnel by similar results the t2-3,

region, flight results.

predicted results were

values within

previously that from for and

on the

grounds three data

exhibited

measurements. measurement adding

SURFACE STATION

PRESSURE 205 MEASUREMENTS

to SA-2, thereby from SA-2.

Center of (callbers)

Fresaure

(CP/D) from GmbaI Plane (Sta. lO0)

--SA-3 Data ------SA-I & SA-2 Data_ea_ ---_Predicted

I
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6

I
2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 6.0

Nachl_mber Gradlent of Normal Force Coefficient (C_)

SA-3 Data ------SA-I & SA-2 Data 04ean) _----Pred ic ted

I
0 0.4
0.8 1.2 1.6

J
2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0

Rach

_lumba r

FIGURE 56

12-2.

CENTER

OF

PRESSURE VERSUS

LOCATION MACH

AND

GRADIENT

OF

NORMAL

FORCE

COEFFICIENT

NUMBER

HA-3 _-2 -_lent Pres*ure O Predicted

Telemetered Teleu_tered O/tad

beta _tta _-3 Tunnel) -_-_-2 Telemetered Teleueteted (Wind DQta Data Tunnel)

I
Nea.ur_nt D76-

i
J IQ ._._7_ __..__=_ "

PredLcted

aurJe_

Pre**ure/Ambtent

Prem,urt

_a,urelnt

oeo-r

1.0 0 0 O.4 0.8 t.2 1.6 2.O 2.4 2.8 3.2

2.o

._s_.
asur_

,r_.=._./*,.,,_._t p_..n_. | /
t_

)_,,c:. u_._
Oo Sur{ace O.4 0.8 1.2 _Pressure 1.6 ..... 2.0 2.4 2.8 MAch 3.2 _ber Pressure/6mbten_

)_a*uremnt

0_I-FI

0 0 2.0 Surface 0.4 0.8 1.2 Premsute 1.6 2.0 2.4 Z.8 MAch 3.2 Number 0 _urface O4 Pre_e/Amb_ O8 12 _ 16 2O 24 28 Ma_h _2 _u_b_

Premoure/Ambl_t

I
14tSlUrem_t D78-

i
l(_

.......
0.4 S_l"fae 0.8 Presmure/Amb1_t 1.2 PreJsure 1.6 2.0 2._ 2.8 Nach 3.2 Number

D_9-

i0

_..,i o*

.-".

1o; ...... i 201

0 I 04 O8 12 1.6 Surt*ce Pressure/_Jbtent Pres,ure _ea*u_ment D83-P3 1.0 . 0 . 0 O4 08 12 16 sty. 86O Hel*urm_t l_catto_* S60 & 863} _3-F3 _0-rl i_ 12 (Sta. St*. _3

2.0

24

28 M_ch

3.2 _mber

2O

24

28 _ach

32 Number

0.4

O.8

1.2

[.6 I

2.O 078-I0

2.4

2.8 _ch

3,2 N_mber " Sta. 863

IT I_2-P3 l_l-Ft Sta. $60

J'_JuF_ntLocitl_ (Sta.

205)

ri Zl

__

IV _8D79-10

D77-10 076-10

[,'[G U R F_' 12-3.

RATI()S AMBIENT MACI[

OF

S[II_FACE ]H{ESSURE

PI_ESSU[U,; VEI_SUS

TO

FIG[;RE

12-4.

RATIOS AMI?,II,,'NT MAct!

OF NUM AND

SURFACE PRESSURE f:_EI:_ 1019

PI{I';SSUIH" VF I_SUS

TO

NU'M BF;I{ AND 863 MEASUREMENTS 12.4.3 STATION

12.4.2

STATION

860

989

Pressure from cated number radial face situated upper the the the at four Stations in Figure location of pressure at portion center fuel 860

ratios measurements and

(surface (same 863, are

to ambient) as on plotted versus

obtained SA-2), loMach the Surfrom plotted the

Pressure four

ratios measurements Mach

(surface on

to ambient) the interstage 12-5.

obtained are These for the D86-20

versus

number

in Figure

12-4, with a each individual

sketch indicating measurement. D80-FI and on the

surface pressure measurements first time on SA-3. Measurements are from D87-20 mately of the 989. located fin are at Station III at 989.3, and I, Station

were obtained D84-20 and approximately

measurements station 863, were tanks and

D82-F3, extreme direction. facing above that

7 degrees D85-20 and at approxiI. Values at Station at Langley

located facing

locations located

respectively; 1019.3, also Ill and pressure 0.3 tunnel flight and lower since from tests data. D87-20, pressures the

of the fuel D81-FJ of the cluster Observed

the flight were 860,

Measurements tanks.

D83-F3 at Station

located slightly indicated 80

7 degrees from ratio of surface from Data well from with

fin locations to ambient l. 0 at Mach wind the

flight

readings

3 increased

to approximately

the pressure dropped to a minimum of ambient at Maeh 1.2 and gradually increased around results 8-foot comparison pressure error than margin Math from TPT 2. wind and in SA-3 tunnel 4-foot Figure SA-3, of the data tests UPWT. 12-4, but both telemetered is in good conducted SA-2 indicates results data.

percent of to ambient with Langley for lower the

2. I atMach2. (ce = 0) agreed

agreement in the data, shown

Measurements 1019.3 Station cated of the indicated 989. closer S-IV 3, stage. as

D85-20 slightly expected, expansion Readings

at

Station than are at lo-

slightly are within

orifices on the

to the

corner

frustrum D85-20 57

measurement

Figure pressure obtained

12-6 coefficients from the

is

representative Mach the Figure a value

plot number on

of which panel

surface were HI-IV. measlargest 2.5 1.74 cm was

versus six and in occurred where 0.7.

measurements location 12-6. of

A configuration urement pressure is also

sketch shown

of each The 1726, minus

coefficient

at Station

from the shoulder, obtained at Mach

_.,,Jr.

_.''L_._*.

''%

FIGURE RATIOS SURFACE t2-5. OF PRESSURE TO AMBIENT PRESSURE VERSUS MACH NUMBER INTERSTAGE ON dropped 1.5atMach from 1.2toavalue slightly above FIGURE 12-6. I)RESSURE COEI:EICIENT VEI_SUS ambient Mach at 1.6. It is conjectured atthistime MACH NUMBER ON CENTAUR thatthelocal hock ave s w movingownstream d caused SIMU LATION PANE [, thisdrop inpressure. ind W tunnel measurements at coefficients at w_rious Mach locations inclose roximity p totheflightmeasurement Values of pressure numbers are plotted versus vehicle station in Figure do indicate not thisdrop.However, thevalue obtained agreement with wind fromthewind tunnel was tests afaired value, the 12-7. Results show excellent and tunnel results (Reference 4) on the Centaur shoulder possibility xists e thatthefaired value notcorrect. is
configuration tests pressure at Ames The directly Research flight behind Center results the for indicated shoulder the

12.4.4 CENTAUR SIMULATION PRESSURES Anexperiment wasflown onSA-3osimulate t the Centaur houlder s configuration thenose behind fairing. Thefailureonthefirst Centaur flightw_us possibly attributed adverse toan pressure distribution
in the vicinity of the shoulder arrangement. tion in support mounted on SA-3 Two To gain some with respect full scale to a venting flight informapanels were of this hypothesis, to simulate 2.3-cm two

Mach a very in the

numbers low subsonic

available. region region.

a portion of the Centaur

..h,.,. ..,,.

configuration. on the payload locations other

thick panels

were one

installe4 fin

, .......

_,,,.

+,,,

'_',

surface

of the vehicle, panel

between

HI and IV (designated fin locations I and

III- IV) and the panel

between

HI (designated

I -If). The panels wide in circumference to 1731. back The

were approximately and extended from of the nose cone

60 degrees Station 1968 was moved

shoulder

10 cm A

to station 1727 on the area encompassed total of ii surface located the base of the pressure on measure-

by panels. ments surface similar on of 58 SA-3. the were to panels

....I_+1
FIGURE 12-7.

I _ ;+ i
COEFI:ICIENT VEI/SUS VAIIlOUS -

longitudinally The the Centaur simt_lation were SA-3

the center]ine in an area instai|ed on each one PRESSURE VEHICLE MACI| SIMU panels

of the panels. Base pressures during

vented

STATION NUMBERS ON

AT

measured flight.

CENTAUtt

LATION

PA NE L

SECTION

XIII.

INSTRUMENTATION

13. i

SUMMARY

sure Tail.

Gear These

Case

Lub,

Lo;

and

D27-5, 3.2

pressure seconds after

Inside ignire-

failures All their

occurred of these

Overall tem was 97.0 satisfactorily All preflight Transmitted was time that failure. sufficient of the

reliability percent. with and

of All

the

SA-3

measuring normal were

sys-

tion

command. to

measurements prior

had to the

commutators from

performed operation. normal.

no deviation inflight RF

sponded failure.

various

systems

power

calibrations power from good 292 all data

Measurement telemetry during the links flight are The Gas pressure Tank ignition. later. strain had no showed tion. no output

M27-12, even

Frequency though this

Static inverter

Inverter, did func-

to

produce

approximately entire system

seconds.

Indications without significant

performed

measurement No. 1, became The signal

D3-0t, intermittent was

Pressure 1.6 sec-

of

in LOX

The Band Even

si_,mal the

strength was very C-Band

of all close Radar

RF to

systems, the expected

except values. a lower-than-

C-

onds after 3.9 seconds The ing Stud,

completely

lost

Radar, though

received

measurement output. This

E21-02, failure were

Strain, is believed four before other launch

Mountto be gauge day.

normal signal, tracking the UDOP system, and cient for This dundant good trajectory

information the Azusa information.

from this system, system was suffi-

in the failures

strain gauges. There on similar measurements

flight has tracking

again proven As

the usefulness

of re-

The D145-9, after have is also ignition.

pressure Ap Across

measurements Shroud,

D143-2, were lost are at this in

D144-9, 0.5

and

systems.

pointed out in Section of flight exist when

seconds to at

XIII Paragraph data good from one

13.4, some system

periods

ignition. received a large

These avery amount

measurements high of "g" load displacement

believed time. this There area

may

be insufficient to provide but these periods systems. camera to that coverage of SA-2. for may be

tracking

information,

filled using The the SA-3

data from

redundant sequential

engineering flight was

Pressure tion Chamber,

measurem(mt failed became output of They was the at 73

D1-4, seconds

pressure range noisy at

Combustime. this This time.

comparable

measurement A normal 13.2 MEASURING ANALYSIS Three Measurement Malfunctions function. measurements measurements made fourteen six were on the tively. Partial All-5, ed to Main record voltage The Top, gauge does that The measuring Radiation D13-5, Turbine eight measurements voltage thatwere C69-5, Fuel lost because Temperature Pump Inlet; of was time

extremely observed 108 discrete after

cutoff. probes 6, 2, A19-03 did not

level

were At9-OC,

probes number A19-01, and

and 11 on respec-

There SA-3 found usable, vehicle. to be and

were

607

flight

Of these completely one was

measurements, unusable,

were partially failures Fuel the and valves' were LOX also Valve observed respectively. opening, because previously. Pressure pressure. A systems pressure. port the the on thereby the was pressure the same the showing port. as the of nitrogen vehicle vent It the is gas rose side an increase The drop pressure in the 59 Gear This Case is a of but the on A6-5 and These failmeas-

questionable.

measurements Two types of First, there were temperature tion ments in the in area malfunctions seven pressure lost serving Second, which the occurred on transducers because the there measuring the flight. and one

recorded

the valves' closing mentioned D18-2,

uring

failure

measurement power in failures. supply five.

of a malfuncdirect were measuresix other components measurement an pressure support orifice the the this to the thus launch. pressure unusually showed type not the high

measurements had apparent

transducer. high pressure trapping As

analysis believed someinto of the the in transducer

obstructed, during

failure were:

Shield; D12-5, LOX D18-5, Gear

Pressure Pump

atmosphere, transducer the rise gas in this

Pressure Inlet;

Inlet; D14-5, Gear

Pressure Case Top; Pres-

decreased, trapped case at

Pressure Case Lub,

D19--5, Pressure

Hi; D20-5,

atmospheric pressure. obstruction relieved theflameattenuation less(probably This was was asmuch as shortly beforeutoff. c 10db)than thatnotedntheBlock type. o I
Measurement Overall Reliability reliability of the SA-3 measuring system 13.4 13.4.1 RF SYSTEMS ANALYSIS

TELEMETRY

was 97.0 percent; this is assuming eighteen failures for 598 measurements, plus three failures of the 108 discrete level measurements. probes which are the remaining nine

Cape Telemetry. 240 degrees from

2 Station pad 34)

(1.7

km

at approximately

Telemetry The first The whereas on SA-2 The time optical on this the was type flight, of reliability approximately these of liquid level probes the 56 probes, very was impedance percent. that recorded chamber the reafter cut- 3O

signal to be The

strength above the

(Figure receiver received

13-I) during 25 65 to

at

this at retro

used 97.2 type

for percent,

the

station all times.

appears

threshold

performed

satisfactorily. probes

lowestsignatwas The to signal level

reliability

rocket at this dbm.

-10

firing. time

dropped minus

35 dbm 75

approximately

to minus

pressure

transducers in the combustion

--i

sidual pressure off performed transducers on performed The performance the measurement due to operate 13.3

satisfactorily. Also, the surface areas and

the pressure retro rockets

as expected.
-5O

PredLcte,

temperature as they on the

measurements did the on the M31 SA-2 panel voltage

gave flight,

a 100 percent except did for not

-70 0 40 I 8o !20

J
_s0 Flight Ti._ (see) ZOO z4o 290 320 Stgnai Strength (dbm) Cd_l_ _I,DL_I_ z

which failure.

measuring SYSTEM

TELEMETRY

ANALYSIS

_Fredl

_d

m_Ret_o$

Fire

Data vehicle system In SA-3 links,

transmission was and two effected a TM

for by auxiliary

flight eight

testing radio

Saturn
-]0

telemetry assembly. system flight satis-70 0 4,0 8G L20 Flight Tt_ bO (_e_) 200 h 2_,0 280 320 5_

equipment systems, (link

addition, 6) for and

experimental RF time. assembly first

a PCM 9), were operated

(link tested factorily.

a UHF

the

ALl systems

FIGUttE The excellent, system strength were The retro enough overall and will from noted, PCM rocket for but package firing, good data. from The found be used telemetry The propellant stage) being higher overall more data. Block tanks showed good and The same II antenna at the results, somewhat attenuation as for the panel forward with more (located portion the signal constant between of than the strength other records Signal resulting the S-I performance extensively in the of Possibly, future the the tot UHF UHF link band 9 was will performance indications very link of are accurate was very most a 30 still to [ink 6 was found to be that the PCM/FM data. good. likely 35 dbm The A few antenna drop at a level signal nulls nulls. during high Flame signal was Maximum seconds, 10 to 25 ever, prior aspect but to aspect Other they muLtipath, angle,

13-1.

TELEMETI/Y (CAPE

SIGNAL

STYIENGTH 2) were present, attributed small

TELEMETI_Y strength These attenuation. may antenna

provide this these

decreases were less cross and

in signal intense. polarization, flame

be

were but

nulls,

showed

remained

attenuation 98 not noisy attenuation

was to 138

present seconds.

at

this However,

station the

approximately

to be

satisfactory.

until approximately occurred between

118 seconds. 120 and 130

transmitting

and caused a db below normal,

signal drop of approximately which was expected. Howthat This the was attenuation caused by the would end

it wasn'texpected to engine angle. cutoff.

changing

attenuation from although retro it is

due firing, not

to

the can very

roll be

of

the

vehicle, on these This

recordings. about the 6O

at retro rocket Block I antenna;

firing was however,

seen

pronounced.

meanshatthevehicleantenna t gainat this aspect angle re.latively is constant.

Cape Telemetry from 3 Station (6.9 Pad 34}. km at approximately 200 degrees

G BI

Telemetry Signal was

Station receivedat All fired. lowenough some links At

(Grand this functioned this

Bahama station the noise to

Island). between signal in the roll were on 48 until reduced large and the some

55 retro links

seconds. rockets dropped Also, to present

normally

time,

to cause due

Preliminary strength signal between There propagation Flame from dropout this was this at

investigation station any time. and signal the was Cape flame attenuation in signal due the less, Cape first and was

shows sufficient Some fluctuation few began 2 station. thanother less, this outboard

that difference

the to 2 of

signal prevent existed station.

data. enough was

decreases signal station. noise.

cause at this

No

flame

attenuation

station more during

Telemetry from seconds 5 to

multipath flight. 10 seconds Link links. 10 exEven

Han6ar grees

D from

Station (4.3 Pad 34).. at dropouts during the to used a by low this

km

at approximately

210

de-

attenuation at less

later thav. perienced though flame

Telemetry attenuation was

The experienced intervals buted hand

signal

station at retro roll. gain

was

generally firing may and This

low and be

and at to

rocket system

station engine

recorded cutoff.

vehicle

attri-

a shortdecrease This gases. more station, was probably Some of

after final

partially tracking

partially

to the signal

expulsion decreases

of exhaust were 2

this

station.

strength

intense than especially

the decreases at after the vehicle

Cape Telemetry began to roll.

I:IHF Telemetry mately 200 was This is the a Saturn flight it followed was than vehicle the

- Mandy from

Station (7.7 km Pad 34).

at approxi-

degrees

Signal about the

attenuation, same as the

due Cape

to

retro

rocket

firing,

Telemetry

2 station. first was the time flight. excellent, predicted of retro systems. to roll, the this flame rockets The but using that The UHF signal and curve effects affected signal this only could one much 102 two as telemetry strength shown almost from was be antenna in has been during Figure perfectly. the this low engine system after used powered 13-2, on

Green

Mountain

Telemetry

Station

(near

MSFC).

The at this

telemetry station signal

signal approximately strength SA-2. but or

(Figure 128 was

13-2) seconds

was after

received liftoff.

There exhaust, less the was The signal short

noevidence and the the VHF began system

Average higher been time. error due SA-3

approximately for this investigation

15 to 18 db has not yet at this an and

than on determined,

The reason is under

expected and it

because

was

The difference in calibration to the flights.

CIIZ_ StX,,t Strenat_ (d_,O

could possibly by a difference conditions

be caused by in propagation of the SA-2

turned away from data noise threshold dropped periods. below

station was minus value

of the time. dbm and the times for

different

weather

only

_01_TalN

T_L_y _t,k

S'_ATIO_

13.4.2
Retro

UDOP

tvt t_

Mandy from

Station Pad The 34).

(7.7

km

at

approximately

200

degrees

AC_,C voltage with Signal Maximum occurred produced 25 dbm for their one

at

this

stationwas between

constant 78 and

until 79 until below Retro

iio " 0 go 80 120 l'ltlht 160 TL_e (see) _c_ 240 28o 320

125 began

seconds,

exception probably 125 seconds

seconds. IECO. normal) rocketfiring mately

attenuation, attenuation between

caused and to 133 continued 15

by flame, dbm of

at approximately

Sllfnsl

$tr*nSth

(dbm)

UI_

TI:IJKgTIt'f.i_4Pr Ll_

STATION

(12 125 and

seconds.

a sig_qal duration. occurred caused rolled. until attenuated

attenuation

approxi-

Signal firing
-rio 0 _0 SO IZO rttghr 160 xt_ (_e) 2OO Z40 ZSO 32O

variation destruct, the was noisy vehicle received and

between by nulls in

retro the

rocket antenna

and as Signal

pattern

FIGURE

13-2.

TELEMETRY ( GREEN

SIGNAL MOUNTAIN

STRENGTH AND MANDY) but

465

seconds destruct.

after

liftoff,

it was

after

61

Tango 270

Station degrees Average

(Titusvilte from signal Pad 34).

Cocoa

Airpor

G 22.9

km

at

flights vehicle. 95 dbm, much to one

because However which as the 35 roll

of

the the

slower signal the range the

[iftoff remained data signal since records

velocit above

5, of

the

minus

meets to 40 of the

commitments. was This the indicate attenuated is probably system that has the

strength

was

higher

than

prelimi-

From as due only MK and

160 seconds

to destruct, dbm vehicle,

nary tion after

predictions (Figure 13-3). Some signal attenuawas experienced due to antenna nulls, especially the vehicle began to roll.

at times.

antenna. was until The

However,

5tg_l

Sttm_th

(d]_)

_Jt2_O14

II system from 225 tracking. periods.

s_at Strength

passive from 270 seconds, signal was

160 until while the attenuated

220 seconds, MK I station most during

-50

was these

......

_,

,..F

I
{_b_)

?1, V
_ _t_i Fire

"
l
20(} 240 280

.........

_,,o
0 40 80 120 lrLiBht

I
lbO TLme (see)

]zo l_nJl -50 Btrt*ngth (dl_a) v 4_ so :zo t_(I zoo 2_, ;'_rO J2U

_" -70 ----_

htTol

_llre

"\

I r! r r !

-90

-110 0 40 80 120 Fli.ght 180 fLme (see) 200 2Z.0 280 3_0 -80 I _

iii;ii
- ]0o ,i ao t2o _o zoo zae 280 320

FIGURE Retro to 15 db was until was Other rocket

13-3. firing

UDOP

SIGNAL an

STRENGTH attenuation of l0

produced signal. station. seconds after

below

the

average at this 464

No flame Signal after

attenuation was liftoff, received but it 13.4.4 C-BAND FIGURE 13-4. AZUSA ST!_E RADAR AND NGTIt RADAR SIGNAL

experienced approximately very noisy

and

attenuated

destruct.

Stations AGC records including favorably strength 23.4 is km presented from at in were the received Green with from several Station. Mandy degrees other They records. Beacon from pulse so the pulse. Station from Pad Prior was output. receiver This normally that used it if was the 1. |6 34). to liftoff, frequency This detuning be was was it was noticed and erratic to get a lower at this because proved this to a that giving range single but signal station, skin be the a C-BanP double (4.7 km at approximately 199 degrees

stations, all compared The Pad signal 34) Airport,

Mountain Tango and Station 214 13-3,

Metro Figure

(MerrittIsland

moding causing detaned caused

approximately

lock-on, narrow level than it was could The in Figure

13.4.3

AZUSA

would felt be

received

adequate beacon from

tracking

inadequate.

Records approximately the system 170 seconds. between Azusa propagation flight. 62 These 5 and signal and

from 194 degrees

the

MK from

11 station Pad 13-4} first 80 due the first than 34) for

(12.4 indicated the was first

km

at that

signal i3-4.

strength

station

is shown

operated The 12 signal db

as for

expected (Figure the

160

to Automatic The andused pattern the than for during predictions. at about beacon 92 seconds. this time, Records 85 tracking The but was signal was acquired followed 20 that then to the the at liftoff

fluctuating

seconds. to

a smooth lower began began

normally antenna effects

fluctuates lobingfor lasted longer

multipath part of

30 dbm signal system

show

on

previous

decreasing

seconds;

huntingtabout a 91seconds wasswitched and toautomaticskintracking from92to103 seconds. Beacon tracking wasusedfrom 103until 196.5seconds. During thistime,thesignal-to-noise ratiowas 20to 30dbwhich sufficient is forhigh accuracy tracking. Someoise present n was between and seconds 115 132 which mayhave causedyflame, utit wasnTt been b b enoughto concern. cause However, rocket retro firing causedisturbances10to 15dbwhich d of drove the signal-to-noise ratiodown to12to15db. This disturbance probably have would been insignificant the if signal levelhad normal. been After retro rocketfiring, the signaldropped belowthenoise levelat about 194seconds andthe system switched was toskintracking from197 to202 seconds. Thishappened around35 again 2 seconds and thesystem wasswitched automatic to skintracking from241 seconds untildestruct. fterdestruct, A this stationtracked pieces f thevehicle o andthe. loud c formedyProject ighwater. b H
Station This T plus matic appeared 0.16 (Patrick used AFB_ the 32.9 MK km south of tracking to Pad 34). until autostation this,

it had a 2 to 3 db jitter for the remainder Records show that this station also narrow from this and the pulse beacon. width, double Apparently as more pulsing, it had

had and not

of the trouble

flight. with

countdown for done

prepared had

by detuning its beacon therefore experienced This station lost track was of other and

station 1.16 difficulty. times

three

during

the may and the by

flight. have flame retro roll.

The first time been a combination attenuation. rockets The 140 to had system beacon 187 The fired tracking seconds

at 140 seconds and poor beacon response two may back and ended times have and were been forth skin after caused

switched and

between tracking automatic It

automatic from

automatic

up rising

skin tracking from 187 seconds until tracked the water cloud after destruct.

destruct.

GBI

Station The

(Grand signal was experienced No flame

Bahama received the

Island). at same GBI 65 trouble was seconds as the at after other this

liftoff. stations. station, tion

It

attenuation firingcaused 5 db.

present a signal

but retro of approximately

rocket

attenua-

station

51 optical

22 seconds, at which time beacon tracking. AGC at normal for the first 53

it switched the ground seconds.

Even station except was for

though able one

response to track between

was below the beacon 192 and

normal, all the 228 seconds.

this way,

After

period

63

_AL

mm-mm_m--_ I"!"1 A I OF MALFUNCTIONS AND DEVIATIONS

SECTION SUMMARY XIV.

The flight test of Saturn SA-3 did malfunctions or deviations which could a serious ever, system of here failure minor for or design

not reveal any be considered Howand are

tween kg/cm

the 2 ( 1.3

center psi)

and lower

outboard than

LOX at

tanks IECO

was

0.09

predicted

(Section

deficiency. did occur

V Paragraph

5.4.2).

a number

deviations

summarized Corrective division marked area for with where

documentary were items Each occurred.

purposes. recommended listed. item is by the

Control

measures some of the an asterisk. the malfunction

12. tilt to graph angle the

An error of 44.28 angle

in tilt degrees of

cam

resulted arrest

in as

a maximum compared VII Para-

These are listed in the

at tilt 44 degrees

desired 7.2.1).*

(Section

Launch 1. 45-minute Paragraph

Operations A ground hold 3.4). at generator T minus power 75 failure caused (Section a IH

13. observed

clockwise

roll (Section

moment VII

of

155_

kg-m 7.2.3).

was

at IECO

Paragraph

minutes

14. 04 output computer (Section III for the Paragraph sequence 3.4). compared as sloshing

Increased to amplitude compared 7.4). that

s[oshingwasobservedin on the of 24 cm to 10 SA-2 was cm on flight. observed SA-2

LOX in pitch (Section

tank on VII

A maximum

2. records

The digital malfunctioned

SA-3, paragraph Guidance

3. cycled were

The several

"Support times (Section

Retrack about Ill

Pressure 500 ms after 3.5).

OK" all

switches engines

running

Paragraph

15. celerometer that the instead 3.5). LOX of 16. azimuth (Section observed

Erroneous system (Section

outputs on VIII the

from

the

cross Platform

range

aewere

ST-124P 8.3.3).

4. bubbling the

measuring stayed 60 seconds

error open for

indicated 137 seconds Ill

Paragraph

valve

expected

(Section

Paragraph

The and VIII

ST-124P platform the resolver chain Paragraph 8.3.3 and

was was

not aligned not trimmed 8.4. 2).

in *

5. mand

The (Section

LOX III

fill

mast

failed 3.6)*

to retract

on

com-

Paragraph

Paragraph

Trajectory. 6. longer The than burning expected time for SA-3 IV was 1.3 seconds 4.3. l). cessor graph

17. amplifier

A failure stage repeater of

due the was

to an

open

circuit guidance (Section

in one sigmaI VIII

buffer proPara-

ST-124P

encountered

(Section

Paragraph

8.4.2). 18. A disturbance between 8.4.2). 113 was and observed 125 seconds in the signal VIII

7. nominal platform IV

Cross due and to

range vehicle, 4.3.1 ).

displacement and also due

was

to

the

left

of the

a difference

in alignment

between

processor Paragraph

(Section

to winds

(Section

Paragraph

Electrical Propulsion 19. 8. higher 9. engine graph The than The position 5.2). 10. a vehicle 11. 54 The roll The retro motion pressure rockets (section drop were misaligned, causing 5.7). orifices * be21. measures across the 10.6). vehicle predicted gear specific (Section case pressure its limits impulse was 1.1 percent 5.3). Structures ineasurement (Section V Parafuel (Section on 20. A prior to

System Number liftoff 5 (Section measuring IX supply Paragraph voltage 9.2).* failed

V Paragraph

2 exceeded

high line,

vibration

level

was

observed

on

the

suction X

longitudinal; 10.5, 31.

measurement

E45-g

Paragraph

V Paragraph

Systematic (section

trm_sientswereobserved X Paragraph 10.5.3 and

in eight Paragraph

Environmental 22. dicated (Section 23. much Paragraph as

Temperatures Totalcalorimeter

and

Pressures (C77-5) previously innoted

25. gradient

Base than

pressure previous

on the heat flights

shield

had XI

a higher Paragraph

(Section

measurement as great as

11.2.1.1). Instrumentation 26. were tion Fourteen usable, measurements and 13.2). Radar XIII signal Paragraph strength was lower one was were unusuable, six (Sec-

losses

twice

XI Paragraph Heating would 11.3). rate be

11.2.1.3). on the S-IV by skin theory was twice as XI

predicted

(Section

partially XIII 27.

questionable

Paragraph The C-Band (Section

24. XI Paragraph

Flame

shield 11.2. 1.1).

pressure

was

unusual

(Section than

predicted

13.4.4).

65

SECTION

XV.

SPECIAL

MISSIONS

15. I

PROJECT

HIGHWATER

motion time. transmitted

of

the

booster booster

was

observed

for

an extended to on be

A few on

measurements Telemetry lost after

continued signals project and

telemetry. temporarily

links High-

A experiment successfully upper cord, upper the higher (3.76 stages'

water on

cloud SA-3. 86.7

experiment on At SA-2) 292 was seconds gal) of of at a

(similar range of water km of

to time primainto (0.45 211.41

the the the km km

3,

4,

and

8 were

conducted water

accomplished

water, but were regained and continued until after etry link 600 data booster red. various signals 6 (PCM) seconds. would was Figure periods were It not lost

between 335 400 seconds. until 420

360 seconds Link 7 telemwhereas if any of the The occurduring

ballastswere m 3 (22,900 At at an the and time altitude

rupturedwith Project 167.22 range

seconds;

injecting atmosphere. vehicle than km was above

continued represent outofcamera 15-1 of

to transmit reliable range

until however,

approximately

Highwater,

is questionable,

measurements. when breakup coverage

predicted) predicted).

presents Project

camera Highwater.

The ducted formation

Saturn SA-3 with

water flightin that

release order on

experiment to the compare SA-2 the gal) to an noise 400

was the

concloud

15.2

HORIZON Usable

SCANNER data 100 period Data from and the 130 were No data the retro fire data horizon seconds within portions was would at 153.6 MISSIONS scanner range 5:degrees of have seconds. the flight until continued expected time. of were The cxwere 100 to

on the

observed

experiment_ ionosphere of water and equilibrium through a obtained data erratic seconds; be usable

to investigate by the release to monitor state, frequency and the range

the effects of 86.7 ionosphere's

of perturbing m 3 (22,900 return monitor 300 cps to radio

between this

during and

peetedvalues.

in other

to passively from

unusable. until

megacycles.

however,

15.3

OTHER

SPECIAL

Inaddition scanner flown have of as been this output, tests on

to Project a number SA-3. in detail The mission following

Highwater of The special results in the table are

and of

the these

horizon were tests

missions

discussed report. special

preceding lists the discussed: Reference

sections section

in which
Burst +_.02 Seconds Burst _0,0 seconds

results

Section

a,

M-31 (Block

Heat

Shield

Panel XI Paragraph 11.2.1.3 5.2 5.4

II Type)

b. c.

LOX Full

Depletion Propellant

V Paragraph V Paragraph

Loading d. e.
B_rst +(?.13 Second6 Bur_t +0,19 Secondl

Block Passenger

II

Antenna $5'-124P

Panel

XIII VIH

Paragraph 13.3 Paragraph 8.2.2 Paragraph 13.3 Paragraph 12.4.4

I. FIGURE 15-1. PICTURE HIGHWATER SEQUENCE OF PROJECT g. h. Film showed destruct 66 from that the long the S-i range camera remained stages. at Vero Beach i. j.

PCM Centaur S-IV and

Telemetry Pressure Stage Pressure II Swing Rockets Study

YAH XII

EXPERIMENT

Temperature Meas. Arm XI llI Paragraph 11.3 Paragraph 3.6 5.7

booster dummy

intact after The tumbling

Block Retro

of the upper

V Paragraph

REFERENCES

1.

M-AERO-PO-3-62; Flown By SA-3"

"Saturn (U) ; by

C-1 Hardage,

Vehicle O. Flight 14, 1961. Flight

SA-3

Test

Flight: November (C);

Trajectory 2, 1962.

Corridor

To

Be

M. ; dated

2o

MPR-SAT-WF-61-8; Working Group; dated

"Saturn December "Saturn dated June 5, and

SA-I

Evaluation"

by Saturn

Flight

Evaluation

3.

MPR-SAT-WF-62-5; Working NASA Vehicle TM Group; X-503;

SA-2 1962.

Evaluation"

(C) ; by Saturn

Flight

Evaluation

4,

"Steady Shapes"

Fluctuating Coe, C.

Pressures F. ; dated

at TransonicSpeeds March 1961.

On

Two

Space

Payload

(C) ; by

67

DISTRIBUTION DIR Dr. yonBraun DEP-T Dr. Rees DEP-A Mr. Gorman AST-S Dr. Lange EY Mr. Maus R-DIR Mr. Weidner R-SA Dr. Kuettner Mr. Dannenberg R-AERO-DIR Dr. Geissler Mr. Jean R-AERO-P Mr. McNair R-AERO-A Mr. Dahm Mr. Wilson R-AERO-G Dr. Hoelker R-AERO-F (50)
Dr. Speer R-AERO-M Mr. Mr. Mr. ttorn Vaughan Smith R-AERO-Y R-COMP-DIR Dr. Mr. Mr. Hoelzer ' Hubbard Cochran R-COMP-R R-COMP-RR R-TEST-DI:R Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. R-ME-DIR Mr. R-ME-X Mr. R-ME-D Mr. R-ME-M Mr. R-MEMr. Orr F Franklin MS-H Mr. MS-IP Mr. R-RP-DIR Dr. Stuhlinger MS-IPL Miss LVO-DIR Dr. LVO-G Mr. RigcIl LVO-M Mr. (2) I-DIR (2) Mr. LO-E Mr. LO-ED4 Mr. Jelen (8) Young T Collins Pickett Gruene Akens (2) Remer (15) Robinson Eisenhardt Wuenscher Kuers Dr. Mr. Mr. Heimburg Tessmann Edwards Grafton Sieber Driscoll Reilman

R-TEST-DIR-M R-TEST-C R-TEST-I

R-TEST-S R-TEST-SB

R- P& VE -D IR Dr. Mr. Dr. R-P& Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrazek Goerner Lucas VE-P Paul Heusinger Kroll Hunt Farrow Palaoro R-P&VE-A R-P&VE-M

R-P&VE-PP R-P&VE-S

R-P&VE-D R- P& V E - BA Mr. Hoffman

R-AERO-FF Mr. Lindberg

R-ASTR-DIR Dr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Haeussermann Fichtner Moore Hoberg Bell Price R-ASTR-N R-ASTR-G R-ASTR-I R-QUAL-DIR Mr. Grau R-Q UA L-A Mr. Mr. Mr. Urbanski Brien Smith R-QUAL-Q R-QUAL-R R-QUAL-P Mr. Brooks R-QUAL-PSC Mr. Peck

Mr, Avery R-ASTR-D Mr. Mr. Hosenthien McMahen R-ASTR-G

68

DISTRIBUTION (Cont'd) EXTERNAL

Headquarters, Washington Assistant National Aeronautics to the Administration: _k Program _ Space Administration W. Phillips Hyatt S. Day Jr. T. Kopenhaver 25, D.C. Franklyn Evaluation: Dr. Robert Abraham C. Seamans, James

Office of Plans Associate Director Office of Director: Deputy Director

Office of Scientific _ Technical Administrator: Office of Programs

Information:

Melvin

of Reliability & Quality Assurance: Manned Mueller Space (Systems) Vehicles Flight : Dr. Joseph F.

Director of Launch

Shea Captain Robert Freitag (USN)

& Propulsion:

Office of Space Sciences Director: Homer F. Newell Launch Director: Vehicles Donald & Propulsion H. Heaton Programs (10) & Technology Power Generation: John L. Sloop

Office of Advanced Director: Thomas Director Office Director: of Propulsion

Research F. Dixon and

of Applications Morton Morris J. Stoller Tepper Center

Goddard Space 4555 Overlook Washington Attn: Director, National Moffett Manned Houston Attn: Iierman Ames 25,

Flight Avenue D.C. LaGow

Research California Center - P.O. Robert Robert Alfred Charles R.

Center:

Smith

J.

DeFrance

Aeronautics Field, Spacecraft 1, Texas Director:

& Space

Administration

Box Smith Mardel M.

1537 (5) (3) Grant (2) Floyd L. Thompson

Gilruth

Director, National Langley Director, National 21000 Cleveland Director, National 150 Pi_co

Langley Aeronautics Field, Lewis Aeronautics Brookpark 35,

Research & Space

Center:

Administration

Virginia Research Road Ohio Operations & Space Santa Monica, Office: California Robert W. Kamm 69 Center: Abe Silverstein

& Space

Administration

Western Aeronautics Blvd.,

Administration

DISTRIBUTION E XTE RNA L Flight Research 273 California Center: Paul F. Bikle

(Cont'd)

Director, P.O. Box

Director,

National

Security Maryland

Agency

National Aeronautics Edwards, Director, National Wallops

& Space

Administration

Ft. George Mead, Attn: C3/TDL

Commanding Wallops Aeronautics Island, Station: & Space Virginia Lab Drive R. L. Krieger White Sands New Mexico Attn:

General Proving

(3) Ground L Test Center Office, Force (2) (3) MTGRY

Administration

ORDBS-OMTIO-T AF Info Missile Intelligence U.S. D.C. Air

Jet Propulsion 4800 Oak Grove Pasadena Attn; Jet Attn: Office Room The Attn: Director Office Room The Irl 2,

Commander, Patrick Attn: Group Chief of Staff, Pentagon CCMTA The AFB, Tech

Florida

California Reports Laboratories, (4) Sec. of Defense for Research

Newlan,

Propulsion H. Levy

Washington 1 Cpy 1 Cpy Commander Wright Air

25, marked marked (5)

f_r,DCS/D for DCS/D

AFDRD AFDRD-EX

of the

Asst.

& Engineering 3E1065 Pentagon 25, D. C. Tech Library of Guided of the 3E 131 Pentagon 25, D.C. Secretary Missiles of Defense

Development Air 3

Center Force Base, Ohio

Washington

Wright-Patterson Attn: WCOSICommander Air Attn: Force

Flight AFB,

Test California

Center

Edwards

FTOTL

Washington Commander, Arlington Arlington Attn: Security U.S. Atomic

Rocketdyne Armed Hall 12, TIPCR Station Va. (Transmittal Instruction) Commander-in-Chief Energy Commission, Sandia Corp. Lab Strategic Offutt Attn: Dir Air AFB, Command Nebraska of Opns, (2) Development Station, Tennessee Center Force Library Missile Division per Cognizant Act. Services Teeh Info Agency (5) 6633 Canoga Attn: Canoga Park, O.I. Avenue California Thorsen (3)

University of California Radiation Tech Info Div P.O. Box 808 California Craig Energy Br, P.O. Commission, Box 969

Livermore, Attn: U.S. Clovis Atomic

Commander Arnold Arnold Sandia Corp. Attn: Air Teeh.

Engineering

Livermore Livermore, Attn: James Central 2430 Attn: 7O Washington Liaison

California McMinn, Document Agency W. OCD D.C. Div. (2) Control Sec.

Commander Air Force Missile Development Holloman Air Force Base New Attn: Mexico Tech Library (SRLT) Center

Intelligence E Street, 25, N.

DISTRIBUTION EXTERNAL Corn mander U.S. Point Chief, Dept. Naval Mugu, Bureau of Navy 25, D.C. I Cpyto SP, I Cpy to RESI, Air Missile Test Center

(Cont'd)

Chrysler Michoud Attn: (4) Huntsville Attn: 1 Clay to REW3 Research of Navy 25, 463 D.C. H. California of Weapons H.C,

Space Operations

Division (11)

Calahan

Operations Bader, Jr. (3)

Washington

I CpytoAD3, Chief of Naval

Headquarters 6570th Aerospace U.S. Air Force Wright Attn: Patterson H.E. Medical Air Force Division Base, (AFSC) Ohio

Department Washington Code

Vongierke of America Products

Director (2) U.S. Naval Research Washington Attn: Code 25, D.C. 2027

Radio Corporation Defense Electronic Lab Data 8500 Van Inc. Engineering Martin Space Systems Balboa Nuys,

Division Bivd California

Douglas Missile Santa Attn:

Aircraft and Monica, H.M. A.J. D.A. Space

Company, Systems (1) (5) (2) California

Company Systems Division

Thomas German Petty

Baltimore 3, Maryland Attn: W.P. Sommers

Scientific Attn: P.O.

and

Technical

Information S-AK/RKT)

Facility

(2)

AMSMI-RBLD; Bldg 4488

RSIC

NASA Representative Box 5700 Maryland Aircraft Space Jack Program Long Small Island, (3) Engineering Office N. Y.

Bethesda, Corporation California Bakeman Grumman Apollo Bethpage, Attn:

Aerospace 2400 El Segundo, Attn: D.C.

Corp.

East El Segundo

Arinc 1700 Attn: The P.O. New Attn: North Space 12214 Downey, Attn:

Research K Street, 6, W.J. Boeing Box R.H. American

Corporation N.W. D.C. Willoughby

Washington

Company Branch 26088 26, Louisiana Nelson (3)

Saturn Booster Orleans

Aviation Systems

& Information Division Lakewood Boulevard California A. W.F. Shimizu Parker (2) (1)

7t