Jump to content

Space Shuttle Launch Pad 39A with Challenger STS-6


Recommended Posts

Thanks Rich,

 

sorry, but unfortunately I'm no local hero. i5684_no2.gif

 

Hello everybody,

 

and even after a day, the strips are still gluing unchangedly in place, so that the decision for the Bare-Metal Foil (New Improved Chrome) has fallen. top2.gif

 

YPWEeb.jpg

 

Then I wanted to see how the stripes on the ASTC would look like, and was pleasantly surprised again. top.gif

 

ayz6Jo.jpg

 

Cutting these approx. 7 mm long and 1 mm wide strips and gluing over the dividing lines between the segments, however, proved to be the expected delicate matter, because one has hellishly to take care when handling with cutter and/or tweezers, so that the very thin foil does not tear off.  eek.gif

 

And as one can see, the dividing lines under the stripes are becoming slightly visible,  but the same can also be seen on this photo from the STS-43 at a higher magnification. cant-believe-my-eyes-smiley-emoticon.gif

 

RmFIhD.jpg
Source: flickr.com (NASA on The Commons)

 

All in all, a completely successful matter with these 3D-ASTCs, which was worth all the effort.  up040577.gif

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

after having been more intensively involved with the AFTC rings that have been printed meanwhile by Shapeways and tested by me, I want to go back to the 3D modeling of the Intertank wherewith Michael Key had started last December, what I've been posting about. 8)

 

Therefor I had sent him in the result of my research my drawing and the estimated Stringer dimensions without and with foam insulation, where actually only the dimensions with foam insulation for his 3D modeling are relevant. up045518.gif

ZQl2Lu.jpg

Thereupon he had to adjust his 3D model once again, which I as a 3D rookie have not imaginated so complicated, but which should turn out to be a fallacy. ::)

 

At the beginning of the year he told me that he has meanwhile modeled another version with these stringer dimensions, given by me,

 

up061175.jpg   
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

consisting of each 26 Stringers in the two Thrust Panels and of each 40 Stringers in the intervening Stringer Panels


But somehow I immediately stumbled over his number of 40, that's totally 80 stringers in the Stringer panels, which I was very surprised because I dimly remembered a number 108 in our German Raumcon discussions, wherewith the confusion around numbers and terms started at the beginning of my project start (11/2011). up039493.gif

 

After intensive researches I finally found the explanation in the System Definition Handbook SLWT, in which the Intertank structure is described quite well. 

 

up061176.jpg

Source: Space Shuttle/External Tank System Definition Handbook SLWT

 

up061177.jpg

 

After that one has to distinguish the following terms: up045518.gif

 

While in the six Skin/Stringer Panels (45°) there are each 18 of these Stringers,

 

up061178.jpg

 

one speaks in the two Thrust Panels of Ribs, whereby in each case 26 parallel ribs as well as seven circumferential ribs are integrated in these panels,

 

up061179.jpg

 

Therewith was clarified at least the number of stringers, namely 108, which showed that Michael Key's 3D model had with totally only 80 too little stringers.


And now I had to explaine this fact heavy-heartedly Michael Key, whereby I was afraid that he would lynch me for it.eek.gif

 

Thereupon he was very disappointed and had initially thrown in the towel quite frustrated.

 

But of course, I did not want to give up that fast ... i5684_no2.gif

 

On the other hand, it would probably have been more useful to distribute the Stringer number onto the circumference of the eight 45° panels, whose drawing he had also been given by me. But in hindsight one is always smarter than before ... ::)

 

In the meantime, I did it my way both for the six Stringer Panels and for the two Thrust Panels with following results and sent it to him, in the hope that he would have an insight as well as a good will. smiley_worship.gif

[IMG]

Long story short, therewith I obviously had affected his honor, so that he was ready to go on. But I had to confirm to him that it would finally remain, in each case 54 stringers in the Stringer panels (135°) and in each case 26 ribs in the two Thrust panels (45°), whereupon I gave him my word and was jolly glad. up040577.gif

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for your nice compliments. bow.gif

 

Hello everybody,

 

there are progresses to be reported of Michael Key's intertank modeling.  up045518.gif

 

After the number of Stringers (108) and that of the Ribs (52) have been clarified, we now have to clarify some further details on the Intertank, which are marked in this image, some of which have already been integrated into Michael's model. 

 

up061337.jpg
Source: NASA

 

Here are his latest 3D pictures, whereby I wondered at first about these six plates in the Access Door, smiley215.gif that I've never seen before. 

 

Furthermore, I noticed that the size and location of the Access Door (AD) and the Carrier Plate (CP) cannot be quite right,

 

up061338.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

which is why I determined them more precisely based on photos, wherefore I used the agreed reference size 1 Stringer+Valley = 1,3 mm.  

 

At first I used this great direct view of the Carrier Plate, which has almost no perspective distortions, what should be considered. 

 

For the determination and conversion of the measures, the following explanation of my numbers in the photos with and without mm is necessary, so that one does not get confused.

 

Numbers without mm are measured values in the respective photo, and Numbers with mm are the converted measurements in 1/144. up045518.gif

 

And if one compares this photo with his model, stands out that the distance D2 of the Carrier Plate from the Thrust Panel is too large because it should be only 2 Stringer+Valley (2,6 mm).

 

up061340.jpg
Source: NASA

 

With this distance and the determined dimensions of the Carrier Plate of 3.5 mm x 5.0 mm (W x H) I am afterwards in this photo of the Access Door boarded, which unfortunately is not so distortion-free in the area of the door. rolleyes.gif

 

And in this photo one can see that the door is flat and has no attached panels. 

 

up061341.jpg
Source: NASA

 

Here's a similar picture at which the access door panel is removed, which is attached with 44 flat profile screws. 

 

up061329.jpg
Source: NASA

 

Thus, the Access Door and the Carrier Plate would have the following dimensions:

 

Access Door: 9,1 mm x 7,7 mm (W x H) 

 

Carrier Plate: 3,5 mm x 5,0 mm (W x H)

 

As one can see in the following image, the Fairings of the LO2 Feedline (17'') and of the GH2 Press. Line (2'') were added, as well as the LH2 PAL Ramp and the LO2 PAL Ramp, as well as the Supports for the two Press. Lines and the associated Cable Trays

 

up061330.jpg

 

Thereto Michael has suggested to omit the two thin Press. Lines and the Cable Trays, as they would go beyond the intertank anyway and could possibly break off during printing or transport. 

 

He was worried about the PAL Ramps. While the LO2 PAL Ramp could survive at the top, he fears that the LH2 PAL Ramp could probably break because it's very long and thin. So he asked if he should cut them off at the ends of the Intertank, which I agree with. up045518.gif

 

up061331.jpg

 

up061332.jpg

 

Since I anyway want to insert the LO2 Feedline and the Press, he should omit them away, but not the Cable Trays, because I could continue them to the front and backwards.

 

Then I still showed him these two photos, on which one can see that the bottom plates of the Fairings are flush with the stringers and not put onto, what he has accepted and wants to change.

 

up061333.jpg
Source: NASA

 

up061334.jpg
Source: NASA

 

These were essentially my hints and correction wishes.  up046118.gif

 

Regarding of his plates attached on the Access Door, which I had queried, he sent me this photo here, which surprised me, since I did not have seen it yet.

 

up061335.jpg

 

That's why I asked him if he had any source, whereby it could possibly be a Mock-up. undecided.gif

 

I believe that shows once again that a timely and consensual coordination of such details is important for a smooth process, that's why one never stops learning.   up040577.gif

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks René for your nice words. bow.gif

 

Hello everybody,

 

let's go step by step on our way to the goal, here are the next images of Michael Key's 3D modeling. cool.gif 

 

As one can see in this image, he has omitted both the six plates in the door and adjusted their size, as well as he had corrected the distances of the AD and the CP from each other and from the Thrust Panel.  up045518.gif

 

up061495.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

The position of the CP, however, remained unchanged and still sits too high up, although I had already marked it in this last image, rolleyes.gif

 

up061341.jpg
Source: NASA

 

what one can also see in this photo.

 

up061496.jpg
Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (Jester)

 

Furthermore, it is noticeable that the bottom plate of the large LO2 Fairing admittedly is flush with the stringers, but not that of the small LH2 Fairing,

 

up061497.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

which is still to be corrected, according to the following photo, but hopefully will not cause any problems. rolleyes.gif

 

up061498.jpg
Source: NASA

 

Then here are two more images of the small supports of the GH2/GO2 Press. Lines (2''), first with the indicated lines,

 

up061499.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

and here the final design without the lines, whereby the thin wires (Ø 0.3 mm) will separately be inserted later and covered with small caps. up045518.gif

 

up061500.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

Now I hope that these last changes can also be considered by him, according to which an upload of the 3D model to Shapeways nothing would stand in the way. top.gif

 

But Michael Key wanted to be honest and told me, that there are some very small parts in this model that could possibly overstrain Shapeways' possibilities, so the model might not pass their inspections the first time around. That would be normal, and Shapeways would let him know the problem, which he would correct. smiley215.gif

 

That's why I'm very curious, but initially his modified model is still due. up040577.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just an idea: Rather than chop of the trunking entirely leaving a butt joint, why not leave a short stub with a step ("lap joint") in it,  so that separate pieces placed on the tanks could locate into this?

 

I suspect the parts are so tiny that it would give no advantage - but like I said, just an idea.

 

Kirk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for your nice words, but we have still  to wait a little bit. bow.gif

 

Hello everybody,

 

once again to this photo of the Access Door, that was shown by Michael Key, whose source was previously unknown.  hmmm.gif

 

up061335.jpg

 

A friend from the ARC Forum (southwestforests) has found the same photo in this Article, that was published by Jacques van Oene. top.gif 

 

1246-nasa_space_shuttle_transition__reti
Source: spaceflightinsider.com (Jacques van Oene)

 

By the end of 2012, this Original Test-ET (1977-80) had been exhibited on the KSC-Visitor Complex, but 2013 had to give place for the new Atlantis Exhibition Hall, in front of whose entrance since then there is standing a huge Mock-up ET with boosters. 

 

And in this Article I found many other interesting photos of this ET, including also this photo of the Carrier Plate, which is just five stringers above the Access Door, as we now know.  up040577.gif

 

space-shuttle-external-fuel-tank-5_29_20

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

and now back to the 3D Intertank, where Michael Key is coming down the stretch after his considering of my last little changes. cool.gif

 

And just now, my "special" friend and helper DaveS in the NSF Forum comes out of the wood and presents me this interesting photo of the Access Door at STS-31 (1990), unfortunately without source. rolleyes.gif

 

But after I've found the image in Google, I recognized it from the URL, according to which it comes from the collection of George Gassaway, which I know by now. top.gif

 

1477143.jpg
Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway)

 

And since I found a similar photo of the STS-30 (1989), I suspect that since the use of the Leightweight Tanks (LWT), starting at STS-6, such doors were installed, which apparently also had a foam insulation.   

 

STS-30_INT_Door_Umbil_crop.JPG
Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway)

 

For this also militates this photo of my friend James MacLaren, which also shows such a door in the background. The image shows the Challenger on Pad 39-B, probably during the preparation for her fateful final mission STS-51L (1986), what I still will find out. huh.gif

 

jQkL6p.jpg
Source: forum.nasaspaceflight.com (James MacLaren)

 

Consequently the photo used so far for the 3D modeling shows a Graphite-Composite door, as has been used later on the Super Lightweight Tanks (SLWT)

 

EEJPuN.jpg
Source: NASA

 

like here at the STS-133 (2011). 

 

2010-5562-m.jpg
Source: NASA


For Michael Key's 3D-Modeling this realization is coming too late unfortunately, but which is not a problem, because I can glue this door with the two handles later on, especially since it is very small (9 mm x 8 mm), 

as one can see here. up040577.gif

 

QDv74s.jpg    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello everyone,

 

now it goes on with the 3D Intertank journey, which went into the next round, which keeps me in suspense. rolleyes.gif

 

Unfortunately I have yet overlooked an important detail that was not yet correct in the last pictures of Michael Key's 3D model and consequently could not remain, what was to be seen 14 days ago in this picture.  

 

up061497.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

I had circled the part already, but at first I was only interested in the bottom plates of the two Fairings. cool.gif

 

After I had Michael Key pointed this and had been once more showing the still too high Carrier Plate, he wanted to get back to with the final model for the final checkup, for what I specifically had asked him befor a possible upload to Shapeways . schlaumeier.gif

 

Almost at the same time DaveS came up with this, so far unknown Access Door, how it most likely had looked like at  ET-8 during STS-6. top.gif

 

up061556.jpg
Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway)

 

About this I have informed Michael Key and told him at the same time that he should not change the door, because I could scratch this little detail as well.

 

After that he surprised me with his final Intertank version, in which he had even considered this door in addition to the lower located Carrier Plate, which of course I was pleased. speak_cool.gif

 

w2EXDi.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

And here are further pictures of his 3D model:

 

1u6ocA.jpg

 

After I have begun to wonder about the arrangement of the two Fairings as well as the PAL Ramps and Cable Trays  cant-believe-my-eyes-smiley-emoticon.gif

 

tLOzft.jpg

 

at this close-up my hair suddenly stood on end. erschrocken3.gif

 

5dJqxP.jpg

 

Apart from the somewhat too crude shape of the big LO2 Fairing, both fairings are next to each other almost at one height, but what is not true, although in turn was clearly visible on previous photos, but what apparently he has not registered and consequently not so implemented. smiley_worship.gif

 

In reality, the arrangement of the fairings however looks like as at these two photos. cool.gif

 

bpUFmn.jpg
Quelle: NASA

 

hNiR2q.jpg
Source: NASA

 

But the bafflement was following, by telling me at the same time that he had uploaded his model to Shapeways, which would have allowed everybody to order immediately, but what was agreed otherwise, i5684_no2.gif by the way, for EUR 58 (WSF) or EUR 91 (FUD), but with these errors.   eek.gif 

 

And in the 3D panorama view of the Intertank in his Shapeways Shop, this error was also clearly visible (see red dashed line).

 

Furthermore, I wondered about the tapering shape till the top of the two PAL Ramps and the resulting gap to the Cable Trays, which is not true.  nono.gif

 

pqkvNv.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)

 

Then I have immediately communicated Michael Key this change requirement on the basis of these earlier photos,

 

gOurBt.jpg
Source: NASA

 

i9aoUO.jpg
Source: NASA

 

what I have marked on this image again.

 

cIuzot.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)

 

Because of these mistakes, I have asked him to remove his offer from his shop site immediately, which he then has done. hmmm.gif

 

A controversial point is still the form of the fairings and the arrangement of the GH2/GO2 Press. Lines, for which he has sent me this picture, in which I have marked my changes in red.

 

PR2MZk.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

And as one can see in these photos, the two Press. Lines should run closer to the LO2 Feedline .

 

DqRcub.jpg
Source: NASA

 

STS-59_ET-63_Mar94.jpg
Source: georgesrockets.com (George Gassaway)

 

As far as the current state. up040577.gif
Slowly but surely, but somehow we'll crack the hard nut like the squirrel. eichhoernchen_0006.gif

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

the Intertank in Michael Key's Shapeways Shop currently looks like this, but still with the important note Not For Sale, what will hopefully change soon. top.gif

 

710x528_22338957_12475127_1519068194.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)

 

While everything looks awesome on this side, there are a few detail problems to solve on the other side.  smiley215.gif

 

But we can do it together, in any case I have supplied the necessary reference ammunition.  up040577.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

Michael Key has still modified the shape of the two Fairings a bit, which looks really better now. cool.gif

 

vRnSN5.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

xcfhro.jpg

 

wKxZM7.jpg

 

And the arrangement of the details now agrees fairly well with the original and can therefore remain so.  speak_cool.gif 

 

tgI88m.jpg
Source: NASA

 

ldAGGQ.jpg

 

And since the wall thickness of the LO2 Fairing is only 0,25 mm in 1:144, we have agreed on to insert no opening for the LO2 Feedline (Ø 3mm), so I can glue the line directly. top.gif

 

Gjm05X.jpg

With that Michael Key has now reached the home stretch and the final is heralded. file.php?avatar=9546_1448235804.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

so friends, we are just before completion. cool.gif

 

At first still this small addendum, which I have reached out non-binding to  Michael Key, without knowing whether he would go into rapture in view of my previous special requests. rolleyes.gif

 

But I thought, asking does not cost anything, either-or?  nixweiss.gif

 

On this image of the STS-6 one can see these two areas, in which the Stringer-Valleys are filled up with Insulating foam, which would perfectly complete the already nicely detailed Intertank. top.gif

 

DJIuUw.jpg
Source: retrospaceimages.com (J. L. Pickering)

 

The white part (left) is the RSS Antenna, as well as an Aerodynamic Vent in the middle of the right-hand area, as I found it in George Gassaway's ET collection,  up045518.gif

 

here at STS-37 (ET-37),

 

ET-37_W_SRBs_plusZ_Jun90.jpg
Source: georgesrockets.com

 

as well as here at STS-36 (ET-33).

 

STS-36%20ET-33%201-90%20RSSant.jpg
Source: georgesrockets.com

 

And what should I tell you, in his final version, he has even implemented these two details.speak_cool.gif

 

b2HpvX.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

ku04kf.jpg
Source: shapeways.com/forum (Michael Key)

 

This surprise he really succeeded.   up040577.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Manfred,

 

These last few posts really make you think about the future of this hobby. It used to be that "aftermarket" resin replacement parts could be of variable quality and fit - to the extent that they are sometimes not worth the bother. With the advent of printing on demand from a +/-0.05mm (or thereabouts?) resolution process, the accuracy is now almost limited by what the draftsperson is able to see (or be made aware of by people such as yourself).

It is actually very exciting - there is a prospect of models becoming more and more realistic, and scale being a thing that you select at ordering time. 1:32 Shuttle/Launch pad anyone? :)

 

Kirk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kirk,

 

and thanks for your nice thoughts, which provide a broad scope for speculation and interesting new ideas ... einfall.gif

 

But I would be satisfied already if Shapeways were able to realize a resolution of the stringers and ribs in the range of approx. 0,3 mm in good quality. up040577.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

after the events have almost happened in quick succession today, it is now done. yahoo.gif

 

But always nice in turn step by step. cool.gif

 

After Michael Key had uploaded his model to Shapeways, he sent me the Link, from which the following images are taken, which are showing the awesome Intertank in different views, as one can see. top2.gif

 

Based on the large number of pictures you can already see how much the end product thrilled me ... erschrocken2.gif

 

MS3EOS.jpg

 

pNSBz9.jpg

 

jIV7JN.jpg

 

LiM3gR.jpg

 

ldogIb.jpg

 

IopbKr.jpg

 

Lixp7x.jpg

 

XICyny.jp

 

diuKrM.jpg

 

Thereupon I immediately ordered a print for 95,99 EUR incl. shipping. up045518.gif

 

In the midst of the delirium of joy then came a friend from our Raumcon Forum with his damper regarding the shrinkage problems at FUD and FXD, as well as in connection with the costly stiffening rings, which one would have to consider.  eek.gif

 

Based on these legitimate hints, Michael Key responded immediately and after a few changes has uploaded his model again, and now lets print it 0,8% larger. huh.gif

 

He also pointed out that one possibly might have to sand a bit, either on the printed Intertank or on the ET parts of the kit, but that would not be unusual and should be feasible. top.gif

 

However, as this model, with a wall thickness of about 0,7 mm, is quite thin, he would not recommend removing the stiffening rings. Instead, he has reduced their mass by enlarging the holes in the middle, which has fortunately resulted in a cost savings of about 20 EUR, that one can not complain about. speak_cool.gif

 

And those changes looked like this.

 

rj1s1N.jpg

 

3cvr3X.jpg

 

Thereupon I immediately have canceled my first order and reordered new, and here is the current Link, over which one now can order the Airfix Intertank (1:144) for 71,83 EUR in FUD, and in the 3D view (top right) one can keep a close eye on it from all sides. spiegel-smilies-0002.gif

 

XafzJf.jpg
Source: shapeways.com (The Aerospace Place)

 

Now I hope that Shapeways can also print the part with all its details, wherefore all available thumbs are needed, JC_doubleup.gif to make it to a round matter in the end in the truest sense of the word.  up040577.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everybody,

 

my next project will be the Ice/Frost Ramps on the LH2 External Tank, and I hope that Michael Key can help me with this as well.  up040577.gif

 

FaWuvj.jpg

Source: NASA

 

And so the ramps for the GO2/GH2 Press. Lines look like in detail.

 

LKalCW.jpg

Source: NASA

 

I know that my friend Bill (niPartshas modeled a set of these Ice ramps in 1:72, but in 1:144 they are unfortunately much smaller.

 

710x528_5088747_1336648_1459324146.jpg

Source: shapeways.com (niParts)

 

In reality these ramps are 2' x 2' x 1' , that means 2 mm x 2 mm x 1 mm for the ET (1:144).

 

The diameter of the LH2/GH2 Press. Lines is 2'' = Ø 0,35 mm (1:144) and should be the reference. up045518.gif

 

The openings in the ramps are slightly larger, approx. Ø 0.5 mm, as one can see in this image.

 

h0KrvK.jpg

 

Maybe that these very thin wall thicknesses could be a problem for Shapeways 3D printer? hmmm.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...