IPB
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Would Phoenix be able to blip its rockets to move around a bit?, ...and not just pulling itself along with the arm...
Guest_Oersted_*
post May 20 2008, 09:38 PM
Post #1





Guests






OK, premature, premature, but still... After a succesful landing and thouroughly having dug holes and trenches in the original working volume of the arm: how about moving about a tiny bit? - I was wondering if the rocket engines could possibly be used to shift position just a few decimeters at a time. Small blips, which should be so weak that they wouldn´t overturn the lander.

It could also come in handy when the snows come in later in the year and threaten to bury the lander.

A few things would be necessary: no post-landing venting of possible excess fuel (who knows about that?). No permanent disabling of the rockets after EDL. A possibility to stow and unstow the solar panels (ok, that is probably a show-stopper, but just humour me here...). The last would only be an issue if it was thought that small blips of the rockets would raise sufficient dust to degrade the solar panels´efficiency.

Just thinking out of the box here... - And I know it very probably won´t ever happen. But if!

- Well, let us just get this baby down in one piece for now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
tasp
post May 22 2008, 12:30 AM
Post #2


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 903
Joined: 30-January 05
Member No.: 162



Fleshing out my idea a little more:

There apparently is an existing valve that vents the helium, so a piece of pipe on the discharge of that valve leading strategically towards the deployed positions of the panels would not introduce another leak path into the helium plumbing, so there is no impact to the overall reliability re helium pressurization. A failure of that valve post landing leaves us no worse off than we are now.

The existing hydrazine is unsuitable for long term storage onboard due to freezing effects.

However, if a subsequent lander had suitable hypergolic bipropellents (methane, nitrogen tetroxide ??) they could be vented safely though the combustion chamber through the already existing valving, separately, with no impact to the mechanical reliability of the propellent system. There would be a software fault possible that would cause the system to fail, but there are existing similar software failure modes to the existing control system we manage to live with now.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dvandorn
post May 22 2008, 03:58 AM
Post #3


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3419
Joined: 9-February 04
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Member No.: 15



QUOTE (tasp @ May 21 2008, 07:30 PM) *
Fleshing out my idea a little more:

There apparently is an existing valve that vents the helium, so a piece of pipe on the discharge of that valve leading strategically towards the deployed positions of the panels would not introduce another leak path into the helium plumbing, so there is no impact to the overall reliability re helium pressurization. A failure of that valve post landing leaves us no worse off than we are now.

The existing hydrazine is unsuitable for long term storage onboard due to freezing effects.

A few thoughts of my own...

First off, after you vent the helium, there is no pressure in the tanks. You'd have to add pumps to pump out anything from the unpressurized tanks, and those tend to be heavy enough to preclude their use. (Hence the use of helium to pressurize the tanks so the fuel delivery systems are pressure-fed and pumpless.)

Second, long-term storage of hypergols on Mars is probably not a great idea due to freezing, but only if you ever plan to use the remaining propellants. Otherwise, if you design your fuel tanks and plumbing properly, you can keep the remaining fuel (frozen or otherwise) in those tanks forever. Hypergols, particularly nitrazine and UDMH (unsymmetrical di-methyl hydrazine) were first developed as rocket fuels in the U.S. so you could maintain fully fueled missiles in their silos for months or even years and have them ready to go at literally a moment's notice. Only in later years were the hypergols traded out for solid fuels in American nuclear missiles.

In fact, there is probably significant hydrazine and nitrazine left in the tanks of the Viking landers to this day. AFAIK, no powered landers (including Surveyors, Lunar Modules, Viking landers, etc.) ever actually vented their propellants after landing. They all vented the pressurizing helium, but never the actual hypergols. (Indeed, if you vented your hypergols and they managed to mingle somewhere below your lander, you're going to get more than a "little hop" out of it...)

-the other Doug


--------------------
“The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.” -Mark Twain
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Oersted   Would Phoenix be able to blip its rockets to move around a bit?   May 20 2008, 09:38 PM
- - djellison   5 seconds post landing, the pressurizing helium ga...   May 20 2008, 09:55 PM
- - ToSeek   One of the Surveyors (unmanned lunar landers) did ...   May 20 2008, 10:26 PM
|- - ElkGroveDan   There was some talk of doing this with NEAR after ...   May 20 2008, 10:31 PM
- - kwan3217   As noted before, once the helium vents, Phoenix is...   May 20 2008, 10:42 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (kwan3217 @ May 20 2008, 11:42 PM) ...   May 20 2008, 11:14 PM
|- - Oersted   QUOTE (djellison @ May 21 2008, 01:14 AM)...   May 21 2008, 01:03 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (Oersted @ May 21 2008, 02:03 PM) ....   May 21 2008, 02:00 PM
||- - Oersted   QUOTE (djellison @ May 21 2008, 04:00 PM)...   May 22 2008, 12:29 PM
||- - climber   QUOTE (Oersted @ May 22 2008, 02:29 PM) I...   May 22 2008, 01:13 PM
|||- - ugordan   QUOTE (climber @ May 22 2008, 03:13 PM) ....   May 22 2008, 01:19 PM
||- - djellison   QUOTE (Oersted @ May 22 2008, 01:29 PM) P...   May 22 2008, 02:40 PM
||- - centsworth_II   QUOTE (Oersted @ May 22 2008, 08:29 AM) P...   May 22 2008, 03:11 PM
|- - pioneer   QUOTE (Oersted @ May 21 2008, 01:03 PM) I...   May 21 2008, 02:41 PM
||- - djellison   QUOTE (pioneer @ May 21 2008, 03:41 PM) I...   May 21 2008, 03:04 PM
|- - Alex Chapman   QUOTE (Oersted @ May 21 2008, 02:03 PM) I...   May 21 2008, 03:02 PM
|- - simonbp   QUOTE (Alex Chapman @ May 21 2008, 09:02 ...   May 22 2008, 04:09 AM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (simonbp @ May 22 2008, 05:09 AM) A...   May 22 2008, 07:27 AM
- - dmuller   QUOTE (djellison @ May 21 2008, 09:14 AM)...   May 20 2008, 11:42 PM
|- - pioneer   QUOTE (dmuller @ May 21 2008, 12:42 AM) P...   May 21 2008, 01:57 PM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (pioneer @ May 21 2008, 02:57 PM) D...   May 21 2008, 02:03 PM
- - tasp   Perhaps future landers might have a more volatile ...   May 21 2008, 03:15 AM
- - nprev   I dunno, man. Correct me anyone if I'm wrong h...   May 21 2008, 03:32 AM
- - dmuller   QUOTE (pioneer @ May 21 2008, 11:57 PM) D...   May 21 2008, 03:28 PM
- - tasp   Fleshing out my idea a little more: There apparen...   May 22 2008, 12:30 AM
|- - dvandorn   QUOTE (tasp @ May 21 2008, 07:30 PM) Fles...   May 22 2008, 03:58 AM
- - nprev   True enough. Maybe something like that would be wo...   May 22 2008, 01:08 AM
- - edstrick   "...Five TEGA runs of the same sample don...   May 22 2008, 05:33 AM
|- - climber   QUOTE (edstrick @ May 22 2008, 07:33 AM) ...   May 22 2008, 09:36 AM
- - edstrick   Actually, I expect there would be some value in Ph...   May 22 2008, 08:03 AM
|- - djellison   QUOTE (edstrick @ May 22 2008, 09:03 AM) ...   May 22 2008, 08:28 AM
- - Tesheiner   Mmm, I have the feeling this topic will be quite a...   May 22 2008, 08:06 AM
- - centsworth_II   QUOTE (Tesheiner @ May 22 2008, 04:06 AM)...   May 22 2008, 08:24 AM
- - climber   QUOTE (Tesheiner @ May 22 2008, 10:06 AM)...   May 22 2008, 09:40 AM


Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th December 2024 - 04:07 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.