Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA
MPB-SAT-FE-64-19
ABSTRACT
M PIt-SA T- FE-64-19
( Supersedes MPR-SAT-64- i7 )
..Aero-Astrodynamics Laboratory
Aero-Astrophysics Office
Aerodynamics Division
Flight Evaluation and Operations
Studies Division
Astrionies Laboratory
Computation Laboratory
Propulsion Division
Structures Division
Vehicle Systems Division
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1
SECTION L FLIGHT TEST SUMMARY ..........................................
1
i. i Flight Test Results ...........................................
i. 2 Test Objectives ............................................. 2
111
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Page
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)
Page
SECTION
VIII. ORBITAL ATTITUDE ............................................. 61
8. I Summary ................................................. 61
8.2 Vehicle Attitude in Orbit ....................................... 61
8.3 Non-Propulsive Venting System Performance ......................... 63
Pa ge
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Concluded)
Page
vii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure T it i e Page
4-1 Vehicle Mass, Center of Gravity and Mass Moment of Inertia ....................... 13
4-2 Vehicle Mass, Center of Gravity and Mass Moment of Inertia ....................... 14
6-8 Gas Pressure in Fuel Tank 3 and ttigh Pressure Spheres .......................... 29
6-15 Fuel Tank Ullage Pressure During Prepressurization S-I Boost and S-IV Flight ........... a6
viii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)
Title Page
Figure
6-17 LOX Tank Ullage Pressure During Prepressurization_S-I Boost and S-IV Flight ........... 37
7-2 Pitch Plane Wind Velocity Component and Free Stream Angle-of-Attack ................ 45
7-3 Pitch Attitude, Angular Rate and Average Actuator Position ........................ 46
7-4 Yaw Plane Wind Velocity and Free Stream Angle-of-Attack ......................... 46
7-7 Roll Attitude, Angular Rate and Average Actuator Position ......................... 47
7-10 Pitch Attitude Error, Angular Rate and Average Actuator Position .................... 48
7-11 Yaw Attitude Error, Angular Rate and Average Actuator Position ..................... 48
7-i2 Roll Attitude Error, Angular Rate and Average Actuator Position ..................... 48
50
7-f6 Pitch and Yaw Control Accelerometers ......................................
7-17 Calculated Upwash Factor for Fin Mounted Angle-of-Attack Mcters ................... 51
52
7-i9 ttorizon Sensor Angles .................................................
7-20 Horizon Sensor Angles and Calculated Attitude Angles and Altitude .................... 52
ix
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)
7-21 Calculated and Predicted Pitch Axis Resolver Chain Error ......................... 53
10-t SA-7 Pitch Bending Moment and Normal Load Factor ............................. 68
10-9 Envelopes of S-IV Structural Vibrations During S-I Stage Powered Flight ................ 74
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont'd)
10-10 Envelopes of S-IV Components Vibrations During S-I Stage Powered Flight .............. 75
10-t3 Instrument Unit and Apollo Acoustics During S-I Flight ............................ 77
t0-14 Envelopes of S-IV Structural and Component Vibrations During S-IV Stage Powered Flight .... 78
11-3 Temperature on 60-Degree Fairing, Tail Shroud and Hydrogen Vent Pipe ............... 81
11-12 S-I Stage Inertial and Heat Shield Pressure Differential ........................... 86
xi
LISTOFILLUSTRATIONS
(Concluded)
Figure Title Page
13-1 FinPressure
Distributions
.............................................. 93
13-2 AxialForceandBaseDragCoefficients
...................................... 93
i4-1 RFSystem
Performance
................................................ 99
A-1 SA-7VehicleConfiguration
.............................................. 106
A-2 S-IStage
........................................................... 107
A-3 S-IVStage
.......................................................... 108
A-4 Instrument
Unit...................................................... 109
A-5 SA-7Payload
...... .................................................. 110
xii
LIST OF TABLES
7-III Comparison of Space-Fixed Velocities at S-IV Guidance Cutoff (621. 375 sec Range Time) .... 57
7-IV Comparison of Space-Fixed Velocities at Orbital Insertion (63i. 375 sec Range Time) ....... 58
xiii
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
Abbreviation Definition
xiv
CONVERSION FACTORS TO
INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF UNITS OF 1960
To Obtain
Parameter Multiply By
m 2
area in. 2 6. 4516x10 -4 (exact)
ft 3. 048x10 -1 (exact) m
length
kw
power BTU/hr 2. 9287508x10 -4
o F+459.67 5. 555555556x10 -1 oK
temperature
ft 3 2.8316846592x10 -2 {exact) m 3
volume
xv
_fliki. ip|i--L ,--" • • --
. "_vi'_l Ili.Jkl_ i I/'_L
MPR-SAT-FE-64-19
Saturn launch vehicle SA-7, third of the Block II 12:00 Z,September 22, at coordinates of 2(;.4 degrees
vehicles, was launched at 11:22 AM ESTollSeptember latitude and 69.0 degrees E longitude.
t8, t964. The flight test was a complete success
with all missions being achieved. The performance of both the S-I and S-IV stage
propulsion system s was satisfactory for the SA-7 flight
SA-7 was the third Saturn vehicle launched from test. SA-7 was the third Saturn vehicle to employ H-1
Complex 37B at Cape Kennedy and represents the engines at a thrust level of 836,000 N (188,000 lbf) to
second launch of a Saturn/Apollo eonfigmration. The provide thrust for the S-I stage. 'Phe vehicle longitu-
countdown of SA-7 was interrupted by four holds that dinal thrust of the S-I stage averaged between 0.92
lasted for a total of two hours and 42 minutes. Tile percent ( engine analysis ) and t. 24 percent ( flight sirn -
first hold came at T-245 minutes of the countdown and ulation) higher than pre(lieted. Vehicle specific ira-
was caused by inadvertent firex system activation on pulse averaged between 0.71 llercent (engine analysis)
the service structure during air conditioning duct re- and 0.90 percent (flight simulation) higher than pre-
moral. The hold lasted for 69 minutes. At T-30 min- dieted. The performance of all subsystems was as
utes a scheduled 20-minute hold was extended 4 rain- expected for the flight test.
utes when the S-IV LOX pressurizing regulator
indicated a malfunction. The third hold, at T-12 SA-7 also represented the third Saturn flight test
minutes, lasted for 20 minutes. The hold resulted of the IlL IOA-3 engine for the S-IV stage. The vehicle
from a malfunctioning of the S-I hydraulic pump tern- longitudinal thrust determined hy engine analysis was
perature OK interlock which prevented S-I hydraulic approximately equal to predicted thrust, and the thrust
pumps from being turned on. The final hold was a determined by flight simulation was 0.89 percent
range safety hold. Grand Turk Eadar was operating lower thanpredieted. From engine analysis, the spe-
intermittently. This hold was called at T-5 minutes; cific impulse was 0.02 percent higher than predicted,
it lasted for 49 minutes. The count was recycled to but was 0.98 percent lower than predicted based upon
T-13 minutes, resumed, and continued through launch. flight simulation. The performance of all S-IV sub-
systems was as expected for the flight test.
The actual flight path of SA-7 deviated from rmm-
inal due to high S-I stage performance. Total velocity The overall performance of the SA-7 GuMance
was 39.4 m/s higher than nominal at OECO and 1.8 and Control System was satisfactory. The ST-124
m/s higher than nominal atS-IV cutoff. At S-IV cut- system, along \_ith control rate gTros, provided atti-
off the actual altitude was 0.99 km lower than nominal rude and rate control for both stages. Partial load
andthe range was 13.72 Mn longer than nominal. The relief was accomplished by control aecelerometers
cross range velocity deviated 3. 5 m/s to the left of active in the control loop from 35 to 100 seconds.
nominal at S-IV cutoff. The S-IV payload at orbital Vehicle response to all signals was properly executed
insertion (S-IV euteff + i0 see) had a space-fixed ve- ineludiug the roll maneuver, pitch program and path
loeity 2.8 ,n/s greater than nominal, a perigee alti- gx_idanee during the S-IV stage flight. The counter-
tude of 180.21 km and an apogee altitude of 231. 10 clockwise roll moment, due to the unbalanced acre-
km, giving a predicted lifetime of 3.8 days, 0.6 day's dynamic forces caused by the S-I turbine exhaust
longer than nominal. The extrapolated orbit based on ducts, resulted in a roll attitude error of -3.5 degrees
data for an epoch of i0:57 Z, September 22, reached near 60 seconds. A large aerodynamic moment in
the estimated breakup altitude of 86 km at approxi- both the pitch and yaw was required to simulate the
mately 11:50 Z, September 22, at coordinates of 21.7 telemetered control parameters during the S-I stage
degrees S latitude and 56.4 degrees E longitude. The flight. The source of this moment has not been iso-
theoretical ballistic impact time is approximately lated.
rm , ,", 2 '."'
..... m_Umm_ | I_ IL-
Separation was executed smoothly with small con- The S-I and Instrument Unit electrical systems
trol deviations experienced in the pitch and yaw plane. operated satisfactorily during the boost and orbital
A larger than expected ullage rocket misalignment phase of flight. All mission requirements were met.
produced a significant roll deviation of 6.0 degrees. Thelifeof the F6 and Pt telemeters was 129 minutes.
The ullage rocket misalignment in roll required to
simulate this deviation was approximately 1.2 degrees All S-IV electrical systems functioned properly•
compared to a 3_ RMS value for the four rockets of All power requirements were satisfactorily met, and
1.4-degree. sequenced commands were received and executed at
the correct times.
Path guidance was initiated at 17.2 seconds after
separation. Performance of the adaptive guidance Overall reliability of the SA-7 measuring system
mode in the pitch plane and delta minimum in yaw was was 99.35 percent; this includes 8 measurement mal-
satisfactory in achieving insertion conditions very functions that resulted in total loss of information.
near those desired. Operation of the three airborne tape recorders (one
in the S-I, one in the IU and one in the S-IV stage)
A misalignment of the ST-124 stabilized platform was very satisfactory. The playback records were
occurred during the holddown period after ignition of free of retro flame attenuation effects. The passenger
S-I stage engines. The cause of this condition was fire detection system, flown for the first time on
traced to a high vibration of the leveling pendulums. SA-7, operated satisfactorily. No fires were indi-
This vibration of the pendulums is believed to have cated.
driven the platform out of alignment before it became
space-fixed at liftoff. The total measured ST-t24 Ninety-one cameras provided optical coverage for
guidance system space-fixed velocity at S-IV cutoff launch of SA-7. Nine of the instruments failed due to
was 7806.0 m/s (7806.0 m/s was programmed for a power failure on camera station 4.
velocity cutoff). The total velocity at cutoff from
tracking was 7807.8 m/s. Most of this deviation is Recovery of the 8 onboard cameras was impossi-
due to the problem mentioned above. ble because of Hurricane Gladys. Two cameras were
subsequently recovered after having been _ashed up
The maximum bending moment experienced dur- on the beaches at San Salvador and Eleuthera Islands.
ing the flight of SA-7 occurred at 74. 7 seconds and
indicated a maximum of approximately 30 percent of The Boilerplate Apollo Spacecraft (BP-15) per-
the design moment. Second mode bending frequencies formance was highly satisfactory with all spacecraft
were noted for a short period after separation, with mission test objectives being fulfilled by the time of
the frequency gradually decreasing to near first mode orbital insertion, and additional data were obtained by
prior to LES jettison. First mode bending was excit- telemetry through the Manned Space Flight Net_vork
ed for a short period of time following LES jettison. until the end of effective battery life during the fourth
orbital pass.
The vibration levels on the S-I stage were among
the lowest ever exhibited by the Saturn vehicle. The 1.2 TEST OBJECTIVES
S-IV vibrations were about the same as previously
observed. The objectives of the SA-7 flight test were as
follows:
No unexpected environments were indicated for
the SA-7 flight. Surface pressures and temperatures 1. Launch Vehicle Propulsion, Structural, Guid-
on the S-I and S-IV stages were in good agreement ance and Control Flight Test with Boilerplate Apollo
with past results. S-I stage base thermal environ- Payload - Achieved
ment was similar to previous flight results indicating
maximum heating to the outer region. Simulation of 2. First Complete Flight Test (Both Stages)
the flame shield total heat rate indicated a level of Utilization of the ST-124 Platform System - Achieved
30-40 watts/era 2 after approximately 70 seconds. This
verifies that no convective cooling is present in this 3. Second Flight to Demonstrate the Closed Loop
area as would be expected. Engine compartment Performance of the Path Guidance Scheme during S-IV
temperatures indicated that no fires existed in the burn using the ST-124 Guidance System - Achieved
S-I base. Compartment pressures and loading on
SA-7 were in good agreement with expected levels. 4. Third Live Test of S-IV Stage - Achieved
- CC
5. Third Flight Test of InstrumentUnit - Achiev- 13. First Test of the S-IV Stage Non-Propulsive
ed Venting Sys tern - Achieved
6. Demonstrate Physical Compatabilityof Launch 14. First Test of S-I Engine Area Fire Detection
Vehicle and the Second Apollo Boilerplate under Pre- System (Passenger Only) - Achieved
flight, Launch and Flight Conditions - Achieved
15. First Test Without S-IV LOX Tank Backup
7. Second Testof Guidance Velocity Cutoff (S-IV Pressurization System - Achieved
Stage ) - Achieved
16. Recovery of 8 Movie Cameras Which View
8. Third Test of S-I/S-IV Separation - Achieved LOX Sloshing, Separation, Chilldown, etc Not
Achieved*
9. Third Launch From Complex 37B - Achieved
17. Third Orbital Flight of Burned Out S-IV Stage
10. First Flight of Active ASC-15 Time Tilt and Instrument Unit; Second Orbital Flight of Burned
Polynomial for S-I - Achieved Out S-IV Stage, Instrument Unit and Apollo Boiler-
plate; Approximate Weight 17,700 kg(39,100 lbm) -
li. First Complete Flight Test (Both Stages) Achieved.
Using Control Rate Gyros in Closed Loop - Achieved
i
Time From Time From [ Time From
Actua[ Pred Act-Pred First Motion Guid Zero (Ti) OECO (TB3)
[
r
First Motion 0.06 0
0.27 0.27 0
Guidance Detects DO
0.33 0.33 0 0
Guidance Computes Zero Time
I
Brakes Released 10,96 10.96 i o 10.63
I 0.71 0.8
Separation 148.44 147.73
i 18, 19-18.89
Introduce Guidance 165.67
i
172.07 23.95-24.65
Introduce Misalignment Corr,
Saturn launch vehicle SA-7 was launched at 11:22 This report is published by the Saturn Flight
AM EST on September 18, 1964, from Saturn Launch Evaluation Working Group which is made up of repre-
Complex 37B, Eastern Test Range, Cape Kennedy, sentatives from all of Marshall Space Flight Center
Florida. SA-7 was the seventh vehicle to be flight Laboratories, John F. Kennedy Space Center, MSFC_s
tested in the Saturn I R&D program and represents prime contractors for the S-I stage (Chrysler) and
the third of the Block II series. The major mission S-IV stage (Douglas Aircraft Company) and engine
of this test was to evaluate the performance of the contractors (Rocketdyne and Pratt & Whitney).
complete launch vehicle system (two live stages) and Therefore, the report represents the official MSFC
to place into orbit the Apollo Boilerplate, BP-15, pay- position at this time. This report will not be followed
load configuration. SA-7 represented the second flight by a similarly integrated report unless continued
test of the Apollo Boilcrplate with a Saturn I Launch analysis and/or new evidence should prove the con-
Vehicle. clusion presented here partially or entirely wrong.
Final evaluation reports may, however, be published
This report presents the results of the Early by the MSFC Laboratories and the stage contractors
Engineering Evaluation of the SA-7 test flight. Per- covering some of the major systems and/or special
formance of each major vehicle system is discussed subjects as required.
with special emphasis on malfunctions and deviations. t
_lPIPt ........
countdown and was caused by inadvertent firexsystem S-IV stage arrived via air-
June 12, 1964
activation on the service structure during air condi- craft. S-I umbilical con-
tioning duct removal. The hold lasted for 69 minutes. nections completed.
At T-30 minutes a scheduled 20-minute hold was ex-
tended 4 minutes when the S-IV LOX pressurizing Command Module arrives
June 15, 1964
regulator indicated a malfunction. The third hold, at via aircraft.
T-12 minutes, lasted for 20 minutes. The hold re-
sulted from a malfunc tioning of the S-I hydraulic pump June 16, 1964 Integrated GSE-test com-
temperature OK interlock which prevented S-I hydrau- pleted.
lic pumps from being turned on. The final hold was a
range safety hold. Grand Turk Radar was operating S-IV weight and balance
June 17, 1964
intermittently. This hold was called at T-5 minutes; operation.
it lasted for 49 minutes. The count was recycled to
T- 13 minutes, resumed, and continued through launch. June 19, 1964 S-IV erection.
IU erected for drill mark-
The total propellant load based on delta pressure ing.
readings corrected for fuel tank temperature readings
and environmental conditions was 520 kg (1147 ibm) IU erected after drill op-
June 22, 1964
less than the total load determined by discrete level eration completed. Swing
probe data. arm qualification test com-
pleted.
A number of problems concerning ETR instru-
mentation were encountered during the SA-7 count- June 23, 1964 Power applied to S-IV
down.
stage. IU umbilical con-
nection.
3.2 PRELAUNCH MILESTONES
V¥111 ILtUII1 I II In
TABLE 3-I CONCLUDED mainland with a few convective cells over the Atlantic
drifting westward in over the launch site. Radar scan
information showed that the cells had tops to 3657 m
July 31, 1964 Lastof the engine replace-
and were slowly dissipating as they passed over the
ments (due to cracked LOX
coastline. A high pressure ridge oriented NE-SW
domes) was checked out
over the eastern Gulf area produced generally north-
electrically.
easterly winds aloft over the launch site.
August 19, 1964 All systems vehicle over- Because of the condition of the seas in the vicinity
all test.
of the recovery area, camera capsule recovery was
not attempted. However, two of the eight cameras
August 27, 1964 Hurricane Cleo passed the were discovered approximately 50 days after launch.
area and launch complex
was secured.
September 14, 15, 1964 Countdown demonstration 7. Precipitation- Showers in the vicinity of
3.4 COUNTDOWN
September 17, 1964 Launch countdown begum.
was continuous until T-245 minutes, when a hold was _h_ukd Zl _n _ Extm_d 4MIn for GS[ Hold[ m
/ /
caused by inadvertent firex system activation on the
service structure during air-conditioning duct removal.
The water entered one S-IV umbilical connector which,
_t GSE Hokl _
in turn, produced erroneous indications of S-IV engine
exciter firing. Power was removed from the S-IV - 'r-_,o T.:e_
Caun_m_m(mlnl
was picked up 69 minutes later. FIGURE 3-1. HOLD TIME VERSUS COUNT TIME
The count was then continuous until T-30 minutes 3. 5 PROPELLANT LOADING
when a scheduled hold was initiated. During this
scheduled 21-minute hold, the S-IV LOX pressurizing There were no propellant transfer system prob-
regulator indicated a malfunction. Analysis of the lem areas or malfunctions in the SA-7 launch count
problem indicated normal and satisfactory operation. down.
By this time, the hold had been extended four minutes
longer than scheduled. The count progressed to T-12 3.5. i S-I STAGE
minutes when it was again interrupted because of mal-
functioning S-I hydraulic pump temperature OK inter- The S-I stage LOX tanks were loaded to a pre _
lock, which prevented S-I hydraulic pumps from being determined weight. The fuel weight was to be adjust-
turned on. Since measurements indicated normal ed to compensate for variations in bulk fuel specific
temperature, the interlock was jumpered in a block- weight at launch. A fuel specific weight check was
house distributor. Hold time was 20 minutes. made at T-25 minutes on the initial countdown. At
this time, S-I tank temperature indicated the average
The count was resumed at T-12 minutes and pro- bulk fuel specific weight to be 99.55 percent of nominal
gressed to T-5 minutes when a range safety hold was 7935.9 N/m s ( 50. 519 lb/ftz). To account for the an-
called because of intermittent operation of the Grand ticipated increase in specific weight between that time
Turk radar. Due to S-IV LOX bubbling and space- and ignition, the fuel correction was based on a fuel
craft battery lifetime constraints, the count was re- specific weight of 99.58 percent. A correction of
cycled to T-13 minutes. During the hold, difficulty -0. 090 N/cm 2 (-0. 130 psi) was dialed into the fuel
was encountered with the swing arm hydraulic test. levelcomputer and the semi-automatic loading system
This problem was corrected without adding to the began to correct the fuel load.
range hold by a jumper in a blockhouse distributor.
After 49 minutes, the radar problem was corrected, At T-10 minutes, fuel tank temperatures indi-
and the count resumed and continued through liftoff cated the average bulk fuel specific weight to be
which occurred at 1122:43.26 EST. 7907.3 N/m 3 (50. 337 lb/ft3). Allowing for a slight
temperature decrease during the remaining time of
3. 4. 2 COUNTDOWN PROBLEM AREAS countdown, the fuel specific weight at T-3 minutes
was 7908.9 N/m s (50. 347 lb/ft_). LOX tank tem-
The major difficulties encountered during the perature indicated the mean LOX specific weight to
SA-7 countdown are listed in Table 3-II. Figure 3-1 be 11,061 N/m 3 (70.4i lb/fts). Based on these spe-
shows hold time versus count time. cific weights and recorded wind conditions, the aver-
age delta pressure readings show the propellant
A number of the problems listed in Table 3-II weights at T-3 minutes to be 277,951 kg ( 612,777 lb)
concerned Eastern Test Range, ETR, instrumenta- of LOX and 123,530 kg (272,337 lb) of fuel.
tion. These items are marked with an asterisk in Discrete probe activation times were telemetered
Table 3-II.
during the flight. Analysis of these data gives an
-- ""
_l_rl .... 5;';;T:AL
TABLE 3-H, SPECIFIC PROBLEM AREAS DURING COUNTDOWN
i. T-795 Minutes: Initial S-IV LH 2 tank gas sample contained excessive moisture necessitating several
tank-purge cycles. As a result, the start of S-IV ordnance installation was delayed
approximately 80 minutes.
2. T-740 Minutes: The vacuum jacket on LH 2 skid inlet line would not hold vacuum. Investigation proved
the inner llne to be intact. The leak in the vacuum jacket could not be located. All
welds and flttlngs in the jacket were coated with sealant to minimize the leakage
problem. No delay resulted.
3. T-365 Minutes: Inadvertent firex system activation on the service structure drenched the S-IV stage.
Water entered one electrical umbilical connector which, in turn, produced erroneous
indications of engine #1 and helium heater igniter exciter firing. Power _as removed
from the S-IV stage and the connector was dried, Associated circuitry was functionall
checked. The above resulted in a hold st T-245 mln of 69 min duration.
4. T-357 Minutes: S-I fuel depletion sensor #1 ga_e an indication of depletion. Since the sensor was
one of two redundant probes, fuel bay #2 was reopened and the probe electrically dis-
connected. No delay resulted.
5. T-220 Minutes: S-IV fire detection system indicated fire at the S-IV LH 2 skid during S-IV LOX loading.
The indication was determined to be erroneous and the result of corrosion in a con-
nector in the resistance wire circuitry, The system was not considered usable for
launch and was not used fuTther. No delays resulted.
6, T-120 Minutes: *The 91.18 radar at ADtigua was reported non-operatlonal with a 24 hour estimated repair
time, The MYS°26 radar also located at Antigua was being dismantled and therefore could
not be utilized as a backup system, However, the Grand Turk radar was still operat_nal
and it was decided to continue preparations for launch. The Antigua station is the
primary station for cutoff and orbital insertion data.
7. T-37 Minutes: S-IV cold helium regulator outlet pressure appeared to exceed red-line values. Several
functional cycles were accomplished to verify indications before it was discovered
that the problem was one of data misinterpretation only. This problem delayed resuming
the count at T-30 for approximately 5 minutes.
8. T-30 Minutes: *The C-Band 5.16 radar at San Salvador was experiencing interference due to a commercial
ship with its navigation radar operating within the C-Band. It was determined that
Grand Turk Radar (7,18) would provide the necessary data. No delay resulted.
9. T-19 Minutes: *For a period of approximately four minutes the Valkaris Mistram site was non-operational.
However, at T-15 it was reported operational. Since SA-7 was using a new Azusa antenna,
which lowered the confidence in obtaining Azusa data, the loss of Valkaria Mistram site
posed a potential loss of range safety and metric data.
10. T-12 Minutes: The S-I auxiliary hydraulic pumps were turned on for the initiation of steering cut,sands.
Pumps #1 and #2 came on satisfactorily. When pump #3 was turned on, the motor tempera-
ture OK relay dropped out. In turn, the OK-to-start hydraulic pumps lights went out
and pumps #1 and #2 shut down. This is the normal sequence for the stated malfunction.
Since measurements indicated normal temperatures, the OK-to-start hydraulic pumps
indication interlock was removed from the circuit by amans of a Jumper.
*During the same time frame, the IU C-Band beacon readout from the range indicated
martial performance for metric data. The beacon readout improved with time and was
termed "Go". The total hold time was 20 minutes.
11. T-8 Minutes: During the automatic bleed test of the umbilical swing arms the panel operator actuated
the "Auto Test" switch for an excessive length of time. The electrical system locked
itself in, requiring that a Jumper be installed to unlock the system and to prevent the
test from running continuously. This was accomplished during the Range Safety hold
that followed.
12. T-5 Minutes: *Grand Turk radar (7.18) operation became intermittent, resulting in a Range Safety hold.
Due to S-IV LOX bubbling and spacecraft battery constraints, the count was recycled to
T-13 minutes. The total duration of hold was 49 minutes.
*During the above Range Safety hold, the Data Transmission System (1)TS) for the IGOR's
and ROTI's was reported non-operational. This presented a potential loss of optical
coverage since focusing data and angular tracking data are transmitted to these cameras
from the radars by this system. This system was reported operational just prior to
resuming count.
*During the period of preparing the vehicle to resume count, the Azusa Mk II lost its
zero reference. This system was to provide powered flight range safety and metric data.
At 11:05 EST the system had obtained zero set and was again operational.
accurate indication of propellant volume flow rates. LOX loading system, in conjunction with the LOX
Using specific weights determined from tank temper- supply pump, was successfully utilized for loading
atures, the propellant load corresponding to these flow the LOX tank. Loading of LOX into the S-IV stage
rates was 277,862 kg (613,582 ib) of LOX and was initiated 5 hours and 47 minutes prior to liftoff.
124,139 kg (273,679 Ib) of fuel. This load is consid-
ered to be the best estimate of the actual propellant The LOX vent valves remained open throughout
loaded. Approximately 340 kg (752 Ibm) in the engine the loading operation. The LOX transfer line had
fuel jackets are not included in the above load. The been precooled for approximately 12 minutes prior
total weights are reflected in the ignition weights to the initiation of LOX main fill. The LOX main fill
sho_n in the mass tables in Section IV. line pressure reached a maximum of 141 N/cm 2 (205
psi) and stabilized at approximately 139 N/era 2 (202
The upper portion of Figure 3-2 is a fuel specific psi). At approximately the 10 percent level, a stabi-
weight versus temperature curve for SA=7 with applic- lized loading rate of 745 gpm was reached. This load-
able prelaunch and flight data included. The lower ing rate was maintained until the 98 percent mass level
portion of Figure 3-2 shows the launch day predicted was reached at 25 minutes and 30 seconds after initia-
and indicated propellant loads versus fuel specific tion of the LOX transfer line precool. The loading
weight with applicable weight information included. system then closed the main LOX fillvalve as sched-
uled. After the cooldown of the S-I and S-IV LOX re-
SpKIflc Weight IN/m_ SPecific Weight (1_ 11_
plenish systems was completed, the cycle replenishing
operation was initiated. During this operation, the
LOX inthetank was allowed to boil off to the 99.5 per-
[ "*_,''"°*, 7 _'"_1_
....... the LOX replenishing cycle was resumed. The cycle
was continued until the start of the 150-second auto-
(1) main fill, and (2) replenish. The automated did not decrease below the prefill ambient pressure.
At approximately the 15percent mass level, main moved after launch sequence start by opening the
fill was initiated, and the loading rate was increased switch. This interlock is not required after launch
to approximately 1960 gpm. When the 95.5 percent sequence start, and the jumper would have prevented
level was reached at approximately 30 minutes after the four hydraulic pumps from being deenergizedat
initiation of LH 2 precool, the main fill valve closed "all engines running." An additional "momentary"
automatically. LH 2 replenish continued with normal jumper was necessary at T-8 minutes to unlatch a
automatic operation until pickup of the 99.25 percent circuit in the swing arm hydraulic systems. This
mass level. Reduced replenish was then initiated to circuit will be modified for SA-9.
During the 150-second automatic count, the auto- Power to the RCA 110 Computer was applied
matic loading system was used to complete the final at 9:50 PM, August 17, 1964, to perform preventive
replenish operation to the 100 percent mass indica- maintenance checks, computer verification tests, and
tion. The LH21oad at S-I ignition command was 7,772 system interface checkout tests. At approximately
kg (17, t34 lbm). 11:00 PM, the operational launch programs were
loaded into the computer to support the launch count-
3.6 HOLDDOWN down.
The S-I stage Combustion Stability Monitor utes, the paper tape reader did not function properly.
and all associated recording equipment performed A backup system was utilized, after which the test
The S-I stage Fire Detection Monitor and all lines water quench hoses, and cryogenic and fuel
associated recording equipment performed satisfac- flex hoses and bellows were burned beyond repair, but
torily during launch. No temperature rise was noted. generally only portions of these were completely de-
stroyed. An inspection of the holddown arms reveal-
3.7 GROUND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT ed that no appreciable damage was sustained by them.
3.7. 1 ELECTRICAL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT The environmental control system sustained the
Launch with negligible damage. Insulation covers
The electrical support equipment responded that were blown from several places on the launcher
and performed as designed during the SA-7 countdown and boattail ECS ducts during the launch of SA-6 sus-
and automatic sequence. A switch jumper was installed tained negligible damage during the SA-7 launch be-
to bypass the vehicle engine 3 hydraulic-temperature cause of better shielding provisions.
OK switch which malfunctioned. This jumper was re-
_I.II_LIi
I. _ ; II/I-ILI, J[ iiglllll
10
A visual inspection of the Umbilical Swing Arm The flame deflector sustained minor damage and
(USA) system revealed blast damage in the following can be used for the third time. The majority of the
areas: Access platform roofs blown off on USA Nos. damage was to tubing that served communication
1, 2 and 3, access platform door and door housing equipment, cameras, etc. The third and fourth levels
blown loose on USA 2, accumulator pressure gauge of the umbilical tower sustained minor damage to
damaged at USA No. 1 Control Panel, frayed housing gauges, relief valves and tubing of the GN 2 hazard
retract lanyards on USA Nos. 3 and 4. Minor damage proofing system.
occurred on umbilical arms 1 and 3 A/C duct insula-
tion. 3.8 LAUNCH FACILITY MEASUREMENTS
the umbilical tower pneumatic systems. Insulation on certain critical engine and vehicle parameters to
on the spacecraft cooling system (Water/Glycol) indicate safe ignition and launch conditions. The
supply and return lines was burned away in the area measurements are monitored in the blockhouse during
of the umbilical 11 m (35 ft) level. countdown. Since these specified limits apply to pa-
rameters which are critical to vehicle performance
A review of the launch records available to date and, in turn, mission success, the countdown proce-
indicates that all active ground support equipment dure may be halted if any redline system value falls
systems performed within design specifications. One outside its assigned limits. Whether launch proce-
deficiency was noted. dure is halted or continues depends upon the validity
placed in the indicated measurement value and the
Only three of the four swing arms functioned danger imposed by the value in question. If the value
properly. The LH2 vent line on arm 3 did not discon- posesa threat to vehicle performance, launch will be
nect as it should have when the umbilical pneumatic delayed until the problem is corrected.
film analysis. The film clearly showed that the pneu- rameters.
ing that there was some pneumatic pressure on the launch were generally in agreement with those of
pneumatic cylinders. This initial movement indicated SA-6. There was no evidence of sound focusing dur-
that some pneumatic force was exerted. However, it ing this launch. This was in agreement with rawin-
has been concluded that the complete opening of the sonde information which gave no evidence of thermal
solenoid valve, for the duration of time required, did gradients that could result in focusing.
The film analysis also indicates that venting oc- regions defined by relative distance of the transducer
from the launcher. These regions are termed "Far
curred through the LOX umbilical drainlines for from
4 to 5 seconds after liftoff. This has been attributed Field," "Mid Field," and "Near Field." In addition,
three recording stations were located in the AGCS
to a configuration change since the S-IV umbilical
drain was connected to the S-I vent. The S-I vent rooms at LC-37.
and transformers were damaged in the elevator equip- db, recorded at stations 25K05 located 64 m (2t0 ft)
ment at the northeast corner of the launch pedestal. 178 degrees azimuth, 66 degrees angular ooordinates.
I!
The maximum "Near Field _' {umbilical tower) All acoustical db levels are referenced to 0. 002
sound level measured was 164 db. Allf_Near Field" microbar (0 db).
transducers are located on the umbilical tower from
approximately the 12 m (41 ft) level to the 77. I m
(253 ft) level.
12
ml_m
(877,200 Ibm). The approximate S-IV stage pro- roll and pitch moments of inertia are given in Table
pellant (mainstage) consumption was 44,600 kg 4-IH. These parameters are plotted versus burning
(98,350 lbm) during powered flight (see Figs. 4-1 time in Figures 4-1 and 4-2.
/
Center of Gravity --
0 0
-20 0 20 40 60 80 I00 120 140 160
4 x 107 4 x 106
-----_____
Pitch -- 3
\
2
Roll --
0 i 0
-2C 0 20 40 60 80 i00 120 140 160
S-I Burning Time (sea)
FIGURE 4-1. VEHICLE MASS, CENTER OF GRAVITY AND MASS MOMENT OF INERTIA
C$,N.;;,ENT;AL
• •-, _-- ,_HJ_, ill_111111111111_ 13
-.-C_-'__'F;_i.'__
._'.'T';.%
L .
1.5
+'I.
_.= Center of ,
Gravity -_
1.0
Mass -/_-_
0.5
0 0
0 I00 200 300 400 500
S-IV Burn Time (sec)
4 x 106 6 x 104
Roll
1
Pitch -__
0
0 I00 200 300 400 500
S-IV Burn Time (see)
FIGURE 4-2. VEHICLE MASS, CENTER OF GRAVITY AND MASS MOMENT OF INERTIA
14
•"-_,Ja_i lli_r.l_ I I#._ ,L-
s-Iv STAGE
O_TEOM iHD S-Iv STA_i
l'hiiDPr IQIITIOI_ O01_a_D 7II_T 140_10_ _IGIN1 _ SiEYAllA"_IOi( IGW_TIO_ C_I,AWD S-IV STAGE CU_OF_
THRUST DECAY
Pre_ Actual Prod 'j Act.lL rred_ Actual Vrl_ AetoaL rred _ Actual Pre_ Acru|l pred_ i Actual
Dalai TDG (|ec) -3,_ -3.O6 0 0.06 14b.93 ll7,_ L17,73 LlV,ll l&q._3 130,14 blV, 33 62L.36 621.67 b2_ 0
i
_,uae (Is)
$-1 |teie, OTy 18.751 _l,7b l|,lbl 18,71_ ._O.;'$1 18,706 ll.lhl _,8,7114
LO_ ZTO,eVE I 277,662 273,201 173,033 1,7691 l,VqI l,lhq 1,58l
ll-I 121,617 ! 121,179 130,117 Ill ,O61 1,7781 2,153 l,llO i,071
Ullase Gse (_l k ill) Sb $8 b5 &b 1,787; I,bIW 1,717 l+tl_
lie llwl 3 ' 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
0 ...... _ 1, Ii II 50 0 0
_l 3 38L 305 3|1 10 Ill 298 IO
Total I-I |tall ill,Ill ISl,bb2 _3,919 _b,ll3 Sb,OIC $5,_9 3S,IS5 3_,t$O
S-Ill*IV Interltell 1,0_7 l,Lll i,OI7 l,lLl 911 981 931 qPil_
$-IV BLaSe. Dry 6,113 h. ll3 d.135 6.1&$ t.135 1. ill b. IIS b. IAS b.133 6.ti$ ] I.liS 5.1_3 5.1)3 l.l_
LA_ 38, Lq3 31.12S II, 195 li. llS II. |S1 lO. ill SO.IS3 38.173 31. Ill S0. ill i IS I.OOl 64 t77
7,1Oi 7.632 I )l 20q 25 103
7.Ill ?.771 ?.?ll 7.772 ?.Ill 7.111 7,109 7.hV1
Ullill Gel (_ & In) i5 II 13 I1 II li li II li 16 IO_ 103 IC_ lO3
UII*Ia locker Vropellen_ llo IIO 110 110 IIC 110 II Ill
Ulllle _¢kil _llll lip Ill 111 llt Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill 121 0 0
_olt el 77 hi 77 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
lotll i-IV Itele Si.4l$ $1.51l S2.1IS $1.tl SI.11I ll.li? SI.ILI tl.)Oi SI, Ill 32.16q b._lt 7.$37 _.4l_ I _o7
Vehicle lnitrullnt U_Ii l.liS i.i_l l.lil l,bal 1.1l_ 1,_O i.lil l.liO i 3.hli 3.AI0 1._37 /.131 1.637 1._3_
lIliold liiibl I 7.111 1.Ill l.lll ?.Ill l.lll lolll I 1.816 1.811 7,816 1.1L4 7.81l 7.814 7.Eli 7,811
Lll i q-ll i.lll l.iV1 l.ttl I.tl7 l.tll l.ll7 l.ltl 1.ttl l.Vtl l. Vql
llrll lltlhl I/ill Villi SI/.I91 }lb.}ll tlO. l_ Ill. Ill i Ill.aM Ill.ill Ill,Ill Ill.l
lec_nd llllht lllll Total 61.hil il,$S_ 13.All iS._O0 ll.lll II.ll_ 16.dqi I7.IS_
ill Ill)
I-I Itlll. Dil lOl.50_ IO7.S_O Ill. SOl Ill.b1 IOl.l IOl.ll IO1.5OO IOl.ll
L_ tll._l tli. Sil 602.300 Ill.Vii 3,iOI i.lll l.llO 1.Ill
IP-I 261._1 l ll.lll lib.Ill lll.}Oi 6ollq I.iN 3.IlS i.}ll
L_ UIIiIo Gii (O_ i Ill liS ill 1i$ Ill l.tlt $.701 3.939 I.?O_
......,,<Oil
lelI_
,: l ,l ,l ,, ,l l 'l
blYO I_cklt Iropellint I,IS3 I.ISI I.SSI I.lll 1.3_ l.lhl l.l$1 I.ISI
lroit 1.0_ |._ l,O00 I.I 0 O O
Oronlti ll II 31 li 0 0 0
loill I-I lille 191.5_i 997.9SO 9tl.dVt Vi.195 Ill.511 Ili.llf Ill.eli Ill.ill
l-i/I-Iv I nllrililt 1.395 l.li9 1.396 l.i_V 1.11_ l.ill i.lil l.lll
I-ll Stele. Dry 13.51t 13._7 li.lll 13.1_? ! II.SII ll.l_l IS.SIT ll._.ll 13.325 IS._i) LS.hll 13.¼1 13.Sib II.%l
l_ _,10_ i.lll I_.ll i_.lll I_. Ill l_.lll l.lll l.ill
i I IT.Oil 17,134 l 7.Oll 17.1_ 11.711 lt._l li. Ill li.lti 19.115 |6.18i #O 46O 37 _47
L_0{ Ullill GII {_ i le) 33 IS 3S 3S 3_ $6 33 36 1S ST ill ill IZl 23t
Ull*le lockit Propellant 113 lll Ill Ill ill ill ISS ill 17 Ill O O O O
UII,I • llocket _*ei iT9 177 I19 177 ill i77 ill ill 179 ill 0 O O O
Total I-IV I/ill IlS,IS6 Ill. Ill Ill. Slh IlS°13i l]3, ll] iIS.31L 113.121 Ill. Ill IIIoVS3 llS. I li li.ll7 lb.llS IT.131 Ib._
Vehicle Inltt_ll_t U_lt S,II& 3,SII S,I_ S,311 S,IIC S,SI1 3,430 3,391
Payload Xce_bly 17.13l ll.lll II.2SI IT.ill iT.ill l?.lll ll.13l ll./ll 17.lSI 17.126 17.lll 11.216 17.23l 17.Zl8
LH i _.li_ l.lOO 6.he1 i.bOO b.5Ol l.10_ t.60l b.ll t+lOl l.l_ 6.101
ltTit Pitier It,ll Total 1.131.169 1.1_._18 l.llh.ll3 l.lll.bql llO.Oil ltV_lhl 1tl.311 lli.lll
lecond rlllhi Jill • Total 166.3t3 ll, i.311 lll.ll3 li_.lO1 I6.1_S 3t. IO7 36,#_9 IT.Ill
L IPua_ _onlwud Inclode| 17 ki/e (_7,3 lb_/o) Lobe ll-I flov per enline.
_. l-IV propIilin_ coni_i_d includii II kl (ll ibm) for hell_ll hiller conl_tion.
*PredLctad _Ilhte ire thole reported In t-V&VE-VAI-66-39
CT.:;7;3:;:TI$,L
15
__¢'_(_tk[ C I rtCkl'r I A I_.,,
ACTUAL PREDICTED
MASS HISTORY
kg (Ibm) kg (Ibm5
S-IV chIlldown LH 2 -2 -5 -2 -5
S-IV Ullage Rocket Propellants -2 -5 -4 -8
S-IV Frost -12 -27
r
2nd Flight Stage @ End of Thrust Decay 17,754 39,141 16,692 36,7q9
16
,
[V_T
k s 1. D*_v met *r. D*v N ta •• Day kl-. _ % D*v
lb Inches Inches
M It hour UI lies
13, _47 0.16 1,182.6 0.30 ?.81 0,0 25.626 0.12 TS. _07 0.11
In•tr_t
A•a*mb ly With
A•elmbly M L thout
at 10nLtion
Actual Ilia $I_,_ L6.06 0.0! 0.0068 0.0000
2,07[,1_ 38,706, _8
1•t rIIsht Stale I, LSS.giS J 6_II, $ 0._|
at 7Lr*r Notion
ACtkUll Ilia $L3.327 I$.1_1 0.03 O.0_mS O. 0OO8
260,27i O,OS 876.0 1.O 0.86 0.0 _33,_91 0.1q 23.618,116 0,_
39,1_1 5.98 1,_,73.2 0.0 _*.12 0.0_ 51,1_2 0.O2 1,0L511_5 0.0q
123,751 0.]_ 386.0 0.30 0.54 0.03 179._77 O.27 _,_}.713 0.17
17
SECTION V. TRAJECTORY
5. I SUMMARY
error in the altimeter data was 75 meters. A possi-
ble bias w'as indicated in the altimeter output of ap-
The actual trajectory of SA-7 deviated from proximately 100 meters.
nominal because of high S-I stage performance. Total
velocity was 39. 4 m/s higher than nominal at OECO 5.3 TRAJECTORY COMPARISON WITH NOMINAL
and 1.8 m/s higher than nominal at S-IV cutoff. At
S-IVcutoff the actual altitude was 0.99 km lower than Actual and nominal altitude, range, and cross
nominaland the range was 13.72 km longer than nom- range (Ze) are compared graphically in Figure 5-1
inal. The cross range velocity deviated 3.5 m/s to for the S-I phase of flight and in Figure 5-2 for the
the left of nominal at S-IV cutoff. S-IV phase. Actual and nominal total earth-fixed ve-
locities are shown graphically in Figure 5-3. Com-
A theoretical free flight trajectory of the separa- parisons of actual and nominal parameters at the
ted S-I booster indicates that the impact ground range three cutoff events are shown in Table 5-I. The nom-
was 58.5 km longer than nominal. Impact, assuming inal trajectory is presented in Reference 2.
the tumbling booster remained intact, occurred at
536.8 seconds range time. Altitude and range were greater than nominal dur-
ing S-I burn. The actual earth-fixed velocity was 39.4
The S-IV payload at orbital insertion (S-IV cutoff m/s greater than nominal at OECO. This excess ve-
+ 10 sec) had a space-fixed velocity 2. 8 m/s greater locity can be attributed to the high performance and
than nominal, a perigee altitude of 180.21 km and an longer burning time of the S-I stage.
apogee altitude of 234. 10 kin, giving a predicted life-
time of 3.8 days, 0.6 days longer than nominal. The The longitudinal acceleration was lower than nom-
extrapolated orbit based on data for an epoch of 10:57 inal for the first 45 seconds of S-I flight and higher
Z, September 22, reached the estimated breakup alti- than nominal for the remainder of S-I stage operation
tude of 86 km at approximately 11:50 Z, September 22, (Fig. 5-4).
atcoordinatcs of 21.7 degrees south latitude and 56.4
degrees east longitude. The theoretical ballistic im- The S-IV stage cutoff 2.02 seconds later than
pact time is approximately 12:00 Z, Scpteml)er 22, at nominal and, combined with the 0.71 second late S-I
coordinates of 26.4 degrees south latitude and 69.0 stage cutoff, resulted in a l. 31 seconds longer burn-
degrees east longitude. ing time of the S-IV stage. Total acceleration during
S-L T burn averaged 2 percent lower than nominal as a
5.2 TRAJECTORY ANALYSIS result of low S-IV stage performance. This low per-
formance and a steeper trajectory with more gravi-
Tracking data were available from first motion tational losses resulted in a S-IV stage velocity gain
through insertion. All tracking systems experienced of 37.6 m/s less than nominal in i. 31 seconds longer
difficulty in maintaining track during the S-I cutoff and burning time.
separation sequence. The reduced metric tracking
data showed discrepancies between the various track- The actual space-fixed velocity at the S-IV cutoff
ing systems of 200 to 400 m in position components. signal given by the guidance computer (621. 375 sec)
was 7807.8 m/s, compared to the predicted velocity
SA-7 was the fourth engineering test of the MIS- of 7806.0 m/s. The actual velocity is based on the
TRAM tracking system and the second engineering test powered flight trajectory, which matches the velocity
of the GLOTRAC system on a Saturn vehicle. The at insertion deduced from orbital tracking. The de-
most comprehensive tracking coverage was obtained viation w'as due principally to guidance errors identi-
from the MISTRAM system. Reliable data, with less fied after the flight.
than 5 m random error, were obtained from 50 tb 500
seconds. The GLOTRAC system had some difficulty The range was greater than nominal during S-IV
with the San Salvador transmitter; therefore, reduced burn. The altitude was greater than nominal to 566
metric data were obtained only from 170 to 403 sec- seconds and less than nominal for the remainder of
onds. The random error in this data was also less theflight. The apex altitude reached during S-IV burn
than 5 meters.
was 4. 4 km higher than nominal; however, by S-IV
cutoff this deviation was reduced to 0.99 km lower
An engineering test of the radar altimeter was than nominal. Approximately 0.28 km of the low cut-
flown on SA-7. According to the altimeter reliability off altitude can be attributed to low' S-IV stage per-
signal, valid data were obtained from 164 to 795 sec- formance. The remaining 0.71 km can be attributed
onds with only a few short dropouts. The random to guidance errors. Mach number and dynamic
18
IECO OECO
Surface I I
Altitude (kin) Cross Range (m)
Range (kin)
--Actual t i/ 400
100 i00
-- -- -- Nominai /
/
/
/
200
80 80
0
60 60
i
i ,-200
40 40
Altitude
i
I
I . -400
20 20
Surface Rangei
0 I I i ,i I
0 20 40 60 80 i00 120 140 160
Range Time (sec)
Surface
Actual S-IV CO
------ Nominal I
2400 260
1600
Altit:ude __ 60
1200
40
8O0 I00 '/
400 20
• _, 19
_.L_/'_kl led I"_I--L i"_P'I • I
Aititudt (kin)
EarEh-Fixed Vc[ocit>, V_ctL, r 27.61 i 26.92 O.69 26. ',9 25.78 C,.71 _ ----
O. O7 O. 07 0 O0
E_tLh-F[xed Veh_c[L) VcatL_r 105.43 ] [('5.56 -0.13 10'3.52 [ [[_5.65 -0,13 115.11/ i15,Cl8 0.02
Azimuth (de_)
OECO _+ }', m
Earth-Fixed V, [L'_ie',' Acct_racy S-IV CO _+ 1OO m
OECO _+ O. % m/s
-- Aclull
-- -llmllll Actual
.... Nominal
F.,lr_flxld Veloc_ (m/s) S-IV CO Longitudinal Acceleration (m/s 2)
1
S-IVCutoff
.,,o
6_ /r AI
/
551_
/ i /
/
/ ILEU
5O
/
Ik, O 220 300 380 400 $40 820 700 _I0
RangeTime (see)
OECO
/ii ! I
/
'_ / i i /
/ ii
i I/--
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 L60
RangeTime lsec)
Range Time (see)
20
- C'2-:
:,"
:-"::
:T'A L
Actual
pressure are shown inFigure 5-5. These parameters
--- Nominal
were calculated using measured meteorological data Math DynalT_ic Pressure IECO OECO
Number (N/crnL) I I
to an altitude of 27 km. Above this altitude the U. S. lo _.o . .
I I
Standard Reference Atmosphere was used.
Dynamic _ _ i/,/
Pressure "_- _',_ ] i
A comparison of actual and nominal parameters
/ \\
at significant event times is given in Table 5-H°
Apex is given for both the S-IV stage and the discarded
ceive the signal until 0.022 seconds later. The velocity Range Time (secl
increments imparted to the vehicle from the terminating
FIGURE 5-5. MACH NUMBER AND DYNAMIC PRES-
SURE
464.3 464.3*
Loss of Telemetry (S-I Stage) Range Time (see)
38.6 23.3 15.3
Altitude (km)
828.27 814.40 13.86
Range (km)
Total Acceleration (mls 2) -8.40 -65. O0 56.60
-I.028 -2. i00 1.072
Evaluation Angle From Pad (deg)
21
thrust decays are shown in Table 5-III for the S-I and TABLE 5-V. INSERTION ELEMENTS COMPARISON
S-IV stage at OECO and S-IV guidance cutoff, respec-
Actual Nominal Act-Nom
tively.
Time of Orbltsl Insertion 631.375 629.352 +2.023
(Range Time sec)
TABLE 5-IH. VE LOCITY GAIN AT CUTOFF
Space-Fixed Velocity (m/s) 7810.44 7807.67 +2.77
S-IV CO 2.7 1.6 _ross Eange Velocity (m/s) 221.4 224.9 -3.5
culated impact location relative to the launch site is ilncllnation (deg) 31.75 31.76 -0.01
Longitude
Cross
parameter
Range*
Range
i
(km)
(kin)
IP Report
863.995
Ca Icu la_'_
883.7
L2.4
Nominal
825.2
12.b
Act -Nora
58.5
-0.2
Perigee
\
-- _ _ Altitude
Geodetic Latitude (deg) 26.156 26.094 .26.263 -0.169
\\/
*Surface Range is Measured frc_n Launch Site
22
aril
The final orbit and reentry of SA-7 is shown in south latitude and 69 degrees east longitude (south-
Figure 5-8. The orbit reached the estimated breakup east of Madagascar in the Indian Ocean). This reentry
altitude of 86 km at approximately 1t :50 Z, September location is consistent with the fact that no signal was
22, at coordinates of 21.7 degrees south latitude and received from the Minitrack beacon after the KANO
56.4 degrees east longitude (see Fig. 5-8). The observation. Monitoring for the t36 mc beacon at
theoretical ballistic impact time is approximately Carnarvon and Woomera, Australia, and South Point,
12:00 Z, September 22, at coordinates 26.4 degrees Hawaii, confirmed that the vehicle was no longer in
orbit.
ISO ° 160 ° /40 ° 120 ° I00 ° 80 ° 60 ° 40 ° 20 ° 0 ° 20 ° 40 ° 60 ° 80 ° I00 ° 120 ° /40 ° 160 ° 180 °
|60 ° 160 ° 140 ° I;>0 ° I00 ° SO ° 60 ° 40 ° 20 ° 0 20 ° 4.0 600 Boo I00 ° 120 140 ° 160 leO
23
_L i,,,,,..=k ,--m • I
Wi_II IilJl. l_ I Iw_
pairs. Figure 6-1 illustrates the thrust buildup of each Sp_clfic ImpqJll¢ 1_¢I
first method is an engine analysis, which uses tele- FIGURE 6-2. VEHICLE LONGITUDINAL THRUST
metered parameters to compute clustered thrust, spe- AND SPECIFIC IMPULSE
24
Thrust II000 N) Thru sJ (IO00Ibl
Vehicle total propellant flow rate and mixture ra-
z_o¢ I
tio are shown in Figure 6-3. Flight mixture ratio av- _CO 114/.M S_}
I
eraged approximately 2.2 percent lower than predicted. 1oo_ -I i
RatJoItOK/F_It) -- -- -- PrlmdlctN
6co :
4c_
RlnoB Tbnlo15_)
_oo
FIow_ (lb/$1
---- 7
at 147.64 seconds. A typical thrust decay of an out- function of time were known from the engine analysis
board engine is presented in Figure 6-4. based on the telemetered measurements. Only the
absolute levels were considered in doubt. With the
6.2.2.2 FLIGHT SIMULATION flights of the Saturn I Block II vehicles it has proven
impossible to fit the trajectory with this assumption.
The vehicle longitudinal sea level specific Continued investigations have indicated a possible
impulse, vehicle longitudinal sea level thrust, and to- theory for the problem. Because of the clustered
tal liftoff weight were derived from the telemetered arrangement of the engines it is now theorized
propulsion system measurements in a simulation of that the engines do not exhaust into an ambient atmos-
the tracked trajectory. A summarization of the aver- pheric environment. Expansion rather takes place into
age values and deviations of the flight simulation re- a pressure fielddifferentfrom ambient caused by in-
suits from predicted and from the postflight engine terference effects between the exhausts from the mul-
').5
The simulation method must now be used to solve During the time interval between S-I stage ignition
for variations in thrust shape and drag shape simul- and liftoff,engine position 3 combustion chamber pres-
taneously. This, of course, decreases the accuracy sure indicated large pressure disturbances which were
of the results. The exact amount of the degradation substantiated by data from the thrust chamber dome
has not been determined as yet. combustion stability monitor longitudinal vibration
measurement. Chamber pressure data (Fig. 6-6)
For this flight the simulation program was utiliz- indicated these pressure disturbances occurred be-
ed in the normal manner with one significant exception; tween Pc prime and build up to 90 percent of rated
along with solving for the axial force coefficient, a thrust level. Chamber pressure during a normal build
variable multiplier was also determined which would up is shown for comparison. Oscillograph data indi-
change the shape of the local thrust curve to get a good cate the durationof the pressure disturbances was ap-
fit to the observed tracking trajectory. This variable proximately 20 milliseconds. Combustion stability
multiplier is presented in Figure 6-5 along with the data indicated the frequency of vibration was within
indicated thrust correction that is computed from the the range of 960 to 6000 Hz and equal to or greater
telemetered base pressure measurements. than _ i00 g for 2.5 milliseconds (see Fig. 6-6).
Flight data applicable to engine position 3 indicate the
_2
thrust level.
26
Pressure (N/cm 2)
Pressure (psi)
600
1 l
Measurement Typical Chamber
Saturation 8OO
5OO Pressure I
400 60O
30O
4OO
2OO
200
I00
y/Pc Prime
0
-2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 -1.7 -1.6 -1.5
Range Time (sec)
Dome
Vibration Level (g) L Measurement Recovery
20O
I I rr After
l
Separation
I00
-I00
2.S--!111-- /
-2OO
-2.00 -1.99 -1.98 -1.97 -1.96 -1.95 -1.94 -1.93 -1.92
Range Time (sec)
27
Individual engine thrust and specific impulse were TABLE 6-II.
calculated with the Saturn S-I stage propulsion system
mathematical model. Input for the reconstruction was ENGINE THRUST LEVE L COMPARISON
obtained from flight telemetry data and consisted of:
propellant and vehicle weights, pump inlet conditions, Engine Actual-Predicted Actual-E xpected
propellant densities, and turbopump speeds. Position (N) (lbf) (N) (lbf)
In order to make a detailed analysis of engine per- i 7,560 1,700 20,000 4,500
formance it was necessary to establish a new predic- 2 10,680 2,400 22,690 5,100
tion of the system performance, based on the actual 3 1,020 230 12,590 2 830
flight propellantweightsand densities. This new pre- 4 iO, iO0 2,270 21,930 4 930
dictionis referred toas expected performance for dis- 5 6, 67O i, 5OO t8,680 4 200
cussion purposes. These expected data allow a clearer 6 8,940 2,010 21,130 4 750
comparison of actual flight performance with predicted 7 1,870 420 13,750 3 090
performance, since both data are based on common 8 267 60 12,900 2 900
propellant densities. The flight fuel and LOX specific
weights were significantly different thanpredicted; the data. Figure 6-7 shows the engine-to--engine devia-
fuel specific weight at launch wa., heavier than predicted tions in thrust and specific impulse. The largest de-
and the LOX specific weightwas lighter than predicted. viation in thrust and specific impulse was observed on
The effects of the increased fuel density are twofold: engine position 4.
the propellant loading system loads an additional a- Deviation From Predicted Thrust (Average)
1.2
mount of fuel in order to satisfy propellant depletion
requirements, and burning time is increased because
engine power levels are dropped and additional fuel
must now be burned. The expected inboard engine cut-
off time related to propellant load and fuel density
which was reported by KSC was 142.5 seconds, or ap-
0.4 ii,ii
proximately 1.5 seconds longer than predicted. The 0.8 __ I
The average specific impulse for all eight engines FIGURE 6-7. DEVIATIONS IN INDIVIDUAL ENGINE
was only 1.4 seconds higher than predicted, but was PE RFORMANCE PARAM ETE RS
engine performance being much higher than expected The final flight performance prediction was based
cannot be definitely established from the available on data obtained from Rocketdyne single engine penalty
28
tests. Penaltystatictestswereconducted for all en- The pressure in the fuel tanks (Fig. 6-8) closely
ginesatNeosho teststandaftertheengines werere- agreed with the pressure seen on past flights and the
both the expected and flight data are based on approxi- RangeTime(see)
FIGURE 6-8. G_S PRESSURE IN FUEL TANK 3
mately the same flight conditions, the difference should
be approximately constant throughout the entire flight AND HIGH PRESSURE SPHERES
flightof SA-6. Possible explanations for the phenom- systemoperationare normal and are due to the action
enon are turbine exhaust effects or non-steady state of the fuel container pressurizing switch. These os-
engine performance; neither is considered when pre- cillations of pressure are transmitted to the fuel pumps
dicting performance. but have a negligible effect on engine performance.
Fuel tank pressurization provides increased initial temperature in fuel tank was 294°K and de-
tank structural rigidity as well as adequate engine fuel creased to a minimum of 270°K at i00 seconds. At
pumpinletpressure. The system operated as expect- this time aerodynamic heating effects were at a max-
ed with no major deviations from predicted perform- imum and caused the temperature to increase to 276 °K
ance • at the end of flight.
The system is designed to maintain a constant ul- 6.3.2 LOX TANK PRESSURIZATION SYSTEM
tainer pressurizing switch opens and closes any of the creased tank structural rigidity and adequate LOX
three pressurizing valves which are active and keeps pump inlet pressures. Prelaunch pressurization is
the tank pressure between 10.3 and 11.7 N/cm 2 gauge achieved with helium from a ground source. From ve-
(15 and 17 psig). At 70 seconds, the flow of pres- hicle ignition command to liftoff an increased helium
surant to the fuel tanks is terminated and the GN 2 re- flow is used to maintain adequate LOX tank pressure
maining in the spheres is joined as one system and during engine start. Operation of the LOX tank pres-
allowed to equalize with the GN 2 in the LOX-SOX surization system during prelaunch and flight was
spheres. satisfactory.
29
Prelaunch
pressurization
of the 4.24 percent ul- 6.3.4 LOX-SOX DISPOSAL SYSTEM
lage was accomplished in 74 seconds. Predicted and
measured LOX tank pressures during flightare shown The LOX-SOX disposal system purges the
in Figure 6-9. Center LOX tank and outboard LOX tank S-I/S-IV interstage area with GN 2. The purge dis-
Pressure t_/cm 2)
Pressure (psi} perses LOX, SOX, or both from the S-IVengine thrust
I chambers during the ckilldown cycle, and provides an
!
inert environment prior to S-I/S-IV stage separation.
I i
I
6.4 HYDROGEN VENT DUCT PURGE SYSTEM
i
J J i J
_o _c_ 6e so l_, i_ t_+c, 16o
Range Time Isec} The hydrogen vent duct purge system removes
FIGURE 6-9. LOX TANK GAS PRESSURES the chilldown hydrogen flowing through the S-IV stage
plumbing at approximately 35 seconds prior to S-I/S-IV
pressures averaged 2.4 N/cm 2 (3.5psi) higher, at the
stage separation. The hydrogen exits the S-IV stage
beginning of flight, and 3.4 N/cm 2 (5 psi) lower, at through three 12-inch diameter ducts that lead down
the endof flight, than predicted. The center LOX tank the sides of the S-I/S-IV interstage and the S-I stage
pressure reached a maximum of 42.4 N/cm 2 (61.5 psi)
in line with stub fins II, IH, and IV. Prior to launch,
at 25 second_ and had decreased to 38.6 N/cm z ( 56 psi) low-pressure helium from a ground source purges the
at 147 seconds. Although this is 0.7 N/cm 2 (i psi)
three ducts. A helium triplex sphere assembly on-
below the regulating range of the C_3X Flow Control board the S-I stage supplies GHe for the purge after
Valve (GFCV), it does not indicate abnormal system liftoff. This purge continues through the chilldown
operation since the 0.7 N/cm 2 (1 psi) is within the operation and S-I stage powered flight.
measuring accuracy.
3O
_%L Ir I_Pk i'l'i • •
--_j_l_l I_ LI_ I I/_
LOX starvation cutoff of the outboard engines was during engine firing and non-firing operations. This
is accomplished without the use of an external pres-
attempted for the first timeon SA-7. Itwas predicted
that LOX starvation would occur when the LOX level surizing source. Hydraulic fluid flows to the actuators
reached the bottom of the outboard LOX container from the high pressure accumulator and returns to the
sumps. The backup timer was set to give outboard en- low pressure reservoir. The electric motor driven
gine cutoff 6. i seconds after inboard engine cutoff if auxiliary pump operates only during prelaunch check-
The cutoff sequence was initiated by the uncover- Performance of the hydraulic systems during S-I
stage flight was satisfactory. Source pressures re-
ing of the LOX level cutoff probe in LOX tank 04 at
139.54 seconds. After a preset two-second delay, mained adequate throughout flight and the oil temper-
atures were well within their specified limits. The
IECO occurred. OECO was initiated by the 6. l-second
oil levels in the individual systems ran lower than pre-
backup timer at 147.64 seconds indicating LOX star-
dicted but remained within limits. Low accumulator
vation cutoff had not been accomplished.
GN 2 precharge pressures could account for these lower
Itwas predicted that OECOwould occur from LOX than predicted oil level values. Since the levels
starvation 5.64 seconds after IECO. This time inter- showed rising trends as the flight progressed, the pos-
valwas predicted on the basis of 0.33 m ( 13 in. ) height sibility of an oil leakisunlikely. No threat to the per-
differential between the center LOX tank and outboard formance of the individual hydraulic systems was posed
LOX tank levels at IECO. The actual differential from by the lower than expected oil levels.
backup timer cutoff since it represents approximately pellant retro rockets provided the necessary retarding
0.5-second burn time for the four engines. The re- forceon the S-I stage to prevent S-I/S-IV stage colli-
constructed residuals agree with probe data, verifying sion after separation. The retro rockets were mounted
that LOX starvation was not accomplished. on the spider beam at the top of the S-I stage, 90 de-
grees apart and midwaybetween the main fin positions.
The propellant residuals were determined utilizing The nozzles were canted 12 degrees from the vehicle
continuous level probes located in the bottom of each longitudinal axis to direct the thrustvector through the
propellant container, measuring the levels from i. 3 S-I stage center of percussion.
with reconstructed flowrates to determine the follow- bustion chamber pressure build up and decay appeared
normal for all four retro rockets. The SA-7 onboard
ing propellant residuals:
tape provided the specific data used in determining the
End of Thrust trends. Erratic data for the middle portion of the
burning period (149. 10 to t50.10 sec) necessitated the
IECO OECO Deca____
kg Ibm kg lbf kg lbm use of curves derived from previous flights to estab-
lish the trend during this erratic data period. A typ-
ical chamber pressure for the retro rockets is shown
LOX 7,812 17,222 1,991 4,389 1,633 3,600
in Figure 6-10.
Fuel 5,556 12,249 2,453 5,408 1,829 4,032 PreSsure IWcrn Z) Pressure (PSi)
• 1_oo
\
vectoring for vehicle attitude control and steering dur-
ingoperationofthe S-I stage. Two hydraulic actuators
were utilized to gimbal each engine in response to sig-
nals from the Flight Control Computer located in the
Instrument Unit.
RarKJel"ime (_,ecl
_,lpli_i--, I'l'l • •
_,,.vilI IIiJIil'_ I I/I_IiB
31
_I_ LIIL &- I I I III'L II Ii I III I tl
--II.,I.0'I_I IIII. _ . in i-
Measured, calculated, andpredicted performance systems, PU system, and the non-propulsive vent
values are shown in Table 6-III. The values obtained system were very close to predicted values.
indicate higher combustion pressure and thrust levels
than previous Block IIvehicles along with correspond- 6.7.2 CLUSTER PERFORMANCE
ingly shorter burning times. High propellant grain
temperatures appear to be the most probable cause for Two separate analyses were employed in re-
these high operating characteristics since combustion constructing the S-IV stage six-engine performance.
chamber pressure varies with temperature.
Definition of Terms:
I. Burning Time - Time interval between the intersection points on the zero thrust line
described by a line tangent to the rise of thrust at the point of inflection extended
to intersect the zero thrust line and by a line tangent to the decaying thrust curve
at a point of reflection extended to intersect the zero thrust line.
4. Average Pressure - Area under pressure versus-time curve divided by burning time.
Predicted values were based on a propellant grain temperature of 289°K and an altitude
of 76,200 m (250,000 ft).
32
k¢tuaI
6.7.2.1 ENGINE ANALYSIS l'hru=t (IGO0 N)
-- -- -Predicted
420 ]
9Z
0 IOO 200 3O0 4O0 5_
Since the actual was very close to the simulated vehicle weight at any point of the trajectory is accu-
trajectory, the only significantuncertainties in the re- rately known. The SA-7 flight simtdation results com-
sults are those due to possible inaccuracies in post- pletely verify the posfflight vehicle mass histor T
33
TABLE 6-IV. S-IV-7 PROPULSION SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Longitudinal Vehicle
Specific Impulse (see) 429.5 425.3 429.6
Longitudinal Vehicle Thrust accounts for engine cant angle, and includes helium heater
thr_ t and thrust originating at the cooldown vents due to leakage of LH 2 through the
engine cooldown valves during engine operation. Ullage rocket thrust and predicted
aerodynamic base drag (600.5 N or 135 lhf thrust effect) are not included.
Vehicle Mass Loss Rate includes all stage weight flowrates, such as the sum of indivi-
dual engine propellant weight flowrates, leakage of LH2 through the cooldown valves,
and helium heater propellant weight flow. Ullage rocket flowrate is not included.
Longitudinal Vehicle Specific Impulse is vehicle longitudinal thrust divided by vehicle
mass loss rate.
obtained from the combination of propellant sensor data 6.7.3.2 START TRANSIENTS
mined that the S-IV cutoff mass derived from flight engines. The engine thrust buildup at the 90 percent
simulation was within 6.35 kg (14 Ibm) of the actual level was achieved by all engines between 1.88 and
S-IV cutoff mass measured duringflight by capacitance 2.18 seconds after start command. For comparison,
probe data and point level sensor data. the chamber pressure transients at start are shown in
Figure 6-12. The individual engine chamber pressure
6.7.3 INDIVIDUAL ENGINE PERFORMANCE and the thrust overshoot during engine start transient
were negligible. Engine thrust overshoot values were
The six Pratt and Whitney RLIOA-3 engines, less than 5 percent on all engines.
which powered the S-IV stage, functioned satisfactorily
during prestart, start, steady state, and cutoff. All
engine events occurred as scheduled, and performance 6.7.3.3 STEADY STATE OPERATION
The engine cooldown periodwas 42.0 seconds (90,236 Ibf). Ma,-dmum and minimum mixture ratio
for LH 2 and 10. 1 seconds for LOX. The LOX con- levels during the flight were 5. 28 and 4.80 respec-
sumption for cooldown was approximately 68.04 kg tively. The maximum mixture ratio occurred at a PU
(150 lbm), or an average flow rate of 1.13 kg/s (2.5 valve angle of -14 degrees while the minimum oc-
ibm/s) per engine. The LH 2 consumption for cooldown curred at an angle of 21 degrees. Figure 6-13 shows
was approximately 136 kg (250 Ibm), or an average the deviations from predicted thrust and specific im-
34
Chamber Pressure (N/cm 2) Chamber Preesure (pit) lanced a smooth thrust decay and reached 5 percent
I
NOte: Time referenced to
guidance cutoff command
300
200
L20
_+.
/ ,o,,- /41_
_A_
/i 7,
}---= / i ii
.o
=o
150 17,]
Z00
LOO
i'!! IOO
-7 5O
35
Thefollowingsketchillustratesthemethod
used The LH 2 pump inlet conditions were maintained
in determining
thecutoffimpulse ofeachengine. within the engine specification requirements range
l'ine Delay Due _, Bdck F21F Eff_,cts throughout flight except for NPSP. The LH 2 tank was
prepressurized with ground supplied helium from 11.0
_ _ 50 ms _ TLme t_ Start c_f Thrust Decay
N/cm 2 (15.9psi) to 24.9N/cm 2 (36.1 psi).
Pressure (N/cm 2)
Pressure (psi)
3O
42
28
26 38
24
34
22
3O
2O
18 26
16
22
14 ,_ m
-_ z8
10 _-_ I4
-150 -50 50 150 250 350 450 550 650 750 850
Range Time (sec)
FIGURE 6-15, FUEL TANK ULLAGE PI:[ESSUI{E DURING PREPIIESSURIZATION S-I BOOST AND
S-IV F LIGHT
36
thefueltankpressurizingvalve. Priortoinitiationof Pressure(R/cm?)
TotalFuelPump Inlet Pressure
Pressure(psi)
steppressurization onsignalfromthepropellant utili- 27
/
pressurization opens the step pressure solenoid and
the tank pressure is allowed to approach the vent set-
24
0. 079 and 0. 124 kg/s (0. 113, 0. 175and0.274 Ibm/s), S- IV Burn Time(sec)
S-IV BurnTimeIsac)
The performance of the non-propulsive vent sys-
Pressure(Wcm2) FuelNetPositiveSuctionPressure
tem was as expected. See Section VIII for details on XO
system performance.
S-IV BurnTime4sec)
34
During the S-IV-7 stage flight, the LOX tank
pressurization system operation was satisfactory.
rhe LOX tank is pressurized with cold GHe from a
!I--
30
• 18
14 IrizgtJon
RangeTime 4sec)
were well above the minimum required limit of 10. 3
FIGURE 6-17. LOX TANK ULLAGE PRESSURE
N/cm 2 ( 15 psi). At the initiation of automatic count
DURING PREPRESSURIZATION,
( 150 sec prior to liftoff), the LOX tank was prepres-
S-I BOOST & S-IV FLIGHT
surized to approximately 33.0 N/cm 2 (47.9 psi) with
about 1.9 kg (4.1 lbm} of ground supplied helium.
N/era 2 (43.6 psi) at approximately 60 seconds before
liftoff, after which it leveled off and began to increase.
Between 120 and 100 seconds before liftoff, the This pressure decay may have been due to flow from
LOX tank vent valve number 1 cycled 4 times. The a vent valve pilot which remained unseated from the
LOX tank ullage pressure then decayed to about 30.1 last vent until 60 seconds prior to liftoff.
37
iJ [-
Number of Helium Coils Operating
lOO
h -. 300
80 !
i
60 ' 1 I 2oo
i •
I
t'0
• I00
20 i I
50 I00 150 200 2'5o 300 - 3s_- 4_oo 450 500
Time After S-IV Ignition Command (see)
Temperature (OK)
Temperature (°g)
1200
lOOO
I 1600
_Temperature Probe Failures
800 / \ 1200
k
600
\
800
%
400 50 iO0 150 £00 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time Alter S-IV Ignition Cor_nand (set)
0.I0 4 0.22
Cold Helium Flowrate
0.09 i
O. 20
0.08 I / i m O.18
I
I 0.16
0.07
LJ 0.14
O. 06 b
j, , -
0.05 l i i ,
4
]
0.12
8
Combustion Chamber Presoure
I ]0
3.8
Pressure (N/cm2) TotalLOXPump Inlet Pressure Pressure_sl)
During S-I boost, the LOX tank ullage pressure $2
ly, showing the characteristic shape of the temperattkre S-IV Burn Time{see)
transient after cutoff. Pressure(N/cm2) Pressure(psi)
25
36
3S
maintaining the required conditions of pressure and ply was more than adequate. The pressure and tem-
temperature. The LOX pumpinlet temperature stabi- perature in the cold helium spheres at SA-7 liftoff were
lized at the bulk temperature of 90.4°K within 5 sec- 2137 N/em 2 (3100 psi) and 21.9°K respectively, indi-
onds after engine start. The temperature then slowly eating a helium mass of 57.4kg (126.5lbm). Alack
increased, maintaining an average of 91.8t°K by the of temperature data for the number 2 cold helium
time of S-IV stage cutoff. The inlet conditions shown sphere during flight negates any determination of he-
in Figure 6-19 were within the specified limits of tem- lium mass in the bottles after liftoff. However, the
perature and pressure throughout S-IV operation. Cold monitoring of pressure and temperature conditions at
the LOX tank pressurization control orifice, during
helium bubbling was initiated at 488 seconds prior to
liftoff and continued satisfactorily until its termination S-I boost and S-IV pbwered flight, verified that no
39
P.mp Tempur+:ur¢_ DurLn_ _uhb in,_
L_]X l.h+¢
6.9 S-IV PROPELLANT UTILIZATION SYSTEM
1,1m,, r ,tul ,. (°K)
95
S
the pump inlets at command cutoff were 980 kg (2154
lbm) of LOXand203kg (4471bm) of LH 2. IftheS-IV-7
flight had been permitted to run to propellant deple-
LOX Pr_star t
%
Event LOX LH 2
kg Ibm kg Ibm
- I0 +_ -,, -4 -2 2 ,;
ied between 344and 327 N/cm 2 (499and 474 psi) from Time from S-IV Engine 5tart Command
liftoff to S-IV engine start command, after which time
it stabilized at 330 N/cm 2 (478 psi). The change in
FIGURE 6-21. TYPICAL PROPELLANT UTILI-
regulator discharge pressure reflects the change in the
ZATION VALVE POSITION
ambient reference pressure.
4O
At thetimeofPUsystem activation, thesystem Engines 1,4, 5, & 6 22 see minimum
sensed apositiveequivalent
LOXmasserror (excess Engine 2 21 see
LOX98.4kgor 217lbm)andpositioned thePUvalves, Engine 3 21.5 sec
causing theengines
toassume a highermixtureratio. Engines 1, 4, 5 & 6 still had a positive accumulator
Thefactorsprimarilyresponsible for thisPUvalve charge at the time (22 sec) noted; the onboard re-
excursion werenon-lincarities
inthesystem andthe corder playback interrupted the pertinent data trans-
initial LOXmasserror sensed in thesystem.This mission at that time, preventing an accurate placing
initialmasserroronSA-7waswithintheaccuracy of of the accumulator fluid exhaustion point.
theloadingsystem. 6.11 ULLAGE ROCKETS
The average engine mixture ratio excursions dur- Ullage rocket performance was satisfactory.
The ullage rocket ignition commandwas given at 148.34
ing flight varied between 4.8and 5.28, which are well
seconds. After ignition command the chaml)er pres-
within engine operational capabilities.
sure of rockets 3 and 4 began to increase immediately,
while the chamber pressure increase of rockets I and
6.9. 3 PU SYSTEM COMMANI)
2 was delayedapproximately 0.05 second. The cham-
The PU system is designed to originate three ber pressure rise rates, which were similar for all
four rockets, required approximately 0.03 second to
commands:
increase from 0 to 689 N/crn 2 (i, 000psi) , represent-
ing a rate of approximately 23,000 N/cm2/s (33,000
1. The PU System Gain Change Command
psi/s). The chamber pressures (luring mainstage
operations were nominal, averaging approximately
2. The Ltt 2 Tank Step Pressure Command
710 N/cm 2 (i,030 psi). The burn time above 90 per-
3. The Arm All Engine Cutoff Command cent thrust level, corresponding to chamber pressure
of approximately 620 N/cm 2 (900 psi), was 3.7 sec-
The first two commands occurred at the proper onds, which compares favorablywith the required min-
imum of 3 seconds.
times; the third was overridden by a signal from the
At bm'nout, the chamber pressures of all four
IU.
rockets decreased simultaneously. Actual flight data
The PU System Gain Change was scheduled to oc- compared with the manufacturer's data revealed an
overall performance level that was slightly above the
cur when the PU system indicated that the LOX mass
had decreased to 33,513 kg (73,884 Ibm). The com- typical manufacturer-specified performance level for
mand was observed to occur at 209.74 seconds (S-IV-7 a grain temperature of 294°K. It should be noted that
when the ullage rocket pressure sensing lines were
stage engine start command was 150.14 see). The
LOX mass at this time was 33,467 kg (73,783 lbm), installed, they were empty, not oil filled. Rocket
thrust data, presented in Figure 6-22, show that the
which was within the expected tolerance range.
Pressure (Nlcm 2) Pressure (psi)
uled
LOX
command
at
Ibm).
to occur
which
mass
This
when
was
time
the
had
PU system
mass
reached
the
indicated
observed
LOX
value
that
11,476
the
to
mass
was
occur
kg(25,300
was
within
at
11,378
488.11
toierance.
Ibm).
kg
seconds,
(25,085
This
,oo
600
- I000
- 800
6OO
t
t_00
The S-IV hydraulic system's performance was
satisfactory throughout the SA-7 flight. The sequence
valves opened upon command, and the accumulators
400
provided an adequate supply of high pressure oil to
preposition the engines prior to engine start. When
200
0I
the engine driven pumps achieved a stabilized output,
200
the accumulators bottomed in an oil filled position.
This reactionwas as expected. The accumulators are l'-An
' Ensine
SCarl:
not required to absorb pump pulsations or pressure
,i Coemut nd
surges; system compliance provides the necessary 146 [48 150 152 154 156 158
Range Time (Bec)
damping.
41
totallongitudinal impulse (the impulse parallel to the Rocket jettison was satisfactory, with all rockets
axis of the stage) was 270,452 N-s (60,800 lb-s), being jettisoned from 12. i to 13.3 seconds after ullage
which was within 0.5percent of the predicted nominal. rocket ignition command.
42
, ....,., ,DENTi, L
and pitch programs which began shortly after liftoff. However, due to the increasing S-IV stage center of
As expected, a counterclockwise roll moment, due to gravity offset, the digital computer velocity increased
the unbalanced aerodynamic forces caused by the S-I to-0.4m/s at 500 seconds and stabilized at that value
turbine exhaust ducts, generated a vehicle roll attitude through S-IV cutoff. The displacement from the ref-
error ( 3.5 (leg at 60 sec). Minor changes in pitchat- erenee trajectory measured at that time was -254 m
titude and engine deflection were noted due to the ( to the left).
change in control system gain coefficients at it0 sec-
onds and due to a change in total thrust vector align- The pitch plane steering m isalig_ment correction
mentat IECO. The roll torque due to thc thrust vector term (_ze) (introduced some 6 see after guidance ini-
misalignment caused only a 0.2-degree clockwise roll tiation) ranged from I. 0 degree to 1.4 degrees at the
attitude error shortly after liftoff; after IECO the angle end of path guidance, well within the expected limits.
increased to 0. 4 degree. These values are very small At S-IV guidance cutoff command, the space-fixed ve-
compared with SA-6 which experienced roll angles of locity vector calculated by the digital computer was
i degree after liftoff and 3 degrees after IECO. These 7806.0 m/s and the altitude (calculated from computer
reduced roll angles are due primarily to the much data) was 184.6 kin. These measured values com-
smaller roll torque on SA-7 and secondarily to the fact pare favorably with the cutoff velocity presetting value
that the roll gain was held constant throughout S-I of 7806.0 m/s and the precaleulated altitude of 185.3
powered flight (on SA-6 it was reduced hy 50 percent kin. At S-IV cutoff command, }he adjusted powered
at 110 see). flight tracking data show that the actual space-fLxed
velocity was 7807.8 m/s (1.8 m/s larger than the ve-
A vehicle roll deviation of 5.9 degrees developed locity presetting) and the actual altitude was t84. 3 km
during S-I stage separation due to a much larger than ( l. 0 km lower than the preealeulated altitude).
expected misaligument of the S-IV ullage rockets.
When the S-IV control system became effective about The inertial velocity components measured by the
two seconds after separation, the roll angle Was rap- ST-124 aeeelerometers are in agreement with those
idly reduced. During this correction, the maximum calculated by the digital computer. The predicted
roll rate of 5.6 deg/s was observed. (based on the ST-124 system's 3a errors) and rneas-
ured inertial velocity component differences (i. e.,
At path guidance initiation the vehicle's space- aeeelerometer-tracking) at S-IV cutoff were:
fixed velocity was about t percent higher than nora inal.
This condition caused the guidance system to issue a Velocity Predicted Difference Measured
nose down pitch steering command correction which Component (m/s) Difference
(m/s)
peaked at 4. 5 degrees at 190 seconds. During this
period (at 169 see), the ST-124 platform issued a Range ± 0.4 - i. 0
maximum nose up pitch attitude error signal of 2.3
degrees to the vehicle flight control system. Altitude ± i. 6 3.6
In the yaw plane, the computer data showed that Cross Range ± i. 8 4.7
the vehicle was to the left (-12. 2 m/s and -460 m) at
guidance initiation. Consequently, the guidance sys- The measured differences are approximately two
tern issued maximum steering eorreetions of -5.7 deg and one-half-times larger than those predicted for the
SA-7 flight and are due principally to the development
)_y and 1.6 deg _X (nose right and CW viewed from
rcar). During this time (at 174 see), the largest at- of large stabilized platform leveling errors after S-I
titude error signals issued by the ST- 124 to the vehicle ignition. The inertial velocity component differences
flight control system were 2.4 degrees nose left yaw ( aceeleromete r-tracking) calculated using the labora-
and 0.6-degree roll (CCW viewed from rear). The tory measured ST-124 system errors (plus thepre-
maximum yaw and roll attitudes resulting from the ignition range and cross range aecelerometer leveling
initiation of yaw plane guidance were 5. 6 degrees nose errors and the azimuth misalignment) fall well within
left and 0.85-degree CW, oeeurring at 174 seconds. the 3a error bands.
VVIII ill'lull I II ta II
43
Electronicsi
q'P,Y,R
(ac attitude
error signals)
ST- ] 26
i
(P,Y,RJPL) i
End Path
Resolvers
Aceei. I-_gG]-- ,Y,z
Cutoff q , )
I • I[ i I I C,,m.,a,_I /
S-IV
L
VeLocity Flight
i I
i
Cutoff Command Sequencers
I
[',_-_2-_..--
'(P Y i Cont ro 1
Flight C(mtrol
Sequent
S igna l s
i nZ
to
Compu te.___r
! Accel. 35
&ctlveto llOfrom sec
44
7.2 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION This is the first flight in which the digital com-
puter provided the pitch program. It utilized a five-
SA-7 was the first Saturn I vehicle to employ a term polynominal to generate the required vehicle
fully active ST-t24 guidance system. The principal pitch rate. The vehicle pitch commands were properly
functions of this system are to: executed by the guidance and control system. The ve-
hicle began to pitch over at 13.5 seconds ; the program
I. Generate attitude error signals for vehicle continued until 136.6 seconds where it was arrested
control and steering throughout flight. at 66.75 degrees from the launch vertical.
2. Issue timed diseretes to the Spacecraft, In- First mode slosh frequencies (0.7 to 1.5 Hz) of
strument Unit, S-IV and S-I stages for sequencing ve- the S-I propellants are indicated by the pitch angular
hicle events throughout the entire flight period. rates during S-I stage flight. These slosh forces are
largest during the max Q region; the resulting angular
3. Compute and issue steering commands for rates are :k 0.3 deg/s.
active path guidance during S-IV stage burn.
Thepiteh program was based on a zero wind pro-
4. Terminate path guidance and initiate S-IV en- file. The largest pitch wind was 12 m/s observed
gine shutdown at the preselected space-fixed velocity. during the max Q region. A wind velocity change of
4. 7 m/s over a 650 m altitude increment caused the
The ST-124 guidance system consists of the ST- maximum angle-of-attack of 1 degree at 75. 0 seconds
124 stabilized platform assembly and electronics box, (74. 4 km altitude).
the guidance signal processor and the digital comput-
er. Figure 7-i shows the interrelationship between Figure 7-2 shows comparisons of the rawinsonde
the components of this system and their integration and angle-of-attack winds and angles-of-attack. The
withthe elements of the vehicle's control system. The angle-of-attack winds which were calculated using the
operational periods of these major guidance and con- Q-ball angle-of-attack measuring system are in good
trol system components are also indicated. agreement with rawinsonde winds. During the maxi-
mum dynamic pressure region (60 to 80 see), the
7.3 CONTROL ANA LYSIS angle-of-attack determined from rawinsonde winds is
within 0.2 degree of that measured from the Q-ball
7.3.1 S-ISTAGE FLIGIIT CONTROL and the fin angle-of-attack meters. From 100 to 115
seconds, the measured angle-of-attack and that cal-
7.3. i. i PITCH PLANE culated using rawinsonde winds agree within 0.5 de-
gree. These parameters indicate good operation of
Pitch plane deviations were small through- the measuring devices in the region of substantial dy-
out S-I stage flight with maximum values observed in namic pressure.
the Maeh i to max Q region. The maximum deviations Pitch Plane, Win(I Velocffy IPoslth/e Derange) Im/sl
10[ I 1 l [ 1 [ ] | ]
in the control parameters were: lo 20 _o 4o 5o oo To ao qo too iIo I_ l_ l_
0 R_lin I
Attitude Error (deg) 0.9 54.5 Plk;h A_le-of-AttacR, Free Strmm (deg)
t+ b_ Above Relative Velocity VKtorl
Angle-of-Attack Dynamic
Pressure Product The performance of the control system was sat-
(deg-N/cm 2) 3.7 75.0 isfactory; however, there is evidence of a significant
45
disturbingmoment in boththepitchandyawplanes. The rawinsonde and angle-of-attack yaw plane
A six-degree-of-freedom (6-D)simulation ofthete- winds are shown in Figure 7-4. The maximum wind
lemetered values,madeby usingQ-ballangle-of- (15 m/s) is only about 1/5 of the 95 percent design
attackwindsandanexternalnosedownmoment,is wind.
compared withtheflight datain Figure7-3. This Yaw Plane Wind Veleclty I+ TO,_lrd Right of FIkJht Plane) li_$J
-z t I ] R,,,p_,,,_,,_ I I I I
Attitude (deg) -0.6 72. I FIGURE 7-5. YAW ATTITUDE, ANGULAR RATE
AND AVERAGE ACTUATOR POSI-
Angle-of-Attack (free stream) TION
(deg) 1.4 67.5
46
-CO" '.;D:'AT:AL I • II
and are well within the design values. gan, rotating the vehicle's pitch and yaw axes into
coincidence with the stabilized platform axes. The
15-degree roll program, executed at a rate of 1 deg/s,
Total Average Actuator Dellection {de:]}
was completed at 26.4 seconds (Fig. 7-8). On pre-
(Vector Sum of Pitch and Yawl
vious Block II flights, the ST-90S stabilized platform
was utilized to generate the rojl attitude error signal
to roll the vehicle from the 90-degree launch azimuth
to the 105-degree flight azimuth. On SA-7, the digital
computer issued a constant command rate to the ×y
,_ :: 4o , :_ _,l i i:,u ;_: resolver to cause the ST-t24 system to generate the
Ramie Time is_)
Free Stream Angle-M-Attack (degt - Block It Design Criteria roll attitude error signal used to accomplish the ma-
Calculated for SA-? neuver.
16
\\
4 i ' ,
r) L_..... , 2::- V L'',
8
Range Time Isec}
4
IZ -- " _R t
_o t Dynamic Pressure Angle-ol-At_ck Product !d_-N/cm 2)
zo
4 8 IZ 16 20 Z4 _ 3t2
/_^karar_r_lTi A I
_vi_m m_,. ..... 47
Theaerodynamic roll momentobserved onall 7.3.2 S-IV STAGE FLIGHT CONTROL
previousBlockII flightswasobserved onSA-7.This
moment is duetotheaerodynamic floweffectsasso- The performance of the S-IV-7 flight control
ciatedwiththeturbineexhaust ductsatthetail ofthe system was satisfactory. The pitch, yaw and roll plane
S-I stage_The resultingattitudeerror reached a parameters are presented in Figures 7-10, 7-11 and
maximumvalueof 3.5 degrees CCW(viewedfrom 7-12 respectively. A large roll deviation developed
rear)at 59.5seconds. Thecomparison ofthecalcu-
latedroll momentcoefficientwiththewindtunnel
measurements is generallyconsistent with the pre-
• j ............. ..
vious Block II flight results (Fig. 7-9). l+; . a
+ u _,,m,+l+t,.,
40 50 b0 80
oO.OIZ
.[K_Y VT --I_-I-/-I-t
were analyzed, it was decided to keep the roll gain _"ill I_011Jklmll°r F°sttl°n (_J) _ S-IV _O _1. II _1¢
48
., +. +
immediately following S-I stage separation due to a digital computer issued a pitch plane steering correc-
large S-IV ullage rocket misalignment (see Section tion of 4. 5 degrees (nose down) from nominal to ad-
IX). During the 2-second period from separation un- just the flight path for the excess velocity condition.
til the S-IV stage control system became effective, A maximum pitch attitude error of 2.3 degrees at
the roll attitude error increased to 5.9 degrees CW t69. 2 seconds resulted from g'uidance initiation ( Fig.
(viewed from rear). The S-IV control system elimi- 7-14). At guidance initiation, the pitch steering com-
nated the roll attitude error rapidly, with very little mand was 6G. 75 degrees: it then increased to 75 de-
overshoot, by introducing a maximum ang_alar roll gTees at 188 seconds to generate the vehicle nose down
rate of -5. 6 deg/s. No control disturbances resulted steeringeorreetion maneuver. Some 6 seconds after
from LES tower jettison at separation plus t2 seconds. the initiation of pitch plane path adaptive guidance, the
168.6 seconds (Fig. %13). These vehicle attitudes alignment correction term is about 2.5 (leg).
,i •
,c_
Ya_ Attitude (_y} and Attitude Error (2_y) (deg)
Ax_J
ii
I /'"_ J %
Pitch Atlitude (,Dp_
and Steering CommandtXZI (deg)
76
initiation ] / Launch
72 ! / / Ver!ical Vehicle
Steer£ng Command| (de a}
/I I
_g_ [ it0 40 _4o 2o_ 2to Ao z,'o
t I j*x 68
// : -
...........
66
J _ ..... Chain Error
Resolver
64
i T E /N ._---_- _R (+ CW V*ewed From Rear)
49
pitch and 0. 02 degree in yaw. Due principally to the 7.4 FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
increasing CG offset during S-IV burn, the pitch atti-
tude error increased from 0.45 degree nose up at 250 7.4.1 CONTROL SENSORS
seconds to 0.85 degree nose up at S-IV cutoff; the
mean yaw attitude error increased from 0.45 degree 7, 4. 1. I CONTROL ACCELEROMETERS
nose left at 250 seconds to 0.67 degree nose left at
S-IV cutoff. These values agree very closely with the Two body-fixed control accelerometers lo-
corresponding preflight predictions (based on CG off- cated in the Instrument Unit provided partial load re-
set and individual engine thrust levels) of 0.47 degree lief in the pitch and yaw planes between 35 and i00
and 0.73 degree in pitch and 0.49 degree and 0.69 de- seconds. Peak lateral accelerations of 0.8 m/s 2 in
gree in yaw. Both the pitch and yaw attitude errors pitch and 0.7 m/s 2 in yaw were measured near max
were larger than those experienced on S-W-6; how- Q. Figure %16 shows the measured lateral accelera-
ever, these increases were predicted because the re- tions transferred to the vehicle CG, The following
moval of the backup helium bottles introduced larger .... 5lmullt_
than normal CG offsets. The mean roll attitude er- Pitch Control Acceleratkm Iml$21 (+ Tc,l,e_ Fin IIII IECO OECO
small throughout flight. After the guidance initiation YaW Corle._ot/_r_Merat_ I11_S21 (+T_r_ Rrl IVI I[C{) OEO0
1 / - The maximtm_
posedupon
erometers
RMS
the signal
functioned
amplitude
was about
satisfactorily
of the noise superim-
0.1 m/s 2. The accel-
throughout the
flight,
6u_r_e
}/ InH_ 5A-7 tlNeme_r_
i SA-7 _ltc'bld
5O
Ruprusuntativc Cross Plot of Flight Data:
/ Yi_ Plant'
Fin Measu rl,_nt'nt /
Upwash = Free -Strvam Angle ol Atta,k / (60 - 70 sec)
2.5
(D 4 t 2/
9!
i I Fr_.t-Strt'am [ron_
2.0 2
4 C'-t%all (deg)
Flight Data
1.5
A
K App ro xi mation
I 0 Theoretical
-_ <6_s3 L
+ __R2 + V 3. 1,2828 0 Pitch ] Flight Data
Theoretical Up_ash = I = i Zb =
r z k6.1_J A y_,,, J
0.5
--_ 6. i _m
!
I 3 4 5
Mach Number
FIGURE 7-17. CALCULATED UPWASH FACTOR FOR FIN MOUNTED ANGLE-OF-ATTACK METERS
adjusting for the upwashfactor, the fin mounted angle- (2.0 to 2.2 Hz, 3.7to 4.5 Hz, 4. i to 5.3 Hz and 6.3
of-attack data were in good agreement with the Q-ball to 9. 0 Hz) during S-I burn. The two roll rate gyros
from 20 to 92 seconds in pitch, and from 20 to 120 responded to the first torsional mode frequency (3.1
seconds in yaw. During the max Q region, the maxi- to 6.7 Hz) during S-I propelled flights. The rate gy-
mum pitch angles-of-attack indicated were-1.0 de- ros did not measure any appreciable bending or slosh-
gree (Q-ball) and -0.9 degree (Fin Meters). Maxi- ing durIng S-IV burn. The performance of the rate
mum yaw angles-of-attack indicated were t. 4 degrees gyro system used in controlling the vehicle was sat-
(Q-ball) and 1.3 degrees ( Fin Meters). isfactory.
7.4.1.3 RATE GYROS The angular rate data telemetered from the con-
trol rate gyro system inthe Instrument Unit were cor-
The SA-7 vehicle was instrumented with rect upto LOS at Pretoria, South Africa, (40 rain). At
three rate gyro packages: Carnarvon, Australia, AOS, the angular rate informa-
tion was no longer usable due to the depletion of the
1. A ± i0 deg/s range, 3-axis, control rate gyro short life battery affecting the F6 telemetry system.
package, located in the Instrument Unit, was used to See Section XII for the detailed analysis of this condi-
provide pitch, yaw and roll angular rate information tion.
for vehicle control throughout flight. A control sig-
nal processor is used with the gyros to distribute ac 7.4.1.4 HORIZON SENSORS
and dc power to the gyro package and to demodulate
the ac rate signals for input to both the flight control Four horizon sensors were flight tested on
computer and the telemetry system. SA-7. They were attached to the outside skin of the
Instrument Unit and oriented as shown on the sche-
2. The second rate gyro package is a3-axis, +10 matic in Figure %18. Except for a brief period dur-
deg/s range, self contained control type unit which is ing the first orbit, only sensor 1 performed satis-
being flown for developmental purposes and is located factorily. Sensors 3 and 4 oscillated randomly between
in the thrust structure area of the S-I stage. 0and 5 degrees and 0and I degree respectively, while
sensor 2 swept over to its stop at a 65-degree deflec-
Analysis of the pitch and yaw rate gyros from both tion angle and remained there throughout most of the
± 10 deg/s packages indicated that the vehicle was re- flight. Sensor t locked on the horizon at 228.2 sec-
sponding to the first four bending mode frequencies onds and remained locked on until the horizon passed
51
with only one sensor operating, the attitude angles
cannot be dete rm ined.
(d_JI
50" Horizon Sensor Angles
3O
g, 20 Sensor 3
]0 Sensor 2
Sensor 1
0 ,_1 t I =
1690 1700 1710
Range Time Isec)
FIGURE 7-18. ttORIZON SENSOR ORIENTATION Idegi-
local vertical)
from its field of view at 794 seconds. Figure %19
for Orbital Velocity
compares the telemetered sensor angle from sensor - , e " oAe down"
90 1700 1
Z0 0_I I l=r
0 _ _ _ _ 600
RitIW TI_ li_l
,m
enlof #1) tkm) Altitude
...,...................
... L FrOm Orbital
2O
FIGURE 7-20. ttORIZON SENSOR ANGLES AND
CALCU L,ATED ATTITUDE AN-
10
52
A comparison between predicted
andcalculated S-[ Stage (maximum actuator deflection was 1 7 dog)
tude error was obtained from a vector balance using Torque Measured 6,200 9,400 15,500
the guidance system measured space-fixed accelera- (N-m) Design Limit 29,200
resolver error are in good agreement for both S-I and Parameter T.ype of Data _ Cutoff
{14.
0 DO o 0.0 ZO 10 10 50 60 10 90 9_" ..J 00 The performance of all S-I and S-IV stage actuators
was satisfactory.
-Ct 4 "
analyzed witb an open loop analog simulation of the This difference resulted from the change of actuators
control filters. The calculated values were within 0.2 that took place after the S-IV-5 flight. The non-
degree of the telemetered data. This small error is [inearities in the actuators on S-IV-5 tended to excite
within the range of telemetry errors. the LOX second rhode sloshing. This tendency re-
suited in a large amplitude indication, since the loca-
The following tabulation presents a summary of tion of the PU probe makes it extremely sensitive to
the maximum measured gimbal actuator flight data: second mode sloshing.
., .... _,141 j
53
t_lkIIPlI_PI. IIIl_I • I
-- v v • _I IVIII'_ I Ir_k
! i
o i
0
I
0 20
I
_
_0
I
4080
RangeTime (see)
I00
,
120
I
Pr'dtct'd
,
I_l mode
j
_"
140
i
li
e o o
o
,
I
i
ObservedFrequencies in Center LOXTank (Hertz) IECO I
_o _o 6o _o _oo _o 140
Range Time (sec}
_ _ PredicteD From Theorelical
Transfer Function Using
Engine Deflections
I -- Predicted l It Modt !
0 I , t I i I [ I_
o Calculated From Respective
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
P. U. Probe Data
12 LH2 Slosh Amplitude, Peak to Peak Icm)
Range Time (see)
IP. U. Probe) IECO
-- Predicted LOX O LOX Probe
I
-- -- Predicted I.A-I
2 D LH 2 Probe I
IECO
Observed Frequencies From S-IV P. U, System (Hertzl I
4
,I
00 _o _o _o _o _oo ,to _4o
Range Time (secl
FIGURE 7-24.
_ o 2o _ _o _o loo 120 1_o S-IV SLOSH AMPLITUDES DURING
,ot
1 /_ _,
'io electronic
computer)
box,
was
guidance
generally
signal
satisfactory,
processor
certain
and digital
devia-
FIGURE 7-23. S-I SLOSH AMPLITUDES DURING t. The predicted and actual guidance intelli-
S-IV POWERED FLIGHT gence errors were in wide disagreement.
....... [ IIrl k I
-- _gl_lrll/l.l_ i ,.._
54
I . ,!!.1 •ll l I_'lll • | -- -
1.0 - 000 s^- 6 -- Theoretical 2nd Mode----_ in subsequent parts of this section.
,,_SA- 7 cJ
0.8 I 0o7
7.6. i GUIDANCE INTELLIGENCE ERRORS
O00Q C
0.6
)-000 0 °O "_0 Guidance intelligence errors are defined as
(
O.4 the differences between the range, altitude and cross
range inertial velocity components measured by the
0.2
Theoretical Ist Mode----_ d
ST-124 acceleromcters and the corresponding param-
1 O0 200 300 400 500 600 0 which were available only at liftoff.
Range Time (sec)
The predicted ST-124 inertialvelocity errors for
LOX SLOSHING FREQUENCY the SA-7 flight test were based on laboratory calibra-
Frequency (Hertz)
tion of the ST-124 stabilized platform system _Table
1.2 I I I
7-1). Three _ deviation values for accelerometer
.... SA-5 Theoretical 2nd Mo_e_ .
1.0 - 000 $A-6 --
leveling andazimuthalignment were used for the pre-
diction. The ST-124 system 3a tolerances were used
0.8
to develop an error band for each velocity component
0.6 to serve as a standard for comparison with the actual
o inertial velocity errors.
0.4
2. The actual space-fixed velocity vector at S- The telemetered ST-124 accelerometer (inertial)
IV cutoff was 1.8 m/s larger than the digital computer velocities measured from vehicle first motion were
value of 7806.0 m/s I identical to velocity presetting). compared with the corresponding velocity components
determined from tracking. The differences between
3. The digital computer's gravity term was the telemetered velocity data and tracking are listed
slightly in error before lfftoff. in Table 7-II for the principal event times, in each
component, the velocity differences are much larger
4. The digital computer sequencing discretes than those calculated from the ST-124 3 _ devia-
were issued with a small time delay. tions.
55
TABLE 7-I. SIGNIFICANT GUIDANCE INTELLIGENCE ERRORS
Even: Typv of Data Total Velocity Range Velocity Altitude Velocity Cross Range Velo¢ itv
Range TLmc Actual Vel_ Diff. Actuat Vel. D_ff Actual Vel_ Diff. A_tua_ Vel. Diff
The guidance intelligence errors predicted from Attitude Accelerometer Non- -0. 008 deg
the laboratory data fall within the limits of the velocity orthogonality
errors calculated from the 3 _ tolerances. This in- Platform Azimuth Alignment 0. 004 deg
dicates the ST-t24 system errors much larger than Platform Leveling Errors
those resulting from the 3 a deviation must have de- About Z axis -0. 030 deg
veloped prior to lfftoff. Figure 7-26 also shows the About X axis 0. 050 deg
56
_'_i_%kl rl i'_P_ I'I'I A I
lln rp_olwe_+
+r for The difference between the total space-fixed vec-
-- + -- A1tribule_1to Tr_kirN
tors for the measured and adjusted computer values
Ran+j++ elo,:n+ +rr+r IL# I,,+LJ+, An+ Other Plat_rm [rr+r
5 Iv co
(-2.4 m/s) is about evenly divided between the range
c ual velocity and altitude velocity errors. Even though the
Ra_e TimeiSe_b _----I'
C_n_rLJCled E_r0r magnitude of the cross range velocity error is large
its effect on the total velocity is virtually zero. The
computer's adjusted total velocity agrees with the
tracking data within the tracking data tolerances of
RaPqe;ime _se(I _"Ncn_fth_onalit_ ----'i- ._ 0.5 m/s. The computer's measured space-fixed
Co_tr,_uhon
Cross ran,je _l,_i_ Frr,r Aq:n#s_ _'_' total velocity agrees exactly with the precalculated
velocity (identical to cutoff velocity presetting) which
i l_z'_ - _ _ - Azimuth Misalignmen I _[
indicates that the computer functioned as expected
] Conlr Jbulion _ -- i
since the maximum predicted implementation scheme
?1_]
l .L_.. i Plallorrn t_elir,rjl, alqe rime iS_l KonirdkJtion -- -- -- ---- i dispersion was , 0.05 m/s. The total velocity differ-
2 ence between the measured computer data and track-
ing (1.8 m/s) is much larger than the maximum pre-
FIGURE 7-26. RE SIDUA L INE RTIA L VE LOC ITY dieted error of 0.4 m/s (based on the laboratory
and the precalculated trajectory data in Table 7-III. decay impulse from the start of S-IV engine shutdown
The same data, corrected for the ST-t24 errors de- signal. However, if the correct predicted cutoff im-
termined after flight and the computer initialization pulse (from guidance cutoff command to the end of
thrust decay) is used, the precalculated total velocity
errors, are included in the comparison.
-2785.2 -86.0
7806.0 7291.7
Computer
(measured)
2.2 4.6
-2.4 -1.7
Computer
(meas-adjusted)
+ l,,,/,xi_ir.P,,r_,. .....
_+. ,_. , z_.l..l_l l IIP'_L
TABLE 7-IV. COMPARISON OF SPACE-Fi)CED VE- etc. ) after this time is due to the rapidly increasing
LOCITIES AT ORBITAL INSERTION vehicle lateral CG offset (from -0. 097 cm at 400 sec
( 631. 375 SEC RANGE TIME) to-0.211 cm at S-IV cutoff). Due primarily to this
condition, the cross range velocity and displacement
F Total Range AiCitude Croea Range
increase to -0.3 m/s and -254 m at S-IV cutoff.
Data Source Velocity Veloclty Velocity VelocLty
(m/i) (m/e) (m/i) (mt.)
would be 7808.8 m/s at orbital insertion; the pre- The time difference between physical lfftoff
dicted total velocity increase between cutoff and in- of the vehicle (first motion) and the sensing of elec-
sertion (2.6 + 0.4 m/s) would then agree favorably trical liftoff command by the digital computer was
with the tracking velocity difference of 2. 6 m/s. 0. 210 second. This time difference resulted in a
computer inertial and gravitational altitude velocity
Using this value for the velocity increase, the error of 2.5 m/s throughout flight. However, the
difference at insertion between the adjusted precalcu- computer program is so written that any such error
lated velocity and the tracking data is 1.8 m/s, which will not carry through to the space-fixed velocity and
is in agreement with the corresponding difference at consequently guidance accuracy is not affected. The
S-IV cutoff. space-fixed altitude velocity is not affected because it
is the algebraic sum of the inertial and gravitational
velocity values both of which contain the 2.4 m/s er-
The performance of the yaw plane delta-minimum
guidance scheme is shown in Figure 7-27. The cross rorandthe error cancels[ Ys =(_'i- AYi) - (Ygy-
A Yi) ]"
range velocity and displacement (-12. 2 m/s and -460
m) at guidance initiation were reduced to minimum
2. Computer Initialization Errors
values at about 400 seconds. The increase in all pa-
rameters (velocity, displacement, steering command,
Small constant velocity differences exist be-
(n_s} (m) C ross R|nge Veloci_ & Oi_lacem eo_ tween the aecelerometer data and the inertial velocity
S-rV values measured by the digital computer. The
Gu(_c_
2 ! xx
i range accelei_ometer and -0. 006 degree for the cross
range aecelerometer. Two-thirds of the total accu-
_2 _ _ _" J Ri_ Ti-_i (_1 I
mulated error in //i resulted from the computer grav-
.,, i xy
ity term used for pre-liftoff computations being slightly
-6
_ _i_iEiPii_pk l'l'i • l
to confirm the correct operation of the computer and During the first orbit while the vehicle was over
it does not check the validity of the flight program. Ascension Island (LO + i/2 hr) a test was made to
Due to the nature of the Bit-by-Bit analysis program, demonstrate the capability of loading information into
all of the computer telemetry was not examined. All the digital computer via the digital command system.
navigation and guidance quantities were examined. The telemetered computer information verifies that
Minor loop telemetry data, which include accelerome- the loading operation was completely successful.
ter readings and mode codes, however, were not ex- Thirty 25 bit data words accompanied by 30 control
am ined. words (16 bits each) were loaded into the computer
and telemetered back to the ground correctly. The
The total number of computer words telemetered verification portion of the load-readout routine was
between liftoff and entry into the cutoff loop was then performed and the 30 data words telemetered
54,883. Of thisnumber, 53,250 or 97.25 percent were correctly again.
available for examination by the Bit-by-Bit program.
The remainder was lost due to telemetry blackout dur- 7. 7.2 ST-124STABILIZED PLATFORM SYSTEM
ing staging and second stage ignition. The Bit-by-Bit HARDWARE ANALYSIS
program examined 62 percent of the 53,250 telemetry
words. The remaining information was minor loop Although the ST-124 system functioned prop-
telemetry. Thus, 60.5 percent of the total flight com- erly detailed analysis of hardware performance re-
puter telemetry (54,883 words) during the time inter- vealed the following deficiencies:
val considered was examined in this analysis. An es-
timated 2.35 percent of the telemetry was lost due to 1. The stabilized platform developed large lev-
dropouts. This number includes the data lost in the eling errors about the pitch and yaw axes between S-I
RF blackout during staging. engine ignition and liftoff {Fig. 7-28).
From this analysis, it was concluded that the Platform LevelingError Aleut X Axis(Yaw)
Angle(deg)
ASC-15 flight computer and flight program operated
a lo I '" ''=..... ,,,,,_;:,,
I
correctly during flight.
i, .o.o,o,..
aolddmm period _ |'& ¢ ¥ Iri=l LGVOIIn s [trot
errors were the main contributors to the guidance in- specified launch requirement of 1793 to 2206 N/m 2
telligence errors. This problem will be eliminated gauge (2600 to 3200psig). FromliftofftoS-IVcutoff,
in future launches by switching the pendulum signals the ST-124 gas bearings consumed 1.1 SCM (38.8
out of the loop prior to S-I ignition. SCF), or 21.6 percent of the total supply of 5.1 SCM
(180 SCF). This value agrees with the predicted con-
2. The stabilized platform also appeared to have sumption rate of 0. 1065 SCM/min (3.76 SCF/min)
lateral velocity error at S-IV cutoff. The cause of tureof the GN2supplied to the ST-124was also 297°K.
this error has not been identified as yet; therefore, it
is possible that a similar effect may occur on future The preset regulator pressure differential be-
flights. tween the gas bearing supply pressure and the speci-
fied Instrument Unit pressure was 12.5 N/cm 2 differ-
The three stabilizing servo loop pickup error sig- ential (18. I psid). The regulator was set at this
nalsindicated maximum values of 0.2 degree. These pressure to provide the specified differential pressure
values, which agree with the corresponding data from of 10.4 • 0.4 N/cm 2differential (15.0=L 0.5psid) at
the flights of SA-5 and SA-6, are satisfactory, The the ST-124 inlet manifold. Prior to liftoff the average
redundant gimbal servo error signal remained very regulated pressure differential (gas bearing supply
near the null position as expected. The guidance ac- pressure minus IU pressure) measured 13.2 N/cm 2
celerometer servo pickup signals were also very differential ( 19.2 psid) ; inflight, the average pressure
smooth and remained near null. differential was 13.0 N/cm 2 differential ( 18.8 psid).
The differential pressure was three percent too high
7.8 ST-124 GAS BEARING SUPPLY SYSTEM during prelaunch and one-half percent too high during
inflight to meet the ST-124 gas })earing manifold sup-
The perfornmnce of the gas bearing supply sys- ply pressure requirement of i0.4 • 0.4 N/crn a differ-
tem was completely satisfactory. The 0.028 m 3 (1 ential (15.0 • 0.5 psid). These small errors are
ft 3) GN 2 storage bottlewas pressurized to 2137 N/cm 2 within the measurement accuracy and, therefore, are
gauge {3100 psig) by the high pressure ground supply not considered significant.
6O
SECTION VIII ORBITAL ATTITUDE
The S-IV-7 stage with Instrument Unit and back. These angular velocities were not telemetered
Apollo Boilerplate Payload was inserted into orbit at during the period of tape recorder playback of S-I/
631.38-seconds range time. The attitude of the ve- S-IV separation data from 642.7 to 672.8 seconds.
hiele at that time was 99.8 degrees in pitch, 0. 5 de-
gree in yaw and 0.06 degree in roll. The angular rates At resumption of telemetry (672.8 see), the an-
observed at S-IV cutoff were-0.03 deg/s in pitch, gular rates had changed to -0.25 deg/s in pitch, -0.24
0.04 deg/s in yaw and 0.06 deg/s in roll. The great- deg/s in yaw and 0.22 deg/s in roll. This indicates
est recorded changes in angular rates occurred be- that the main Ltt 2 vents (propulsive) probably opened
tween 11 and 12 minutes after liftoff. Records indi- during this period which was void of telemetered data.
cate that the main LIt 2 vent opened 12 times during The greatest recorded changes in angular rates occur
this period and that the main LOX vent valve did not between 674 to 720 seconds. During this time period,
open. At 20 minutes the roll angular rate had increased the main LH 2 vents opened 12 times and the main LOX
to 0.4 deg/s CW from rear and the vehicle was per- vents did ,lot open. These were the only recorded
forming a precessional motion with a tumble (pitch/ orbital openings of the main vent valves. Figure 8-1
yaw) rate of 1.46 deg/s. The tumble rate reached a shows the telemetered angular rate observed at Anti-
1.03 deg/s CW from the rear. At loss of telemetry At loss of signal from Antigua 14 minutes after
signal (40 rain) the vehicle was essentially in a flat liftoff, the angular rates were -0.76 deg/s in pitch,
spin and was performing a gyroscopic precessional -0.57 deg/s in yaw, and 0.12 deg/s in roll. At ae-
motion with a half cone angle of approximately 85 de- quisition of telemetry by Ascension (20 rain) the roll
grees and had a precessional period of 4minutes (1. 5 angular rate had increased to 0.4 deg/s CW from rear
deg/s equivalent angular rate). At loss of rate gs_ro and the vehicle was performing a precessional motion
telemetry, the only direct measurement of vehicle with a tumble (pitch/yaw) rate of 1.46 deg/s. This
angular rates, the observed angular rates were less tumble rate reached a maximum of 1.65 deg/s at 25
than 2 deg/s in any axis. Analysis of radar signal minutes. The angular rates observed in the rate gyro
strength records (AGC) after the end of residual pro- telemetry at Ascension loss of signal were 1.38 deg/s
pellant venting (approximately 24 hours), indicates a in tumble (pitch/yaw) and 0.79 deg/s in roll. These
final tumble rate of approximately 6 deg/s. telemetered rate gyro angular rates compare favor-
ably with the angular rates defined by the horizon sen-
A non-propulsive vent (NPV) system was flown sor at this time of 1.46 deg/s tumble and 0.68 deg/s
for the first time onSA-7, in addition to the main pres- roll. The roll rate changed from 0.79 deg/s at loss
sure relief LOX and LIt 2 vent systems used on SA-5 of signal by Ascension (28 rain) to 0.92 deg/s at ac-
and SA-6, to obviate the excessive angular rates due quisition by Pretoria (32 min). At loss of signal by
to the venting of residual propellants after S-IV cutoff Pretoria (40 rain), the vehicle was tumbHngat 1.55
experienced on SA-5 and SA-6. The NPV system was deg/s with a roll rate of 1.03 deg/s CW from rear.
desigued to keep the vehicle ang, alar rates below 6 The vehicle was performing a gyroscopic precessional
deg/s, the maximum allowable on the Pegasus experi- motion with a half cone angle of approximately 85 de-
ments. This system performed satisfactorily and all grees and had a precessional period of 4 minutes ( 1.5
system components operated as expected although deg/s equivalent angular rate). Figure 8-1 presents
there was some indication that the final rates were the tumble and roll rates observed during the times of
approximately the maximum allowable. valid orbital telemetry.
The vehicle was inserted into orbit at 631.38- moments acting on the orbiting vehicle were:
61
Angular Rate (deg/s) Radar, Minitrack, and telemetry signal strength
records (AGC) and radar operators comments were
l , Tape Recorder Playback
/ • _ Roll -, utilized
angular
in attempting
rates after
to define
loss of telemetry.
the
Figure
orbiting
8-2
vehicle
L Ascension ------
Pretoria
,_c.. c_o oo
CAL ANT
Antigua
FIGURE 8-i. ANGULAR RATES DURING ORBITAL FIGURE 8-2. OBSERVED SA-7 TUMBLE RATES
VENTING
VENT SYSTEM
SYSTEM
62
During the period of active telemetry there is reason- valve opened three times. However, the LH 2 vent
able agreement between the telemetered angular rates pressure recording, shown in Figure 8-4, indicates
and the angmlar rates indicated by AGC records. After possible pilot flow up to 805 seconds.
Pre..ure (psi)
the first three revolutions the only valid data available P_'eslure (N/cm2) LH 2 Vent PreMure
0.8
for rate analysis were skin track radar AGC and radar • 0.8
0.4
operator comments. Signal periodicity ( equivalent
angular rate) seen in radar skin track records can be 0
,-0,4
interpreted only as a tumble indication. The vehicle
-0.4600 700 800
tumble rate as indicated by this evidence would be ap- Ibmnge Time (lec)
proximately 6 deg/s at the end of orbital venting of Heat Input (tOOO_tta) llemt Input (Btufhr)
8OO
residual propellants (approximately one day). Spin
rate indications in the orbital records were extremely
difficult to discern and the roll rate at the end of I'
|
!
2500
200O
8.3 NON-PROPULSIVE VENTING SYSTEM PER-
FORMANCE _H2-Tank Pr*oeuFe I_ne
data,
ed.
and
The
system
two hydrogen
component
and
operation
one oxygen
was as
non-propulsive
expect-
!_,.-_ !_\
vent valves opened at engine cutoff {621. "_8 sec), and
the newly designed main hydrogen vent cover closed
0
and latched as intended. 6OO 7O0 800
The main hydrogen vent (propulsive) did open, FIGURE 8-4. LH 2 VENT PRESSURE AND HEAT IN-
but the main oxygen vent (propulsive) did not open PUT
8,896 N-s (2000 lbf-s) based on the following data ( 1,175 lbf-s).
evaluations:
4. In order to make a deduction of the vented
1. After a time lag of approximately 5 seconds, total impulse during the data dropout period, the heat
the LH 2 tank pressure rose sharply from 25. 1 N/cm z input into the LH 2 tank has been evaluated. This eval-
(36.5psi) at 626 seconds to 30.3 N/cm 2 (44.0psi) uation is shown in Figure 8-4. The evaluation was
at 643 seconds, at which time there was a loss of data based on the following events:
because of the onboard recorder playback.
a. The LH 2 tank pressure rise prior to the
2. After the period of data dropout, which oc- data dropout period.
No. 2 vent valve opened nine times. The No. 1 vent er playback period was interpolated.
63
Theequivalentventedtotalimpulseduringthis LaX Tank
Eased Upon I
N-s (820lbf-s). _
l.LOX Tank
995 Wat=s
Heat Input
(S-IV-5
Approximately
Fldght)
20
5. Thecombination of theconclusions
in 3 and4 aboveindicatesa vented
reached
totalimpulseof t0 ! N ",-%
907 of
I
I I
I
Residual
I
I
8,874N-s (1,995 lbf-s) or 7.3kg (16.2 lbm) ofGH 2 ' II I IX". II l
vented through the hydrogen main vents. ' II I I \ of:R..do.
Based on analytical evaluation of the S-IV-7 flight, 11 [ [ Ill I _ [q [
the
command
following
were
residuals
considered
atS-IV
to
stage
be accurate
all engines
for this
cutoff
a-
.08 .I .2
I 1'" '°''-a ',
.4 .6 .8 1.0 2 4 6 8 I0 20
nalysis: Time From S-F4 Engine Cutoff (Hrs.)
LH2 Tank
13.8 N/cm 2 (20 psi) and an LH 2 tank pressure of 19.0 These data are in the expected range if it is rec-
N/cm 2 (27.5 psi), at approximately t. 5 hours from ognized that the LH 2 tank venting is dependent on the
orbital insertion. The predicted tank pressures at heat input into the tank. The predicted heat input is
this time are 13.8 N/cm 2 (20 psi) in the LOX tank shown in Figure 8-6.
(assuming 907 kg or 2000 ibm LOX residual at S-IV Heat Input tWatts Hwt Input (10 5 8t_ hfl I
60OO
cutoff) and 11.7 N/era 2 (t7 psi) in the LH 2 tank (as- I I
Case l - 1.14
2 Tank Walls Completely Wetted by Residual I.H2
suming 136 kg or 300 lbm residual at S-IV cutoff). IMaxlmum Heat Input) - 300
5onductivlty
Heat Input)
64
vv m _| • •:
SECTION IX. SEPARATION
At S-IV engine ignition command the exit plane of increment for both stages plus the total relative ve-
the S-IV engines was 10.1 m ( 33 ft) forward of the lip locity between stages. The two stages had separated
of the interstage; this is 7.0 m (23 ft) greate r than the by 10. I m (33 ft) at S-IV stage ignition, which is 7.0
minimum design requirement of 3 m ( l0 ft). m (23 ft) greater than the specified minimum clear-
value large enough to restore the vehicle to the proper 5 " /_-Cleirs Interstage
attitude. The cause of the roll deviation was primarily
I I!
atotal ullage rocket misalig_ment of 1.2 ÷ 0.2 degrees .... il _._
or some equivalent value distributed among all four ?4B.O 1_.5 1_.0 1_._ 15_.0 150.5 151.0 15_._
Rang_ Tiine (sec)
ullage rockets.
Relative Longitudinal Veloci_j (m/sl
9. 2 SEPAllATION DYNAMICS
ison is the SA-6 separation time history. The S-IV Range Time (sec)
stage engines cleared the interstage 0.06 second ear- FIGURE 9-2. SEPARATION DISTANCE AND INCRE-
lier than predicted. Figure 9-2 shows the velocity MENTAl, VELOCITIES
eL .....
- 7.,,.,,
,,,.,,.
65
au..,
ance. The increased clearance is attributed to the practie_ly the same on both stages, for the first two
later separation time (0.8 sec) from OECO, resulting seconds after separation.
in a higher negative booster acceleration at separation.
The observed angular motion of the S-I stage
The lateral clearance analysis on SA-7 indicated would require the total angular impulse presented be-
that separation required 0.09 m ( 3.4 in. ) of the 0.74 low. This total angular impulse is equivalent to the
m (29 in.} available lateral clearance, corresponding retro rocket misaligument and CG offset indicated.
to a probability of 0.75.
Parameter Actual
The retro rocketmisalignmentis nearlythe same
Pitch Attitude (deg) 0.1 (nose up) 1.0 magnitude as observed on previous flights.
Yaw Attitude (deg) -0.1 (nose left) t. 0
Roll Attitude (deg) 0.4 (CW from rear) - Figure 9-4 shows the telemetered and simulated
Pitch Rate (deg/s) 0 1.0 attitude error transients of the S-IV stage which re-
Yaw Rate (deg/s) 0 t. 0 suited from separation disturbances. The simulation
Roll Rate (deg/s) 0. 1 (CW from rear) - includes the inflight engine thrust buildup and mass
characteristics, and also includes an approximation
Angular rates experienced by the S-I stage were to the preflight predicted CG offset history. In the
considerably larger than the S-IV stage with the ex- yaw plane, the CG offset is to the left of center when
ception of roll (Fig. 9-3). The roll angular rate was looking forward and varies linearly from 1.8 cm
l_i¢tal ¢_nd I t lor_
PitchAngularRateIdeg/s)
agPp " 0.1, _p " 0
2 Illng HilalLg_t - -0.015 dq (_le _p)
Diitu_oance • 678 N-I, _ lee (Dole up)
Separation Pitch, Atticude,_p, (deg) _ Slosh Ilgt = 0.08 •
o _,
!
i
_.--. :--t
.-
.....
S-IV Stage
, .- _ ..... ._ I 52_1 , j
RangeTime (sBcl
-2
-1
0 2 4 6 g lO 12 14 16
Time Afcer Separation
Roll Angular Rate (deg/s)
-- Actual
------ Sileced
I BoLl, Altitude, _g (del)
(_ froa rear)
¢/
Ullelle locket Mioaltgle_t - [._ _+ 0.2"
,
i S-IVStage [
Range Time (set)
I i I 1
I
I I
iI ,
___&__ 6
L i
6 10
L
12
A__I___
14 16
-6 l_ _fler le_retiol
FIGURE 9- 3. ANGULAR VELOCITIES DURING FIGURE 9-4. S-IV ATTITUDE DURING SEPARA-
BOOSTER SEPARATION TION
66
(0.73in.}atseparation valuewouldgiveanupperlimit of 1.4degrees
to4cm(0.7in.)atcutoff.In ofex-
thepitchplane,the CGoffsetis abovecenterand pectedmisalignment.This misalignment includes
varieslinearlyfrom2.1cm(0.84in.) atseparation bothangular andtranslational effects.The1.2=e0.2
to 5cm(2 in.)atcutoff.Thecorrelation degreesdetermined
between the to explaintheroll deviation are
simulated attitudeerrorsandtheactual neartheupperexpected
attitudeerrors limit. However, fromacon-
indicatesthatthevehicle trol standpoint
CGoffsetsandthrustvector thevehiclecouldcontrola misalign-
misalignments werecloseto thoseassumed.The meatofapproximately 2.7degrees withoutsaturating
largeseparation transientinrollis attributed theattitudeerror signalof 15degrees
to1.2J= andtheangular
0.2degreetotalullagerocketmisalit,mment. rate of i0 deg/s, assuming
Initial nootherdisturbances
disturbingmoments existthatwouldaddtotheroll maneuver.Usingthe
of 678N-m (500ft-lb) and1356
N-m (1000ft-lb) areestimated design
tohaveactedonthe valuesof1degree attitudeinpitchandyaw, 1
S-IVstagein thepitchandyawplanes,respectively,deg/sratesandan angle-of-attack of 4 degrees
for thefirst twosecondsafterseparation.These themisalignment thatcouldbetoleratedis 2.0de-
moments areattributed tothecooldown exhaustvent.
grees.Norelaxation of theullagerocketalignment
tolerancesshouldbeconsidered if otherdisturbances
ThealignmenttoleranceofeachS-IVstageullage existedandtheroll error signalshould notbesatu-
rocketis 0.7degree(3a). Rootsumsquaring this rated.
67
SECTION X. STRUCTURES
i0. i SUMMARY
The maximum pitch bending momentexperienc- design moment and 30 percent of the maximum moment
ed during the flight of SA-7 occurred at 74.7 seconds ex _erienced by SA-6.
10.2 RESULTS DURING S-I POWERED FLIGHT tered gimbal angle (fl) which produced the depicted
normal load factor when nominal aerodynamic and
10. 2. 1 MOMENTS AND NORMAL LOAD FACTORS weight data were considered, were used for the bend-
ing moment distribution. The calculated angle-of-
10.2.1.1 CALCULATED VALUES attack necessary to produce the normal load factor
observed is 0.6 degree higher than the measured
The maximum pitch bending moment ex- angle-of-attack if nominal aerodynamics are used.
perienced by the Saturn SA-7 vehicle occurred at 74.7 Time points on either side of this maximum loading
seconds of flight. The distribution of this moment is point were investigated. The resulting angles-of-
presented in Figure 10-1, together with the normal attack were approximately 0.6 degree higher than
load factor obtained from the accelerometer readings those measured, while the gimbal angles coincided.
from the IU measurements. The slope of this load The control analysis (Section VII) indicated that an
factor line indicates the rotational acceleration of the aerodynamic moment was acting on the vehicle; how-
vehicle. This maximum moment is 30 percent of the ever, this is not supported by the structural analysis.
68
i0.2.1.2 MEASURED
VALUES
Station 23.9 m (942 in.) is the location of thrust forces, to that observed during the thrust
the eight LOX stud and sixteen tension tie measure- buildup period. The buildup period is defined as the
ments at the lower side of the spider beam. The ve- the time interval from ignition of the first engine to
hicle body loads can be measured at this station with vehicle liftoff. The engines were scheduled to ignite
the exception of that portion of the load carried in the in pairs, with a 100 ms delay between pairs tolimit
center LOX tank. The maximum bending moments at the vibratory force to 20 percent of the static thrust.
75 seconds estimated on the basis of the strain data Figure 10-2 shows the engine staggering times (igni-
were: -286,000 N-m in yaw, 550,000 N-m in pitch tion delay) to the erratic; however, the maximum re-
with a resultant of 620,000 N-re. These values do not sponse was only 13 percent of the static thrust.
include the 15 percent of the total moment which is
carried by the center LOX tank. Inclusion of this Oscillations of aproximately =_ 0. 1 g were ob-
contribution yields a total resultant bending moment served on the Instrument Unit accelerometer during
of 730,000 N-m at 75 seconds of flight: the time interval between 40 and 80 seconds range
time. An attempt was made to correlate peak ampli-
I0. 2.2 LONGITUDINAL LOADS
tude frequencies of LOX and fuel pump inlet pres-
1000
200
800
j I
150
600
400
7; /ll Simplified
!
Thrust
I00
F
50
200
0
/// Illll -1.6 -1.5 -1.4 -1.3
0
-2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 -1.7
Range Time (sec)
Thrust (i000 N)
Thrust (1000 ib)
7000
6000
1200
5000
Calculated
4000 Response
800
3000
Frequency 3.50 Hertz
2000
// Thrust Max. Dynamic Load Factor = 1.13
( ] 400
1000
0
tl ]
/ 0
-2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 -1.7 -1.6 -1.5 -1.4 -1.3
Range Time (sec)
69
The vibration acceleration level measured in the Frequency (Hertz)
5
Apollo capsule was in good agreement with the calcu- I I
lated accelerations, and the frequency agrees with
that observed on the holddown arms. 4
0 C 0 C
distribution
as observed
Section
10.2.
V.
2.3 FUEL
on
in the
SA-7
TANKS
follow
longitudinal
SKIRT
the same
accelerations
LOADS
general
shown
trends
in
1
o 20 _.0 60 80
Range Time (sec)
lO0 120
t
I_O
The fuel tank skirts were instrumented with FIGURE 10-3. VEHICLE BENDING FREQUENCIES
32 strain gauges. Eight of the gauges are equally Grms
Pitch
O. 20
spaced around each tank at Sta. 6.63 m (261 in. ).
Ist Bending
The data received from SA-7 were in agreement with
- - - 2nd Bending
corresponding data received from SA-5 and SA-6. 0.is
This agreement was expected since the skirts are not
affected by body bending moments, but only by axial
forces which remain nominally the same during each 0.10
flight. , The apparent load relief that occurred on SA-5 NOSe I/
_'_ ",,,_..:t Escape
\" . It/-Tower
and SA-6 during the time interval between ignition and 0.0_ _C )he /
liftoff was difficult to see on SA-7 because of the
I, from 80 to 110 seconds was repeated. This same Range Time (sec)
data
low
for
in the
this evaluation.
frequency range
The
of
response
0 to 10 Hz,
amplitude
with a max-
was
o
20 40 60 BO 100 120 140 160
imum of 0.3 g single amplitude. Range Time Isec)
FIGURE 10-4. SA-7 ESCAPE TOWER AND NOSE
CONE ENVELOPE
Figure 10-3 represents a comparison of SA-7
flight frequencies withSA-6dynamic test frequencies.
After separation of the S-I stage and jettisoning
In Figure 10-4 the amplitude resPonse for the pitch
of the LES, oscillograph records indicate a frequency
and yaw accelerometers, located at the nose cone and
response level of negligible value.
escape tower, are presented. This figure shows peak
amplitudes which occur inthe regions of Mach 1 (55.3
10.2.3.2 FIN BENDING
sec) and maxQ (73.0 sec).
7O
Slice times at 20 seconds, Mach 1.0, and max- Four of the five shear beam and shear panel mea-
imum dynamic pressure were analyzed over the fre- surements indicated expected vibration increases dur-
quency span of 0 - 60 Hz. The predominant frequen- ing the critical flight periods. The overall envelope
cies were 30, 37, and 44 Hz. These predominant of the recorded levels from these measurements cor-
frequencies showed very little change over the various related closely, but was slightly lower than the SA-6
slice times and, therefore, coalescence of the predom- envelope. The fifth measurement, located in the
inant frequencies or any flutter trend was not indicat- center of the shear panel between Fins IH and IV,
ed. The frequency content of the data were approxi- showed an unexpected decrease in level during the
mately the same as recorded on previous flights. Mach l/max Q period. Although this structure ap-
pears to be predominantly affected by excitation from
10.2.4 S-I VIBRATIONS the engines, the maximum level experienced during
mainstage was not influenced by engine vibrations.
10.2.4.1 STRUCTURAL MEASUREMENTS
Shroud panelvibration levels were typical of thin,
Thirteen accelerometers were located on lightly braced structure. Anticipated increases in vi-
the S-I booster to measure structural vibration. All bration were observed during critical flight periods;
telemetered data appeared to be valid, including that however, the amplitudes during holddown and Mach
obtained from four retro rocket measurements ques- l/max Q were approximately 15percent lower on SA-
tioned during previous flights. With the exception of 7 than on SA-6.
shear panel measurement, all data exhibited normal
or expected levels throughout S-I powered flight. En- There were three orthogonally oriented measure -
velopes of the structural vibration levels are present- ments of structural vibration on the spider beam spoke
ed in Figure 10-5. at Fin Line I. Compared with the SA-6 Grmsenvelope,
_SA-7
__. SA-6
Grms Grms
16 32
I I i f | !
SA-'6 Shroud Panel
T Shear Panel Shea'r'Beam& Panels
[2 25,
_
8
4
16
8
\ L 7f
\
-%.
x\ \
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 20 40 60 80 I00 120 140 160
Grms Grms
8 i I 4 i
Retro Rockets
.,_ Spider Beam
6 . _'..: :tO, 3
0 0
0 20 b,O 60 80 100 120 140 t60 0 20 40 60 80 IO0 120 140 160
71
theSA-7envelope exhibited
higherlevelsduringigni-
tionandmainstage, butindicateda considerablere- _ IIA-7
60
Gn_l
Qvibrationwasthreetimeshigherthantheholddo_
vibration.
10.2.4.2ENGINE
MEASUREMENTS 5--
Fouraccelerometerslocatedonthecom- 0
-20
suredvibrationin thelongitudinal
(flight) direction. Gr_
thatwereinconsistentwithpreviousstaticandflight
testhistory. Consequently,thevalidityoftheSA-7 20 L
tween thetelemetereddatareceivedduringholddown
andthelandwiredataobtained fromthecombustion O, I
I
72
occurred after max Q. Compared to SA-6, the SA-7
SA-?
levels were 20 percent higher; however, the SA-7
Grms .... SA-6 levels are comparable to those measured on SA-3
flight.
Grms
I-I Inots_l (ll_,s l_ol_ted)
30 --
Rear _xchanser
-..: 'A
/
10 ....
] v.>g:%
0
1
t
I \ !,
20 40 120 140 160
6°angRe Time
Bo (sec)
_oo o 2o _o R_ngeTimeIs_cl too _a....
Grms
Grms
,o
(10 20 /+0 60 80 I00 120 140 160
>,.
0
[00 120 140
0 20 _0 60 80
RangeTime (sec)
Grms
7
Range Time (sec} g
nt.trtbutoc 9A3 _outt+ Bracket
ENGINE COMPONENTS I
RangeTimeIsec)
Two accelerometers measured the vibration of
the fuel wraparound line of engine 6 near the line out- FIGURE 10-8. VIBRATION ENVELOPES OF S-I
73
Ahardmounted iustrument panelwaslocatedin for comparison. The vibration levels measured dur-
fueltank2andexhibited typicalincreasesinvibration ing the SA-7 flight fell within the envelopes established
duringthe holddown andMachl/maxQregionsof from SA-5and SA-6 flight measurements. The vibra-
flight. ThecompositeGrms envelope wasequaltothe tions on the thrust structure exhibited expected char-
SA-6envelope duringholddown andmainstage, and acteristics during the S-I stage powered flight, and
slightlylowerduringMach1/maxQ. the levels did not present any problems to the S-IV
stage thrust structure.
Thevibrationlevelsoftheshockmounted instru-
mentpanel,located in theforwardskirtregionoffuel The measurements on the LH 2 tank structure
tank1, wereconsistent with expectedamplitudes. showed levels that were higher than expected during
Levelsmeasured on theisolatedinstrument panel holddown, liftoff, and max Q; data were lost during
wereapproximately 84percent lowerthanthoseonthe these periods due to over driving of the telemetry
non-isolated(hardmounted) panel. TheSA-7com- channel. Calibration range changes will be made on
positevibrationwasslightlyhigherthantheSA-6vi- future flights to insure that valid data can be obtained.
brationduringholddown andMach1/maxQ;however,
dueto the relativelylowamplitudes involved,this 10.2.5.2 ENGINE MEASUREMENTS
difference
wasnotconsidered significant.
Measurements of each engine were taken on
Twoaccelerometers locatedadjacent tothedis- the thrust chamber dome in the thrust direction and
tributor9A3mounting bracketmeasured vibrationon on the gear case housing in the radial direction. The
thefuel tankskirt ringframe. Asexpected, anin- vibration levels during S-I stage powered flightwere
creasein vibrationoccurredduringholddown and below the noise level of the telemetry system and were
Mach1/maxQ. Thevibrationperpendicular to the considered negligible at these locations.
ringframewasslightlylowerduringSA-7flightthan
duringSA-6. Compared toSA-6,theSA-7vibration
parallelto thering framewashigherfromignition 10.2.5.3 COMPONENT MEASUREMENTS
velopes of the composite time histories are shown in mounted on the rack. Envelopes of the composite
Figure 10-9. Envelopes of thrust structure measure- time histories are shown in Figure 10-10. Also
ments from the SA-5 and SA-6 flights are also shown shown are SA-5 and SA-6 flight envelopes for the
Grins Thru stStructu
re thrust structure and forward interstage components.
,|
2
BmSA-5&6
ISA-7 I
ture
The
showed
components
a high upper
on the
envelope
aftskirt
which
and thrust
is attributed
struc-
74
Aft Ski rt and Th ru st Structu re three directions (thrust, normal and tangential) dur-
Grms
l0 ing S-I stage powered flight. Overall levels of ap-
1
m_ SA-5 &6 proximately 1+ 5 Grm s at liftoffand maxQ were lower
I
inrush7 than expected. There were no previous flight meas-
urements to refer to for comparison purposes.
+dlb +
40 60 ) 140
The
representing
forward
the
interstage
environment
envelopes
during flight,
in Figure
we re form-
10-10,
:I 1 I]
SA-7 envelope indicates that the vibration amplitude
was attenuated by the isolated pane[ to whichthe com-
mand destruct receiver was mounted. The SA-5 and
SA-6 flight levels were considerably higher due to dif-
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Range Time <secl ferences in the direction of the measurements and
angle-of-attack. The vibrations at the telemetry rack
Grins Forward I nterstage
exhibited the expected characteristics during S-I stage
I powered flight.
SA-5 & 6
SA/ 10.2.6 INSTRUMENT UNIT VIBRATIONS
% G_
6 - - -
12
I InltrUlNnt Unit Gu£dlllnee Ilyltll
! -
_, _ /
I /' \
18 _ Apollo Structure
$ -- -- -L .....
i I /I cx _pped I " ,
+l Ar
0 0 20 40 60 8,0
k
ioc 12o I&o
O 20 40 60 Sg loll 120 [L+O
hnl[* TL_e (sec) Range Tlme (ooc)
75
TheSA-7skinvibrationwas20percentlower 10.2.8 STRUCTURAL ACOUSTICS
thanSA-6.Themounting
ringvibrationwaslowerby
approximately
thesamepercentage.Thiswasasex- The acoustic environments of SA-7 were
pected
duetothelowerangle-of-attack. compared with predicted values rather than measured
76
-- SA-/ O'_erill Sound Pressure Level 1_)
_,-__
_.Z
sA-_
O_'ill 5_1PrlssU m U_el I_)
_:N .,a
C_:;: ¢
r i ] i
Range Time Isec)
/ I ' For_r_ _u_l Skirt Su. _s In_rnal
_0k- i i I _ ! _
Overall Sound Pressure Level (®)
/ i [ I i :
_,.
Ra_o lime _sec_
Overall So_n5 Pressure Level Idbl
t*0
o zo _o _o kO 50
i
60 _0 _0 90
I I_ lie
Ran_JeTime islCl
160
10.2.8.4 APOLLO STAGE
77
S-IV-6. For the same reason, the effectiveness of and SA-6 flight envelopes of the gimbal point meas-
the 10 grain primacord used to open the blowout panels urements are also shown in this figure. Vibration
could not be determined. levels during the SA-5 and SA-6 flights were consid-
erably higher at the gimbal point. These higher levels
10.3.2 BENDING are attributed to differences in measurementlocations
time histories are shown in Figure 10-14. The SA-5 01)0 ; 0 , _ 5O0
RangeTime (sec)
Grin I Thrust Structure
Grins GearCase
30
-3 I 5--)
20 : : i
i 5 ,':.:T[::;J
,o I
560 ._ • 6OO 62O 64O -L I
Rimge Time (seO
Components on Aft SKirt and "[hrust Structure
-l- --6 i
..3 A_s
0
1_ 2OO 3OO _4X) _ 600 7O0
RangeTime (sec)
2
FIGURE 10-15. VIBRATIONS ON ENGINES DURING
S-IV STAGE POWERED FLIGHT
0
78
calibration
limitsofthetelemetry channel(24Grms). A total of 11 component measurements were
After342seconds thevibration
levelsdropped tozero taken on the S-IV forward interstage, LH 2 tank, and
indicating
thateithertheengine experiencedelectrical the aft skirt and thrust structure. The aft skirt and
problems or thatthetransducer mounting blockbe- thrust structure measurements were located on the
camedebonded fromthegearcasehousing.Since all helium heater and at the base of the inverter, sequen-
engineoperating parameters werenominal, it is rea- cer, PU computer and ullage rocket. The LH 2 tank
sonableto conclude that thehighvibrationlevels measurements were located at the attach point betw'een
measured between 220and342seconds werecaused the cold helium sphere and the Ltt2 tank skin. The
byamalfunction ofthemeasuring systemandthere- forward interstage measurements were confined to the
fore,arenotvalidengine vibrationlevels. telemetry rack, specifically at the base of the telem-
etry rack and at the base of the command destruct
Thevibrationlevelsonthe gearcasehousing of receiver mounted on the rack.
engine 3 alsoexceeded thecalibrationlimits of the
telemetrysystem(24Grins)fromS-IVignitionun- Envelopes of the composite time histories for
til 273seconds. After273seconds thelevel dropped components on the aft skirt and thrust structure are
tozero,indicating problems similartothoseexperi- shown in Figure 10-14. Envelopes of the SA-5 and
encedby theengine5gearcasemeasurement. Al- SA-6 flight measurements are also shown in this
thoughthevibration levels measured on the engine 6 figure. The envelopes show that the component vibra-
gear case appeared normal (4 Grin s) , the data con- tions of the three flights varied less than 2 Grins.
tained square waves and must be considered invalid. The vibration levels were nominal throughout S-IV
The data from the engine 1 gear case show a 6 Grin s stage powered flight.
overall level which is slightly higher than the other
engines. It appears that the higher overall level was The vibration levels for the components in the
caused by a low frequency shift in the data. The low LH 2 tank (cold helium sphere) and forward interstage
frequency shift (5 Hz) is not valid data because it is (T/M rack) were below the noise level of the telem-
impossible for the engine to move at the displacement etry system. They are considered to have been neg-
indicated (:_ 10 cm) by the data. ligible throughout S-IV stage powered flight. The vi-
bration levels at the cold helium sphere were lower
The vibration levels measured on the thrust than expected.
chamber dome of engines 2, 5, and 6 were about the
same as measured during the S-IV-7 stage accept- 10.3.4 INSTRUMENT UNIT VIBRATIONS
The number of measurements lost during flight could revealed debonding of the interstage similar to that on
be reduced by the removal and careful rebonding of SA-5. However, the apparent deflection of the inter-
each gear case and thrustchamber dome measurement stage on SA-7 was approximately two times that of
just prior to flight. SA-5. The information available was not sufficient to
determine the actual cause of this failure. An attempt
is being made to instrument futur e flights in order to
1.0.3.3.3 COMPONENT MEASUREMENTS better explain this phenomemm.
79
SECTION XI. ENVIRONMENTAL TEMPERATURES AND PRESSURES
ii. i SUMMARY
RadiationHeatFlux (watts/cm2)
Fin Base Heating Rates Skin temperatures on the S-I-7 60-degree fairing
were higher than on the previous flights as shown in
Fin base heating rates on S-I-7 were similar to Figure 11-3. The reasons for the higher temperatures
the rates for S-I-5 and S-I-6 (see Fig. it-l). How- are due to the hotter SA-7 launch day and to the fact
ever, erratic data were obtained between i and 15 km that the Thermo-lag had been removed from the S-I-7
(40-70 sec) for the total calorimeter measurement fairing.
for the SA-7 vehicle.
Tail shroud temperatures for SA-7 and SA-6 are
ti. 2. 3 S-I STAGE SKIN TEMPERATURES shown in Figure tl-3. Thermal environment for this
area can be closely approximated considering only
Good agreement was indicated for the thermal aerodynamic heating effects, indicating little or no
environment at the forward end of the 1.78 m ( 70 in.) effects from exhaust radiation.
8O
Tern
)erature (°K) Tem_rmturm (o-_)
.......
1 ....
290
-- (;uth_ard Near F...... 'd End ,,f [ , fi -- 7
I I' II J
2_0
:ii'
280 -- --
SA-7 Predicted '
130
260 ----
1
Rangelime (see)
Tempera
ture (°K#
o...... ,.,,,.,,o°i,._o(_.i_)L . L • ]
! ..... 8o(1o,.>,_o .... L r r * /
210 ! SA-6 Predicted • ! _I, !
SA-7 Predicted
L • i
L
. f -
20 _0 _(_ 80 log 120 V,O 160
Rangelime Isec)
FIGURE 11-2. LOX TANK SKIN TEMPERATURES
measurement on the leading edge of the vent protrud- FIGURE 11-3. TEMPERATURE ON SIXTY DEGREE
ing from the stub fin reached a maximum value of FAIHING, TAIL SHROUD AND
360°K (Fig. 11-3). These maximum temperatures HYDROGEN VENT PIPE
were reached by approximately il0 seconds at which
time hydrogen venting occurred, Measured heat shield pressures were consistent to
those obtained on SA-5 and SA-6; however, two of the
Inboard engine turbine exhaust duct temperatures five measurements on the SA-7 heat shield appear to
were measured for the first time on SA-7 (Fig. 11- have failed after it kin.
4). Maximum values measured were within design
limits. 11.2.5 BASE TEMPERATURES
81
III
Temperature (OK)
500
3OO i •
0 20 6C 80 IO0 I20 140 160
• ar_e TlJe (lec)
Temperature (OK)
6OO
I
Side Panel Base Pressure J_inus
Ambient (N]cm _)
A 2.4
Q •
1.6
/ _- st-7
4
300
0 20 40 60 80 100 L_o 14o 16o 0.8
Itar_e Tiae (.e©)
Tempermture (OK)
°%v
I p
f
\
Trailing Zdg* / Heat Shield
/
6OO
500
./ -0.8
_ Predlceed Dais
-1._
4O0, / • -2.4
300
o 20 40 60 80 I00 120 l_O 160
Ranse Time (aac) -3.2
FIGURE 11-4. TURBINE EXHAUST FAIRING TEM- 0 I0 20 30 dO 50 60 70
Altitude {kin)
PERATURE
FIGURE 11-5. S-I STAGE BASE PRESSURES
82
Temperature (°K) Inner Region
1200
itO0
,i
800
sA-5, SA-6
!
700
600
! I
IIZ
50O
II IV
3013
400
2OO I 1 [
30 4O 50 50 7O 0 tO 30 40 50 60
Also shown are the radiation heat rates to the ment below the firewall were nearly uniform, as in
flame shield surface. Contrary to past results, con- SA-6 (see Fig. 11-12). On the average, a general
vective heating is indicated late in flight ihstead of the compartment pressure increase of 0.3 N/cm 2 over
previously unexplained convective cooling. SA-6 is observed in SA-7.
Pressure environments in the thrust frame com- Interstage pressure, in the form of its difference
partment above the firewall and in the engine compart- from free-stream st/tic pressure, is presented in
83
I _ SA-7 Engine Shroud
! !
LO 2O 3C _0 50 6£ ZO
AltiEude (km_
30 40 5O
Altitude (km)
Temperature (°K)
40
Altitude (k/n)
A_tltude Ckm_
second prediction was based on the assumption that
the external flow not only created a base pressure be-
FIGURE 11-9. OUTER REGION HEATING RATE_
84
HeatFluxIwatts/cm2i
Total Heat Flux (watts/cm 2)
20
0
IO 20 30 40 50 60 70
ALtitllde (k m)
RangeTime(sec)
3O 4O 70
FIGURE 11-11. FLAME SHIELD TOTAL AND
Altitude (km)
RADIATION HEATING RATES
FIGURE li-lO. ENGINE SHROUD HEATING RATES However, temperatures measured at Sta. 35.9 m
( 14t4 in. ) deviated after 100 seconds due to apparent
hind the air conditioning fairing, but also interacted debonding of the sensor. Interior skin temperatures
with the exhausting air to create a higher local ex- for the forward interstage were in good agreement
ternal pressure. The flight results are not in very with predicted and S-IV-6 results until 115 seconds
good agreement with either assumption. where the SA-7 flight temperature level became lower
than predicted.
Detonation Pressures
LH 2 Tank Temperatures
The detonation pressure switches located near the
separation plane showed no indication of detonation or LH 2 tank temperatures at Sta. 32.8 m ( 1290 in. )
over-pressurization of the aft interstage area during were in better agreement with predicted than those
separation. recorded for S-IV-6 (see Fig. 11-15). Good agree-
ment for the initial slopes and general data trends
II.3 S-IV STAGE ENVIRONMENT were observed on S-IV-7 with a maximum deviation
of approximately 14 ° K occurring at 115 seconds. How-
ii.3.1 SURFACE TEMPERATURES ever, for the tank measurement Sta. 30.8 m (1211
in. ) good agreement with predicted was obtained until
Forward Interstage Temperatures approximately 70 seconds. Flight data leveled off at
this time while the predicted temperature continued
External skin temperatures on the S-IV forward to rise due to aerodynamic heating. Therefore, data
interstage for SA-7 were in good agreement with pre- for this location is not considered reliable after 70
85
Internal Pressure Minu_ Pint " Pamb (N/cm2) Pint - Pa_b (p_i)
Ambient Pressure INJcm_)
0.50
Thrust Frame C_,mp_rtmea¢ - _ -.
| ] _ 1[
L 0.5
0.25
n --
/
0 / Actual
/
c! _o 4o 6(i 8Q 1_;o 12o lhi3
_.SJJ¢/
-O.25 %
.-0.5
P=d,£?
,,t,X.\
-0.75
-l.O0
Pj:ediz.::_d_ f'4 hO
-- _
t/ •-1.0
'-1.5
-1.25
O 20 40 60 8O i00
Ranse Time (eec)
|
FIGURE li-14. S-iV AFT INTERSTAGE PRESSURE
DIFFERENTIAL HISTORY
FIGURE 11-12. S-I STAGE INTERVAL AND HEAT
SHIELD PRESSURE DIFFEREN# Aft Skirt Temperatures
TIAL
Ol_nmUalPressure _
60DegrmFairing(Wcmz) (PFalrl_ - P_m_artmlmt
) Interior and exterior temperature measurements
O, ll were flown at Sta. 29.4 m (1t56 in. ) for the first time
on S-IV-7. Correlation of the external temperature
with predicted was good until approximately 100 sec-
0.4
RangeTime(sec)
DifferentialPressure Ullage Rocket Fairing Temperatures
TailShroud(Aft)INIcm2) (PShroud"Pcompartment
)
0"8 I I
Ullage rocket fairing number 2 was instrumented
for the first time on S-IV-7 on the internal surface.
0.4 f_
___ III-
During the early portion of flight, until approximately
s/ p 80 seconds, measured levels were slightly lower than
_ [ II
v,,_s,.7
predicted (see Fig. ll-i5). During the period be-
tween 80 and 100 seconds an increase in heat rate was
encountered which is undefined at this time.
-0,4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 l&0 160
Differential
Pressure RangeTime(sec)
TallShroud(Fw_)(N/cm2) (PShroud"Pcompartment
) Structural Temperatures During Orbit
°"1
Oo
1
:.
Predicted and measured orbital temperature his-
tories of the forward interstage, LH2 tank, and aft
RangeTime(see) skirt are shown in Figure Ii-16. Measured tempera-
tures are derived from Ascension Island and Pretoria
FIGURE 1t-13. DIFFERENTIAL PRESSURES
data (I0 to 30minafter insertion) and from Tel 2 data
ACROSS TANK FAIRING AND
(86.6 to 97.2 rain after insertion). No data were ob-
SHROUD
86
Temperature (°K/ Aft Skl.rt b LH2 Tank Temperatures
Durln8 Orbit
Forward Interstage Temperature
Te_ _ereture (°K)
J.50
Sei1lo¢ L_ it _.onl
350
lKy / t,,_ •
. .....qr...._x
25o L
3OO
I_ 2 'l'ank
250
20 60 60 80 IOO 120 160
i.
, 5" u . " . Temperature (°K) l]_rlng
o o _bJ.t
275
375_
_5o Ik
hedtcted
_C Its. 323
223
325
m
_
_
7
l
300 _ - --
I I
173 0 20 60 100 120 140
200
350 0 0.5 t.O 1.5 2.0 2.5
Time After Orbltal ZnsectJ.on (hourl)
0 ( 0 (
S-IV stage thrust structure temperatures located
275 in Stiffner No. 26 were in good agreement with pre-
60 80 [00 L20 [kO
20 I*0
dicted levels as well as S-IV-5 and S-IV-6 flight re-
Range Time (sec)
sults (see Fig. Ii-i7) for the initial 150 seconds of
flight. As on S-IV-5 and S-IV-6, however, the tem-
FIGURE 11-15. S-IV STAGE SURFACE TEMPERA- perature decreased at a more rapid rate for the two
TURES DURING BOOST forward locations than was predicted.
87
Temperature _°K)
Temperature (OR)
300
5OO
250
--D O
200
Measured
STm Location
O A o
/x s
O
D 300
Source Location
Data A
B
750
1°°°
I /
.oy ooo
o¢7 _:_- _ -_u,_._o
500 !
250
]' ¢
I00 200 300 400 500 600
Range Time (sec)
Cloth Closure Temperature theoretical calculations were 0.85 and 0.34 watts/cm 2
for locations A and B respectively.
Cloth closure temperatures about engine 3 and 6
were recorded for the first time on S-IV-7. Flight These heat rates compare to the S-IV-6 heat rate
temperature histories compare well with theoretical values of 1.i3 and 0.68 watts/cm 2 for locations on the
temperature histories which were computed using a heat shield of 0.86 m {33.85 in.) and 1.52 _n (.59.90
two dimensional heat transfer model of the cloth clo- in.) radii respectively. On the basis of these data, a
sure (see Fig. i1-17). The heat rate inputs for the flux of 0.85 watts/cm 2 at location A is reasonable,
88
whilea fluxof 0.34 watts/cm 2 at location B seems S-IV forward interstage (outside the pressurized
Instrument Unit)" temperature varied between 298°K
somewhat low.
and 287°K during S-I stage flight. Liftoff (also S-I
Maximum temperature levels for the cloth clo- stage flight maximum) temperature was 298"K or ap-
sures were 695°K at location A for the sensor tem- proximately 5"K below ambient air temperature. The
minimum inflight temperature of 287_K occurred at
perature which corresponds to a value of 945"K for
70 seconds range time. The foregoing trends were
the hot face at the same location. The average hot
similar to those for the SA-6 flight.
face temperature for the cloth curtain was approxi-
mately 850"K. Average cold side cloth closure tem-
Pressure
perature determined from the heat transfer model was
approximately 625°K between locations A,and B.
Pressure in the S-IV forward interstage decayed
from ambient at liftoff
to 0.4 N/cm 2 (0.5 psi) at the
11.3. 3 AERODYNAMIC PHENOMENON
end of S-I stage powered flight.
Observation of TV films taken during SA-7
1t. 4.3 INSTRUMENT UNIT
flight revealed an interesting aerodynamic phenome-
non. A "halo" of ice crystals formed just aft of the
Apollo nose cone, at approximately Mach = l, and Temperature
existed for about 4 seconds.
All Instrument Unitcomponent temperatures were
The visual -halo" occurred when the SA-7 entered within the operating limits prior to and during flight,
These temperatures were close to those experienced
a layer of high humidity air starting at 6.9 km and
ending at 8.4 km° The ambient air temperature at the during SA-6 flight except for the telemetry ambient
temperature. SA-7 telemetry ambient temperature
respective altitudes was 262°K and 253°K. Occur-
did not vary as much on SA-7 as observed on SA-6.
rence of high humidity air coincidental with flight in
the transonic flow regime (Mach = t) resulted in this Pressure {Conditioned Area)
visual effect, A Prandtl-Meyer expansion at the junc-
tionof the nose cone and the cylindrical section crea- Pressure was maintained at a satisfactory level
ted an area of low pressure and low temperature just (betweon 11.1 and 11.8 N/cm 2) prior to lfftoff. At
aft of the junction. Moisture in the atmosphere con- liftoff the pressure rose to ti. 8 N/cm 2 which was ap-
densed and froze in this region, and thereby formed proximately 0. 15 N/cm 2 below the effective inflight
the visible "halo." cooling lower limit to t4 seconds flight time. How-
ever, during the SA-6 flight, this same phenomenon
1t. 4 EQUIPMENT TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE occurred but lasted _r a lonl_er period.
ENVIRONMENT
Pressure (Unconditioned Area)
ii.4. I S-I STAGE A maximum internal pressure of nearly 0.8 N/cm 2
above ambient was observed inside the unpressurized
Two instrument compartments located im- portion of the Instrument Unit at 58 seconds (see Fig.
mediately above S-I stage fuel tanks FI and F2 con- t1-18). Previous SA-6 data show values about 0. 2
tained instruments which were maintained within sat- N/cm 2 higher than SA-7 which may be attributed to
isfactory operating limits. To maintain this environ- the measurement being on the windward side of the
ment within limits, preflight cooling was provided relative air velocity vector for SA-6.
from a ground source. Listed below are the preflight InternalPressureMlnus_
temperatures and the required operating limits for AmbientPressureIN/cm')
1.6
F2 Instrument Com-
partment Temp. ('K) 296 295 313 293
0.6
j'
FI Instrument Com-
partment Temp. (°K) 301 299 323 273 0
RangeTime(see)
Temperature FIGURE 11-18. INSTRUMENT UNIT PRESSURE
89
SECTION XII. VEHICLE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
12. l SUMMARY
implemented into the design the calibrator "inflight FIGURE 12'I. S-I STAGE CURRENT AND VOLT-
control" circuit has beenplaced on the "long life" bat- AGE
tery.
All EBW firing units used to blow the vent ports,
12.2 S-I STAGE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM initiate separation, and fire the retro rockets operated
satisfactorily. The average charging time was 1.4
The electrical system for SA-7 boosterwas es- seconds with a nominal charge of 2400 vdc.
sentially the same as SA-6. The main differences were
the addition of two fuel depletion sensors, removal i2.3 S-IV STAGE ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS
of the XI telemeter fromarea 9, theadditionof the P2
telemeter in area 12, computer backup for outboard All S-IV electrical systems functioned normally.
engine cutoff, removal of the TV camera in area 2, the All power requirements were satisfactorily met, and
addition of inflight fire detection, engine cutoff due to all sequenced commands were received and executed
roughcombustion after cutoff arm, and revision of the at the correct time.
thermal probe circuitry.
The electrical power system consisted of five
The electrical power source for the booster con- major subsystemcomponents: battery 1 (control bat-
sisted of two identical 28-volt zinc silver oxide bat- tery), battery 2 (engine battery), instrumentation
teries, designatedas iDl0 and ID20. The capacity of battery 1, instrumentation battery 2, and the static in-
the batteries was 2650 ampere-minutes. verter.
During the boost phase of flight the booster elec- Thevoltage and current profiles for battery 1 and
trical system operated satisfactorily. The tDi0 bat- 2 are shown in Figure 12-2 along with the voltage pro-
terycurrent varied from 89 to 122.8 amperes and the file for the static inverter. The performance of bat-
tDttbus voltage varied from 27.7 to 29.2 vdc. The teries I and 2 were satisfactory and the current and
tD20 battery current varied from 94 to 100 amperes voltages were within the expectedranges. Theol_er-
and the 1D21 bus voltage varied from 28. 5 to 28.9vdc. ation of the instrumentation batteries was normal,
Figure 12-1 shows the currentand voltage profiles for with 26 volts output and a total current of 16.2 am-
the S-I stage. peres. At launch and at S-IV cutoff, the respective
currents of instrumentation battery l were 10.8 and
The output of the eight 5 vdc measuring supplies t0. 3 amps, and the respective currents of instrumen-
located, one each, in the measuring distributors de- tation battery 2 were 5.4 and 5. 9 amps. The differ-
livered a nominal 5 vdc. The master measuring sup- ence was expected because the design power levels of
ply was not telemetered, but could be monitored from the two batterieswerenotidentiea[. The performance
the calibration voltage. The master measuring supply of the inverter was satisfactory. During separation,
was nominally 5 vdc. the output voltage dropped, as shown, to 108.8 volts.
9O
A similarvoltagedropwasobserved in thedatafrom 12.4 IU STAGE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
theS-IV-6flight. It is believed thatthepins,which
are connected to the umbilicalduringGSEpreflight The electrical system for SA-7 Instrument Unit
monitoring of invertervoltage,wereshortedby an was essentially the same as SA-6; the main difference
ionizingoftheareaaroundthepinsbytheullagerock- was the replacement of the program device with the
ets. This ionization-shorting phenomenon innoway guidance computer for sequence of events timing. An
impairedtheoperation oftheinverter. additional 270 multiplexer and measuring distributor
were added on SA-7 to handle the added DDAS require-
LR.2
29.0
l
Vott_,e7
I I I
U.Activate, _['-Cutrent r-, Unitconsisted
The electrical
of two
power
28-volt
source
zinc
for
silver
the
oxide
Instrument
batter-
ies, designated as 8Dt0 and 8D20. The 8DI0 battery
4
z. 'Voltage was the "long life" battery and was rated at 2650 amp-
minutes. The 8D20 battery was the "short life" bat-
_.6
Engine
Cutoff tery and was rated at 1850 amp-minutes.
II o
100 20O )oo 40o 5oo During the boost and orbital phase of flight the
RanQe Time(sac)
Currentlamps)
Vo|tigl(VOC) 8etteryNo, 2 8O Instrument Unit electrical system operated satisfac-
]0.0
torily, except for the failure to monitor the 3 rate gy-
Volts AmFs
30 7O
11o
114 I
(ngineCutOff
IJ
10B 0 100 200 3O0 40O 5OO 600 700
Range
Time(sac}
2," " moc=._JA,_
I "-I t ,._°
0 tO 120 lOO _0 _[I _0 420 /_0 540 _0
R_ TimeIsK)
Volts
FIGURE 12-2. S-IV STAGE CURRENT AND
_0 ;_._
.:,.21 8us'VoRwe _0
VOLTAGE Vo_
9i
dropped below the hold-in voltage of the relay. This voltage at 57.73 minutes there was a step in the outlmt8
phenomenon occurred at approximately 41 minutes of of the three rate gyro telemeter channels. This step
flight. This time is based on the discharge character- dropped the output voltage to 0.6 vdc. This output vol-
istics for the "short life" battery at a load of 75 am- tage remained constant until the measuring supply be-
peres because the signal was lost over Pretoria after came inoperative or until the 5-volt supply was unable
40 minutes of flight. The telemeter calibrator was on to maintain its output voltage.
the shortlife battery. With F6 in the "calibrate mode r'
and the calibrator on the short life battery the charac-
teristic output on the three rate gyro telemeter chan- All measurements on channels 2 through 15 of the
nels between 41 minutes and 57.73 minutes of flight F6 telemeter were lost after 41 minutes of flight, but
was avoltage slowly drifting towards zero. When the those of prime importance were the three rate gsrro
28-volt battery became less than the 5 vdc measuring measurements which were on the long life battery.
92
SECTION XIII. AERODYNAMICS
13. i SUMMARY
Because of the relatively small angles-of-attack at around Mach 1. i which is in excellent agreement
and resultingengine deflections encountered during the with predicted. Flight results were higher than pre-
SA-7 flight, itwasnot possible to make valid analyses dictedin the subsonic regime and fell, on the average
of aerodynamic stability parameters. about 20 percent lower than predictedafter Maeh I. 4.
Sk-,S----_...._. . .- Fin Sb
04
0
Because of two apparent measurement failures 0 0.5 i0 15 210 2 $ 3 0 3.5 &O &_
_ch
93
SECTION
XIV. INSTRUMENTATION
14. i SUMMARY 14.2.2 MEASURING RELIABILITY
Overall reliability of the SA-7 measuring sys- Reliability of the S-I stage measuring system
tem was 99.35 percent; this includes 8 measurement was 99. 7 percent, considering only those measure-
malfunctions that resulted in total loss of information. ments active at liftoff compared with complete fail-
Only measurements active at liftoff were considered ures.
in the above percentage. A total of t4 measurements
were scrubbed before launch. One of the combustion chamber pressure meas-
urements, Dl-3,was termed as a partial success
Transmitter radio frequency power on all links (Table 14-I) because of damage sustained to the vi-
was sufficient to produce desired data coverage of all brotron caused by a high vibration level at ignition.
planned flight periods. This includes the IU stage te- The remaining seven combustion ct_mber measure-
lemetry during brbit. However, continuous channels ments were considered to be successful, but only one
from link F6 were terminated prematurely due to a of the seven, Dt-4, was within the 0.5 percent meas-
wiring error. The lost data included IU rate gyro in- uring error limit. The partially successful measure-
formation. ment, Dt-3, contained a 14.85 percent calibration
shift. The next highest percent shift was observed on
The passenger fire detection system, flown for DI-7and was 1.9i percent. Two of the measurements,
the first time on SA-7, operated satisfactorily. No D1-6 and Di-8, contained shifts that were only slightly
fires were indicated. inexcess of the error limit; the shifts were 0. 7i per-
cent and 0.54 percent respectively.
All preflight and in/light calibrations were normal
and satisfactory. 14. 3 S-IV STAGE MEASURING ANALYSIS
94
TABLE 14-I. S-IAND IU MEASUREMENT MALFUNCTIONS
Title Remarks
Meas. No.
EI14-18 Vibration Rear Spar Flange Meas. Inoperative, inaccessible for replacement.
L68-801 Sound Intensity Instr. Unit Gauge diaphram was damaged during checkout
resulting in the loss of mechanical coupling
to the crystal.
Partial Success
C5-I Temperature Turbine Shaft Reads much lower than measurements on other
#7 engines.
CI-6 Temperature LOX Pump Bearing Very little change in reading compared to
#l measurements on other engines.
95
TABLE 14-II. S-IV STAGE MEASUREMENT MALFUNCTIONS
Feilurea
F613-410 Ring Node Accel, Sis. 1250 Pin Plane 2 hllure reason unknown
Pattie1 Success
C603-405 LH2 pump Housing Temperature Engine $ Open circuit in Camp sensing le8 of tamp bridge
C677-409 Temp-LH 2 Tank External Skin Improper contact of brldgemodute connector plus
C600-402 Turbine Inlet Temperature Engine 2 Trend Only (cause of failure under investigation)
96
Instrumentation). The following systems were utilized
configuration between the timing capacitor and emit-
on SA-7:
ter of the unijunction transistor, effectively insulating
the capacitor from alternate discharge paths.
S-I Stage
Dl PDM-FM-FM
14.3.2 MEASURING RELIABILITY
D2 PDM-FM-FM
The flight performance of the S-IV-7 instru-
mentation system was very good. A total of 401
D3 PDM-FM-FM
measurements was attempted. By launch time, seven
measurements had developed problems which were
Instrument Unit
impossible to resolve within launch schedule limita-
tions and were therefore officially deleted. Conse-
F5 FM-FM; FM-FM-FM $3 SS-FM
quently, there were 394 active measurements aboard
S-IV-7 at lamlch. Of these, five were complete fail-
F6 FM-FM; FM-FM-FM; Pt PCM-FM
ures in that they provided no usable data. This loss
resulted in a measurement efficiency of 98.7 percent. PA M- FM- FM
14. 4. I MEASUREMENT MALFUNCTIONS respective stages. The DDAS function was digital en-
coding and transmission of the model 270 comnlutator
outputs of Links FI, F2, F3 and F6 at reduced sam-
A total of t87 inflight measurements was
scheduled to be flown on the IU of SA-7. No IU meas- piing rates. The primary purpose of the link P2 DDAS
was preflight checkout of the S-I-7 stage; the link PI
urements were scrubbed prior to launch and only one
measurement failed. The IU sotmd intensity measure: DDAS was used primarily for preflight checkout of the
IU. DDAS information was also available from links
ment L68-801 had a loss of mechanical coupling to the
PI and P2 during flight. Insertion of digital data into
crystal. This failure was caused by damage during
the PCM output format worked very satisfactorily.
checkout (see Table 14-I).
Data transmission for flight testing Saturn inflight relay within the F6 telemetry package was in-
advertently overlooked and was connected to the short
vehicle SA-7 was effected by thirteen radio telemetrT¢
life battery. When the short life battery voltage de-
system links on the combined S-I, S-IV and IU. An
additional three links (MSC responsibility) were on cayed to the dropout point, the relay became deener-
gized causing all continuous data channel relays to go
the Apollo Spacecraft (see Section XV for Spacecraft
97
to the calibration bus position and therefore data in- was required for the transfer from record mode to
puts were invalid from this time on. This occurred playback mode. Th_ recorder began playback of data
at a range time of approximately 41 minutes (extra- at 174.90 seconds and completed data playback at
polated time). 309. 0 seconds. At completion of recorder playback,
modulation was removed from telemeter F2.
PCM data acquisition by means of the predetection
recording system at sites having this capability pro- Operation of this airborne recorder was satis-
duced excellent data results. factory and data contained in the playback record is
free of the effects of retro flame attenuation.
The passenger fire detection system was flown
for the first time. Operation of the modules was nor- 14.6.2 S-IV RECORDER
mal with no fires indicated. Scattered momentary
indications did appear in some channels. This prob- The S-IV tape recorder operation was en-
lem was also encountered during checkout. tirely satisfactory. The malfunction noted during the
flight of S-IV-6 did not occur. Telemetry measure-
Transmission of all three S-IV links was good ments were taken on S-IV-7 to record vehicle recep-
throughout the flight. All transmitters, multicoders, tion of the following commands: record, stop record,
and VCO's were operational up to t08 minutes after playback, and stop playback. The tape recorder re-
liftoff. The last recorded data were from Antigua at ceived these commands and responded to them as
that time. planned. However, the playback command was not
actually recorded; but since operations occurred as
14. 5.3 INFLIGHT CALIBRATION planned, the command was received. This measure-
ment, which is on PDM, effectively destroys its own
All in flight calibrations were normal and record by causing systems 1 and 2 to stop the sending
satisfactory. There were no inflight telemetry cali- of real time data and to commence the transmission
brations on the IU stage airborne tape recorder play- of recorded data. Had playback not been effectod by
back record, nor during orbital telemetry coverage. this command, it would have been observed in the data
Present configuration of the telemetry for SA-9 calls and could have been used in malfunction analysis.
for the same conditions.
The S-IV recorder received signal to reeord at
14. 5.4 PREFLIGHT CALIBRATION 139._4 seconds andto stop at 169.64 seconds, range
time. Playback ofS-IVrecorder information occurred
All preflight calibrations were normal and between 642.72 and 672.79 seconds.
satisfactory.
14. 6. 3 IU RECORDER
14. 6 AIRBORNE TAPE RECORDERS
The telemeter F5 and F6 (Instrument Unit
14.6.1 S-I RECORDER links) airborne recorder receivedthe signal to record
at 139.54 seconds and to stop recording at i69.64
The airborne tape recorders used for the seconds, range time. Recorder transfer signal to
SA-7 flight were dual-track recorders capable of re- playback mode was initiated at 642. 72 seconds. An
cording the mixer-amplifier outputs of two teleme- elapsed time of 1.62 seconds was required for the
ters. The S-I stage contained one recorder which transfer to the playback mode. The recorder began
recorded the output of telemeter F2. The Instrument playback of data at 644.34 seconds and completed da_a
Unit contained one recorder which recorded the out- playback at 672. 79 seconds.
puts of telemeters F5 and F6. During the playback
mode the transmitter is switched from the mixer am- Operation of this airborne recorder was good and
p[flier to the recorder. The purpose of the recorder data contained in the playback record are free of the
is to record data during the periods when RF dropout effects of retro flame attenuation.
is anticipated due to flame attenuation, retro and ul--
lage firing, look angle, etc.
i4. 7 RADIO FREQUENCY ANALYSIS
The telemeter F2 (S-I stage link) airborne re-
ceived the signal to record at 39. 34 seconds and to All onboard RF systems performed as expected.
stop recording at 173.44 seconds range time. Re- Effects of flame attenuation were more severe on this
corder transfer signal to playback mode was initiated flight than previous flights and resulted in lost data
at 173.44 seconds. An elapsed time of t. 46 seconds for the Apollo and S-I stage links.
98
14.7. I TELEMETRY 14.7.2 TRACKING
! I
c,.°. Mo.n,.l_
on: lit
_I/_ _ I I _ _///////////////////////////////////////////////////A
Wl,t,m X I I • i _/A
Ml*tr. iz v/i/lll I •
I [] II _/IIIIIIIA
¢lz (LI6) Fi • I
[] I I I
_.d_ [] [] N _/IIIIIIA
• I i_d I_ Vll/llll_
Az_I_/cl_m_c
• I _//I////////////////.,_/A
I_ I KI
c_-n_c ,c.c
A,IJ.tt, I I I
I II I i I
a*_.d6
*.,ll.°
cupric r_H
,i .....
I !
I i i 1 l I I I
All stations experienced signal dropout at retro in some regions while failing to meet expectations in
rocket ignition as expected. Flame attenuation was others. An Azusa/GLOTRAC summary is shown in
quite severe at all uprange telemetry sites. Cape Tel Figure'14-i. It is observed that the Mk II and Atlan-
2 experienced approximately 40 seconds of attenuation tic sitemsuffered phase unlocks at retro rocket firing
with the signal dropping to threshold level during part but experienced no noticeable main engine flame ef-
of this period for the Apollo and S-I stage links. fects. Simultaneous three-station tracking was ob-
tained from 165 until 437 seconds and from 598 until
Unexplained signal fluctuations were observed at 645 seconds, giving about 3i9 seconds of usable track-
Cape Tel 2, Cape Tel 3, New Smyrna and Vero Beach ing data.
between 190 and 290 seconds.
The signal threshold levels and corresponding
All stations saw signal fluctuations resulting from phase unlocks between 440 and 590 seconds were a
Launch Escape System (LES) jettison. result of improper handover techniques at the San
99
Salvador transmitter. Steps have been taken to pre- 14.7.8 TELEYffSION
vent this happening on future flights.
The television AGC curves indicate that good
14. 7.3 MISTRAM data were received between 20 and ii5 seconds. At
ii5 seconds, flame attenuation caused a signal drop
MISTRAM AGC data was much improved over of about 20:db which recovered at 136 seconds. Retro
previous flights (a summary is shown in Fig. 14-1). rocket firing resulted in a 2.5-second signal dropout
As with all RF systems, a dropout occurred at retro period. A summary is shown in Figure 14-1. Picture
rocket ignition and lasted about 3 seconds at MISTRAM quality throughout the flight coverage was excellent
L MISTRAM II had large attenuation spikes at retro except during retro rocket burning and separation
ignition and termination. The signal between these when the picture was momentarily blacked out. One
spikes was attenuated butusable. This same phenom- of the camera leases (screw on type) came loose at
enon occurred with the C-band radar systems. separation, but did not greatly affect the picture qual-
ity.
Handover at 350 seconds resulted in a 20 db drop
at MISTRAM II lasting 5 seconds. MISTRAM I dropped 14. 7.9 COMMAND
to threshold and remained until re-acquisition at 375
seconds. Good signal levels were observed until 598 The guidance command experiments per-
seconds. formed at the Cape and at Ascension Island were per-
formed successfully.
i4. 7.4 C-BAND RADAR
Destruct command systems performed as ex-
AGC data received from the operating radar pected.
stations were excellent. Cape radar had a signal
dropout from 77 to 1t0 seconds attributed to a polari- 14.7. i0 RF SYSTEMS ANALYSIS (S-IV)
zation null, and Grand Turk experienced a dropout
from 400 to 472 seconds. The latter resulted when The RF performance of S-IV-7 was satis-
another radar station interfered with the Grank Turk factory. Data from link 3 of Tel 2 were noisy from
interrogations. approximately 350 seconds until loss of signal. Links
1 and 2 were satisfactory during this time. However,
Retro rocket effects were similar to MISTRAM II, Antigua data showed no appreciable noise after 4i0
i.e., attenuation spikes at ignition and termination seconds on link 3. Forward and reflected power
with normal ( t0 db down) signal between. A summary measurements were steady throughout flight except at
of C-bsnd AGC is shown in Figure 14-i. staging. It was apparent from tape recorder data that
the forward power dropped and the reflected power in-
14. 7.50DOP creased, indicating that the plume from the retro and
ullage rockets seriously affected the antenna imped-
The ODOP system operated as expected and ances. Based upon limited orbital data information
provided useful data until approximately 500 seconds (Tel 2 and Tel 3), it is evident that the recorded sig_
with intermittent losses occurring during the flame nal strengths were substantially improved over those
and retro rocket periods. An ODOP AGC coverage of S-IV-6. From a launch phase plot of link D2 _Tel
summary is shown in Figure 14-1. 2), a serious drop occurred at approximately i25 to
140 seconds. This drop was caused by main engine
14.7.6 ALTIMETER flame attenuation.
i00
Theoverallcoverage
obtained for SA-7 was sat- umbilical connector pneumatic system ope_2ated, but
isfactory. Out of 91 instruments, 9 failed to operate was disconnected when the mechanical release was
due to a power failure on camera station44. Timing _tuated by the swing arm rotation.
from camera start was recorded on all film except
one sway camera. Usable time indexing (time dis- Complete 360-degree surveillande of the launch
placement between an exposed frame and its reklted facility and vehicle was provided by a system of 44
timing mark) was only recorded on the tracking cam- fixed cameras at various sites within the proximity of
eras. the launch facility. Of these 44 cameras, 35 operated
properly. The failure of the nine cameras to operate
14. 8. i ENGINEERING SEQUENTIAL CAMERAS was caused by power failure on station 4. Vehicle
liftoff was recorded by the fixed cameras for a dis-
Seventeen instruments were located on the tance of three vehicle lengths. No malfunctions dur-
launch pedestal to observe the launcher ground support ing this time were observed.
equipment (GSE) and the aft section of the vehicle
prior to and during liftoff. The GSE observed were 14. 8.2 ONBOARD CAMERAS
the eight holddown arms, short cable mast II and IV,
and. the LOX fill and drain mast. Eight onboard optical cameras were on the
SA-7 vehicle. All eight cameras operated as pro-
All eight holddown arms appeared to operate nor- grammed and were ejected. Immediate recovery of
mally. However, the cap on the shoe pivoted on the these cameras was Impossible because of Hurricane
end of the holddown arm at stub fins I-II, and l/I-IV Gladys in the impact area. However, two of the cam-
fell after arm retraction. Cameras viewing the hold- eras were recovered on San Salvador and Eleuthera
down arm s were unrestrained and vibrated excessively Islands. Good coverage was obtained from these cam-
normally.
Sixteen long focal length, ground based track-
The LOX fill and drain mast appeared to retract Lug telescopes recorded operation of the vehicle from
normally, but was obscured by smoke and ice when launmh through jettison of the launch escape system
released from the vehicle. tower. Cameras within this system were used to re-
cord the exhaust flame pattern. A change in the flame
No movement of the heat shield during engine ig- pattern of the outboard engines was observed approx-
nition was perceptible. The aft section of the vehicle imately 15.7 seconds after liftoff. Prior to this, a
(engines and heat shield) appeared to operate satis- dark area in the flame pattern extended downward ap-
factorily with no damage seen_ proximately i.5 m from the engine nozzles. This
dark Jrrea decreased to approximately 0.3 m in length
First motion of the vehicle liftoff was defined by at 15.8 seconds range time. A similar dark area has
the records received from two cameras positioned for been observed on previous flights and attributed to the
this purpose. presence of fuel rich turbine exhaust gases introduced
by the outboard engine aspirators. This same condi-
In addition to the launch pedestal cameras, twelve tion occurred again for this flight.
cameras located on the umbilical tower viewed the
upper ground support equipment of the launch complex Retro rocket ignition and burning ware observed
and forward section of the vehicle. Cameras were lo- by the tracking telescopes. All rockets appeared to
cated at the 14. 6 m levelito view the fuel fill and drain ignite sImultaneously and burn for 3.33 seconds. Sep-
mast, and at the 36 m level to view the vehicle inter- aration was also observed, as well as the trajectory
stage, These two camera groups obtained excellent of the S-IV stage through jettison of the Launch Es-
film coverage of this area and thelatter was used to cape System tower.
determinedvehicle vertical displacement for the first
5. 8 m of flight, even though the camera operated at 14.9 ORBITAL TRACKING AND TELEMETRY
three-quarters its programmed speed. SUMMARY
LH 2 vent line on this arm did not disconnect when the by the NASA Space Tracking and Data Acquisition
10i
Network
(STADAN_ andthe Manned Space Flight Net- vehicle lifetime. The last vehicle contact was a Mini-
work (MSFN), composed of the global network of track beacon signal received on 136 mc telemetry by
Minitrack stations and Minitrack optical tracking sta- Kano, Nigeria, on revolution 59 at 11:33:39 Uo T., Sep-
tions (MOTS). The MSFN, supported by elements of _mber 22, 1964.
DO]), is a global network of radar tracking stations.
Additional tracking support was provided by the Smith- There were four optical observations (Baker-
sonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO), and the Nunn Camera) reported by SAO and two optical ob-
North American Air Defense (NORAD). servations (MOTS} reported by STADAN. No com-
ments have been received concerning the stellar
The last beacon track of the orbiting vehicle was magnitude of the orbiting vehicle. Thirteen NORAD
4.Shours after liftoff by Hawaii. All subsequent radar observations were reported.
tracking was skin-track. It can be seen that the skin
trackmode was successful on SA-7 as it was on SA-6.
The last skin track of the vehicle was at ii:i8:53 t4.9.2 TELEMETRY
102
SECTION XV. SPACECRAFT
15. i SUMMARY trol motor, carrhed the tower structure safely out of
the path of the spacecraft. On the basis of design
This was the second Saturn flight to carry a values, the maximum tumbling rate (approximgtely
Boildrplate Apollo spacecraft (BP-i5). A descrip- 675 deg/s) observed during the launch escapemotor
tion of the BP-i5 spacecraft, as flown, is given in burning period indicated possible yielding of theLES
Appendix A and in Reference 5. The purpose of this ballast mounting plate but no separation.
flight test was to demonstrate the compatibility of the
spacecraft with the launch vehicle, to determine the All strain gauge, pressure, and accelerometer
launch and exit environmental parameters for design measurements indicated that the spacecraft performed
verification, and to demonstrate the alternate mode satisfactorily in the launch environment. Command
of escape tower jettison, utilizing the launch escape module conical surface static pressures correlated
and pitch control motors. Primary differences be- closely with wind tunnel data, and the product of
tween the BP-i5 spacecraft and the BP-i3 spacecraft, angle-of-attack and dynamic pressure (_q) did not
flown on the SA-6 mission, were the installation of an exceed 4. 78 deg N/cm 2 ( i000 deg lbf/ftz). The vent-
instrumented simulated reaction control motor quad ing system of the service module performed satis-
on the service module, relocation of some sensors, factorily.
and the installation of live launch escape and pitch
control motors in the launch escape subsystem. All A t. 8 g, peak-to-peak, 10 Hz vibration was noted
mission test objectives were fulfilled. during holddown. Other vibration modes were similar
to those experienced during the BP-i3 spacecraft
i5. 2 SPACECRAFT PERFORMANCE (Ref. 5) flight. One of the simulated reaction control subsys-
tem qnad assemblies was instrumented for vibration
All mission test objectives were fulfilled by the on the BP-15 spacecraft flight. The measured vibra-
time of orbital insertion, and additional data were ob- tion levels were above the design limit.
tained by telemetry through the,_Manned Space Flight
Network until the end of effective battery life during The strain measurements in the command module
the fourth orbital pass. Radar skin tracking was con- and service module indicated that all bending moments
tlnued by the network until the spacecraft reentered are within the design limits.
over the Indian Ocean during its 59th orbital pass.
The launch heating environment of the BP-i5
During the countdown, there were no holds caused spacocraft was similar to that encountered by the BP-
by the spacecraft. All spacecraft subsystems fulfilled i3 spacecraft. Peak values at most points for the
their specified functions throughout the countdown and two flights were approximately equal; however, the
the planned flight test period. Engineering data w_re influence of surface irregularities, as weU as cir-
received through telemetry from all but two of the t33 cumferential variations in heating', was somewhat dif-
instrumented spacecraft measurements for the full ferent for the two flights because of differences in
flight test period of the mission. trajectory and angle-of-attack. Both command and
service module heating rates were within the predicted
The instrumentation subsystem was successful range. The heat protection equipment on the launch
in determining the launch and exit environment, and escape subsystem (LES) was subjected to tempera-
telemetry reception of the data was continuous through tures much lower than the design limits which were
launch and exit except for a short period during ve- established on the basis of an aborted mission.
hicle staging. Battery life exceeded the launch plus
one orbit requirement, with main battery A providing Flight data from the instrumented simulated RCS
at least 7 hours and 38 minutes of useful power, and quadassembly differed from the values issued for de-
mainbattery B providing at least 5 hours and 20 min- sign criteria for the RCS. Additional investigation
utes of useful power. and analysis will be necessary to complete the design
and flight data criteria.
The launch escape tower jettison by the alternate
mode was successful. Positive ignition of the pitch Satisfactory engineering data, covering desig-
control motor could not be determined; however, the nated parameters of spacecraft environment for a
general trajectory indicated that it operated properly. SaturnVtype launch trajectory, were obtained for use
The launch escape motor, together with the pitch con- in verifying launch and exit design criteria.
103
........... • A •
The flight test of Saturn SA-7 did not reveal any velocity vector at S-IV cutoff to be 1.8 m/s larger
malfunctions or deviations which could be considered than the digital computer value (Para. 7.6.1 and
a serious system failure or design deficiency. How- 7.6.2).*
ever, a number of deviations did occur and are sum-
marized. 3. The digital computer's gravity term was
slightly in error before liftoff ( Para. 7.7.1). *
Corrective measures were recommended by the
MSFC Laboratory concerned for some of the items 4. The digital computer sequencing discretes
listed. These are marked withan asterisk. Each item were issued with a small time delay (Para. 7.7. l). *
is listed in the area where the deviation and/or mal-
function occurred. Orbital Attitude
1. S-I stage combustion stability monitor on en- 2. Debonding of aft interstage after separation
gine 3 indicated large pressure disturbances during ( Para. 10.4).
ignition ( Para. 6.2.3).
2. The flight fitel and LOX specific weights are Vehicle Electrical Systems
significantly different from predicted due to tempera-
ture change (para. 6.2.3). I. An in.flight
control relay for link F6 was con-
nected to the short lifebattery instead of the long life
3. Higher than predicted S-IV cutoff impulse battery (Para. 12.4).*
( Para. 6.7.3.4).*
2. S-IVinverter output voltage dropped momen-
4. Minimum required LH 2 pump inlet conditions tarily at separation (Para. 12.3).
2. Large stabilized platform leveling and azi- 3. The long-dwell commutator clock malfunc-
muth alignment errors caused the actual space-fixed tioned from liftoffthrough separation (Para. 14.3. i).
VE HIC LE DE SCRIPTION
Instrument Unit, and Boilerplate Apollo command and (121 ft 2) and extended radially about 2.74 m (9 ft)
service modules (Fig. A-l). The changes which dis- from the outer surface of the thrust structure. Four
tinguish this vehiole from the SA-6 flight vehicle in- stub fins were attached midway between the main fins.
clude: Stub fins II, III and IV also provided enclosure and at-
tachment for the three 0.0348 m (12 in.) diameter
1. Elimination of the S-IV LOX tank backup ducts used to exit chilldown hydrogen from the S-IV
pressurization system. stage. Four fairings between the larger fins and stub
fins enclosed the inboard engine turbine exhaust ducts.
2. Addition of non-propulsive venting system on
S-IV stage. A.3 S-IV STAGE
3. Elimination of ST-90S stabilized platform Six gimbal mounted RLIOA-3 engines, provid-
system and supporting equipment. ing 400,340 N (90,000 ib) total thrust at an altitude
of 60,960 m (200,000 ft) , powered the vehicle during
4. ST-124 system and control rate gyros active the S-IV stage portion of powered flight. The engines
in vehicle control from liftoff. were mounted on the thrust structure with a six-
degree outward cant angle from the vehicle longitud-
5. Live launch escape and pitch control motors inal axis. Each engine had a gimbal capability of a
used to eject launch escape system. plus or minus four-degree square pattern for pitch,
yaw, and roll control. The S-IV stage (Fig. A-3)
The following is a description of the four major carried approximately 45,359 kg ( i00,000 Ib) of usa-
components of the vehicle. ble liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen.
duced by an engine failure at critical dynamic pres- through the antivortex screen, filter assembly and
sure. Propellants were supplied to the engines through sump cone. The lower suction line flange ends were
suction lines from an arrangement of nine propellant connected to the LOX inlet flange on each engine.
tanks. These tanks consisted of four 1.78 m ( 70 in. )
diameter fuel tanks, four 1.78 m (70 in.) diameter The thrust structure provided engine thrust trans-
LOX tanks and a 2.67 m (105 in. ) diameter center fer to the LH 2 and LOX container.
LOX tank. Each outboard tank (LOX and fuel) sup-
plied propellants to one inboard and one outboard en- Four 15,125 N (3400 lb) thrust solid propellant
gine. The center LOX tank supplied the cutboard tanks ullage rockets provided proper positioning of the pro-
through the LOX interchange system. Thrust and pellants prior to the S-IV stage ignition.
longitudinal loads were carried by the pressurized
LOX tanks. The propellant tanks were retained at the
forward end of a structural member called a spider A. 4 INSTI_UMENT UNIT
105
LAUNCH ESCAPE SYSTEM
COMMAND MODULE
SERVICE MODULE
INSTRUMENT UNIT
S-._r STAGE
58.06 m
6.5m
106
CAMERA
LOX/SOX
DISPOSAL
TVCAMERA
INSTRUMENT
COMPARTMENT
(TYPICAL F-! &
ANTI-SLOSH BAFFLES
(1.78m DIA TANKS)
TI-SLOSH BAFFLES
(2.67m DIA LOX TANK)
CABLE TRUNK
CHILL-DOWN
DUCT
TURBINE
EXHAUST
HEAT SHIELD
DUCT
107
',ESSDOOR
MANHOLE COVER_
AFT BULKHEAD
UMBILICAL
THRUST STRUCTURE
LHzMAKEUP SPHERE
, SUCTION
HELIUM HEATER AND LINE (TYP.)
AMBIENTSPHERE
AFT INTERSTAGE
HEAT SHIELD
ENGINES (6)
f HYDROGEN
VENT
STACK (3)
BLOWOUT
PANEL(8)_
108
TheInstrument Unit(Fig.A-4)locatedbetween no initiators installed in the jettison motor, and the
theS-IVstageandthepayload, providedanenviron- wiring, circuit from the sequencers to this motor was
mentally conditionedcompartmentto houseelectronic purposely not completed so as to simulate a jettison
equipment. Structurally,
this unitconsistedof four motor failure. The alternate mode of tower jettison
1.02-meter-diameter (40in.)tubesextendingradially (by firing only the launch-escape and pitch-control
froma 1.78-meter-diameter (70 in.) centertube. motors) was used.
Theoveralldiameter andlengthwere3.91m(154in.)
and2.31m(91in.) respectively.Theequipment in- Four simulated RCS quad assemblies were at-
stallationIncludedguidance andcontrol,telemetry, tached to the upper portion of the SM exterior, 90 de-
tracking,electricalpowersources,anddistributors. grees apart. In order to duplicate the aerodynamic
TheST-124 systemandcontrolrategyroswereactive characteristics of the production units, the simulated
invehiclecontrolfromliftoff. units were similar in size and shape and were ar-
ranged on the SM in the same location as they would
A.5 PAYLOAD be found on the production spacecraft. The RCS quad
assembly located near the Fin Iaxis was instrumented
TheApolloBoilerplate
15(BP-15)spacecraft, to provide temperature and vibration measurements.
shownin FigureA-5, wasof a configuration essen-
tially the same as that of the BP-13 spacecraft flown The spacecraft weight when inserted into orbit
on SA-6 (Ref. 6 and 7). The primary differences was 7816 kg/17,231 Ibm); the spacecraft weight at
were as follows: liftoff was 10,813 kg(23,838 lbm). The BP-15 space-
craft weight was greater than that of BP-13 space-
The LES motors for pitch control, tower jettison, craft by 94. 3 kg (208 ibm) at orbit insertion and 134
and launch escape were live. However, there were kg (295 ibm) at liftoff.
/"
_. FIN _r-'_
r/ _. CENTER COMPARTMENT-
COMPARTMENT }MPARTMENT m
POWER
CONTRO 1 INSTRUMENT
PACKAGE
8 TELEMETRY
PACKAGE
_POLLO SPACECRAFT
INTERFACE
,OMPARTMENT
PASSENGER GUIDANCE
COMPARTMENT I
PACKAGE
ACTIVE GUIDANCE
PACKAGE
- ACCESS DOOR
INSTRUMENT UNIT
FIN
109
Ballast
Enclosure -_ _'_- Nose
Cone
Pitch Motor
Jettison
f Motor
Oc
Escape Motor
\
Launch Escape System
Tower
Command Module
,Quad Assembly _
-% i
_"_--.Serwice Module
Service /
Module J
Ex tens ion
Adapter
110
REFERENCES
2. NASA TM X-53120, August 13, 1964, (Confidential) , "Final Predicted Trajectory and Dispersion Study
for Saturn I Vehicle SA-7," by J. D. Weiler and O. M. Hardage, Jr.
3. MPR-SAT-FE-64-16, August 7, 1964, (Confidential) , "Results of the Sixth Saturn I Launch Vehicle
Test Flight," by Saturn Flight Evaluation Working Group.
4. MSC-R-A-64-2, June 18, 1964, (Confidential) , "Post Launch Report for Apollo Mission A-J01 (BP-
13). "
5. MSC-R-A-64-3, October 10, 1964, (Confidential) , "Post Launch Report for Apollo Mission A-102
(BP-15) ."
6. MTP-M-S&M-E-6i-2, May 12, 1961, (Confidential), "Saturn Block II Design Criteria," Vehicle Sys-
7. "SA-7 Saturn Vehicle Data Book," July 15, i963, (Confidential) , Vehicle Engineering Branch, Propul-
sion and Vehicle Engineering Laboratory.
8. MPR-SAT-FE,64-15, April 1, 1964, (Confidential) , "Results of the Fifth Saturn I Launch Vehicle Test
9. Memo: R-ASTR-NG-i02, September 15, 1964, (Confidential), "The Effect of Known Guidance Errors
on SA-7 Flight Performance," J. L. Mack.
10. Memo: R-ASTR-G-263-64, August 11, 1964, (Confidential) , "Test Data From Serial Number 4, ST-
i24 Platform System for SA-7," Carl H. Mandel.
11. Memo: R-ASTR-G, November 8, 1962, (Confidential), "ST-J24 Instrument Errors," C. H. Mandel.
111
INDEX
112
retro rocket, 30, 31, 32 Cooldown
period, engine, 34
Coefficient
axial force, 26, 93
Electrical
base drag, 93
Combustion Stability Monitor, 10, 26 IU systems, 91
113
timesof, 20 GroundSupport Equipment, 5, 10
Exhaust engineserviceplatform,10
gas,101 flamedeflector,11
turbine,29, 105 holddown arms,10i
LOXumbilicaldrainlines,l i
servicestructure,7
swingamn, 5, 10,11,101
Fin umbilicalconnectionpneumatic system,5, 11,101
accelerometers, 70 umbilicaltower,11
angle-of-attacksensors,45,50,51 visualinspection,100
basegastemperatures, 82 waterquench hoses,i0
baseheating rate,80 Guidance
bending, 70 command experiments, 100
main,31, 105,109 computer error, 18
pressure distribution,93 data,18
pressureloading,93 pathinitiation,43
pressure measurements, 92 pathprogram,43
skintemperature, 80 ST-124 system,43,45, 105,109
stub,30,70,105 system performance, 45,46
First MotionTime,21,101 S-IVinitiation,49
FlowRate Gyro
GH2,36 rate,51,105,109
mass,totalpropellant, 33 rate,measurement, 91,92
Flutter,71
Force tt
totallongitudinal,26
Fuel Heater
depletion sensors,90 helium,91
engine jackets,9 ST-124,91
fill anddrainmast,101 Heating
LH2loading,9, 10 S-I-7base,rate,82
LH2mainfill valve,9, i0 engineshroud,85
LH2masslevel,10 heliumheaterflux, 39
LH2pumpinletconditions, 36,37 LIt2tankinput,63,64
LH2system,105 spacecraft,aerodynamic, 103
LIt2tankvents,9 HeatShield
LH2transferline,9 movement, 101
Ltt2ventline,9 pressures, 81
pumps,29 tlelium
sensing probe,7, 9 cold,bubbling, 39
specificweight,7, 9 cold,sphere vibrations,74,79
tanks,29 cold,supplypressure andtemperature,
39
controloutletpressure,40
G heatexchanger, preeool,9
heater,24,91
GLOTRAC, 18,99 heatercombustion temperature,39
GN2 heaterexciter,9i
hazardproofing system,11 heaterheatfhLx,39
pressuresupplysphere,30 heaterignition,39
triplexspheres, 30 heaterparameters, 39
GOX mass,39
flowcontrolvalve,30 pressurization flow rate, 40
linevibration,73 sphere temperature, 40
114
storage sphere, 40 Instrument Unit, 11, 31, 68, 75, 76, 79
triplex, 30 electrical system, 91, 92
ttolddown, 6_, 71, 72, 74 recorder, 98
arms, 10, 10l umbilical separation, 1l
points, 105 Instrument Unit Measurements
vibration, 70 aceelerometer, 68, 69, 70
Holds, 5 sound intensity, 97
Horizon Sensor, 5i, 52 system reliability, 94, 97
Hydraulic temperatures, 89
actuator gimbals, 31 vibration levels, 68, 75, 76, 79
lanyard disconnect, 11 Instrumentation
oil levels, 31 battery one, 90
oil temperature, 31 battery two, 90
source pressure, 31 ETR, 5, 7, 8, 100
S-Ipump, 5, 7, i0 Intersta ge
S-I system, 24, 31 debonding, 79
S-IV system, 41 for_vard vibration, 74, 79
S-IV system accumulators, 41 pressure, aft, 83
S-IV system sequence valve, 41 separation, 65
temperature "OK" switch, 5, 10 S-I, S-IV, 30, 101
temperature, 85, 86, 87
J i
IECO ( see cutoff)
Ignition Jettison
command S-IV, 65 LES, 68, 70, 78, 99, i00, 101, 103
helium heater, 39 ullage rocket, 41, 42, 91
pops, main propellant, 26
retro rocket, 101 L
115
semi-automatic loadingsystems,7 Mast
S-IV,77 Measurements
oxidizersystems,9 Milestones, 5, 6
116
Pitch residuals, S-I, 26, 31
S-I stage, program, 45 residuals, S-IV, 40
Pogo sensor data, 34
oscillations, 69 sloshing, 53
Pressure suction lines, 105
aft interstage, 83 S-IV consumption, 13
chamber, 69 tanks, 31, 105
chamber, buildup, 24 tank temperature, 7
cold helium regulator outlet, 40 utilization, 24, 30, 40, 41
cold helium supply, 39 utilization probe, 53
conditional area, 89 Pump
detonation, switches, 85 inlet conditions, 28, 36, 37, 39
dynamic, 18, 21 LOX, cooldown period, 39
engine fuel pump inlet, 29, 69 speed, turbopump, 28
fin loading edge distribution, 93 Purge
fin measurements, 93 calorimeter seal, 30
flame shield, 82 disposal system, 30
fuel ullage, 29 engine compartment TV camera, 30
GN 2 supply sphere, 30 hydrogen vent duct, 30
heat shield measurements, 93 LOX pump seal, 30
hydraulic source, 31
LH 2 tank, 63, 64 Q
117
V
Valves instrument unit, 75, 76, 79
inertialcomponents, 43 yaw, 72
space-fixed, t8, 20, 22 Voltage
hydrogen, ductpurgesystem,30
hydrogen, non-propulsive valve,63 W
hydrogen stacks,108
hydrogen totalimpulse,63 Weights
LH2line,II lift-off, 26
LOX,61 propellant, 28
mainpressurereliefLOXsystem,61,63 vehicle, 28
oxygen, 63
oxygen, non-propulsive valve,63
residualpropellant, 6t, 63
S-Iline, i1
Vibrations
Apollo,acceleration level,70
Apollo,structure,77,79
coldheliumsphere,74,75, 79
engine,71,72
enginecomponent measurements, 72
flightlevels,68
forwardinterstage measurements, 74,79
fuelsuctionlineflange,72
fueltankskirtringframe,74
fuelwraparound line,73
GOXline,73
hard-mounted instrument panel,74
heatexchanger outletflange,72
holddown arm,acceleration level,70
instrument compartment panels,73
120
Pitch residuals, S-I, 26, 31
oscillations,69 sloshing, 53
hydraulic source,3t q
LH2tank,63,64
LH2ventrecording,63,64
LOXpumpinlet,29 Q-BaU
LOXtank,64 angle-of-attack sensor, 45, 50, 51
regulated supply, 30
R
repeated surges, 26
retro chamber, 31, 32
Radar
surface, 80
altimeter, 18
S-I chamber, 26
S-IV chamber transients, 34, 35 C-Band system, 100
Grand Turk, 5, 6
S-IV forward interstage, 89
thrust frame compartment, 83 KANO, 23
skin track, t03
ullage rocket chamber, 41
Radiation
unconditional area, 89
inner region, 82, 84
Pressurization
outer region, 82, 84
engine turbopump gearbox, 30
plume, 80
helium, flow rate, 40
Range
inflight fuel tank, 36
cross, 18, 20, 22
step, 37
slant, 33
Probe
surface, 19, 20, 22
continuous level, 31
Rate, Gyro, 51
discrete level, 5, 7, 9
Rates, Gimbal, 53
Propellant
Rawinsonde
automatic loading systems, 9
data, I l
booster consumption, 13, 28
winds, 45, 46
densities, 28
Recorder
depletion requirements, 28
instrument unit, 98
depletion time, 33
onboard tape, 94, 98
flow rate, 9, 25, 31, 33
S-I stage, 98
ignition pops, 26
S-IV stage, 98, 100
loading, 9
117
transfersignal,98 guidance system, 45
Separation, 30, 31, 65, 68, 70, 101, 105 distribution, pneumatic, 10
It8
VCO, 98 S-IV, 33, 34, 105
Televis ion S-IV buildup, 34, 66
GH2, 37 discrepancies, 18
ullage, 37 radar, 18
corrections, 26 Transients
li9
V
LH 2 line, li lift-off, 26
LOX, 6t propellant, 28
non-propulsive system, 24, 37, 61, 63, 64, 105 Winds (see atmospheric)
oxygen, 63
oxygen, non-propulsive valve, 63
residual propellant, 6i, 63
S-I line, 11
Vibrations
Apollo, acceleration level, 70
Apollo, structure, 77, 79
cold helium sphere, 74, 75, 79
engine, 71, 72
engine component measurements, 72
flight levels, 68
forward interstage measurements, 74, 79
fuel suction line flange, 72
120
DISTRIBUTION
Mr. Kuers
121
DISTRIBUTION (Cont'd)
R-RP-DIR EXTERNAL
Dr. Stuhlinger
Headquarters, National Aeronautics & Space Administration
R-TEST-DIR Washington, D. C. 20546
Mr. Heimburg Assistant Deput 5" Administrator: Dr. G. L. Simpson, Jr.
Mr. Tessmann Office of Policy Planning: Dr. G. L. Simpson, Jr.
Office of Technolog), Utilization: Breene M. Kerr
R-TEST-C Scientific & Technical Irfformation Division Director: Melvin S. Day
Mr. Grafton Office of the Associate Administrator: Dr. Robert C. Seaman, Jr.
Office of Industry Affairs
R-TEST-I Reliability & Quality Assurance Office: John E. Condon
Dr. Sieber
Office of Manned Space Flight
R-TEST-M Associate Administrator: Dr. G, E. Mueiler
Mr. Edwards Apollo Program Director: Maj. Gen. S. C. Phillips (USAF)
MSF Field Center Development Director: Capt. Robert Freitag (USN)
R-TEST-S
Mr. Driscoll Office of Space Science and Applications
Associate Administrator: Dr. Homer E. Newell
R-TEST-SB Director of Engineering: Robert F. Gm'barini
IVlr. Reihnan Launch Vehicle & Propulsion Programs Director: Vincent L. Johnson
(10 copies)
MS-tt Meteorological Programs Director: Dr. Morris Tepper
Mr. Akens
122
DISTRIBUTION
(Cont'd)
Director,LewisResearch
Center:Dr. AbeSilverstein Uo S. Atomic Energ3 _ Commission, Sandia Corp.
National
Aeronautics
&SpaceAdministration University of California Radiation Lab.
21000BrookparkRoad Technical hfformation Division
Manned Spacecraft
Center Attn: Clovis Craig
NationalAeronautics& Space
Administration
ttouston,Texas77058 U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Sandia Corp.
Attn: Director:Dr. Robert
R. Gilruth Livermore Br, P. O. Box 969
RobertSmith,CodeEC6(5) Livermore, California 94551
P. O. Box 5700 i
& Engineering
Room 3E1065 Commander
Washington, D. C. 20301
Commander
123
DISTRIBUTION
(Cont'd)
124
DISTRIBUTION
(Concluded)
RadioCorporation
ofAmerica Rocketdyne
Defense
ElectronicProducts 6633CanogaAvenue
DataSystems
Division CanogaPark,California 91303
8500Balboa
Blvd. Attm O.I. Thorsen{3)
VanNuys,California91406
125