IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Astrobotic PM-1 mission, CLPS mission with NASA and commercial payloads
mcaplinger
post Jan 14 2024, 05:58 PM
Post #46


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2502
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



Without a schematic of the propulsion system, it's really difficult to intuit what may be happening. Having done a little digging, apparently even the ACS thrusters are biprop (MMH doesn't work as a monopropellant, the spacecraft I'm familiar with that used dual-mode monoprop/biprop used pure hydrazine.)

Normally the large pressure gradient between the helium tank and the rest of the system would prevent any migration back into the helium tank, but if the pressure is equalized then all bets are off. Systems that aren't so mass-constrained have one-way check valves to keep migration from happening anyway (see Figure 1 in https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23...ion_Performance ) but it seems that Peregrine cut out anything that wasn't absolutely required.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rlorenz
post Jan 14 2024, 06:09 PM
Post #47


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 609
Joined: 23-February 07
From: Occasionally in Columbia, MD
Member No.: 1764



QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Jan 9 2024, 06:01 PM) *
This seems odd to me, since usually such a valve would open just once and then a downstream regulator would maintain system pressure at the desired safe level. But it sounds like they tried to avoid needing a regulator by just burping the valve open briefly (in hindsight maybe not such a good idea.)


Cassini operated this way. I mean, it wasnt designed to operate this way (see my Haynes Cassini-Huygens Owners Workshop Manual) - it had a regulator, but somehow the regulator stuck open with a high leak rate - not enough to pop the propellant tank right away, thankfully, so the operators were able to close the upstream latch valve (which turned out to have a rather lower leak rate than specc'd, fortunately) and burped it later to maintain the ullage pressure as the fuel depleted. Sounds like Peregrine jumped to that approach - higher risk, but simpler/lighter

Biprops are hard to get right - a lot of failures/anomalies attributable to this piece of the system - Mars Observer, Akatsuki, Cassini, JUNO.....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thorsten Denk
post Jan 15 2024, 12:30 PM
Post #48


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 3-September 12
From: Almeria, SE Spain
Member No.: 6632



Latest update, very detailed and interesting:
https://www.astrobotic.com/update-17-for-pe...ne-mission-one/

The probe will burn up deliberately in Earth's atmosphere on Thursday evening (UTC) over the Great Barrier Reef.
https://twitter.com/tony873004/status/1746288506509684988

Thorsten
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Thorsten Denk
post Jan 19 2024, 08:57 AM
Post #49


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 122
Joined: 3-September 12
From: Almeria, SE Spain
Member No.: 6632



"Peregrine appears to have reentered [Jan 18] around 2059 UTC as predicted"
https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1748110238664802317

Thorsten
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Explorer1
post Jan 20 2024, 08:07 PM
Post #50


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2073
Joined: 13-February 10
From: Ontario
Member No.: 5221



Some poignant video footage has been released, separation of the lander from the upper stage, and the Iris rover spinning its wheels in the vacuum. The CMU students can take heart in their rover working to the moon and back, even if they couldn't land.
https://www.astrobotic.com/final-update-for...ne-mission-one/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Edomann
post Jan 29 2024, 04:58 AM
Post #51


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 17-January 24
Member No.: 9314



QUOTE (rlorenz @ Jan 14 2024, 06:09 PM) *
Cassini operated this way. I mean, it wasnt designed to operate this way (see my Haynes Cassini-Huygens Owners Workshop Manual) - it had a regulator, but somehow the regulator stuck open with a high leak rate - not enough to pop the propellant tank right away, thankfully, so the operators were able to close the upstream latch valve (which turned out to have a rather lower leak rate than specc'd, fortunately) and burped it later to maintain the ullage pressure as the fuel depleted. Sounds like Peregrine jumped to that approach - higher risk, but simpler/lighter

Biprops are hard to get right - a lot of failures/anomalies attributable to this piece of the system - Mars Observer, Akatsuki, Cassini, JUNO.....



Isn’t it usual to use a pyrotechnic valve to isolate the He tank? Solenoid valves present the risk of valve bounce during periods of very high vibration during the launch; the valve stem lifts off the seat. The pyrovalve provides a hermetic seal until the charge is ignited, so it ensures zero leakage during the launch phase and is only fired when that is complete.

I know that the thrusters on the mission have no previous flight heritage; I’m wondering whether other fluid-flow components in the propulsion system also lack heritage.

Ed
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Jan 29 2024, 06:54 AM
Post #52


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2502
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (Edomann @ Jan 28 2024, 08:58 PM) *
Isn’t it usual to use a pyrotechnic valve to isolate the He tank? Solenoid valves present the risk of valve bounce during periods of very high vibration during the launch; the valve stem lifts off the seat. The pyrovalve provides a hermetic seal until the charge is ignited, so it ensures zero leakage during the launch phase and is only fired when that is complete.

Of course. The Peregrine leak only started after the Triton Space pyrovalves were fired. They apparently worked fine and the issue was downstream.

QUOTE
I know that the thrusters on the mission have no previous flight heritage; I’m wondering whether other fluid-flow components in the propulsion system also lack heritage.

Possibly not, but heritage only goes so far. The components on Cassini and Juno had tons of heritage, but that didn't keep them from misbehaving.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th March 2024 - 08:33 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member.