-

NASS-37143 

MMC-NLS-SR.001 

January 1992 

N/\5/\ 

MANNiiO 8PACE 8V8TEM8 

Book I - Structures 

& Core Vehicle 

- '9 •• 

National Aeronautics and Space Adrr.•nistration 

Marshall Space Flight Center 

Michoud Assembly Facility 

Cycle B'(CV1991) 

NLS Trade 

Studies and 

Analyses Report 

(NASA-CR-184471) CYCLE O(CY1991) N93-16682 

NLS TRADE STUDIES AND ANALYSES 

REPORT. BOOK 1: STRUCTURES ANO CORE 

VEHICLE Final Report (Martin Unc1as 

Marietta Corp.) 673 p 

G3/31 0127422 
-- .. 
FOREWORD 

This document is Book 1 of the Cycle 0 Study Report and documents the activities performed 

by MMC in support of the MSFC NLS Structures Team. The work was performed under NASA 

Contract NASS-37143 between May 1991 and January 1992. This study report was prepared by 

Manned Space Systems, Martin Marietta Corporation, New Orleans, Louisiana for the 

NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center. 

i 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFf BLANK 

ii 
-

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SR-1 Book 1; NLS Core Tankage Structures Trades and Analyses 

INTRODUCTION ................................................................... . I 

STUDY TASKS CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX (by Trade #) •••••••••••••••••• 2 

STUDY TASKS CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX (by Element) ......•........... 3 

STUDY TASKS 

3-S-OOlA 

3-S-OOlB 

3-S-OOlC 

3-S-007 

3-S-008A 

3-S-008B 

3-S-008C 

3-S-0080 

3-S-009A 

3-S-009B 

3-S-OlOA 

3-S-OlOB 

3-S-OlOC 

3-S-011 

CV-DI-OlA 

CV-DI-OlB 

CV-STR-14A 

CV-STR-14B 

CV-STR-14C 

CV-STR-140 

CV-STR-14G 

CV-STR-14H 

CV-STR-16A 

CV-STR-16B 

CV-STR-16C 

CV-STR-160 

CV-STR-17A 

Fwd Skin Alternate Panel Construction ............................ 5 

Fwd Skirt Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study ...................... 19 

Alternate Fwd Skirt Configuration Definition .................... 37 

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade ................................ 51 

Tank Length vs Facility Impacts ................................... 67 

LH2 Tank Impact vs Ullage Pressure T/S ........................ 79 

LH2 Tank Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study ...................... 99 

LH2 Tank Alt Panel Construction ................................ 1 05 

Intenank Commonality Assessment .............................. l27 

Intertank Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study ...................... 151 

1..02 Tank Impact vs Ullage Pressure T/S ....................... 157 

1..02 Tank Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study ..................... 179 

L02 Tank Alt Panel. ................................................ 185 

Slosh Baffle Requirements & Design Definition ............... 191 

L02/LH2 Tank Access Trade Study .............................. 217 

Alt Transportation Attachment Points Evaluation ............... 267 

Fwd Skirt Structural Ref Config Enhancements ................ 281 

1..02 Tank Structural Ref Config Enhancements ................ 325 

Intertank Structural Ref Config Enhancements ................. 367 

LH2 Tank Structural Ref Config Enhancements ............... 425 

NLS Core Tankage External Hardware Definition ............ .495 

T'PS Reference Definition ......................................... 509 

Core Tankage Manufacturing Plan ............................... 605 

Core Tankage Facilities Plan ...................................... 621 

Core Tankage Tooling Plan ....................................... 639 

Transportation & Handling Requirements ....................... 647 

Alternate Aft Skirt Configuration ................................. 661 

iii 

•

1 

'PR!CEOING PAGE B1_ANK NOT FtLMFD 

- J_ JNTDHJON!IJJJ ~ 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFI' BLANK 

iv 
INTRODUCTION 

This Repon SR-1 (Book 1): Structures Trades and Analyses, documents the Core Tankage 

Trades and analyses performed in suppon of the NLS Cycle 0 preliminary design activities. The 

repon covers trades that were conducted on the Vehicle Assembly, Fwd Skirt, L02 Tank, 

Intenank, LH2 Tank and Aft Skin of the NLS Core Tankage. For each trade study a two page 

executive summary and the detail trade study are provided. The trade studies contain study results, 

recommended changes to the Cycle 0 Baseline and suggested follow on tasks to be performed 

during Cycle 1. 

1 
Study Task Cross Reference Matrix (by Trade #) 

TRADE STUDY t TIS SUM PARA t 

TRADE STUDY TITLE 

MSFC MMC HLLV 1.5ST 

3-S-C101A CV-5TR·18A 5.2.3.4.2 1.2.3A.2 Fwd Skirt All Panel Conetructlon 

3-S-CI018 cv-sTR-188 5.2.3.4.3 1.2.3.4.3 Fwd Skirt san.n.r Pitch S..alllvlay Study 

3-S-001C CV~2 5.2.:UA 1.2.3A.4 Alternate Fwd Skirt ConftguratJon DellniUon 

3-S-CI07 cv-sTR-21 NIA 1.2.1A.8 Alternete 1.5 Blllge Support Trade 

3-S-OOIA CV-5TR-20A 5.2.8.4.3 8.2.8.4.3 Tenk lAnglh vs Facility lmpecta 

3-S-0088 CV-5111-208 5.2.8AA 8.2.8.4.4 Ut2 Trilntpecl vs Ullege "-eure TIS 

3-S-CIOIC cv-sTR-20C 5.2.8A.5 8.2.1A.5 Ut2 Tenlr Bllftener Pitch S..alllvtty Study 

3-S-0080 Fv.STR-200 5.2.8.4.8 8.2.8.4.8 Ul2 Tri All Panel CoMtrucllon 

3-S-OOIA Cv-5TR·11A 5.2.5A.2 8.2.5A.2 ln .... nk Commonellty Aueumenl 

3-S-OOtB cv-sTR-111 5.2.5.4.3 8.2.5A.3 ln .... nk BUffen• Pitch SeneiUvtty Study 

3-S-010A CV-5TR·15A 5.2.4.4.3 1.2AA.3 LD2 Tenk llnpeot vs Ulllge Preaure TIS 

3-5-1101 CV-5111-151 5.2.4.4.4 1.2A.4.4 LD2 Tenk Stiff..., Pitch SeneiUvtty Study 

3-S-010C cv-sTR-1sc S.2.4A.5 8.2AA.5 LD2 Tenk All Penel 

3-S-011 cv-sTR-22 1.2.4.4.8 1.2.4.4.8 Sloah Beflle Requirements I Dealgn DellniUon 

- CV·Dio01A 5.2.4.4.2 8.2A.4.2 LD21LH2 Tenk AooMe Trede Study 

- CV·DI-011 5.2.1A.7 8.2.1A.7 All Treneportellon Atteohment Points Evsludon 

- CV-5TR·14A 5.2.3.4.1 8.2.3.4.1 Fwd Bldrt Structurel Ref Conllg Enh..,......ts 

- CV-sTR-141 5.2.4.4.1 8.2AA.1 LD2 Tenk Beruolural Ref Conllg Enhencements 

- CV-sTR·1CC S.2.5A.1 8.2.5A.1 ln .... nk Structure! Ref Conflg Enhencements 

- CV-sTR-140 5.2.8A.1 8.2.1A.1 LH2 Tri Structure~ Ref Conllg Enhenoemenla 

- CV-5TR-1CG 5.2.1A.1 8.2.1A.1 NLS Core Tenbge ExterneiHerdwere DeflniUon 

- CV-5TR·14H 5.2.1A.2 8.2.1A.2 TPB ......... Definition 

- iCV.STR-11A 1.2.1A.3 8.2.1A.3 Core Tenbp llenulealurlng Plen 

- CV.sTR-111 5.2.1AA 1.2.1AA Core Tenbp FMIItiM Plen 

- iCV-sTR·11C 1.2.1A.S 1.2.1A.5 CoreT_..T_.. ...... 

- CV..STR-110 5.2.1A.8 1.2.1A.I Transporlellon I Hencllng Req-.....nts 

- CV.STR·17A 5.2.7A.1 1.2.7A.1 Altemete Aft 8ldrt Conftgurallon 

2 
Study Task Cross Reference Matrix (by Element) 

Element TIS I TIS SUM PARA I 

TRADE STUDY TITLE HLLV 1.5ST 

Vehicle CV.STR·14G 5.2.1.4.1 8.2.1.4.1 NLS Core T•nba• Exterul H8rdw•re Definition 

AMy CV.STR·14H 5.2.1.4.2 8.2.1.4.2 TPS Reference DeftnltJon 

Eng CV.STR•11A 5.2.1.4.3 8.2.1.4.3 Core Tenbge ... nufeciUrfng Plan 

CV..STR·118 5.2.1.4.4 1.2.1.4.4 Core Tenbge F•cllldee Plan 

CV-8TA·1tsC 5.2.1.4.5 1.2.1.4.5 Core T8nbge Tooling P18n 

CV..STR·11D 5.2.1.4.1 1.2.1.4.1 TreMportetlon I Henclllng Requlrement8 

CV·DI-018 5.2.1.4.7 1.2.1.4.7 Alt Trenapol18tlon All8chment Polnt8 Ev81uatlon 

3-S-407 NIA ts.2.1A.I A*rnala 1.5 Stage SUpport Trade 

Fwd CV..STR·14A 5.2.3A.1 ts.2.3A.1 Fwd Skirt Structurel Ref Conftg Enhancement8 

Skirt 3-S-401A 5.2.3A.2 ts.2.3A.2 Fwd Skirt Alt P•nel CoMtructlon 

3-S-4018 5.2.3A.3 1.2.3.4.3 Fwd Sldrt Stlflenar Pitch Sanaltlvlty Study 

3-S-401C 5.2.3.4.4 1.2.3.4.4 Ahemate Fwd Sldrt Configuration Dellnldon 

LD2 cv-sTR-148 5.2.4.4.1 1.2.4.4.1 LD2 Tank Structural Ref Conllg Enhancemant8 

T•nk CV·DI-01A 5.2.4.4.2 8.2AA.2 LD2 T•nk Aooau Trecle Study 

3-S-010A 5.2.4.4.3 1.2.4.4.3 LD2 Tank Impact va Ullllge Preuure TIS 

3-i84108 5.2.UA UUA LD2 Tank S1111aner Pilch Sanaltlvlty Study 

3-S-010C 5.2.4.4.5 8.2A.4.1 LD2 T8nk Alt Panel 

3-S-011 5.2.4.4.1 1.2.4.4.1 Sloeh Balle.._....._ .. I O.lgn Definition 

lntartank CV..STR·14C 5.2.5A.1 t.2.5A.1 ln....,. Slruclurel Ref Conflg Enhancements 

3-8-00IA 5.2.5A.2 t.2.5A.2 ln ..... Conunondty A ... ....,, 

3-8-00H 5.2.5.4.3 1.2.1.4.3 ln .... nk Stln.n. Pilch Sanalllvlty Study 

ut2 CV-8TA·14D 5.2.1.4.1 UIA.1 ut2 Tank Structural Ref Conllg Enhancements 

T•nk CV·DI-01A 5.2.U.2 1.2.1A.2 LH2 Tank Aooau Trede SIUdy 

3-S-OOIA 5.2.U.S UIA.S T8nk Unsllh va Faclhy Impacts 

3-S-0088 5.2.UA U.IAA ut2 Tank Impact va Ullage ,._.,,.TIS 

3-S-OOIC 5.2.U.5 UIA.S LH2 Tank Sllffanar Pitch San.atlvlty Study 

3-S-OOID 5.2.U.I UIA.I LH2 Tank A1t Panel Conatrucdon 

AftSidrt CV..STR·17A 5.2.7A.1 U7A.1 A*rnala Aft Skirt Conflguretlon 

3 

-
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

4 
U\ 

"tt 

27 

0 "'" tT1 

0 

.... : 

<"-

(J 

... _.., 

;; 

s.:· 

J"!! 

!! 

f-''· 

~-: .:;. 

:a,; 

. ..., 

··- C' 

.. ~ 

r 

~ ~:J 

Jk• 

·~ !;t 

~ 

( ( 

3-S-001A 

{CV-STR-18A) 

Forward Skirt Alternate 

Panel Construction 

Prepared By: G.M.Roule' 

(504) 257-0020 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.91352 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
01 

Objective/ Approach 

Objective 

• Develop And Evaluate Forward Skirt Alternative 

Panel Construction To Determine Preferred Skin 

Concept Relative To Weight, Costs, & Manufacturing/ 

Producibility Impacts. 

Approach 

• Define Point Of Departure (P.O.D.) Forward Skirt 

Reference Geometry. 

• Identify Concept Options For Panels Using 

Various Structural Configurations. 

• Estimate Weight Differences. 

• Perform Cost Analysis. 

• Evaluate Options With Respect To Evaluation 

Criteria. 

• Select Preferred Option. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR ,. .. 152 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
-.J 

Groundrules & Assumptions 

• Use NLS Baseline Forward Skirt As Point Of 

Departure (P.O.D.). Material= Al-2219. 

Configuration As Defined by MFSC Reference 

Layout: 

Forward Skirt, NLS-0008 {Dated 10/9/91) 

Reference Trade Studies: 

CV-STR-14A " Forward Skirt Structural Design 

Configuration Enhancements". 

·External Tank Tooling Will Be Used Wherever 

Possible Per NLS Program Requirements. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.91352 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
00 

Key Issues/Evaluation Criteria 

• Manufacturing/Producibility. 

• Weight Impacts. 

• Costs. 

Manufacturlng/Producibility 

Weight Impact 

Costs Non-Recurring 

Recurring 

Use Of ET Tooling Is An NLS Program 

Requlrement.Selected Option Should Utilize 

Current Manufacturing Build Approach & 

Any Additional Weight Must Be 

Traded Against Loss Of Payload 

Lift Caoabllitv 

Minimal DDT&E Desired. 

Low Cost Per Flight Desired For 

HLLV 

::::: 

t 

=r 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMP- .,52 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( I 
\() 

O~tio11_1 -Forward Skirt Baseline Panel_(p.o.D.) 

2.50 

GMR.91352 

- •• 1.38 

\ 

.063 

Sheet Stock\ 

Formed 

Hat Section 

\ 720@ ' ... O.S.L. ~I Typ 

• Formed Metal Hat-Sections With Sheet Stock Membrane. 

• Similar To ET lntertank Design. 

• Utilizes Existing ET Processes And Tooling. 

·:·:·:·:- ::::~}I:~::::::::::::::: .. :;: :::::::::.:::::·:·-: .. •,·, ........ -.-.... ····---:-:-:-:;:;:: :::::~:::::::T.::::· .. :::: .. , ::::: :::::·:::: -:-·-::-:-:.;-:.-::-··· .:.;:-::=::.:: :::::.=::: :·::/:::::;::.;:.;.:::.-·· 

15° 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Option 2 - Blade-Stiffened Panel 

.070 .114~~-

---· ----==-:::=:tr==- I I '\ r 

2.020 

\ 2.826 1 ~ Typ ~ 

-

0 

•Integrally Machined Panel With Longitudinal Blade-Stiffening. 

• Does Not Utilize Some Existing ET Processes And Tooling. 

• Design Consistant With Maximum Axial Load. 

-:;:::·:· ::::::::::;:~::::::::;:::;::::::::::::-- ::·::::::::~;:;:;:;:;::::::::::::::::::::::·:·. ;::::: .·:·=· :::=::::::::;:;: .. ::::::-::~:::::::::::::. :::=:::::~::::::::::::::::: . ,:;: ,· ;:;::·:::: ;: ;: .. _.;::=:-:·=:::;.;:;:;::=::.··::·.· 

MARTIN MARIErrA 

GMR.91352 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ' 
( 

Manufacturing/Producibilitv Summar¥ 

• Baseline I 

• Baseline Slightly Difficult Similar To Option 1 But Process Now I • Can Use 

• Similar To lntertank (Baseline} Developed On ET lntertank lntertank Tooling Etc. 

• Similar Mechical 

Easier Option 2 • Less Fabrication Assembly Same As (Smooth Machined Blade 

Baseline O.S.L.} Stiffened Panel • Some Existing • 1/F At Tank Attach 

I Tooling Available - Is More Complex ..... I 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.91352 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
-

N 

Weight Impact Summary 

GMP ... 152 

I 

Option 1 

(Baseline) 

Option 2 

Machined Blade 

Stiffened Panel 

1521.0 

1586.5 

P.O.D. 

+65.5 

( 

0.0 

4.3% 

Increase 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

{ 
-\Jo) 

Evaluation Summary 

Option 1 

(Baseline) 

Option 2 

Machined Blade 

Stiffened Panel 

GMR.91352 

Baseline 

65.51bs. 

Increase 

( 

Baseline 

Less Fabrication 

Simple Welding W/ 

Some Existing 

Tooling. 

Good Synergism 

With E.T. 

( 

MARTIN MARIE7TA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
-.,. 

Conclusions 

• Option 1 - Currently NLS Baseline, Is Synergistic With 

External Tank, And Requires The Least Development. 

• Option 2- Has Slight Weight Increase, May Be Easier To Apply 

TPS, Assembly Less Complex Than Baseline. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.01352 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( I l 
..... 

""' 

( ( ( 

Recommendations 

• Consider Alternate Fabrication Approaches If Alternate Proposed 

Forward Skirt Configuration (Ref. Trade# 3-S-001C) Is Adopted . 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.91352 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1 !92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.3.4.2 Alternate Panel Construction (#CV-STR-018-A) 

Objective 

This trade study developed and evaluated alternative construction methods for the forward skin 

skin panels. 

Approach 

(a) Define a point of departure forward skin panel. 

(b) Identify concept option for skin panels using an alternate structural configuration. 

(c) Estimate weight differences. 

(d) Assess producibility impacts. 

(e) Evaluate options with respect to evaluation criteria. 

(f) Select preferred option. 

Options Studied 

Option 1 - Fabricated mech. attached to hat sections with sheet stock skin (Cycle 0 Baseline). 

Option 2- Integrally machined panel with internal longitudinal blade-stiffeners. 

Key Study Results 

Option 1 - (Baseline) is synergistic with External Tank due to its lntertank-like design. 

Option 2 - has a 4.3 per cent increase in weight. but local sizing requirements due to internal 

stiffening would probably increase weight even further. Internal stiffening was chosen to minimize 

TPS application impacts. However this option can save fabrication efforts. Panels could be either 

mechanically attached or welded similar to L021LH2 barrds. 

Conclusions 

The fabricated hat section and sheet construction is the preferred approach due to it's lower weight. 

ease of TPS appli-cation, and potential for assembly using ET tooling. However, since the 

Intertank is a labor-intensive construction, and the forward skin is similar in construction to the 

Intenank, the forward skirt should be considered as a good candidate for producibility 

enhancements. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain Option 1 as Baseline for Cycle 0. Consider alternatative fabrication approaches if 

alternate proposed forward skin configuration per Section 5.2.3.4.4 is adopted. 

16 

·
--

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6. 2. 3. 4. 2 Alternate Panel Construction (#CV -STR-018-A) 

Objective 

Page 1 

This trade study developed and evaluated alternative construction methods for the forward skin 

skin panels. 

Approach 

(a) Define a point of departure forward skin panel. 

(b) Identify concept option for skin panels using an alternate structural configuration. 

(c) Estimate weight differences. 

(d) Assess producibility impacts. 

(e) Evaluate options with respect to evaluation criteria. 

(f) Select preferred option. 

Options Studied 

Option 1 ·Fabricated mech. attached to hat sections with sheet stock skin (Cycle 0 Baseline). 

Option 2 - Integrally machined panel with internal longitudinal blade-stiffeners. 

Key Study Results 

Option 1 -(Baseline) is synergistic with External Tank due to its Intertank-like design. 

Option 2 - has a 4.3 per cent increase in weight, but local sizing requirements due to internal 

stiffening would probably increase weight even further. Internal stiffening was chosen to minimize 

TPS application impacts. However this option can save fabrication effons. Panels could be either 

mechanically attached or welded similar to L02/LH2 barrels. 

Conclusions 

The fabricated hat section and sheet construction is the preferred approach due to it's lower weight, 

ease of TPS appli-cation, and potential for assembly using ET tooling. However, since the 

Intenank is a labor-intensive construction, and the forward skin is similar in construction to the 

Intertank, the forward skin should be considered as a good candidate for producibility 

enhancements. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain Option 1 as Baseline for Cycle 0. Consider altematative fabrication approaches if 

alternate proposed forward skin configuration per Section 6.2.3.4.4 is adopted. 

17 
·-

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFr BLANK 

18 
~, 

) 

"" 0 

9 

2 

C) 

iJ 

l;p 

(.,") 

ITI 

CJ 

rl:a 

2 

~ 

z 

0 

-4 

~ 

r 

~ 0 

-\0 

( 

Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study 

3-S-001 8 (CV-STR-188)- Fwd Skirt 

3-S-0108 (CV-STR-158)- L02 Tank 

3-S-0098 (CV-STR-198)- lntertank 

3-S-OOSC (CV-STR-20C)- LH2 Tank 

Prepared By: Dlllp Dudgaonkar 

(504)257-0076 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8,1992 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Objective and Approach 

Objective 

• Evaluate the configuration if Revising the Stiffener Pitch will 

produce a lower weight design 

Approach 

• Use PANDA II Optimisation software 

• Demonstrate PANDA II validity by correlating STAGS Program 

Results used for ET panels 

• Evaluate Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity on: 

• Forward Skirt Skin Panels 

• L02 Barrel Panels 

• lntertank Skin Panels 

• LH2 Barrel Panels 

• Prepare Conclusions and Recommendations 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

{ ( i 
N 

-

STAGS-C Vs. PANDA II Study 

ET LH2Tank STAGS PANDA II 

Thickness Nxlcrlt Knockdown Nxlallow Stresses NX 

fnomlnan In lblln Factor lb/ln In strlnaer lblln 

0.149 1193 0.514 613 3533 1193 

1193 

613 

0.141 1082 0.518 560 3382 1082 

1082 

560 

0.132 983 0.523 514 3260 983 

983 

514 

- ---

M.S MSGEN 

FSGEN General Stresses 

lnstabllltv In strlnaer 

2.0 -0.29 

1.0 0.42 

2.0 0.38 3492 

2.0 -0.25 

1.0 0.51 

2.0 0.48 3342 

2.0 -0.21 

1.0 0.59 

2.0 0.52 3232 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

/ 

Panda II Optimisation Study 

Factors of Safey used in Panda Optimization 

• For General Instability 

• For Panel Instability 

(FS GEN) 

(FSPAN) 

= 2.0 

= 2 •• 0 

• Minimum load factor of local buckling (FSLOC) = 0. 72 

(allowing the skin to buckle after the limit load) 

• Factor of safety for Stress (FSSTR) = 1.0 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

I 
N 

~ 

( 

Panda II Optimization Study - Forward Skirt 

0.18 T 

0.16 ..;..------· 

0.14 11- -

0.12 ·• 

I 

·- ..... 0.1 c 

- I .... 

L. 

~ 0.08 .. I 

0.06 

0.04 

0.02 

0 

4.0 5.0 

Forward Sk1rt 

Tbar vs Str1nger Spac1ng 

·-

·-

6.0 7.0 8.0 

Strtnger Spactng <tn> 

9.0 

-· 

• 

Nx lb/ln 

1 -·--15oo 

1 ---o-- 2ooo 

I -•-2500 

10.0 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
to.) 

~ 

( 

Panda II Optimization Study - Forward skirt 

~1.3"~ 

~ ~ t 

2.59" 

JJ 

0.071 t 1 ~r I \ 214" 

4.43" ~ 0.056 

-- ...._2.0 ~ ... 3.2 .... 

Current Design Panda II Optimized Design Optimized Design with 

(Nx = 2000 lblln ult) Modifications 

Stringer Spacing = 7 .33" Stringer Spacing = 5.0" Stringer Spacing = 5.0" 

Frame Spacing = 48.0" Frame Spacing = 48.0" Frame Spacing = 48.0" 

Tbar:0.151" Tbar:0.139" Tbar:0.149" -- ·-·-

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( l 
( ( 

Panda II Optimization Study - L02 Tank 

L02Tank 

Tbar Vs Strtnger Spactng 

0.18 

0.16 

0.14 Nx 1b/tn 

0.12 

t,) -•-gss 

""' ....... 0.1 c: 

-

_. ---o--1345 L. 

~ 0.08 ~ -•-1600 

0.06 

0.04 

0.02 

0 

4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 

Strtnger Spactng <tn> 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Stiffener Size and Pitch Sensitivity Trades - L02 Tank 

I - -- I 

--.) 0.52" ~ 

:;;::::a 

J.--1.25 -.1 

L 'T 

1.25" 

~1 

1.80" 2.10w 

• 

L02Tank 

~ 

Current Design Optimized Design Optimized Design 

Nx:96() lb/ln Nx:1345 lb/in 

Stringer Spaclng:1 0.832" Stringer Spaclng:4.0" Stringer Spacing:4.0" I 

Frame Spaclng:34.9" I 

Frame Spaclng:34.9" Frame Spacing:34.9" I 

I 

Tskln:0.170 Tskln:0.067 Tskin:0.075 ! 

I 

Tbar:0.193 Tbar:0.0963 Tbar:0.104 

-- - -

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( l 
( 

Panda II Optimization Study - lntertank 

lntertank 

Tbar Vs Str1nger Spac1ng 

o.3 T 

0.29 .. 

0.28 

Nx lb/ln 

. 0.27 

0.26 -•--4400 

N &: ...... :e 0.25 ---Q--5200 

J 

0.24 -•-5600 

0.23 

0.22 

0.21 

0.2 

4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 

Stringer Spacing (In) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Panda II Optimization Study - lntertank 

r--l.J·~ 0.747" 

l 

2.59. 

2.91" 2.79" 

0.071 t 0.075 

.... 4.4Y ~2.0 ...... 2.0 

~ 

Current Design Panda II Optimized Design Panda II Optimized Design (Nx = 4400 lb/ln ult) (Nx = 5200 lb/in ult) 

Stringer Spacing = 7 .33" Stringer Spacing = 7 .33" Stringer Spacing = 1 0.0" I 

I 

. 

Frame Spacing = 45.0" Frame Spacing = 45.0" Frame Spacing = 45.0" I 

! 

! 

Tbar:0.238" Tbar:0.21" Tbar:0.241 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

{ I ( 
Panda II Optimization Study - LH2 Tank 

LH2 TANK 

Tbar Vs Str1nger Spac1ng 

0.25 

0.2 

I ~ .... Nx lb/ In 

0.15 -1-

-·----- ~ I --•--1700 

~ ...... 

c: 

-.... ·- I ---o-2soo L.. 

------·-

lV 

.a 

.... I -•-3250 0.1 ~· 

0.05 

0 +------+------+------+------+------r------r------r----_, 

2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 8.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 

Stringer Spacing (In) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SVSTEMS 
Stiffener Size and Pitch Sensitivity Trades - LH2 Tank I - -- I -.J o.s· ~ 

::;;:::::J 

~1.25 --..J 

I 1.82" 'T 

1.25. 

~L 

1.1o· 

* 

LH2Tank I 

~ Current Design Optimized Design Optimized Design I 

Nx:2&001blln Nx:3250 lb/in I 

I 

Stringer Spaclng:1 0.832" Stringer Spaclng:2.0" Stringer Spacing:2.0" I 

I 

I 

Frame Spaclng=2&.7" Frame Spaclng=26. 7" Frame Spacing:2&. 7" I 

I 

I 

Tskln:0.170 Tskln=0.061 Tskln:0.0&7 I 

Tbar:0.193 Tbar:0.108 Tbar:0.123 

- --- -

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~VSTEMS 

( 

l 
\J,) 

-

( 

Conclusions 

Forward Skirt and lntertank 

Weight sensitivity data was generated for varying stringer pitch for the reference 

configuration skin/hat fabricated construction approach 

Forward Skirt 

When modified to produce practical designs the PANDA II minimum weight configuration 

did not offer significant weight savings to the baseline. 

lntertank 

The modified PANDA II minimum weight configuration was slightly lighter when 

· compared to the baseline configuration. However, the sizing is close to the minimum 

weight for a common liT driven by HLLV loads. 

L02 Tank and LH2 Tank 

Weight sensitivity data was generated for varying stringer pitch for the reference 

configuration machined longitudinal Tee stiffened panel • 

L02Tank 

The PANDA II minimum weight configuration offers significant weight savings to the 

baseline configuration. However, It requires a thicker billet with closer stiffener pitch 

LH2Tank 

The PANDA II minimum weight configuration offers significant weight savings to the 

baseline configuration. However It requires a thicker billet with stiffener pitch too close 

to be practical. A slightly greater pitch must be chosen resulting In slightly higher panel 

weight. MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
w 

N 

( 

Recommendations 

Forward Skirt 

Maintain the reference configuration pitch and stringer size. During cycle 1, study 

other types of stringer sections such as blade, tee and Z section to see if they offer 

weight and produclblllty advantages. 

lntertank 

Maintain the reference configuration pitch and stringer size. During cycle 1, study 

other types of stringer sections when defining the 'stand alone' 1.5 stage intertank 

defined In section Trade Study # 3-8-009A 

L02Tank 

Maintain the reference configuration pitch and stringer size. During cycle 1, study 

alternate barrel panel with reduced stringer spacing and varying frame spacing 

LH2Tank 

Maintain the reference configuration pitch and stringer size. During cycle 1, study 

alternate barrel panel with reduced stringer spacing • Also study varying frame 

spacing to define a barrel configuration with the minimum total frame plus barrel 

weight 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( l 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.3.4.3 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity (# 3-S-0018) 

Objective 

To develop the weight sensitivities of the forward skin if pitch and stringer size are varied. 

Approach 

(a) Use current configurations as baseline 

(b) Use the Panda D program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

(c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

(d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

(e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The current hat section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda II was used to 

optimize stringer size for varying pitch and load. One intermediate ring frame is used to provide 

stability. The weight (t bar) trend shows that an optimum occurs at a stringer pitch of 5.0 inches 

for an axial compression load of 2000 lb/inch. However the optimum stringer section indicated by 

Panda needs an increase in the attachment flange width to provide room and edge distance for the 

skin/stringer attachments. Once this modification is incorporated the current reference becomes 

close to optimum. 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch while maintaining the reference 

configuration skin/hat section fabricated construction approach. When modified to produce a 

practical design, the Panda ll optimized configuration does not offer any significant weight savings 

compared to the baseline configuration. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration Fwd skin pitch and stringer size. During cycle 1, study other 

types of stringer sections such as I section and Z sections to see it they offer weight and 

producibility advantages. 

33 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge Page 2 

Stringer Sp8cing vs Tb8r 

0.18 T .~ Nx lblin 0.16 - • 0.14 _,______. --1500 0.12 • .. 0.1 • ---D-2000 • 0.08 ~ 

0.06 -•-2500 0.04 

o.oz 

0 

Stringer Stringer Stringer Stringer 

Sp-.cing Spacitg Sp.cing Specing 

•<4.0 .s.o ·7 .33 •10.0 

~.3'~ 

Current Dealgn Panda II Optlmlud Dealgn Optlmlud De81gn wtth 

(Nx • 2000 lblln un) Modification• 

Stringer Spacing • 7 .33" Stringer Speclng • 5.D" Stringer Spacing • 5.0" 

Frame Spacing • 48.0" Frame Spacing • 48.G" Frame Spacing • 48.G" 

Tbar.0.151" l'bllr.O. 131" Tbar.o.1." 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for mere detailed results 

- 34 
-

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.3.4.3 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity (# 3-S-OOlB) 

Objective 

To develop the weight sensitivities of the forward skirt if pitch and stringer size are varied. 

Approach 

(a) Use current configurations as baseline 

(b) Use the Panda ll program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

(c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

(d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

(e) Prepare conclusions and reconunendations 

Key Study Results 

The current hat section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda II was used to 

optimize stringer size for varying pitch and load. One intermediate ring frame is used to provide 

stability. The weight (t bar) trend shows that an optimum occurs at a stringer pitch of 5.0 inches 

for an axial compression load of 2000 lb/inch. However the optimum stringer section indicated by 

Panda needs an increase in the attachment flange width to provide room and edge distance for the 

skin/stringer attachments. Once this modification is incorporated the current reference becomes 

close to optimum. 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch while maintaining the reference 

configuration skin/hat section fabricated construction approach. When modified to produce a 

practical design,the Panda n optimized configuration does not offer any significant weight savings 

compared to the baseline configuration. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration Fwd skin pitch and stringer size. During cycle 1, study other 

types of stringer sections such as I section and Z sections to see it they offer weight and 

producibility advantages. 

35 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Stringer Spacing vs Tbar 

0.18 T Nx lb/in 0.16 • 0.14 :..-------· 0.12 .. -•-1500 

~ • 

0.1 • --o--zooo .A 0.08 ~ 

0.06 -•-zsoo 0.04 

0.02 

0 

Stringer Stringer Stringer StrinGer 

Spacing Spa.cing Spa.cing SpliCing 

.. 41.0 :5.0 .. 7.33 •10.0 

~·3~ 

Current Design Panda II Optimized Design Optimized Design wHh 

(Nx • 2000 lblln un) Modifications 

Stringer Spacing • 7 .33" Stringer ap.clng • 5.D" Stringer Spacing • 5.0" 

Frame Spacing = 48.0" Frame Spacing • 48.D" Frame Spacing • 48.0" 

Tbar.0.151" lber.0.13r Tbar.O. 1 41" 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

36 
~ 

( 

3-S-001C 

(CV-DI-02) 

Alternate Fwd Skirt 

Configuration Definition 

Prepared By : Wayne Waguespack 

(504)257 -0032 

Approved By: R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

!HARTIN IHARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Issues And Objective 3-S-001-C 

Issue 

• Core Stage Cannot Be Fully Checked Out At Build Site 

Because Some Avionics And Propulsion Components 

Are Located In The lnterstage Of The Encapsulated 

Payload. 

Objective 

• Determine If An Alternate Concept For The Fwd Skirt I 

~ lnterstage Would Permit Full Core Stage IACO. 

IY7ART/N MARIETTA 

WRW 91350 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 

' I 
~ 

Approach 

• Obtain Definition Of The Reference Configuration. 

• Develope Concept For Packaging Launch Vehicle 

Avionics And RCS In An Expanded Fwd Skirt. 

• Evaluate Against Reference Configuration. 

• Prepare Conclusions And Recommendations. 

3-S-001-C 

IJI7ARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91350 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Reference Fwd Skirt Configuration 3-S-001-C 

lnterstage 

(Part Of Encapsulated. 

STA 2284.80 · Payload) 

~ Launch Vehicle Avionics 

RCS Tankage ---... 

STA 2473.80 --f:-=--!:::::=~---~------4 

STA 2569.80 --1--------------l 

WR)N 91350 

And RCS Packaged In 

lnterstage 

"'----- Fwd Skirt 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

l 
~ 

..... 

( 

Ref Configuration Avionics 3-S-001-C 

Quantity And Location 

Box Description *Size Weight Aft **Central CTV 

Batteries (Avionics) 20 X 17 X 12 135 2 . 2 4 

Batteries (EMA) 11 X 21X 8 125 ***16 OR ****24 

Power Distribution 20 X 16 X 12 100 2 2 

Load Distribution 20 X 17 X 8 75 2 

Inertial Navigation Unit I CPU 11 X 17.5 X 8 67 3 

Rate Gyro Unit 7.6 X 8.25 X 6.25 15 3 

Antenna Gimbal Drive 6X8X6 50 1 

Proximity Operations Sensor 12X14X8 110 1 

Earth Sensor 8X8X7 15 2 

GPS And Pre Amp 7 X 11 X 7 15 2 

Sun Sensor 4X4X4 2 2 I 

CAM Hardware 8 X 10 X 8 30 2 

Remote Voter Unit 6 X 10 X 6 35 6 4 3 

MDU/RDU 8 X 12 X 8 12 2 4 10 

Engine 1/F Unit 8 X 10 X 6 20 4 

Mechanism Control Electronics 8 X 10 X 8 20 2 

VIdeo Camera 4X8X6 5 2 

Lights 6X6X6 10 2 

Pan I Tilt I zoom Mech 90 1 

Navigation Lights 3X3X3 1 6 

Navlaatlon Llaht Converter 4 X4X2 2 2 

S Band Transponder 9 X 16 X 4 15 2 

Ku Band TransPOnder 4 X 13 X 6 15 2 

Signal Processor 15 X 8 X 8 15 2 

RF Combiner (Central) 8X6X2 12 1 

RF combiner (Proximity Operations) 8X6X2 9 2 

Po~er Amplifier 12X14X2 lO 2 2 

* First 2 Numbers Indicate The Mounting Surface Area. 

**Central Avionics Are Located On The CTV For The HLLV And The lnterstage For The Stage 1.5. 

*** HLLV. 

**** Stage 1.5. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW .NLS.91350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
f:; 

Alternate Fwd Skirt Configuration 3-S-001-C 

~i~~\ , CoreStage 

RCS ~ fYl 

WRW.~'' - 'l1350 

f 

Proposed Fwd Skirt Configuration 

f 

Avionics 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

I 
~ 

1,.) 

Alternate Fwd Skirt Configuration 3-S-001-C 

r93.70 

STA 2569.80 STA 2379.70 

WRW.NLS.91350 

Avionics And RCS Contained 

In Proposed Fwd Skirt , Allowing 

Complete Check Out Of Core Stage 

IJitART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
t 

Opti~ns Comparision 

' 

Avionics And RCS 

Packaged IN lnterstage 

3-S-001-C 

' Encapsulated 

Payload J-----r--~---- STA 2284.80 ----r-------\ 

Encapsulated 

Payload 

Bolted Interface 

Fwd IIUlHJI Between Skirt And 

~~~~ ~rum ~11111111111111111111111~1~001~ lnters~ge ------

1 

i~~ Core T 

_ ij STA 2473.80 ~lllll1llllllill_i 0 

lge ~ I 

Reference 

Configuration 

WRW.r <}1350 

RCS And Core Stage 

Avionics Packaged 

In Fwd Skirt 

Alternate 

Configuration 

Core 

Stage 

! 

MARTIN MARIE7'TA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

l 
( 

Conclusions And Recommendations 3-S-001-C 

Conclusions 

• Full IACO Of Core Stage 

- Packaging Of Avionics Feasible. 

- Requires Relocation Of Interface Joint. 

• CTV Arrangement And Installation Scenario Unaffected. 

Recommendations 

• Study The Proposed Alternate Configuration In Cycle 1. ~ 

·IJ'tARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

WRW.NLS.91350 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

S .2 .3 .4 .4 Alternate Fwd Skirt Configuration (#3-C-OOlC) 

Objective 

Detennine if an alternate concept for the forward skin and intertank would pennit full core stage 

IACO at build site. 

Issue 

Core stage cannot be fully checked out at build site because some avionics and propulsion 

components are located in the interstage which is not part of the core stage. The interstage is 

required-as part of the encapsulated payload concept and would be mated to the launch vehicle at 

KSC. 

Approacb 

(a) Obtain definition of cycle 0 reference configuration. 

(b) Develop concept for packaging launch vehicle avionics and RCS in an expanded fwd skirt. 

(c) Evaluate against ref configuration. 

(d) Prepare conclusions and recommendations. 

Options Studied 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 baseline 

Option 2 - Alternate concept- interface joint relocated to sta 2379.70, avionics and RCS packaged 

in new extended fwd skirt. 

Key Study Results 

The RCS tankage size and location requires the skirt to be extended approx 8 feet to provide the 

required packaging volume. This extended skirt tben bas sufficient space to package the launch 

vehicle avionics. The new configuration still provides adequate clearance to allow the CTV engines 

to occupy the inner volume. Moving the field joint to its new location reduces the interface diameter 

which should result in a reduced weigbL 

Conclusions 

The alternate concept will permit full IACO of Core Stage. The concept provides adequate space 

for packaging of avionics and propulsion components. It does however require the relocation of 

the interface joint and reduces the length of the intcrstage. 

Study Recommendations 

Study the alternate configuration further in cycle 1. 

46 
-

National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Packllge Page 2 

lnterstage (part of 

encapsulated payload) 

Launch vehicle 

avionics and RC~ 

packaged in 

interstage 

STA 2473.80 ---.t~~.....:::::::::::::...::!...:::=:~-~ ----.-1 

RCS tankage t!·:rt 

STA 2569.80 --1--------------1 ___ J._ 

Cycle 0 baseline 

STA 2379.70 f 

189.70 

fwd skirt 

STA2569.80 L 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

47 

Launch vehicle 

avionics and RCS 

packaged in 

proposed fwd 

skirt allowing 

complete check-oL 

of core tankage at 

build site 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.3.4.4 Alternate Fwd Skirt Configuration (#3-C-OOlC) 

Objective 

Determine if an alternate concept for the forward skin and intenank would permit full core stage 

IACO at build site. 

Issue 

Core stage cannot be fully checked out at build site because some avionics and propulsion 

components are located in the interstage which is not part of the core stage. The interstage is 

required as part of the encapsulated payload concept and would be mated to the launch vehicle at 

KSC. 

Approach 

(a) Obtain definition of cycle 0 reference configuration. 

(b) Develop concept for packaging launch vehicle avionics and RCS in an expanded fwd skirt. 

(c) Evaluate against ref configuration. 

(d) Prepare conclusions and recommendations. 

Options Studied 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 baseline 

Option 2- Alternate concept- interface joint relocated to sta 2379.70, avionics and RCS packaged 

in new extended fwd skin. 

Key Study Results 

The RCS tankage size and location requires the skin to be extended approx 8 feet to provide the 

required packaging volume. This extended skin then has sufficient space to package the launch 

vehicle avionics. The new configuration still provides adequate clearance to allow the crv engines 

to occupy the inner volume. Moving the field joint to its new location miuces the interface diameter 

which should result in a reduced weight. 

Conclusions 

The alternate concept will permit full lA CO of Core Stage. The concept provides adequate space 

for packaging of avionics and propulsion components. It does however require the relocation of 

the interface joint and reduces the length of the mtcrstage. 

Study Recommendations 

Study the alternate configuration further in cycle 1. 

48 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero 

lnterstage (part of 

encapsulated payload) 

Structures Data Package 

Launch vehicle 

avionics and RC~ 

packaged in 

interstage 

ST A 2473.80 ---.t~ll!!:;.....:::::=:::::...~:=:::__~ ---,T""" 

RCS tan~e -- :·:rt 

STA 2569.80 --1-------------f ---'LCycle 0 baseline 

Sf A 2379.70 

1 

189.70 

fwd skirt 

STA2569.80 L 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

49 

Launch vehicle 

avionics and RCS 

packaged in 

proposed fwd 

skirt allowing 

complete check-ol 

of core tankage at 

build site 

Page 2 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFI' BLANK 

-

so 
·~ 

0 

§ 

-.. 

~ 

I 

~ (") 

a 

2 

G) 

"'C 

:g 

G1 

1'1 

OJ 

r 

)> 

2 

~ 

:z 

0 

-i 

::!:! 

r-

~ 0 

v. 

-

( 

3-S-007 

(CV-STR-21) 

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade 

Prepared By : Ed Phillips 

(504) 257-5540 

Tom Severs 

(504) 257-5226 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

Approved By: M. A. Simms 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

EP/TJS-81-143 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

N 

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade 3-S-007 

Objective 

• Develop impacts to the 1.5 stage when supported on the 

launch pad at the forward SRB thrust fittings instead of at the 

base of the vehicle. 

Approach 

• Review requirements, set ground rules. 

• Determine critical load conditions and support loads. 

• Review reference vehicle (common core) structure for critical 

conditions and loads. 

• Identify impacts to reference vehicle. 

• Evaluate weight impacts/savings for common core vehicle. 

• Perform a dynamic assessment of the concepts 

• Document results. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

EPITJE' 43 

I / l 
(A 

w 

Ground Rules 3-S-007 

• Reference Configuration definition & weight per MSFC baseline 

dated 9/20/91 

• Tank ullage pressure profile similar to ET (i.e., 17.3 psig min at liftoff) 

• Use 18° cone angle off centerline for clearance 

• Hold down for 1 OOo/o engine thrust on all engines 

• Duplicate SRB stiffness for support structure 

• Lateral loads reacted at ASRB fwd thrust fittings and vertical 

shear pins in base of engine module 

• Rotation of supports delayed until thrust ball fittings have cleared 

thrust fittings on 1.5 stage 

• Ground Winds as per NASA Cycle 0 loads issued 5-91, B. Graham 

to P. Thompson 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

EPIV JS-IB 1-143 
~ 

/ 

Alternate Hold Down Concept For 1.5 Stage 3-S-007 

Reference 

.-MLP 

EPITJS. •43 

Alternate 

Simulated -\ ASRB Support 

Rotates for '~, 

Clearance \ \ 

\ \ 

MLP 

' \ VA, 

\ \ \ \ \ \ 

\ 

18deg 

I 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

I 
VI 

VI 

Launch Pad Support Details 3-S-007 

EPIT JS-8 1-143 

(\ 

\ \ 

\ \ 

·~~ I I 

I 

Supt Hinged on lnb'd ~+--+-----i--Hold Downs- 4 Places 

Vert. Shear Pins - 4 places 

'---------+-r--Max wind produces 10 Kips 

of Lateral Shear (Limit) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
"" 0\ 

1.5 Staae Fwd Suooort Loads 3-S-007 

Case 1: 

1.5 Stage • On Pad. Fully 

Loaded. No Wind 

+X 

+980K +980K 

-1960K 

All loads shown are Umlt 

EPITJ!' '43 

I 

Case 2: 

prelaunch. t ·1.0 sec. 100o/o power on 6 

Engines w/1.1 Dynamic Factor. No Wind 

+X 

- 670K 

-1960K 

'-----' t I MLP 

+3300K THRUST 

(Dyn Factor=1.1) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

I 
~ 

( 

1.5 Stage Fwd Support Loads 3-S-007 

Case3: 

1.5 Stage • On Pad. Fully 

Loaded. 60 Kt. Wind 

+X 

100 Kips 

~-

~ • 110K 

·1960K 

All loads shown are Limit 

EPIT JS·B 1·143 

Case 4: 

Prelaunch. t= -1.0 sec. 100% Power on 6 

Engines w/1.1 dynamic factor. 30 Kt. Wind 

+X 

25 Kips 

• 28K --

-670K 

-1960K 

. ttaM ...... 3 K 

t I MLP 

3300K THRUST 

(Dyn Factor=1.1) 

MARTIN MARIETTA ----------- ---

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Vt 

00 

Alternate 1.5 Sta_a_e_ S_upport Trade 

Impacts to 1.5 Stage Vehicle 

• Crossbeam put back into lntertank with full thrust fittings 

• Due to the hold down load on the lntertank: 

3-S-007 

• Increase diameter of Fwd SRB Bolt by 1.0 in for the hold down load 

- Increase Thrust Fittings and inserts to accommodate the larger bolt 

- Add thickness to Outboard Lower Cap on Crossbeam 

- Add thickness to Crossbeam caps at center half of span 

- Add longerons Inside lntertank fore and aft of the Crossbeam 

- Strengthen lntertank frames aft of the SRB fitting 

- Revise LH2 tank Barrel Panels and delete intermediate frames 

- May require stiffening to maintain the LOX aft dome/SRB beam 

clearance 

• Redesign the propulsion module since the hold down loads are at 

Station 2985 

- Remove hold down structure 

- Add 4 lateral support shear pin receptacles to the engine module 

for Prelaunch support 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

EPITJ' '43 

I 

{ 
v. 

\0 

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade 3-S-007 

LH2 Tank Weight Comparison with Alternate Support 

• Unpressurized Tanks @Prelaunch 

• Min. Ullage Pressure = 17.3 psig at Launch 

8 lntennedlate ff----~--------r-----fl Tber .222 ..... ··-······ ···-· ~-----+--------J-----J13 ln;::::late Frames .... ~----·· ..... Tber .198 ---------------------- Tber .196 

9 lntennedlate ...... 1 lntennedlate 

Frames ~---- -------- Frame 

~----~---·····•··---~~ Tber .171 

Typical 

9 Intermediate rr~:::~~:::::t:::::~~ \ ~---··+···----+··--fl1 ln~::e:late Frames 

Tbar .206 

8 Intermediate 

Frames ~-----~--------1-----111 ln~::e:late 

2 Intermediate 

Fr. 4058 , No Intermediate 

Frames Frames 

Reference Alternate Support 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

EP/T JS-B 1-143 
E 

Alter'!~t~ _1.5 _Stage Support Trade 3-S-007 

Common Core Weight Comparisons (17.3 pig at LO) 

EPfTJ~ '43 

I 

Alternate Configuration A 

• Unpressurlzed Tanks at Prelaunch 

• Min. Ullage Pressure = 17.3 pslg at Launch 

Ahemate Conftgundlon A 

Supported at Llunch by 

the SRB CrossbeMI 

Reference Conflgundlon 

Supported at Llunch by the 

/All~~ 

ComDOnents 

lntertank 

LH2Tank 

Thrust Structure 

Contingency 

Total Dry Wt. 

l 

Common Core Vehicle 

Mass Properties (Wt. LBS) 

Reference Ahernate A (Deltas) 

12683 14683 +2000 

39221 34421 -4800 

108125 106325 -1800 

(Included) (Included) -240 

204290 199250 -5040 

MARTIN IWARIETTA 

' 
0'\ 

-

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade 3-S-007 

Common Core Weight Comparison (25 pig at LO) 

IE?trJS-IBH43 

Alternate Configuration B 

• Unpressurized Tanks at Prelaunch 

• Min. Pressure = 25 psig at Launch 

AHernate Configuration B 

Supported at Launch 

by the SRB Crossbeam 

CUrrent Configuration 

Supported at Launch by the 

/Aft T..-n Longorons 

Comoonents 

lntertank 

LH2Tank 

Thrust Structure 

Contingency 

Total Dry WI. 

Common Core Vehicle 

Mass Properties (Wt. LBS) 

Reference Alternate f1 (Deltas) 

12683 14683 +2000 

39221 32921 -6300 

108125 106325 -1800 

(Included) (Included) -240 

204290 197950 -6340 

MARTIN IWARIETTA 
~ 

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade 

Launch Off Forward Support - Dynamic Assessment 

• Background 

3-S-007 

- Vehicles have been held down at aft end until thrust builds up and 

then released, e.g., Saturn V 

- - Vehicles have been flown off supports, e.g. Shuttle 

- - In each case stored strain energy has led to problems 

- The loads problems were worked with fixes 

- - Extrusion pins slowed down energy release on Saturn 

- - SRB ignition delay reduced strain energy on Shuttle 

• New approach to hold down leads to new conditions 

- Larger strain energy in vehicle at Lift Off - Larger strain energy in hold down structure, more powerful liquid 

engines, smaller total vehicle weight 

• New point/type of release 

- Blowing bolts at front end would release strain energy very rapidly 

-This "step change" in load in FWD lntertank would be more dramatic 

than the present shuttle. MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

EPfTJf '43 

l I l 
~ 

Alternate 1.5 Stag~ Support Trade 

Launch Off Forward Support - Dynamic Assessment 

• Assessment 

3-S-007 

- This system could be made to work but it would be difficult - The implications are that the launch transient would be more 

severe and the Lift Off loads would be higher 

• Primary Concerns 

- The way to lower loads is to lower the strain energy at liftoff, Shuttle 

approach, or slow down the launch (Saturn approach). 

- The strain energy In the vehicle can only be reduced by making 

it stiffer, and therefore, heavier, which is undesirable. 

- Slowing the transient is possible, but it involves maintaining the 

vehicle in close proximity to the tower for a longer period of time, and 

this is certainly not desirable. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

EIP/lJS-81-~43 
~ 

Alternate 1.5 Stage Support Trade 3-S-007 

Conclusions 

• Up to 5000 Lbs. can be saved by supporting the 1.5 Stage 

vehicle at the forward SRB fittings. 

• Dramatic Increase In design and launch complexity, particularly 

In the area of lift off dynamics and pin retraction. 

Recommendations 

• Consider redesigning the lntertank as a more practical weight 

savings option. 

• Maintain the baseline approach for holding down the 1.5 Stage (i. e. 

Aft hold down on the Propulsion Module). 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

EPITJS ·43 

' 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge 

6.2.1.4.8 Alternate Hold Down for 1.5 Stage (3-S-007) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Evaluate the benefits and impacts to the 1.5 Stage vehicle when it is supported on the launch pad at 

the forward SRB fittings instead of being cantilevered from the base of the propulsion module. 

Approach 

(a) Review requirements, establish ground rules 

(b) Detennine critical load conditions and support loads 

(c) Review reference vehicle (Common Core) for critical conditions and loads 

(d) Identify impacts to the reference vehicle 

(e) Evaluate weight impacts/savings for the common core vehicle 

(f) Perform dynamic assessment of concepts 

(g) Document resulJS 

Options Studied 

GSE structure simulating the SRB stiffness would attach to the forward SRB fittings (Station 

2985) and aft SRB fittings (Station 4058). The GSE strUcture would deploy at lift off to provide 

clearance for the vehicle. 

Key Study Results 

A crossbeam would have to be added to the lntertank: and the shell stiffened locally to carry the 

increased (over the ET values) loads. Approximately 30 intermediate rings could be removed from 

the LH2 tank and the barrel membrane thickness reduced substantially. The propulsion module 

could be resized to remove the hold down structure. 

Lift off is significantly more complex. Strain energy is stmed in the structure when the engines are 

running, but before separation from the MLP. This energy can be released differently depending 

on the release method chosen, none of which are simple. Severe transient loads are induced from 

the sudden release of the strain energy. The more slowly the strain energy is released, the longer 

the vehicle will be in close proximity to the toWer, which is not desirable. 

Conclusions 

Up to 5000 lbs. can be saved by supporting the 1.5 Stage vehicle at the forward SRB fittings. 

However, the concept is considered to be a high risk item, particularly in the area of lift off 

dynamics and hold down pin retraction. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the baseline approach for holding down the 1.5 Stage vehicle. 

65 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

-NLP 

Reference 

-· ta 

:tntertank 

Ul2 ~ank 

'ftzuat Structure 

eon~ 

~otal Dry wt. 

Additional Information 

GSJ: Support 

Stz:uctuz. '. 

Rotate• for ~ 

C1earance ~ 

~ \ \ I I \ It"""\ 

\ \ \ I 

\ 

18 deq 

I 

Alternate 

Cc :a Core Vehic.le 

llua Properti.ea (1lt. J.BS) 

.. fereaoe AltezD&te A (Del.taa) 

12683 16683 +2000 

35»221 3.a621 -6800 

108125 106325 -1800 (:tncl.ud~Ml) (:tncl.udecl) -260 

206210 115»250 -504 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

66 

Page 2 
~ 

( 

3-S-OOSA 

(CV-STR-20A) 

Tank Length vs Facility Impacts 

Prepared By: Robert Houston 

(504) 257-1510 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

Approved By: Don Lumley 

Bob Simms 

/Jf7A RTIN MARIE7'TA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

I 

Tank Length vs Facility Impacts 3-S-008A 

Objective 

Assess External Tank Manufacturing Tooling and Facilities 

To Determine The Impact of Increased Tank Length 

Approach 

Analyze Major Tooling Positions & Processing Facilities To 

Determine: 

1) Maximum Length Capability of Tools and Processing 

Cells 

2) Define Impact of Length Growth 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE :">VSTEMS 

l l 
$ 

Background 3-S-008A 

• Initial Investigation Performed Under TO 1.6.2.1-216 Stretched 

External Tank (1982/83) Contract No.NASB-30300 

• Further Study Under IR&D 1990 

IWARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
cJ 

( 

Tank Length vs Facility Impact 3-S-OOSA 

: 5 ft B/C Gapacity Limited - Requires 

Tank Processing Cells 

Cells 8/C LH2 SOFI R::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::: urnover Operation Use Ait. Cell N 

Cell D LH2 Aft Dome SOFI Not Requ~red Use Alt. Cell N . . 

Cell E 

Cell F 

Cell P 

Cell A 

LH2 lnt Clean 

L02 Hydro Test 

Ext Clean & Prime 

Veh. Stack 

: 5ft : 

Cells N (Alternative) LH2 SOFI .................... , ............................... """,,,,,,,,,,,, , .. 

Cells M L02 SOFI 

4 8 12 16 

·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:· Achievable with Minor Tooling and Facility Mods 

rzzzzzzzzzzz;t Major Facility Mods - (ET Downtime Greater Than 9 Mo.) 

uu111111111111111111111 Modify Alternative Facility 

New Facility Required 

/flfARTIN /flfARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~VSTEMS 

( l 
...,J 

-

/ 

Tank Length vs Facility Impact 3-S-OOSA 

Assembly Impacts 

LH2 Major Weld Assy 

Final Assy (Bldg 1 03) 

LH2 Proof Test (Bldg 451) 

14'- 0" 

Test & Checkout (Bldg 420) :~=·=·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:~:~:·:~:~:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:~:::·:·:·:~:·:·:~:·:::·:·:·~mm»l)»~ 

Growth (ft) 8 12 1 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Achievable with Minor Tooling and Facility Mods 

~ 

V/////Tfl'/Ud Facility Mods 

Relocate Fwd Dome Attach Tooling 

t!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1!1J Extend Existing Bldg 

·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:· LH2 Tank Proof Test( Pressure Only) up to 11 ft 

(Applied Loads May Require New Facility) 

1 

/tiiARTIN /tiiARIE7'TA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
....J 

N 

'" 

Critical Facility Impacts - One-of-a-Kind Cells 3-S-OOSA 

• Cell E • Internal LH2 Clean and lridite 

·Stretch 5 ft ·Minor Tool & Facility Modification 

• Stretch 5 ft to 11 ft • Raise Roof & Lengthen Door 

-Stretch 11 ft to 17ft· Raise Roof, Lengthen Door and Lower Sill 

·Stretch Over 17ft ·NEW CELL 

• Cell A - Core Tankage Stack 

• 8 ft 6 In LH2 Stretch Without Major Facility Modification 

-Over 8ft 6 in to 12ft ·Modify TPS Closeout Room 

·Over 12ft. ·NEW CELL 

n-fARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE !"'VSTEMS 

I 
...J 

~ 

Summary 3-S-OOSA 

• Reference Configuration LH2 Tank Stretch Feasibility Re-Confirmed 

- 5 ft Stretch Requires Minor or No Modifications 

• Tank Stretch up to 11 ft is Possible with Facility Modifications: 

- Cell E - Internal LH2 Clean & lridite 

- Cell A - Core Tankage Vertical Stack 

- Cell P - External Clean & Prime 

- LH2 Major Weld Assy 

- LH2 Proof Test( Bldg 451) 

• New Facilities/Major Mods are Required above 11 ft 

- New Proof Test Facility @ 11 ft 

-New VAB Cell A@ 12ft 

-New VAB Cell E@ 17ft 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.6.4.3 Tank Length vs Facility Impacts {#3-S-OOSA) 

Objective 

Assessed the external tank manufacturing tooling and facilities to determine the impact of increased 

tank length. 

Approach 

Each major tooling position and processing facility was analyzed to detennine: 

(1) current maximum length capability of tools and cells 

(2) modifiC81ions required for each step of incremental growth up to building or 

other limitation. 

Key Study Results 

Cell E - Internal LH2 Oean and Iridite: 

Stretch up to S ft - Minor Tool &. Facility ModifiCation 

Stretch 5 to 11 ft - Raise Roof &. Lengthen Door 

Stretch 11 to 17 ft - Raise Roof. Lengthen Door &. Lower Sill 

Stretch Over 17 ft - New cell 

Cell A - Core Tankage Stack: 

Stretch LH2 Tank 8 ft 6 in 

Stretch 8 ft 6 in lO 12 ft 

Stretch Over 12 ft 

-No~ facility mod. 

- Modify TPS Closeout Room 

-NewceU 

Reactivate existing Cells M & N for L02 & Ul2 Tank SOFI 

Existing Proof Test facility can accommodate up to 11 ft stretch (Pressure Only). Applied loads 

may require new facility 

Conclusions 

Reference configuration S ft Ul2 Tank s~tch confirmed 

Tank Stretch up to 11 ft is possible with modifications. 

New Facilities/Major Mods are Required above 11 ft but can be accommodated 

Recommendations 

Use study results as an input to Propulsion Tank Stretch Study P-001 

74 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Tank Processing Cells 

Cells B/C LH2 SOR 

Cell D LH2 Aft Dome SOFI 

lo.zzzmazz:a:SIIaft 18/C capacity Limited - Req. ulres 

l'l , ITumover Operation Use Alt. Cell ___,N 

Cell E 

Cell F 

Cell P 

CeliA 

LH2 lnt Clean 

L02 Hydro Test 

Ext Clean & Prime 

Veh. Stack 

Not Required Use Alt. Cell N • · Sft ' : 17ft.. 

Adequate•tor L02 Requirement • . : 12ft 

8ft 6 In 12ft ~ ~ 

' '1 

12ft ~ Cells N (Alternative) LH2 SOR lmiiiiltiiiJ:JIID[]J]ImCIIIIIIIIIIm:Zz:zz:~clt.1 Cells M L02 SOR Adequate tor L02 ~ulrament ' :: ·: 

~----------~----·--------- 4 8 12 16 

w.nmuumw Achievable with Minor Tooling and Facility Mods 

r 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a Major Facility Mods • (ET Downtime Greater Than 9 Mo.) 

"''''''''''''''" Modify Alternative Facility 

---• New Facility Required 

Length vs Facility impacts for Tank pocessing cells 

LH2 Major Weld Assy I I ~:;, 0" f_ 

Final Assy (Bldg 1 03) 

LH2 Proof Test (Bldg 451) 

9'· 0" ~~ 1~0" ... • i'li • • 1~~ •• J 

New F8CIIty Required 

Test & Checkout (Bldg 420) 

14'· 0" 

' ~ 

, 

Growt h ( ) ft ~ ~, 12 16 

,,,,,,,,,. Achievable with Minor Tooling and Facility Mods 

Facility Mods 

w~ Relocate Fwd Dome Attach Tooling 

• • • • • Extend Existing Bldg 

I -•••••••• -------. LH2 Tank Proof Test( Pressure Only) up to 11 ft 

(Applied Loads May Require New Facility) 

Length vs Facility impacts for Assembly Facilities 

Additional Information 

s·ee Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

75 

18 
National Launch System J/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6. 2. 6. 4. 3 Tank Length vs Facility Impacts (#3-S-OOSA) 

Objective 

Assessed the external tank manufacturing tooling and facilities to detennine the impact of increased 

tank length. 

Approach 

Each major tooling position and processing facility was analyzed to determine: 

(1) current maximum length capability of tools and cells 

(2} modifications required for each step of incremental growth up 10 building or 

other limiaation. 

Key Study Results 

Cell E - Internal LH2 Clean and lridite: 

Stretch up to S ft • Minor Tool & Facility ModifiC&lion 

Stretch 5 to 11 ft - Raise Roof & Lengthen Door 

Stretch 11 to 17 ft - Raise Roof. Lengthen Door & Lower Sill 

Stretch Over 17 ft • New cell 

Cell A· Core Tankage Stack: 

Stretch LH2 Tank 8 ft 6 in 

Stretch 8 ft 6 in to 12 ft 

Stretch Over 12 ft 

- No major facility mod. 

• Modify TPS Closeout Room 

·New cell 

Reactivate existing Cells M & N for L02 & Ul2 Tank SOFI 

Existing Proof Test facility can accommodate up to 11 ft stretch (Pressure Only). Applied loads 

may require new facility 

Conclusions 

Reference configuration 5 ft Ul2 Tank stretch confumed 

Tank Stretch up to 11 ft is possible with modifications. 

New Facilities/Major Mods are Required above 11 ft but can be accommodated 

Recommends tions 

Use study results as an input to Propulsion Tank Stretch Study P-001 

76 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Tank Processing Cells 

Cells B/C LH2 SOFI 

Cell D LH2 Aft Dome SOFI 

5 ft 1_8/C capacity Limited • Requires 

tmmz:I!:I!ZZI!IZZBI !Turnover Operation Use Alt. Cell N 

__, 

Cell E LH2 lnt Clean 

Not Required Use Alt. Cell N 

5 ft • 17ft. 

Cell F L02 Hydro Test Adequate, for L02 Requirement. 

; 12ft 

Cell P Ext Clean & Prime 

Cell A Veh. Stack 8ft61n 12ft ~~ //// 

J 

12ft ~ Cells N (Alternative) LH2 SOFI l:miiiiaiiiiiiiiiiDIIIliiiil~IIIJZ:Z::~~:zzft.1 Cells M L02 SOFI Adequate for L02 ~equlrement 

~----·-----~------·---------- 4 8 12 16 

wggggwgwwggg» Achievable with Minor Tooling and Facility Mods 

r 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 21 Major Facility Mods - (ET Downtime Greater Than 9 Mo.) 

'"""r"r""r" Modify Alternative Facility 

New Facility Required 

Length vs Facility impacts for Tank processing cells 

LH2 Major Weld Assy ~·- 0" .~ _t 

Final Assy (Bldg 1 03) 

LH2 Proof Test (Bldg 451) 

9'- 0" -v 17"- 0" ·v .~ ., .... ~ ... • I" 11'- c .. J. 

_if:? New F•clllty Required 

14'- 0" ~ f 

• Test & Checkout (Bldg 420} 

Growt h ( ) ft ~ 8 12 16 

Achievable with Minor Tooling and Facility Mods 

Facility Mods 

6'2?d62>WR'W Relocate Fwd Dome Attach Tooling 

P?;t;¢¢';';';td Extend Existing Bldg 

LH2 Tank Proof Test( Pressure Only) up to 11 ft 

(Applied Loads May Require New Facility) 

Length vs Facility impacts for Assembly Facilities 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

77 

18 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFI' BLANK 

78 
"tt 

~ a 

-;r ,._ 

0 

-o 

~g. 

(.) 

f'l'l. 

m ,-

:p 

2 

~ 

z 

0 

-; 

~ 

r= 

~ 0 

~ 

3-S-0088 

(CV-STR-208) 

LH2 Tank Impact vs. Ullage 

Pressure Trade Study 

Prepared By: Tom Severs 

(504) 257-5226 

Approved By: R. Simms 

Flev: lrtltlal 

~ Date: Jartuary 8, 1992 

I 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

TJS..B1-~39a MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Objective and Approach 3-S-008-B 

Objective 

• This trade develops the impacts to the LH2 tank pressure 

shell for ullage pressures of 34 psig {the baseline) to 80 psig. 

Approach 

• Determine pressure capability of the reference configuration. 

00 • Establish critical loading conditions. 

0 

• Perform analysis to determine membrane and weld land 

thickness requirements for pressures above the capability of 

the Reference Configuration. 

/JIIARTIN n-tARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ5-B' a 

t I ' 
00 

-

( 

Approach (Continued) 3-S-008-B 

• Develop weight impacts compared to the Reference 

Configuration. 

• Evaluate the weight savings if the biaxial yield theory is 

used in the proof test analysis. 

• Evaluate impact to manufacturing for increased thicknesses. 

Document results of the study and prepare conclusions. 

/JitART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJS-IB1-139a 
Ground Rules & Assumptions 3-S-008-B 

• Nominal tank configuration as per MSFC Cycle 0 definition 

as per 10/9/91. (34 psi maximum ullage pressure) 

• The study addresses tank membrane and weld land 

requirements only, stiffener size and pitch, and frame size 

and pitch is from the reference configuration. 

• Thicknesses are taken to a zero margin before additional 

material is added. 

~ • SF = 1.40 on ultimate, 1.10 on yield. Room Temp. Proof 

Factor = 1.05 

• Pneumatic proof test. (Similar to the ET.) 

/IITARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ5-B1 "a 

( ( ( 
00 

I.IJ 

( 

Ullage Pressure Req't vs. Capability 3-S-008-B 

34 psi Ullage 

t:.Of\.4 

t:.066 

t:.170-

t:.170-

t:.180-

t:.180-

t:.190 -

~ 

t:.160 - t:.087 

Insufficient 

Capability 

Flight 

Pressure 

Flight 

Capability 

0 25 50 75 

Pressure [psi] 

Proof 

Pressure 

Flight 

Pressure 

Proof 

Capability 

0 25 50 75 

Pressure [psi] 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

TJS-B1-139a, 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Ullage Pressure Req't vs. Capability 3-S-008-B 

40 psi Ullage 

t:.084 

t:.066 

t:.170-

t:.170-

t:.180 -

t:.180-

t:.190 -

t:.160 - t:.087 

Insufficient 

Capability 

Ullage 

(34 psi) 

Flight 

Pressure, 

40psl 

Ullage 

Flight 

Capability 

0 25 50 75 

Pressure [psi] 

Proof 

Pressure 

Flight 

Pressure 

Proof 

,_,UI.IUI.IIIity 

Insufficient 

Capability 

0 25 50 75 

Pressure [psi] 

/JIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ8-B1·. 1 

( ( ( 
00 

lll 

Max. Design Pressures 

Ref. Ref. 

Location Con d. Config. 34 psi 

Capability 

Fwd Dome Flight 32.0 34.0 

Proof 41.0 38.3 

Bbls 3 & 4 Flight 46.2 34.0 

Proof 52.4 38.3 

Bbls 1 & 2 Flight 67.6 39.0 

Proof 55.5 38.3 

Barrel1a Flight 71.3 39.0 

Proof 58.6 38.3 

Aft Dome Flight 46.5 40.2 

Proof 41.0 38.3 

TJS-B1-139a 

3-S-008-B 

Max. Ullage Pressure [psig] 

40 psi 50 psi 60 psi 70 psi 80 psi 

40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 

44.3 54.3 64.3 74.3 84.3 

40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 

44.3 54.3 64.3 74.3 84.3 

45.0 55.0 65.0 75.0 85.0 

44.3 54.3 64.3 74.3 84.3 

45.0 55.0 65.0 75.0 85.0 

44.3 54.3 64.3 74.3 84.3 

46.2 56.2 66.2 76.2 86.2 

44.3 54.3 64.3 74.3 84.3 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Delta Membrane Thicknesses 3-S-008-B 

Thicknesses in Inches 

Location Ref. Conflg. Max. Ullage Pressure [psig] 

Thickness 34 psi 40psl 50 psi 60psl 70 psi 80 psi 

Fwd Dome .066 to .084 .007 .029 .066 .103 .140 .177 

~ Bbls 3 & 4 .170 .000 .000 .014 .051 .088 .124 

Bbls 1 & 2 .180 .000 .000 .000 .029 .061 .094 

Barrel1a .190 .000 .000 .000 .019 .051 .084 

Aft Dome .160 to .087 .000 .007 .040 .072 .105 .137 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ5-B# 'i 

( ( / ( 
( 

Weld Land Thicknesses 3-S-008-B 

Thicknesses in Inches 

Location Ref. Config. Max. Ullage Pressure [pslg] 

Thickness 34 psi 40 psi 50 psi 60 psi 70 psi 80 psi 

Fwd Dome .066 to .084 .204 .237 .294 .352 .411 .470 

~ Bbls 3 & 4 .170 .204 .237 .294 .352 .411 .470 

Bbls 1 & 2 .180 .229 .264 .323 .382 .440 ' .499 

Barrel1a .190 .229 .264 .323 .382 .440 .499 

Aft Dome .160 to .087 .236 .271 .330 .388 .447 .506 

Jt;7ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJS-B1-i39a 
00 

00 

Membrane Delta Weight [Lbs.] 

Location Delta Wt. Delta Wt. Delta Wt. Delta Wt. 

34 psi 40psl 50 psi 60 psi 

Fwd Dome 92 380 866 1351 

Fwd Barrels 0 0 714 2602 

Aft Barrels 0 0 0 1383 

Aft Dome 0 92 525 945 

Sub-Total 92 472 2105 6281 

Contingency (8 %) 7 38 168 502 

Total 99 510 2273 6783 

Wt. Factor 1 1.00 1.01 1.06 1.17 

3-S-008-B 

Delta Wt. Delta Wt. 

70 psi 80 psi 

1837 2322 

4489 6326 

2966 4598 

1378 1797 

10669 15044 

854 1203 

11523 16247 

1.29 1.41 

NOTE: 1) Wt. factor Is based on weight Increase to total LH2 tank. Ref. Wt = 39,220 Lbs. 

hTARTIN hTARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJS-81 t ( · 

( ( 
~ 

( 

Manufacturing Impacts 3-S-008-B 

• Effect of Increased Tank Weld Land Thickness 

Stretch Form of Gore Panels 

- Current vendor: American Hydro-Forming CA 

-Plate Thickness Capability Up To 0.5 Inches 

-Requires Incremental Development Program to Determine 

Max Thickness Capability 

- New Grippers & Hydraulic System Mod 

- No Commitment without Test Panel 

Option: Perform Industry Survey to Locate 

Potential Suppliers 

- Larger Machine Tools Do Exist 

Manufactured by L&F Industries CA 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

T JS-81-i 39a 
/ 

,· 

Manufacturing Impacts 3-S-008-B 

·Dome Assembly: 

Weld Land Thickness Tooling Capacity 

Up To 0.400" - Minor Mods Only 

0.400" to 0.425" - Extensive Mod to Clamping System on 

1/2 Dome & Full Dome Weld Fixtures 

0.425" to 0.500" - Extensive Mod to Clamping System on 

cs 1/4 Dome Weld Fixtures 

TJS..B' 'a 

( 

0.500" to 0.627" -Major Rework on all Dome Tool for New 

Clamps and Clamping Loads 

/J'1.4 RTIN /J'tARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
( 

Summary 3-S-008-B 

• LH2 tank weight impacts: 

- 694 Lbs. impact at 40 psig 

- 16,319 Lbs. impact at 80 psig 

• Weld thickness manufacturing impact: 

- Extensive modifications necessary for ullage 

pressures above 60 psi. 

\0 • Stretch Forming Impact: 

- - Uncertain capability for thicknesses beyond .5 inches. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

T JS-8~ -139a 
Summary 

18000 

16000 

14000 

12000 

Weight 1 oooo 

[Lbs] 8000 

6000 

\0 

N 4000 

2000 

Weight Impact vs. 

Ullage Pressure 

Pressure Wt. 

[pslg] [Lbs.] 

34 100 

40 500 

50 2300 

60 6800 

70 12000 

80 16000 

Increasing Tool 

Mods (Dome Weld 

& Supplier Fab) 

Minor Dome Tool Mods 

3-S-008-B 

Weight Impact for Ullage 

Pressure Increase 

0 - -------~ ----·-------------------

·2000 

30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 

Max Ullage Pressure [psi] 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ9-B1 1 

( ( ( 
( 

Biaxial Yield Theory Savings 3-S-008-B 

18,000 -~--

Biaxial Yield 

16,000 Weight Savings Weight Impact for Ullage 

Pressure l!.Wt. Pressure Increase 

14,000 sl 

12,000 34 

Weight 1o,ooo 

Impact 

[Lbs] 8,000 

40 0 

50 0 

60 900 

70 1100 

\() 

6,000 \,.) 80 1200 

Weight Impact for Ullage 

4,000 Pressure Increase If Biaxial 

Yield Criterion Is used 

2,000 

0 ..___ _...._. _ ______._______ 

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 

Max Ullage Pressure [psi] 

n-tARTIN n-tARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ5-B1-~39a 
'f. 

Issues Identified During Study 3-S-008-8 

Issue: The number and spacing of frames can change 

as the .skin is increased for a more fully 

optimized configuration. 

Resolution: The stringer size and pitch sensitivity study 

underway will help identify the magnitude of 

the potential weight savings. 

Issue: The study was based on ET type pressure 

time history data. The STME requires a 

different pressure profile which is currently 

being defined by the propulsion team. 

Resolution: Update this trade once the new pressure data 

is obtained from the propulsion group. 

11-fARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJS..B1 1 

( ( - ( 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.6.4.4 LH2 Tank Sizing vs. Pressure (3-S-0088) 

Objective 

This trade study develops the impacts to the LH2 tank pressure shell for increasing ullage 

pressures up to 80 psig. (The baseline pressure is 34 psig). 

Approach 

(a) Determine pressure capability of the Reference Configuration 

(b) Establish critical load conditions 

(c) Perform analysis to determine membrane and weld land thickness requirements for pressures 

above the capability of the Reference Configuration 

(d) Develop weight impacts to the Reference Configuration 

(e) Evaluate impact to manufactming for increased thickness 

(f) Evaluate whether impacts can be reduced by the use of the biaxial yield theory and frame size 

reduction. 

(g) Document results of the study and prepare co11:clusions 

Options Studied 

Ullage pressures from 34 psig to 80 psig. 

Key Results 

The weight impact is roughly 450 Lbs. per psi. No tooling impacts are identified until ullage 

pressures reach 50 psig. Major tooling impacts occur once ullage pressures exceed 70 psig. There 

is no weight savings for ullage pressure below the baseline pressure because the skin is sized for 

compression, not pressure induced tension. There is no weight savings for frame redesign since 

the frames are required for an unpressurized condition. The weight penalty may be mitigated by 

500 to 1200 lbs., depending on the maximum ullage pressure, if the biaxial yield theory is 

adopted. 

Conclusions 

This study identified the weight impacts for ullage pressures between 20 and 80 psig. The weight 

increase is fairly linear and unbounded for increasing ullage pressures. 

Recommendation 

Use the results of this trade as an input to the propulsion studies of engine performance vs. ullage 

pressure. 

95 
' 

' 

National LDunch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

.. jqllt 

IDcr-•• 

[Lba. J 

t•.084 

t=.066 

t•.170 

t•.180 

t•.180 

t•.190 

t•.160 

t•.087 

11000 

16000 

uooo 

12000 

10000 

1000 

6000 

cooo 

2000 

0 

30 

Additional Information 

0 25 50 75 

Pz:eaauz:e [psi] 

1Dcreaabg 'fool lloda 

(D-. 1lel.cl ' 

Buppller J'U,) 

111Dor Do. 

'fool lloda 

co 50 60 '70 

Ullage lre .. ue ls-191 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for IJlOl'e detailed results 

96 

80 

Page 2 

'...-' 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6.2.6.4.4 LH2 Tank Sizing vs. Pressure (3-S-0088) 

Objective 

Page 1 

This trade study develops the impacts to the LH2 tank pressure shell for increasing ullage 

pressures up to 80 psig. (The baseline pressure is 34 psig). 

Approach 

(a) Determine pressure capability of the Reference Configuration 

(b) Establish critical load conditions 

(c) Perform analysis to determine membrane and weld land thickness requirements for pressures 

above the capability of the Reference Configuration 

(d) Develop weight impacts to the Reference Configuration 

(e) Evaluate impact to manufacturing for increased thickness 

(f) Evaluate whether impacts can be reduced by the use of the biaxial yield theory and frame size 

reduction. 

(g) Document results of the study and prepare conclusions 

Options Studied 

Ullage pressures from 34 psig to 80 psig. 

Key Results 

The weight impact is roughly 450 Lbs. per psi. No tooling impacts are identified until ullage 

pressures reach 50 psig. Major tooling impacts occur once ullage pressures exceed 70 psi g. There 

is no weight savings for ullage pressure below the baseline pressure because the skin is sized for 

compression, not pressure induced tension. There is no weight savings for frame redesign since 

the frames are required for an unpressurized condition. The weight penalty may be mitigated by 

500 to 1200 lbs., depending on the maximum ullage pressure, if the biaxial yield theory is 

adopted. 

Conclusions 

This study identified the weight impacts for ullage pressures between 20 and 80 psig. The weight 

increase is fairly linear and unbounded for increasing ullage pressures. 

Recommendation 

Use the results of this trade as an input to the propulsion studies of engine performance vs. ullage 

pressure. 

97 
NationalLOunch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

W.iqht 

lDCJ:' ... e 

[Lba.) 

t=. 084 

t=.l70 

t•.l80 

t•.l80 

t•.l90 

t-=.160 

t•. 087 

18000 

16000 

uooo 

12000 

10000 

8000 

&000 

•ooo 

2000 

0 

30 

Additional Information 

co 

0 25 so 75 

Pressure [psi] 

Proof 

Capabilit~ 

lDcz:eaa.iDv 'fool lloda _....,.., ___ ~ 

50 

(Da.e lfel.cl ' 

SUppllel:' Fab) 

60 

wi.th Bi.azi.al sav1A9a . (App:ox 1000 Lba.) 

'70 80 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

98 
:g 

Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study 

3-S-001 8 {CV-STR-188)- Fwd Skirt 

3-S-0108 {CV-STR-158)- L02 Tank 

3-S-0098 {CV-STR-198)- lntertank 

~-S-008C {CV-STR-20C)- LH2 Tank 

(/) 

CD 

CD 

w 

I 

(/) 

I 

0 

0 

• m 

-1 

... 

D) 

a. 

CD 

(/) 

~ 

c: 

a. 

'< 

Prepared By: Dilip Dudgaonkar 

(504)257-0076 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge Page 1 

5.2.6.4.5 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study (# 3-S-OOSC) 

Objective 

To develop weight sensitivities of the LH2 tank by varying pitch and stiffener size. 

Approach 

a) Use current configurations as baseline 

b) Use the Panda II program to produce panel weight data with varying sainger pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The cUITent internal T section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda II was 

used to optimize stringer size for varying pitch and load. Ring frame spacing based on the 

reference configuration was used. The weight (tbar) trend shows that an optimum occurs at a 

stringer pitch of 2.0 inches for an axial compression load of 2600 lb/inch. However 2.0 inch 

spacing may not be practical. It appears that stringer spacings of 4 to S inches may offer sizable 

benefits 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch while maintaining the the 

reference configurations integrally machined longitudinal tee stiffened panel approach. The Panda 

n optimized configuration developed offers weight savings compared to the baseline configuration 

but is not considered producable. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration LH2 tank barrel configuration. During cycle l, study an 

alternate barrel panel with stringer spacing and/or varying frame spacing increased over the 

optimized configuration but less than the reference. in addition study the impact of varing frame 

spacing on the stiffener pitch. 

100 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

LH2 TANK 

Stringer Spacing Vs Tbar 

0.25 I Nx lb/in 

0.2 -•-1700 

.. 0.15 • --D-2600 .a 

t- ·- 0.1 •1-'"" 

·-

0.0: t -·-3250 

I I 

Stringer Stringer Stringer Stringer Stringer 

Spacing Spacing Spacing Spacing Spacing 

-2.0 -4.0 • 5.0 -7.33 ·10.0 

J..-1.25.J 

I 1.7cr 1.82" 

Current Design Optimized Design Optimized Design 

Nx-2600 lblln Nx=3250 lblln 

Stringer Spaclng•10.832" String.- Spaclngd.O" Stringer Spaclng•2.0" 

Frame Spaclnga26.r Frame Spaclnga26.r Freme Spaclnga26.r 

Takln.0.170 Takln.O.D61 Takln.0.067 

Tbar.0.193 Tbar.0.108 Tbar=0.123 

Additional Information 

Details of this study are contained in Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.BOOK 1 

101 
National Launch System 1 !92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6.2.6.4.5 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study (# 3-S-008C) 

Objective 

To develop weight sensitivities of the LH2 tank by varying pitch and stiffener size. 

Approach 

a) Use current configurations as baseline 

Page 1 

b) Use the Panda II program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The current internal T section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda II was 

used to optimize stringer size for varying pitch and load. Ring frame spacing based on the 

reference configuration was used. The weight (tbar ) trend shows that an optimum occurs at a 

stringer pitch of 2.0 inches for an axial compression load of 2600 lb/inch. However 2.0 inch 

spacing may not be practical. It appears that stringer spacings of 4 to 5 inches may offer sizable 

benefits 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch while maintaining the the 

reference configurations integrally machined longitudinal tee stiffened panel approach. The Panda 

ll optimized configuration developed offers weight savings compared to the baseline configuration 

but is not considered producable. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration LH2 tank barrel configuration. During cycle 1. study an 

alternate barrel panel with stringer spacing and/or varying frame spacing increased over the 

optimized configuration but less than the reference. in addition study the impact of varing frame 

spacing on the stiffener pitch. 

102 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

LH2 TANK 

Stringer Spacing Vs Tbar 

o~~:I 

J:» :; 0.1 5 T ;,.-::::::::::lF_=::::~::: ~ 0.1 

Nx lb/in 

-Oo--2600 

-•-1700 

•I-"" 

o.o: t-+----+---+-----f----f 

-•-3250 

Stringer 

Spacing 

• 2.0 

J.--1.25.-1 

Currant Design 

Stringer 

Spacing 

• 4.0 

I 

Stringer Spaclnga10.832" 

Frame Spaclng:26.T' 

Tskln:0.170 

Tbar.0.193 

Additional Information 

Stringer 

Spacing 

• 5.0 

Stringer 

Spacing 

-7.33 

Optimized Design 

Nxa2600 lblln 

Stringer Spaclnga2.0" 

Frame Spaclnga26.7" 

Tsklna0.061 

Tbar:0.108 

Stringer 

Spacing 

·10.0 

1.7fi 

Optimized Design 

Nx113250 lblln 

Stringer Spaclng:2.0" 

Frame Spaclng:26.T' 

Tskln.0.067 

Tbar.0.123 

Details of this study are contained in Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.BOOK 1 

103 

Page 2 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFf BLANK 

104 
.-

~ 

~ 

"' (') 

a 

2 

Cl 

-o 

~ ..., 

IT! 

m 

,~ 

):a 

"? ,._ 

~ 

2 

0 

-! 

., 

r-

~ 0 

3-S-010C 

(CV-STR-15C) 

L02 Tank Alternate Panel 

& 

3-S-0080 

(CV-STR-200) 

LH2 Tank Alternate Panel 

Construction 

Prepared By: G.M.Roule' 

(504) 257-Q020 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

GMR.91352 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Ob~tive/ ~pproach 

Objective 

• Develop And Evaluate Alternative Construction Methods 

For The L02 & LH2 Tank Barrel Panels To Determine 

Preferred Design Concepts Relative To Weight, Costs, & 

Manufacturing/Producibi I ity. 

Approach 

• Define Point Of Departure (P.O.D.) L02 & LH2 Tank 

Panel Construction Reference Method. 

~ • Identify Concept Options For Various Structural 

Configurations. 

• Estimate Weight Differences. 

• Perform Cost Analysis. 

• Assess Producibility Impacts. 

• Evaluate Options With Respect To Evaluation Criteria. 

• Select Preferred Option. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.91352 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
s -

Groundrules & Assumptions 

• Use NLS Baseline L02 & LH2 Tank Panels As Point Of 

Departure {P.O.D.). Material= Al~2219. Configurations 

As Defined by MFSC Reference Layouts: 

LH2 Tank, NLS-0005 {Dated 10/9/91) 

L02 Tank, NLS-0006 {Dated 10/9/91) 

Reference Trade Studies: 

CV-STR-148 "L02 Tank Structure Design Definition". 

CV-STR-140 "LH2 Tank Structure Design Definition". 

• External Tank Tooling Will Be Used Wherever Possible 

Per NLS Program Requirements. 

• Material Considered For All Options = Al-2219. 

Assume 1.5 Inch Maximum Stock Plate Thickness 

{Readily Available). 

(Cont.) MARTIN MARIETTA 

GMR.91352 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
• 

... • C) 

c: c: 

0 ·-N 0 ·-U) 

,_, t/) :E c: • 

0 -a 0 

·-

... C1) a: ~ 

CD c E -a 0 :I ·-t/) , t/) 

t/) c CD 0 t/) <( 0 as 

olJ .... m 

0 t/) t/) 

CD z c - G) 0 :I ·- .... ~ t/) 

-c ·--ca c 

., 

C'ol 

CD 

"' 

c -a 

- E 

eft 

:I 

- Ct 

G) 

:IE 

·..._,r 

0 ·-

CJ 

;: c ~ 

~ • • 

108 
-

~ 

Key Issues/Evaluation Criteria 

• Manufacturing/Producibility. 

• Weight Impacts. 

• Costs. 

Manufacturing/Producibility 

Weight Impact 

Costs Non-Recurring 

Recurring 

GMR.91352 

Produclblllty Is A Major Factor In Concept 

Selection. Selected Option Should Not Impact 

NLS Manufacture On ET Tooling. 

Any Additional Weight Must Be 

Traded Against Loss Of Payload 

Lift Capability. 

Minimal DDT&E Desired. 

Low Cost Per Flight Desired For 

HLLV 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
--

0 

( 

Option 1 - L02 & LH2 Baseline Panel (P.O.D.} 

,.. . 10.832 1 

I I I 

L021.170 To .215 

LH21.170 To .190 ~ .10 

1.25 L J, J 

t' _j .125 \-1.2s 

L ,_j_ 

• Integrally Machined Panel With Longitudinal Tee-Stiffening. ~~ 

-~ 

• Synergistic With ET Tank Pressure Vessel Designs. 

• Utilizes Existing ET Processes And Tooling. 

• Design Consistent With Maximum Axial Load. I ~r&-:~::.::~=~~*~:::::::~:~::::::*~;:::::::::m:::~~->-&.!f:::::::;;:;:;~=~::::::::::::;:::;:;:::::;:::;:~:~:::::~::;~~=:::=::::::::::::;:;::::::::::::;:=::~;:::::::::::::::;:::::~::::::::::::::::;:~::::::::;:::::::::;:::::::::;:;:::;:::;:::;:::::::;:: 

o· ,1352 MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
--

-

( 

Option 2 - Machined Blade-Stiffened Panel (l02 & LH2) 

GMR.91352 

-- L- r---5.416 -~- 5.4161 

1 I I 

l:e i ' ( ~- T -{ 1~-~p~ 1 

.170 1.25 ~-4 .10 _J__ u 

• Integrally Machined Panel With Longitudinal Blade-Stiffening. t:::: 

• Derived From NLS L02 Tank Pressure Vessel Design (POD). 1ll 

'* :~:: 

• May Not Utilize Some Existing ET Processes And Tooling. t:jj ,,~ 

• Design Consistent With Maximum Axial Load Distribution. !(i 

.-: ··:-:·:·»:-:-:-:· ·.-_.,.,: .-:·:-;.;-:-:·:·X·:«.-:-:-:.:-:·:-:·»:·:-:·:--,.;:-.v:-: .... :-:«-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: .. -:·:-:-:-:-:·:-:·:-:-:-:-:·:·:·.. ,,:.:-.<<·:-:.· :-:·;.;·:·:·:-: ... ·:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:·:·:·:«·:-:v:-:--..:·:·:-:·:·:-:-:-:-:.:-:-:·:-:-••••• ;·:.-,;:.»:-»:-:v:-:.:.:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:-:-:-:-:·:·:..:-:-:-:·:·:-:·:·:-:·:·:-:·:·:-:-:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:-:-:-:-:f~ 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
--

N 

Option 3- Machined_Waffle P~l)el (LQ~_& LH2) 

.170 

Membrane 

(Typ) 

Of'- ~1352 

( 

· • Integrally Machined Waffle Panel With Longitudinal & 

Transverse Stiffening. 

• New Processes And Tooling Required. I 

I I, • Designed For Maximum Axial & Bending Loading 

Conditions • 

• : .. ·.:;:::;:;:;:;.;::.:·:-:·:.:·:·:·::.:·:·:.:-:·:·:·:·:.:.:-:.:::-:·:·:.:::::-:::·.:;:;:;::·:=··:=:-:.:-:=:·:··-:-:-::-:-:-:-.:-.:.:<.··:-·---:: :-·--.:-.; ·-:-·-··:: . .;.··-·-.-:.:- ·.-:-:-.-:::-:=: .. : .. ·· .. ·.: .· ·.· ::.· .• -:. - ··:· .: .•. - .. 

( 

20.50 

(Typ) 

MARTIN MARIE'n"A 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
IJJ --

I 

Option 4 - Machined lsogrid Panel {L02 & LH2) 

.12 

Membra11~ .. ··- (Typ) 

~--

Based On 

8.00-Trtanglex 1.25 

Stiffener 

Height··-

GMR.91352 

.10 

Stiffener 

(Typ) 

•Integrally Machined lso-Grld Panel With 

Multi-Directional Stiffening. 

• New Processes And Tooling Required. 

• Designed For Maximum Bending Conditions 

& BI-Directional Loading. 

1.5 X .320 

Weld land 

(Typ) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
--

~ 

Option 5 - Welded Panel (L02 & LH2) 

GMR.91352 

( 

,. 1~a2 ~ 

.125 

.125t 

• Machined Panel With Welded Extruded 

Longitudinal Tee-Stiffening. 

• Similar To .ET Tank Pressure Vessel Designs. 

• New Processes And Tooling Required. 

Extrusion 

(Typ) 

• Design Consistent With Maximum Axial Load Distribution. 

:~=~:=:=:~===:=:=:=:=:=:=:=:::=~~:~:::~:::=:=:::::=~~=~=:=:::::::::::::::::::::::=:::::::::::~::=:~===:=!=:=:=:=:=:=:=:::::·======:=:=:=::::m.:=::.~::x:::=:=:=:=:=:=:=:=:~:::·=======:·: ::::-:= =· == ::~=~=· := ===· = =:·:=:=.=.= ·= ·. ·=·· :=:.:= = ... ::.:. =·. :==: ·= ·=·=. . = =· = .. 

( 

OSL .25 

t1.00 

I 

~~~ 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
--

VI 

Option 6 - Mechanically Fastened Panel (L02 & LH2) 

Mach. 

Skin Panel 

GMR.91352 

1.. 10.832 .. , 

I I I .1251 I 

:J_ 

Machined 

Slot For 

Extrusion 

I t 

.10 

1.25_.\ • Stock Plate Skin With Machined Slots To 

Accept Extrusions. 

• Extruded Tee Stiffeners. 

• Mechanically Assembled (Tack Weld Or 

Fasten Ends To Prevent Slipage. 

• New Processes And Tooling Required. 

I 

Extrusion 

(Typ) 

OSL 

1.50 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
--

0'\ 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel (L02 & LH2) 

Feed 

Direction 

I'' ,,~' J ,, ,, '~ \: 

,, ,, 

ALS Derived Technology Status: 

• Required Tooling On Order. 

• AL 2219 Material Pelrced 8t Forged. 

• Scheduled Extrusion Of 22191n Early Jan.'92. 

• Weldallte-o49 Material Has Been Cast. 

• WeldaiHe Panels Planned For Mid-Jan. "92. 

· .. ····· -.-. -.-.-. -... · 

,,~ 

~,,, 

~ ,, 

,, ,, 

,, ,, 

,, 

,, ',, 

'\' 

* This Option Considered 

To Be The Same Design 

As Option 1 (P .O.D.). 

• Panels Extruded Through Circular Die 

(Stringers Extruded On Outside Of Circle). 

• After Extrusion Panels Are Brought To Die Heater 

Contractor Where They Are Heated And Rolled 

Out Into Flat Panels And Allowed To Cool. 

• Requires 35,000 Ton Press. 

• New Processes And Tooling Required. 

;:::;.;:;::::.;::: ;:;:;:;:;:;:: ::-;.;.;:;.;:::;:;:;.;:: ·::;:;.;._: :~=::- :·:·:·:-:-·-· .-.-.;.,,--,--,--- ·-:. . .;:::.'··· 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

ovn 91352 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Manufacturina/Producibilitv Summary 

Option 1 Baseline Baseline Baseline (Baseline) 

Option 2 Same As (·)Requires (·)Complex 

Machined Blade Baseline Separate Frame Bracket Arrgt. 

(·)Some High Development (+)Fewer (+) Less Complex 

Machined WorkTo Adapt ET Tooling. Intermediate Bracket Arrgt. 

'afflePanel I 

Option 4 (·) Some High Development (+)Fewer I (+) Less Complex 

- Machined WorkTo Adapt ET Tooling. Intermediate Bracket Arrgt. -...,J I I 

Option 5 Same As (·) Some High Development Same As 

Welded Panel Baseline WorkTo Adapt ET Tooling. Baseline HI her Weld Costs. 

Same As (·) Some High Development Same As 

Baseline WorkTo Adapt ET Tooling. Baseline "VIIVU rAII'IIii'l 

Option 7 Same As Same As I Same As 

Extruded Panel Baseline Baseline Baseline 

GMR.91352 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Weight Impact Summary 

Option 1 I 5,998 I 20,458 I 26,456 I P.O.D. I 0°/o (Baseline) 

Option 2 

Machined Blade 5,195 19,205 24,401 I • 2,055 I -8% 

5,348 19,742 25,091 ·1,365 • 5 °/o 

- I Macn1nea I 4,925 I 18,471 I 23,394 -3,060 ·12o/o -

GO lao-Grit 

Option 5 I 5,998 I 20,458 Welded I 26,456 I 0 I 0 o/o Panel 

Option 6 

Mechanically 6,064 

atened Panel 

20,699 26,763 I +307 I + 1°/o 

Option 7 5,998 20,458 26,456 I 0 I oo/o Extruded Panel 

GMR.91352 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Costs Impact Summary 

t 

ng . ·._ .. : ·.-·. :.·.:._· 

,,~.gnt"!~YOU~g He.currang :: -·::·:=:=;::::::::=:=:::::::;:::_:::::;:::::.:;:;.;:;.;-__ ._::·.- ·=::Noo-flecurrtng 

-:-:-·::_._._·:_-. ,.-.;.:::-.:-:-:·:·-·-:- . .:.:.·.: . . Recu.rnm;J 

Option 1 13.0 Baseline 13.0 1.0 1 (Baseline) 1.0 

Option 2 

Machined Blade I 17.0 I 0.9 I 19.0 1.0 2 

24.0 1.1 42.0 1.0 5 

WafflePanel 

- Option 4 - I 3 \() Machined 26.0 1.1 28.0 1.0 1-GrldP ... - .... 

Option 5 

40.0 1.1 43.0 1.1 6 Welded Panel 

Option 6 

Mechanically 33.0 0.8 35.0 0.8 4 

tened Panel 

*Option 7 TBD TBD TBD TBD I TBD Extruded Panel 

*Insufficient Data Exists To 

Effectively AssessThls Option. 

GMR.91352 

1 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Evaluation Summary 

P.O.D. 1 None Good Synergism 

With E.T. 

8% Slm. To Ba•ellne, But Rea 

2 Sep.F1111M Attach. BrktL 

Decrease Some 

0 

Machined I 5% 5 

Some High Dev.Work To I Fewer Intermediate 

Increase Adapt ET Tooling. u._ ... __ Weld Costs. Frames Required. 

Machined 12% 3 

Some High Dev.Work To I Fewer Intermediate 

Adapt ET Tooling. 

- Decrease HI her Weld Costs. Frames Required. ~ 

Option 5 Same As 6 

Some High Development I Good Synergism 

Welded Panel Baseline Wo~!~ A~~p~ ~ T~llng. With E.T. 

- Mechanically 1% 4 Some High Development j Good Synergism 

stened Panel Increase WorkTo Adapt ET Toollna With E.T. 

Option 7 Same As *TBD New Processes And I Good Synergism Extruded Panel Baseline Tooling Required. With E.T. 

• Insufficient Data Exists To 

Effectively AssessThls Option. 

GMR.91352 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
-

N 

-

Conclusions 

• Option 1 - Is Currently NLS Baseline, Is The Most Synergistic With 

External Tank And Requires The Least Development. 

• Option 2- Will Reduce Weight Over Baseline At-Small Additional Costs, 

However Weight Reduction May Be Offset By Additional 

Weight For Frame Attachment. Requires Additional DDT&E. 

• Option 3 - Has Highest Weight, Potential To Eliminate Some 

Intermediate Frames, And Reduced Panel Weight At 

Extensive Additional DDT&E Costs. 

• Option 4 - Has The Least Weight And The Potential To Eliminate Some 

Intermediate Frames. May Be Able To Reduce Panel Weight 

At Additional DDT&E Costs. 

• Option 5 - No Weight Increase, But Requires Some New Technology 

And Extensive Additional DDT&E Costs. 

• Option 6 - Slight Weight Increase, But Requires Some New Technology 

And Additional DDT&E Costs 

• Option 7 - Most Promising Concept If Proven To Be Feasible. 

I 

GMR.91352 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
-

~ 

( 

Recommendations 

• Maintain Baseline (Option 1) For Cycle ((J & Cycle 1. 

• Continue To Study The Following Viable L02 & LH2 Tank Alternative 

Skin Panel Designs During Cycle 1: 

Option 1 - Baseline Panel. 

Option 4 - Machined lsogrid Panel. 

• Follow Progress & Development Of Option 7 (Extruded Panel). 

This Option Has The Potential To Generate Substantial Cost Savings 

Over The Course Of Sustained Program. 

MARTIN MARIETTA op•-q1352 MANNED SPACF SYSTEMS 

( - ( 
-

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Packllge Page 1 

5.2.6.4.6 Alternate Panel Construction (#CV -STR-015-C) 

Objective 

This trade study developed and evaluated alternative panel construction methods for the LH2 tank 

barrel panels. 

Approach 

(a) Define a point of departure L02 tank panel. 

(b) Identify concept options for skin panels. 

(c) Estimate weight deltas,producibility, and cost 

(d) Evaluate options. 

(e) Select preferred option. 

Options Studied • LH2 Tank 

Option 1- Machine Panel With Tee Stiffeners (Baseline) 

Option 2 - Machined Blade-Stiffened Panel 

Option 3 - Machined Waffle Panel 

Option 4 - Machined Isogrid Panel 

Option 5 - Welded Panel 

Option 6- Mechanically Fastened Stiffened Panel 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel 

Key Study Results 

All options were compared to the Option 1 Reference Configuration. Option 2 had an 8% decrease 

in weight and ranked 2nd lowest cost. Option 3 bad a 5% increase in weight and was the 5th 

lowest cost. Option 4 had 12% decrease in weight and was 3ni lowest cost. Option 5 had the same 

weight as baseline and had the highest costs .. Option 6 had an increase weight of 1% and was 4th 

lowest cost. Option 7 had no weight increase. Cost estimates could not be performed on this option 

due to insufficient data. 

Conclusions 

Seven alternative construction methods were studied. The longitudinal tee-stiffened panels offered 

excellent synergism with ET and related tooling, and were lower in costs. Option 2 was eliminated 

due to poor External Tank synergism and complicated intermediate frame attachment Option 3 was 

eliminated due to excessive DDT &E costs. Option 4, although requiring additional development 

work, may be an attractive method of construction due to the possibility of eliminating intermediate 

frames and weight. Option 5's ET synergism was excellent but was eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 6 also had excellent ET synergism, but was also eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 7 could be the most promising of all the if the technology proves to be 

feasible. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain Option 1 as Baseline. Continue to study the following viable alternative designs during 

Cycle 1: 

Option 1- M/C Panel With Tee StiffeneD (Bueline) 

Option 4 - Machined isogrid paneL 

Follow the progress and development of Option 7 

123 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

J[ Jl •Machined Panel W/~••-StiffeniAg. 

• Synergiatic W/ External "rank. 

•Utilize• &xiatiAg E~ Proceaaea 

An4 ~ooliAg. 

Option 1 - Baeel.ine Panel. (P .O.D.) 

•Deaign Conaiatant With Maximum 

Axial Load. 

l r • Machined Panel W/ Blade-stiffening. 

• May Bot Utilize E~ Proceaaea 

And ~ool1A9. 

Option 2 - Mach. Bl.ade-Stiff. Panel. 

• Deai~Jn Conaiatant With Maxiaua 

Axial Load. 

• Machined W~fle Panel W/ Lon9. ' 

'lraniJV. stiffenin9. 

• ... Prooe•••• And ~oo11A9 

bqui.rec!. 

• Deai~Jnec! J'or Maxiaua Axial ' 

Option 3 - Kachineci Waffl.e Panel. Bendh9 Loadin9 Condition• · 

~ ,_. 

• Machined lao-Grid Panel With 

MUlti-Directional Stiff&DiD9. 

• ... Prooea-• And 'fool.J.Dg 

bquirec!. 

02t,j.on 4 - Kachineci :teocrrid Panel. 

• Deaiped J'or M•x1eva 8endin9 

Condition• ' Bi-Directional 

Loadin9. 

:c 

Option 5 -

r • SkiA With llaahi.ned Slota 'fo 

Accept ZXt:nuiona. 

• Extr1ldecl 'fee stiffener• • 

• llecbaAicall.y A .. .-bl.ed. 

• ... Prooea••• And 'foo11A9 

Option 6 - ... cluuU.cal.l.y l'aeteDad Panel. ~. 

• Pane1a Eztruded '!broup Circ:ular Die 

(stdnpra Extruded OD oatai.de Of Circle) • 

• After Pane1• Are Extruded 'fhey Are Beatec! 

And Rolled oat Into l'l.at Pane1• And 

Allow.d 'fo Cool. 

• Jt8quUu 35,000 "ron Pre ... 

• ... l'rooe .. •• And 'fool1A9 bquirec!. 

Option 7 - Bztzudad Panel. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

124 

Page 2 
-

National lAunch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.6.4.6 Alternate Panel Construction (#CV-STR-015-C) 

Objective 

This trade study developed and evaluated alternative panel construction methods for the LH2 tank 

barrel panels. 

Approach 

(a) Define a point of departure L02 tank panel. 

(b) Identify concept options for skin panels. 

(c) Estimate weight deltas,producibility, and cost 

(d) Evaluate options. 

(e) Select preferred option. 

Options Studied - LH2 Tank 

Option 1- Machine Panel With Tee Stiffeners (Baseline) 

Option 2 - Machined Blade-Stiffened Panel 

Option 3 - Machined Waffle Panel 

Option 4 - Machined lsogrid Panel 

Option 5 - Welded Panel 

Option 6- Mechanically Fastened Stiffened Panel 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel 

Key Study Results 

All options were compared to the Option 1 Reference Configuration. Option 2 had an 8% decrease 

in weight and ranked 2nd lowest cost. Option 3 had a 5% increase in weight and was the 5th 

lowest cost. Option 4 had 12% decrease in weight and was 3rd lowest cosL Option 5 had the same 

weight as baseline and had the highest costs .. Option 6 had an increase weight of 1% and was 4th 

lowest cost Option 7 had no weight increase. Cost estimates could not be performed on this option 

due to insufficient data. 

Conclusions 

Seven alternative construction methods were studied. The longitudinal tee-stiffened panels offered 

excellent synergism with ET and related tooling, and were lower in costs. Option 2 was eliminated 

due to poor External Tank synergism and complicated intennediate frame attachment. Option 3 was 

eliminated due to excessive DDT &E costs. Option 4, although requiring additional development 

work, may be an attractive method of construction due to the possibility of eliminating intermediate 

frames and weight. Option 5's ET synergism was excellent but was eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 6 also had excellent ET synergism, but was also eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 7 could be the most promising of all the if the technology proves to be 

feasible. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain Option 1 as Baseline. Continue to study the following viable alternative designs during 

Cycle 1: 

Option 1 - M/C Panel With Tee Stiffeners (Baseline} 

Option 4 - Machined isogrid panel. 

Follow the progress and development of Option 7 

125 
National Launch Sl_stem 1192 

][ 

Option 1 - Baseline Panel 

Cl,cle Zero Structures Data PackDr.e 

JC 

(P.O.D.) 

•Machined Panel W/Tee-Stiftening. 

•Synerqiatic W/ External Tank. 

•Otilizea Exiatinq ET Proceaaea 

And Tooling. 

•Deaign Conaiatant With Maximum 

AXi&l Load. 

• Machined Panel W/ Blade-Stitteninq. 

• May Not otilize ET Prooeaaea 

And Toolinq. l r • Deaiqn Conaiatant With Maximum 

Option 2 - Mach.Blade-Stiff. Panel Axial Load. 

• Machined Waffle Panel W/ Lonq. ' 

Tranav. stiffeJdng. 

• New Proceaaea And Tooling 

bquired. 

• Deaigned l'or Maxiaua Axi&l ' 

Option 3 - Machi.nec1 Waffle Panel Bending Loadinq Conditiona. 

Option 5 -

• Machined lao-Grid Panel With 

Multi-Directional Stiffeninq. 

• New Proce•-• And Toolinq 

Required. 

• Deaiqned l'or Maxiaua Bendinq 

Condition• ' Bi-Directional 

Loadinq. 

• 8k1n With II&~ Slota To 

Accept &ztruaiona. 

• &ztruct.d T- Stiffener a. r • Mechanically A .. .-bled. 

• 11ev Proceaaea And Toolinq 

Option 6 - Mechanical.l.y Fastened Panel Required. 

• Panela Extruded 'fhrouqh CJ.rcul.ar Die 

(Strinqera Extruct.d On outaide Of Circle). 

• After Panela Are Extruct.d They Are Seated 

And Rolled out Into l'lat Panela And 

Allowed To cool. 

• Requir .. 35,000 Ton Preaa. 

• New Proceaaea And Toolinq JW~qUired. 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

126 

Page 2 
-

~ 

3-S-009A 

(CV-STR-19A) 

lntertank Commonality 

Assessment 

Prepared By: Derek A. Townsend 

(504)257-0021 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1991 

IYIART/N MARIETTA 

DAT.91291 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
..... 

N 

00 

NLS lntertank Commonality CV-STR-19A 

Objective 

•Identify the Commonality Between HLLV, 1.5 Stage, 

& STS lntertanks 

Approach 

DAT.91' 

( 

• Develop a "Standalone" 1.5 Stage lntertank Configuration 

• Develop a "Standalone" HLL V lntertank Configuration 

• Compare "Standalone" Configs with Ref Config & ET liT's 

• Identify Part Commonality 

(A) Identical to ET Part 

(B) Similar to ET Part 

(C) Unique Part for NLS 

• Develop Weight Estimates for "Standalone" Configurations 

& Compare to Reference Configuration 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
-

~ 

Groundrules CV-STR-19A 

• lntertank Structure Definition Per MSFC Reference 

Layout NLS-0001 Dated 10/9/91 

• NLS Ref lntertank Used As The HLLV lntertank For This 

Study 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91297 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
1.5 Stage lntertank Groundrules CV-STR-19A 

• lntertank Length & Dia As ET 

• Basic Panel Construction Similar To ET 

• Omit All Scars For SRB Attach/Loads 

• Ground/Subsystem 1/F's & Penetrations As Ref (HLL V) 

• Frame Locations As Ref., Frames May Be Omitted 

• Frame Depths May Vary 

-

~ 

IWARTIN IWARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( -

( 
( 

Design Loads Comparision CV-STR-19A 

-

~.,.) 

-

DAl.9~297 

Shell Axial Design ET-Derived Core Tankage 

Loads - Limit 

Loads - lb/in 

D 0- 250 

D 251-1000 

1 oo1 - 1500 1 m + 1 1 1: 

I I I I I • 1so1 - 4ooo 

- 4001+ 

Standard ET HLL V 1.5 Stage Common 

Core 

/JitARTIN /JitARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
c: 

0 

·-

.... 

·-c: 

·-ItCl) 

c 

~ 

c 

~ Cl) 

.... 

c: -

1-

w 

• 

132 
-

w 

w 

ET lntertank Arrangement CV-STR-19A 

Ring Frame (4) 

- Fabricated 1-Beam 

Skin/Stringer Panels (6) 

-Mechanically Fastened 

Stringer-Stiffened Panel 

,n n, I • 

DAT.91297 

SRB Beam Main Ring Frame (1) 

• Fabricated 1-Beam ' _Fabricated 1-Beam 

SRB 1/F Ftg 

' - Machined Forging 

~~ 

.Thrust Panels (2) 

- Machined, Blade Stiffened 

, 

r--f1 h -

lnARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
ET lntertank Structure 

• Skin/Stringer Panel XSection 

Xt 852.80 

L02 Tank 1/F Xt 897.1 

Xt 941.4 

CV-STR-19A 

Xt 1123.15 

Xt 1034.2 LH2 Tank 1/F 

I Xt1082.0 I 

Xt 985.675 1 .080 Nominal . 

-It 

• II u I 

12.00 Typ ~ 

.... 

~ 

4Frs j_ t 

Frame XSect Area 

Xt 897.1 1.51 In sq 

Xt 941.4 1.961n sq 

Xt 985.675 6.05 in sq 

Xt 1034.2 2.241n sq 

Xt 1082.0 1.691n sq 

DAT.91' 

( ( -

20.00 j_ 165.00 R 

ISL (Ref) 

t 

2.50 ___, 

15° .071 

.92 -..I 

Nominal Stiffener Detail 

~ARTIN /J'tARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
-

~ 

v. 

Standalone HLLV lntertank* 

ET Ring Frame (4) 

• Fabricated 1-Beam 

NLS Skin/Stringer Panels (6) 

- Mechanically Fastened 

Stringer-Stiffened Panel 

rA Ac 

ETSRB Beam 

- Fabricated 1-Beam 

' 

~El 

CV-STR-19A 

It; 

ET Main Ring Frame (1) 

• Fabricated 1-Beam 

~ 

ET SRB 1/F Ftg 

- Machined Forging 

ET Thrust Panels (2) 

-Machined, Blade Stiffened 

, d "--< . , * Same As NLS Common Core lntertank 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.9~297 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
-

~ 

01 

Standalone HLLV lntertank CV-STR-19A 

• Skin/Stringer Panel XSection 

Xn 3123.15 

LH2 Tank 1/F Xn 2852.80 

L02 Tank 1/F 

I 

ii 

Xn 2897.1 

Xn 2941.4 

+ II • I 

12.00 Typ _ 

4 Frs I 

t .L 

Frame XSect Area 

Xn 2897.1 1.511nsq 

Xn 2941.4 1.96 in sq 

Xn 2985.675 6.05 in sq 

Xn 3034.2 2.241n sq 

Xn 3082.0 1.691n sq 

Xn 2985.675 

Xn 3034.2 

Xn3082.0 I 

.150 Nominal 1 

165.00 R 2o.ooj_ ISL (Ref) 

' 2.50....., ---1 r- 1.38 

1\ 

15° 

.92~-~~ 

Nominal Stiffener Detail 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
-

~ 

Standalone 1.5 Stage liT 

ET Ring Frame (5) 

• Fabricated 1-Beam 

NLS Skin/Stringer Panels (8) 

- Mechanically Fastened 

Stringer-Stiffened Panel 

,n Ac # r 

~~ 

DAT.91297 

CV-STR-19A 

' 

IYIART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
00 

w 

-

• 

Standalone 1.5 Stage lntertank CV-STR-19A 

• Skin/Stringer Panel XSection 

Xn 3123.15 

LH2 Tank 1/F Xn 2852.80 

L02 Tank 1/F Xn 2897.1 

Xn 2941.4 

I 

-R: 

• II .. I 

12.00 Typ 

4 Frs I 

t eL 

Frame · XSect Area 

Xn 2897.1 2.141n sq 

Xn 2941.4 2.141n sq 

Xn 2985.675 2.141n sq 

Xn 3034.2 2.141n sq 

Xn 3082.0 2.141n sq -

Xn 2985.675 

Xn 3034.2 

Xn3082.0 I 

.088 Nominal 1 

20.001.. 165.00 R 

ISL (Ref) 

' 2.50 ~ 

15° .066 

.92 ~ -~~ 

Nominal Stiffener Detail 

/JitARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91i MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
-

~ 

\0 

Weight Estimates 

Hardware 

PaneiAssy 

Panel# 1 

Panel# 2 

Panel# 3 

Panel# 4 

Panel# 5 

Panel# 6 

Panel #7 

Frames Panel# 8 

SRB Ring Frame (2985) 

Ring Frame (2897) 

Ring Frame (2941) 

Ring Frame (3034) 

Ring Frame (3082) 

SRB Beam & Fittings 

Misc. Hardware 

Sub-Total Dry Wt 

Contingency (5°/o) 

Total Dry Wt -

DAT.91297 

ET120 

7563.10 

653.20 

615.30 

676.60 

1906.10 

1907.30 

642.90 

619.30 

542.40 

1532.70 

625.80 

203.20 

220.20 

259.70 

223.80 

1952.60 

1077.50 

12125.90 

606.30 

12732.20 

CV-STR-19A 

HLLV Ref 1.5 Stage Ref 1.5 Stage 

9256.66 9256.66 5014.80 

920.97 920.97 626.85 

900.03 900.03 626.85 

900.03 900.03 626.85 

1906.10 1906.10 626.85 

1907.30 1907.30 626.85 

900.63 900.63 626.85 

900.63 900.63 626.85 

920.97 920.97 626.85 

1609.20 1609.20 1058.20 

625.80 692.70 211.64 

203.20 203.20 211.64 

220.20 220.20 211.64 

259.70 259.70 211.64 

233.40 233.40 211.64 

1952.60 0.00 0.00 

999.61 1199.69 1173.40 

13818.15 12065.55 7246.40 

690.91 603.28 362.32 

14509.06 12668.30 7608.72 

/JIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
-

a 

1.5 Stage Tooling Impacts CV-STR-19A 

• Adaptors Required To Locate Frames With A Decreased 

Depth In The Half Section Tack Tool (T06A7395) & The Half 

Section Finish & Inspect Tool (T06A7399) 

- Further Impacts If The Frame Depth Should Increase 

•lntertank Assembly Tool (T06A7391) Will Not Be Impacted 

• Thrust Panel Handling Fixture Must Be Modified To 

Interface With New ±Y Fabricated Panels 

• Systems Installation Tool (T06A7424) Would Require 

Modification Only If Frame Depths Increased 

JnARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
... 

c: 

C1) 

E 

U) 

U) 

C1) 

U) 

U) 

<C 

~ 

·--

a:s 

c 

0 

E 

E 

0 

0 

~ 

c 

a:s 

t:: 

C1) 

... 

c:: -

• 

141 
lntertank Commonality 

-

~ 

Part Title 

P3 Panel# 3 

P4 Panel# 4 (-Y) 

P5 Panel# 5 (+Y) 

P6 Panel #6 

P7 Panel #7 

PB Panel# 8 (-Z) 

81 SRB Beam 

E = As External Tank 

N = NLS Unique (HLL V) 

U = 1.5 Stage Unique 

DAT.91 

( 

Part Status 

ET HLLV 1.5 Stg 

E N u 

E E u 

E E u 

E N u 

E N u 

E N u 

E E -

( 

CV-STR-19A 

1.5 Stage Modification 

Resized For 1.5 Stage Loads 

'" Thrust Panels Replaced 

>- By Skin/Stringer Panels 

On 1.5 Stage. Common 

1

..- Panels +Y 

Resized For 1.5 Stage Loads 

Resized For 1.5 Stage Loads. 

ldendical To Panel # 2 

Resized For 1.5 Stage Loads. 

ldendical To Panel# 1 

SRB Beam Omitted 

IJ.'1ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

lntertank Commonality CV-STR-19A 

81 

~~ 

- IPS~ P6 P41 P2 P1 ~ P3 PSI P7 ~ 

1M 

- o- -- -~- -o -1- F1 

I I I 

• --

-~= -- -6- --- F2 

-- -- ---F3 . 

-- -- -L t--1- F4 

+ ---t- _Do_ + ---Fs 

I I Fwd ' ' -Z -Y +Z +Y 

+ 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91297 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
lntertank Commonality 

-t 

Part Title 

F1 Frame 2897.1 

F2 Frame 2941.4 

F3 Frame 2985.675 

F4 Frame 3034.2 

F5 Frame 3082.0 

P1 Panel #1 ( +Z) 

P2 Panel#2 

E = As External Tank 

N = NLS Unique (HLL V) 

U = 1.5 Stage Unique 

OAT.91' 

( 

Part Status 

ET HLLV 1.5 Stg 

E E u 

E E u 

E E u 

E E u 

E E u 

E N u 

E N u 

( 

CV-STR-19A 

1.5 Stage Modification 

I"'' 

Common 12.0 Frames On 

> 1.5 Stage, Resized For 1.5 

Stage Loads 

,J 

Resized For 1.5 Stage Loads 

Resized For 1.5 Stage Loads 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
Evaluation Summary CV-STR-19A 

Critera Common Core Unique 

HLLV * 1.5 Stage HLLV 1.5 Stage 

Weight 14509 12668 14509 7608 

# Of New Major Assys 4 1 4 6 

# Of New lnstls 1 1 1 1 

-

~ 

Vl 

Tooling Assy Impacts NLS Ref As Ref As Ref Minor Assy 

Tool Impacts 

Test STA Reqd Verified By STA Reqd STA Reqd Analysis 

*Unique For 1.5 Stage Only, On NLS Common Core 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91297 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Conclusions CV-STR-19A 

Conclusions 

• Significant Weight Savings (approx. 5 Klbs) Can Be 

Realized By Designing A Standalone/Unique 1.5 Stage 

lntertank 

• Unique Design Can Still Be Produced On Existing ET 

Tooling With Minimum Modifications To Locators Etc. 

• Very Little Commonality Exists Between HLL V & 1.5 

~ Stage When Designed As "Standalone" Configurations 

• Unique Designs Requires 2 STA's 

Recommendation 

• Perform A More In Depth Analysis During Cycle 1 To 

Confirm Weight Savings 

WTART/N MARIETTA 

DAT.91 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
National Launch System 1!92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge Page 1 

5.2.5.4.2 Intertank Commonality Assessment(#3-S-009A) 

Objective 

Study the commonality between lll..LV, 1.5 Stage, and STS Intenanks and recommend degree of 

commonality. 

Approach 

(a) Develop a "Standalone" 1:ll..L V intenank config. 

(b) Develop a "Standalone" 1.5 Stage intertank config. 

(c) Compare "Standalone" configs. with the reference. 

(d) Identify the level of pan commonality between m...L V, 1.5 Stage, and STS intertanks. 

(e) Develop weight estimates and compare to reference. 

Groundrules 

Intenank length and diameter as ET. 

Basic panel construction similar to ET. 

Omit all requirements for SRB attachment on 1.5 Stage. 

Interfaces and penetrations as the reference. 

Frame locations as reference, frames may be omitted or reduced in size. 

Frame depths may vary. 

Key Study Results 

The standard m...L V intertank was identified as almost identical to the common core NLS intenank, 

indicating that ASRB loads are the prime driver. A significant weight saving of over 5 Klbs can be 

achieved by designing a standalone 1.5 Stage intertank. This requires an additional STA which 

adds DDT&E cost. The standalone intenank can be produced on existing ET tooling with minimal 

modifications. 

Conclusions 

A standalone intenank for the 1.5 Stage is very attractive due to the significant weight savings 

(40%). Very little pan commonality exists between STS, HLLV and 1.5 Stage intenanks when 

designed as unique standalone configurations. Commonality does exist in panel construction 

methods, tooling, and build approach. 

Study Recommendations 

During Cycle 1 a more in depth study should be performed to confirm 1.5 Stage intenank weight 

savings. This study should also incorporate results from trade study on stiffener pitch sensitivity 

(see 5.2.5.4.3). 

147 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Common Ring Frame (5) 

- Fabricated I-Beam 

NLS Skin/Stringer Panels (8) 

- Mechanically Fastened 

Stringer-Stiffened Panel 

(Thrust Panels Omitted) 

xn 2852.80 

L02 Tank I/F 

I 

Xn 2897.1 Xn 3034.2 

Xn 2941.4 xn3082.0 

Xn 3123.15 

LH2 Tank I/F 

Nominal I 

12.00 Typ 

5 Frs 

I Xn 2985.675~-088 

T T · -r ·'165~00 R 

'---j_ .l .L ISL fef) 

-flSkin/Stringer Panel XSection 

Intertank 

NSTS 

HLLV 

1.5 Stage 

2.50 

Weight 

12152 

14509 

7608 

Nominal Stiffener Detail 

1.5 Stage Standalone Inl.cztank 

Additional Information 

Sec Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

148 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.5.4.2 Intertank Commonality Assessment(#3-S-009A) 

Objective 

Study the commonality between 1-ll..LV, 1.5 Stage, and STS lntenanks and recommend degree of 

commonality. 

Approach 

(a) Develop a "Standalone" HLL V intertank. config. 

(b) Develop a "Standalone" 1.5 Stage intertank config. 

(c) Compare "Standalone" configs. with the reference. 

(d) Identify the level of pan commonality between HLL V, 1.5 Stage, and STS intertanks. 

(e) Develop weight estimates and compare to reference. 

Groundrules 

lntertank length and diameter as ET. 

Basic panel construction similar to ET. 

Omit all requirements for SRB attachment on 1.5 Stage. 

Interfaces and penetrations as the reference. 

Frame locations as reference, frames may be omitted or reduced in size. 

Frame depths may vary. 

Key Study Results 

The standard HLL V intcnank was identified as almost identical to the common core NLS intertank:, 

indicating that ASRB loads are the prime driver. A significant weight saving of over 5 Klbs can be 

achieved by designing a standalone 1.5 Stage intertank. This requires an additional STA which 

adds DDT &E cosL The standalone intertank can be produced on existing ET tooling with minimal 

modifications. 

Conclusions 

A standalone intertank for the 1.5 Stage is very attractive due to the significant weight savings 

(40%). Very little part commonality exists between STS, ffi..LV and 1.5 Stage intertanks when 

designed as unique standalone configurations. Commonality does exist in panel construction 

methods, tooling, and build approach. 

Study Recommendations 

During Cycle 1 a more in depth study should be performed to confirm 1.5 Stage intertank weight 

savings. This study should also incorporate results from trade study on stiffener pitch sensitivity 

(see 6.2.5.4.3). 

149 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Common Ring Frame (5) 

- Fabricated I-Beam 

NLS Skin/Stringer Panels (8) 

- Mechanically Fastened 

Stringer-Stiffened Panel 

(Thrust Panels Omitted) 

Xn 2852.80 

L02 Tank I/F 

I 

Xn 2897.1 Xn 3034.2 

xn 2941.4 xn3082.0 

xn 3123.15 

LH2 Tank I/F 

Nominal I 

12.00 Typ 

5 Frs 

I Xn 2985.675~-0BB 

T T · -r ··165~00 R 

'----j_ l.. J.. ISL fef) 

fr 

Skin/Stringer Panel XSection 

Intertank Weight 

NSTS 12152 .066 

HLLV 14509 

1.5 Stage 7608 

.92.....) 

Nominal Stiffener Detail 

1.5 Stage Standalone Intertank 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

150 
v. 

-

-

( 

Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study 

3-S-0018 (CV-STR-188)- Fwd Skirt 

3-S-0108 (CV-STR-158)- L02 Tank 

3-S-0098 (CV-STR-198)- lntertank 

3-S-OOSC (CV-STR-20C) - LH2 Tank 

en 

CD 

CD 

w 

I 

en 

I 

0 

0 

..... 

tD 

-4 

... 

m 

c. 

CD 

en 

... 

r: 

a. 

'< 

Prepared By: Dilip Dudgaonkar 

(504)257-0076 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Pacluzge Page 1 

5.2.5.4.3 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study (# 3-S-0098) 

Objective 

Develop the intenank weight sensitivities of varying pitch and stiffener size. 

Approach 

a) Use current configurations as baseline 

b) Use the Panda ll program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The current hat section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda ll was used to 

optimize stiffener size for varying pitch and load. Ring frame spacing based on the reference 

configuration was used. The weight( tbar) trend ~sults shows that an optimum occurs at a suinger 

pitch of 7.33 inches for an axial compression load of 4400lb(m. However the optimum stringer 

section indicated by Panda needs an increase in the attachment flange width to provide room and 

edge distance for the skin/suinger attachments. Once this modification is incorporated the current 

reference becomes close to optimum. 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch wbile maintaining the reference 

configuration skin/hat section fabricated construction approach. The modified Panda n optimized 

configuration is lighter compared to the baseline configuration. However modifications to produce 

a practical design may not provide significant weight savings on a common 1/f driven by HLL V 

loads. 

Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration 1/f stringer pitch and size. During cycle 1, study different 

sainger configurations when defining the 'stand alone' 1.5 stage intertank identified in section 

5.2.5.4.2 

1S2 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

lntertank 

Nx Vs tbar 

Stringer 

Spacing • 

4.0 • 

~-3~ 

4.43" 

Currant Design 

Stringer 

Spacing 

-5.0. 

+ 2.59" 

t 

Stringer Spacing = 7.33" 

Frame Spacing • 45.0" 

Tbar.0.238" 

Additional Information 

Stringer 

Spacing • 

7.33. 

Stringer 

Spacing 

·10.0. 

Stringer 

Spacing • 

12.0. 

Panda II Optlmlud Design 

(Nx • 4400 lblln ult) 

Stringer Spacing • 7 .33" 

Frame Spacing • 45.0" 

Tbar.0.21" 

Nx lblin 

-•-4400 

--0..,-- 5200 

-•-5600 

• 

2.91. 

~2.0 

Panda II Optimized Design 

(Nx • 5200 lblln ult) 

Stringer Spacing • 10.0" 

Frame Spacing • 45.0" 

Tbar.0.241 

Details of this study are contained in Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 

153 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.5.4.3 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study (# 3-S-0098) 

Objective 

Develop the intenank weight sensitivities of varying pitch and stiffener size. 

Approach 

a) Use current configurations as baseline 

b) Use the Panda n program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The current hat section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda n was used to 

optimize stiffener size for varying pitch and load. Ring frame spacing based on the reference 

configuration was used. The weight( tbar) trend results shows that an optimum occurs at a stringer 

pitch of 7.33 inches for an axial compression load of 4400lb/in. However the optimum stringer 

section indicated by Panda needs an increase in the attachment flange width to provide room and 

edge distance for the skin/stringer attachments. Once this modification is incorporated the current 

reference becomes close to optimum. 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the sttingerpitch while maintaining the reference 

configuration skin/hat section fabricated construction approach. The modified Panda II optimized 

configuration is lighter compared to the baseline configuration. However modifications to produce 

a practical design may not provide significant weight savings on a common I/1' driven by HLL V 

loads. 

Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration III' sttinger pitch and size. During cycle 1. study different 

sttinger configurations when defining the 'stand alone' 1.5 stage intenank identified in section 

6.2.5.4.2 

154 
--

National Launch System 1 !92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

lntertank 

Nx Vs tbar 

Stringer 

Spacing. 

4.0 • 

J41.3~ 

4.43" 

CUrrent Design 

Stringer 

Spacing 

·5.0. 

+ 2.59" 

71 t 

Stringer Spacing • 7 .33" 

Frame Spacing = 45.0" 

Tbar•0.238" 

Additional Information 

Stringer 

Spacing 

·10.0 • 

Stringer 

Spacing. 

12.0. 

Panda II Optimized Design 

(Nx = 4400 lblln ult) 

Stringer Spacing • 7 .33" 

Frame Spacing = 45.0" 

Tbar.0.21" 

Nx lb/in 

-•-4400 

--....C--5200 

-•-5600 

2.91. 

~2.0 

Panda II Optimized Design 

(Nx • 5200 lblln ult) 

Stringer Spacing • 1 0.0'' 

Frame Spacing = 45.0" 

Tbar.0.241 

Details of this study are contained in Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.<XH.Book 1 

155 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

156 
-

~ 

;g 

rt'J 

n 

t3 

z 

C:J 

"'0 

:l# '-1 

JTl 

tr.! 

r·· 

l~ -.,. ,_ 

" z 

0 

-1 

::!l 

r-

~ 0 

( 

3-S-010A 

(CV-STR-15A) 

L02 Tank Impact vs. Ullage 

Pressure Trade Study 

Prepared By : Tom Severs 

(504} 257-5226 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

TJ5-B1-137 

Approved By: R. Simms 

/JITARTIN /JITARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Objective and Approach 3-5-010-A 

Objective 

• This trade develops the impacts to the L02 tank pressure 

shell for ullage pressures ranging from 10 psig to 80 psi g. 

Approach 

• Determine pressure capability of the reference configuration. 

• Establish critical conditions assuming uniformly distributed 

~ loads. 

co 

TJ8-B1 

( 

• Determine the minimum ullage allowable ullage pressure 

below which no further weight savings is realized. 

• Perform analysis to determine membrane and weld land 

thickness requirements of the Reference Configuration for 

various pressures. 

/JirART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
~ -

.' 

Approach (Continued) 3-S-010-A 

• Develop weight impacts compared to the Reference 

Configuration. 

• Evaluate impact to manufacturing for increased 

thicknesses. 

• Evaluate the weight savings if the biaxial yield theory is 

used in the proof test analysis. 

• Document results of the study and prepare conclusions. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

, 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJS-B~-437 
Ground Rules & Assumptions 3-5-010-A 

• Nominal tank configuration as per MSFC Cycle 0 definition 

as of 9/13/91. (30 psi maximum ullage pressure) 

• The study addresses tank membrane and weld land 

requirements only, stiffener sizing and pitch, and frame 

configuration and pitch is as the reference configuration. 

• Thicknesses are taken to a zero margin before additional 

material is added. 

§ • SF = 1.40 on ultimate, 1.10 on yield. Room Temperature 

Proof Factor = 1.05 

• Room temperature material properties. AI 2219-T87, 

Ftu = 63 ksi (Parent), Ftu= 31 ksi (Weld) 

• Constant tank internal volume assumed. 

• Hydrostatic proof test. (Similar to the ET.) 

/JIIART/N IYIARIETTA 

TJS-81 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Ullage Pressure Req't vs. Capability 3-5-01 0-A 

1:.084 ~ ---

Flight 

Pressure 

a ____ _ 

30 

I 

37 

-.-..... -lllty 

a: t:.17o {I ;. ~~------ -

t:.215 { 

1:.136 

'TJS-81-137 

D 

c 

-------

0 20 40 60 80 

Pressure [psi] 

Pressures [psi] 

Location Ref. Con fig. Proof 

Capability Test 

Fwd Dome 40.0 41.3 I 

Fwd Barrel 46.2 45.8 I 

I 

Aft Barrel 58.5 50.3 I 

I 

I 

Aft Dome 70.6 67.4 I 

I 

/'f!IARTIN /'filAR/ETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Proof Test Requirements 3-S-010-A 

• Max. Design Pressures Based on Proof Test 

Max. Ullage Pressure [psig] 

Location Ref. Conflg. 30 psi 40psl 50 psi 60 psi 70 psi 80 psi 

Capability 

Fwd Dome 40.0 41.3 51.3 61.3 71.3 81.3 91.3 

-

~ Fwd Barrel 46.2 45.8 55.8 65.8 75.8 85.8 95.8 

Aft Barrel 58.5 50.3 60.3 70.3 80.3 90.3 100.3 

Aft Dome 70.6 67.4 77.4 87.4 97.4 107.4 117.4 

lnARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ5-B1 

( ( ( 
( ( 

Delta Membrane Thicknesses 3-S-010-A 

Thicknesses in Inches 

Max. Ullage Pressure [pslg] 

Location Ref. Conflg. 30 psi 40 psi 50 psi 60 psi 70 psi 80 psi 

Thickness 

Fwd Dome .066 to .084 .005 .042 .078 .115 .152 .189 

-

~ Fwd Barrel .170 .000 .035 .072 .109 .146 .183 

Aft Barrel .215 .000 .007 .043 .080 .117 .154 

Aft Dome .122 to .136 .000 .025 .062 .099 .135 .172 

MARTIN /J'IARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ8-B1-137 
Weld Land Thicknesses [Inches] 3-S-010-A 

Max. Ullage Pressure [psig] 

Location Ref. Conflg. 30psl 40psl 50 psi 60 psi 70 psi 80 psi 

Thickness ' 

Fwd Dome .200 .200 .274 .327 .381 .434 .487 

- Fwd Barrel .320 .320 .320 .351 .405 .458 .511 ~ 

Aft Barrel .360 to .387 .320 .322 .375 .429 .482 .535 

Aft Dome .320 .320 .413 .467 .520 .573 .627 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

TJ$-81 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Membrane Delta Weight [Lbs.] 3-S-010-A 

Reference Delta Wt. Delta Wt. Delta Wt. Delta Wt. Delta Wt. Delta Wt. 

Wt. 30psl 40 psi 50 psi 60 psi 70 psi 80 psi 

FWD DOME 1,225.90 65.60 551.05 1,023.37 1,508.82 1,994.27 2,479.71 

FWD BARREL1

' 

2 2,473.16 0.00 475.91 979.01 1,482.11 1,985.21 2,488.31 

AFT BARREL 1

• 

2 3,205.16 0.00 95.18 584.69 1,087.79 1,590.89 2,093.99 

AFT DOME 2,226.50 0.00 328.00 813.45 1,298.90 1,771.22 2,256.67 

-

~ SUB-TOTAL 9,130.72 65.60 1,450.14 3,400.52 5,377.61 7,341.59 9,318.68 

CONTINGENCY (8 °/o} 730.46 5.25 116.01 272.04 430.21 587.33 745.49 

TOTAL 9,861.18 70.85 1,566.15 3,672.56 5,807.82 7,928.91 10,064.18 

Wt. Factor3 1.00 1.11 1.25 1.40 1.54 1.69 

NOTE : 1) Barrel section weight does not include stringers. 

2) Barrel weight, MSFC database 9/30/91. 

3) Wt. factor Is based on weight Increase to total LOX tank. hiARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

T JS-31-~31 
-

~ 

Additional Results 3-S-010-A 

• The minimum ullage pressure for the LOX tank barrel 

sized for the proof test is approximately 10 psi g. This 

allows compression in the shell. To preclude 

compression in the LOX barrel in flight the pressure 

can not go below 25 psig. 

,._,A RTIN ,._,ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJs-a· 

{ ( ( 
-

~ 

( 

Manufacturing Impact Assessment 3-S-01 0-A 

• Manufacturing Impacts of Increased Thicknesses 

1.) Stretch Form of Gore Panels 

- Current vendor: American Hydro-Forming CA 

- Plate Thickness Up To 0.5" 

-Requires Incremental Development Program to Determine 

Max Thickness Capability 

- New Grippers & Hydraulic System Mod - No Commitment without Test Panel 

Option: Perform Industry Survey to Locate 

Potential Suppliers 

-Larger Machine Tools Do Exist 

Manufactured By L&F Industries CA 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 'TJS-B~-137 
i / 

i-

~~ Manufacturing Impact Assessment 3-S-01 0-A 

~ • Dome Assembly: 

i 2.) Weld Tooling Land Thickness Capacity 

Up To 0.400" - Minor Mods Only 

0.400" to 0.425" - Extensive Mod to Clamping System on 

1/2 Dome & Full Dome Weld Fixtures 

~ 0.425" to 0.500" - Extensive Mod to Clamping System on 

TJ8-B1 

( 

1/4 Dome Weld Fixtures 

0.500" to 0.627" -Major Rework on all Dome Tool for New 

Clamps and Clamping Loads 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
169 
"D 

:XI 

.... 

("J 

a 

2 

G> 

'"0 

lJ 

" JTI 

ro 

r-

)> 

2 

" z 

0 

--! 

:!! 

r 

~ C1 

-...... 

0 

Summary 3-S-010-A 

Weight Impact for an Ullage Pressure Reduction 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

Delta 6,000 

Weight 

(Lbs.] 4,000 

2,000 

0 

-2,000 

-4,000 

0 

Increasing Tool Mods (Dome 

Weld and Supplier Fab) --llt411---..... ~, 

Minor Dome l / 

TooiMods / 1.. ... 

Ref. /• 

Co?flg. l/ 

_________ 1/./ 

/

.71------------ . -

8 I I 

I 

I 

10 20 30 40 50 

Ullage Pressure [pslg] 

60 70 80 

/JIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJ8-B1 

( ( ( 
( 

Biaxial Yield Theory S~vings 3-S-010-A 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

Delta 6,000 

Weight 

[Lbs.] 4,000 

- 2,000 ...... 

- 0 

-2,000 

-4,000 

0 

TJ5-81-137 

Biaxial Yield 

Weight Savings 

I 

AWt. 

Lbs.] 

200 

300 

400 

300 

Increasing Tool 

Mods (Dome Weld ... •• 

and Supplier Fab) 

I 

Minor Dome ~h· Tool Mods //' 

• 

Weight Impact using 

biaxial yield theory 

for proof test. 

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 

Ullage Pressure [pslg] 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Summary 3-S-010-A 

• Significant weight impacts identified for increasing ullage 

pressure. 

- 3673 Lbs. at 50 psi 

-1 0064 Lbs at 80 psi 

• Thicker membrane will allow for some weight savings. 

- 50 Lbs at 50 psi 

- 600 Lbs at 80 psi 

a • Application of the biaxial yield theory will reduce the 

TJ5-B1 

( 

weight impacts by 200 Lbs. to 400 Lbs. 

• Impacts for dome tooling identified once ullage pressure 

exceeds 40 psi. 

• Impacts to gore stretch form tooling for ullage pressures 

in excess of 50 psi. 

n'1ARTIN n'1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
---.1 

~ 

Issues Identified During the Study 3-S-010-A 

Issue: LOX density decreases as the pressure 

increases. This may result in a larger LOX tank 

volume requirement. 

Resolution: LOX volume is not significantly affected by the 

increased ullage pressure if the tank is vented 

to LOX saturation shortly before launch. (This 

is the current procedure.) 

Issue: 

Resolution: 

Thicker membrane will reduce the stiffener 

requirement. 

Optimization of the LOX tank wall 

construction (frames and stringers) is 

estimated to save up to 600 Lbs. (Small 

compared to the overall impact.) 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

TJS-81-137 
...... 

-

~ 

TJ8-B1 

( 

Issues Identified During the Study 3-S-01 0-A 

Issue: The study was based on ET type pressure 

time history data. The STME requires a 

different pressure profile which is currently 

being defined by the propulsion team. 

Resolution: Update this trade once the new pressure data 

is obtained from the propulsion group. 

IJitARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
-

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.4.4.3 L02 Tank Sizing vs. Pressure (3-S-OlOA) 

Objective 

This trade study develops the impacts to the L02 tank pressure shell for ullage pressures of 10 psig 

to 80 psig. (The baseline ullage pressure is 30 psig). 

Approach 

(a) Detennine pressure capability of the Reference Configmation 

(b) Assume uniform load distribution and establish critical load conditions 

(c) Perform analysis to determine membrane and weld land thickness requirements for pressures 

above the capability of the Reference Configuration 

(d) Develop weight impacts to the Reference Configuration 

(e) Evaluate impact to manufacturing for increased thickness 

(f) Evaluate whether impacts can be reduced by the use of the biaxial yield theory and frame size 

reduction. 

(g) Document results of the study and prepare conclusions 

Options Studied 

Ullage pressures in 10 psig increments from 10 psig to 80 psig 

Key Results 

The weight impacts for a specific pressure is approximately 200 Lbs per psi. Minor tooling 

modifications are necessary for any increase in ullage pressure. Major tooling impacts occur once 

ullage pressures exceed 40 psig. There is a weight reduction to the LOX tank for ullage pressures 

below 30 psig. Ullage pressure may be as low as 10 psig before the weight reduction trend ends. 

Since the shell is sized for the proof test, a 300 Lbs. to 400 Lbs. reduction to the weight penalty 

may be realized by using the biaxial yield theory. This weight reduction is limited by the flight 

membrane thickness requirement 

Conclusions 

This study identified the weight impacts for ullage pressures between 10 and 80 psig. The weight 

increase is fairly linear and unbounded for increasing ullage pressures. The weight reduction is 

linear and bounded for decreasing ullage pressures. 

Recommendations 

Use the results of this trade as an input to the propulsion studies of engine performance vs. ullage 

pressure. 

175 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

IIIII 

9001 

BIOI 

'7001 

6011 

5111 

4101 

3101 

2101 

1111 

I 

-1111 

-2111 

t=.084 

t•.170 

t•.215 

t•.136 

' 

!'light 

Pres sur 

Pressure [psi) 

n .a ..... ....,._-~ 

•i•d•l ........ 

u ........ SOl :r.a.. 

C-.t.) 

-3010 -M~--~------~----~----~----~----~----~~ 11 20 31 40 51 61 71 81 

U1lage Pressure [psig) 

Additional Information 

See Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

176 

Page 2 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6.2.4.4.3 L02 Tank Sizing vs. Pressure (3-S-OlOA) 

Objective 

Page 1 

This trade study develops the impacts to the L02 tank pressme shell for ullage pressures of 10 psig 

to 80 psig. (The baseline ullage pressure is 30 psig). 

Approach 

(a) Detennine pressure capability of the Reference Configuration 

(b) Assume uniform load distribution and establish critical load conditions 

(c) Perform analysis to determine membrane and weld land thickness requirements for pressures 

above the capability of the Reference Configuration 

(d) Develop weight impacts to the Reference Configuration 

(e) Evaluate impact to manufacturing for increased thickness 

(0 Evaluate whether impacts can be reduced by the use of the biaxial yield theory and frame size 

reduction. 

(g) Document results of the study and prepare conclusions 

Options Studied 

Ullage pressures in 10 psig increments from 10 psig to 80 psig 

Key Results 

The weight impacts for a specific pressure is approximately 200 Lbs per psi. Minor tooling 

modifications are necessary for any increase in ullage pressure. Major tooling impacts occur once 

ullage pressures exceed 40 psig. There is a weight reduction to the LOX tank for ullage pressures 

below 30 psig. Ullage pressure may be as low as 10 psig before the weight reduction trend ends. 

Since the shell is sized for the proof test, a 300 Lbs. to 400 Lbs. reduction to the weight penalty 

may be realized by using the biaxial yield theory. This weight reduction is limited by the flight 

membrane thickness requirement 

Conclusions 

This study identified the weight impacts for ullage pressures between 10 and 80 psig. The weight 

increase is fairly linear and unbounded for increasing ullage pressures. The weight reduction is 

linear and bounded for decreasing ullage pressures. 

Recommendations 

Use the results of this trade as an input to the propulsion studies of engine performance vs. ullage 

pressure. 

177 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

11110 

9001 

8001 

7000 

6001 

5001 

4000 

3001 

2001 

1111 

0 

-1010 

-2000 

t=.084 

' t=.066 

t•.170 

t•.136 

!'light 

Pre:s:sur psi 

0 20 40 60 80 

Pressure [psi) 

._ :t~aere&Si.!f 'l'oo1 llo4s ... 

<•o•e We14 & Swpp1ier F. ) 

.._..._ 1..-et wia 

•i•dalh~ 

, ........ 3M .... 

Ceast.) 

-3010 -M~----~----~-----+----~------~----~----~ 11 21 30 40 50 60 71 81 

Ullage Pressure (psig) 

Additional Information 

See Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.001.Book 1 for more detailed results 

178 

Page 2 
-....J 

\() 

( 

Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study 

3-S-0018 (CV-STR-188)- Fwd Skirt 

3-S-01 08 (CV-STR-158) - L02 Tank 

3-S-0098 (CV-STR-198) - lntertank 

3-S-OOSC (CV-STR-20C) - LH2 Tank 

en 

CD 

CD 

w 

I 

en 

I 

0 

0 

.... 

m 

-t 

... 

m 

a. 

CD 

Yl 

c 

c. 

'< 

Prepared By: Dilip Dudgaonkar 

(504)257-0076 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System U92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.4.4.4 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study (# 3-S-0108) 

Objective 

Develop the L02 Tank weight sensitivities of varying pitch and stiffener size. 

Approach 

a) Use current configurations as baseline 

b) Use the Panda n program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The current internal T section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda n was 

used to optimize stringer size for varying pitch and load. Ring frame spacing based on the 

reference configuration was used. The weight (tbar) trend shows that an optimum occurs at a 

stringer pitch of 4.0 inches for an axial compression load of 960 lb{mch. 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch whDe maintaining the reference .._.,c 

configurations integrally machined longitudinal tee stiffened panel approach. The Panda n 

optimized configuration developed offers weight savings compared to the baseline configuration. It 

does however require a thicker billet and closer stiffener pitch. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration L02 tank barrel configuration. During cycle 1, study an 

alternate barrel panel with reduced stringer spacing and/or varying frame spacing. 

180 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero 

0.18 0.16 I 

0.14 

0.12 .. 

as 0.1 • 

.a 

1- 0.08 

0.06 

0.04 

0.02 

0 

Stringer 

Spacing 

=4.0 

I 

Current Design 

Stringer Spaclng=10.832" 

Frame Spaclng=34.9" 

Tskln=0.170 

Tbar:0.193 

Additional Information 

Lox Tank 

Nx Vs Tbar 

Stringer Stringer 

Spacing Spacing 

-5.o -7.33 

Optimized Design 

Nxd60 lblln 

Stringer Spaclng..t.o" 

Frame Spaclng:34.9" 

Tskln:0.067 

Tbar:0.0963 

Structures Data Pac/Uige Page 2 

Nx lb/in 

-•-965 

---o--1345 

-•-1600 

Stringer 

Spacing 

·10.0 

1.80" 

Optlmlud Design 

Nx•1345lblln 

Stringer Spaclng-4.0" 

Frame Spaclng=34.9" 

TskJn.0.075 

Tbar.0.1043 

Details of this study are contained in Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 

181 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.4.4.4 Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity Study (# 3-S-OlOB) 

Objective 

Develop the L02 Tank weight sensitivities of varying pitch and stiffener size. 

Approach 

a) Use current configurations as baseline 

b) Use the Panda n program to produce panel weight data with varying stringer pitch and axial 

loading (lb per circumferential inch) 

c) Document assumptions made and factors of safety used. 

d) Produce t bar vs pitch sensititivities 

e) Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

Key Study Results 

The current internal T section stringers were used as the baseline configuration and Panda II was 

used to optimize stringer size for varying pitch and load. Ring frame spacing based on the 

reference configuration was used. The weight (tbar) trend shows that an optimum occurs at a 

stringer pitch of 4.0 inches for an axial compression load of 960 lb{mch. 

Conclusions 

Weight sensitivity data was generated by varying the stringer pitch while maintaining the reference 

configurations integrally machined longitudinal tee stiffened panel approach. The Panda II 

optimized configuration developed offers weight savings compared to the baseline configuration. It 

does however require a thicker billet and closer stiffener pitch. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the reference configuration L02 tank barrel configuration. During cycle 1, study an 

alternate barrel panel with reduced stringer spacing and/or varying frame spacing. 

182 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

0.14 

Lox Tank 

Nx Vs Tbar 

~:~:I 

... 0.12 ·-===~ as 0.1 •---- .a 

t- 0.08 

0.06 

0.04 

0.02 

Nx lb/in 

-•-965 

-Q--1345 

-•-1600 

0 +-------+-------~----~ Stringer 

Spacing 

=4.0 

~1.25.-1 

I 

Current Design 

Stringer Spaclng:10.832" 

Frame Spaclng:34.9" 

Tskln:0.170 

Tbar:0.193 

Additional Information 

Stringer 

Spacing 

=5.0 

Stringer 

Spacing 

=7.33 

Optimized Design 

Nx:9601blln 

Stringer Spaclng:4.0" 

Frame Spaclng:34.9" 

Tskln:0.067 

Tbar:0.0963 

Stringer 

Spacing 

a10.0 

1.so· 

Optimized Design 

Nx=13451b/ln 

Stringer Spaclng:4.0" 

Fr11me Spaclng:34.9" 

Tskln.0.075 

Tbar.0.1 043 

Details of this study are contained in Doc #MMC.NLS.SR.001.Book 1 

183 

2.1o· 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFI' BLANK 

184 
"'0 

::0 

~ 

n 

I'll 

0 

z 

C; 

" ~ .-' 

.... 

iii 

t"J .-:r. 

-·--, 

~---

~ 

:2 

0 

-~! 

::!! 

,... 

~ 0 

-

00 

t.ll 

( 

3-S-010C 

(CV-STR-15C) 

, L02 Tank Alternate Panel 

& 

3-S-0080 

(CV-STR-200) 

LH2 Tank Alternate Panel 

Construction 

en 

CD 

CD 

w 

I 

en 

I 

0 

0 

(X) 

c 

-1 

.... 

m 

Q. 

CD 

en 

... 

c:: 

Q. 

'< 

Prepared By: G.M.Roule' 

(504) 257-0020 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Packllge Page 1 

5.2.4.4.5 Alternate Panel Construction (#CV-STR-015-C) 

Objective 

Develop and evaluate alternative panel construction methods for the L02 tank barrel panels. 

Approach 

(a) Define a point of depanure & Identify concept options for skin panels. 

(b) Estimate weight deltas,producibility, and cost. 

(c) Evaluate options. 

(d) Select preferred option. 

Options Studied - L02 Tank 

Option 1- Machine Panel With Tee Stiffeners (Baseline) 

Option 2 - Machined Blade-Stiffened Panel 

Option 3 - Machined Waffle Panel 

Option 4 - Machined lsogrid Panel 

Option 5 - Welded Panel 

Option 6 - Mechanically Fastened Stiffened Panel 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel 

Key Study Results 

All options were compared to the Option 1 Reference Configuration. Option 2 had an 8% decrease 

in weight and ranked 2nd lowest cost. Option 3 had a 5% incmLse in weight and was the 5th 

lowest cost. Option 4 had 12% decrease in weight and was 3m lowest cost. OptionS had the same 

weight as baseline and had the highest costs. Option 6 had an increase weight of 1% and was 4th 

lowest cost. Option 7 had no weight increase. Cost estimates could not be perfonned on this option 

due to insufficient data. 

Conclusions 

Seven alternative construction methods were studied. The longitudinal tee-stiffened panels offered 

excellent synergism with ET and related tooling, and were lower in costs. Option 2 was eliminated 

due to poor External Tank synergism and complicated intermediate ftame attachment. Option 3 was 

eliminated due to excessive DDT &E costs. Option 4, although requiring additional development 

work, may be an attractive method of construction due to the possibility of eliminating intermediate 

frames and weight. Option S's ET synergism was excellent but was eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 6 also had excellent ET synergism, but was also eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 7 could be the most promising of all the if the technology proves to be 

feasible. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain Option 1 as Baseline. Continue to study the following viable alternative designs during 

Cycle 1: 

Option 1- M/C panel with tee stiffeners (Baseline) 

Option 4 - Machined isogrid panel. 

Follow the progress and development of Option 7 

186 
National Launch System 1192 

I 

Option 1 - Basel.ine Panel. 

l 

Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

I 

(P .O.D.) 

r 

•MachJ.ned Panel W/'1'--Stiffeninq. 

•Synerqiatic W/ External 'l'ank. 

•utilize• Exiatinq Z'l' Proceaaea 

And 'l'oolinq. 

•Deaiqn Conaiatant With M&xilllum 

Axial Load. 

• Machined Panel If/ Bl&de-Stiffeninq. 

• Nay Hot ut~ize Z'l' Proce•••• 

And 'l'oolinq. 

Option 2 - Mach.Bl.ade-Stift. Panel. 

• Deaiq.n Conaiatant With Maxiaua 

Axial Load. 

• NachiDed Waffle Panel W/ Long. ' 

'l'ranav. stiffening. 

• ._ Proceaaea And '1'ool.1.ng 

bquired. 

• Deaiq.ned l'or Maxiaua Axial ' 

Option 3 - Machined watfl.e Panel. Bendin9 Lo&dinCJ Condition• · 

~ 

• Machined Iao-Grid Panel With 

Multi-Directional Stiffening. 

• Hew Proce•-• And 'l'ool.inq 

bquired. 

Option 4 - -;;;chined Isoqrid Panel. 

• Deaiq.ned l'or Maxiaua Bending 

condition• ' Bi-Directional 

Lo&dinq. 

I 

Option 5 -

•NachiDed Panel. With .. l.ded 

Extruded '!'-Stiffening. 

•Sia.U.ar 'l'o External. 'l'ank • 

• ._ Proce••- And 'l'ool.incJ Required. 

~ •Deaiqn Conaiatant With Maxiaua Axial Lood DUtrD>uti-. 

• Skin With NachiDed Slota 'l'o 

Accept JCxtruaiona. 

• Extruded '1'- Stiffener a. r • Mecb•nical.l.y Aaa..tll.ed. 

• ... Proceaaea ADd 'l'ool.inq 

Option 6 - llechanical.ly Fastened Panel ~Wquired. 

• Panel.a Extruded 'l'hrouqh Circul.ar Die 

(Strinqera Extruded On outaide Of Circl.e) • 

• After Panel.a Are Extruded '!'hey Are •-ted 

ADd Rolled out Into l'l.at Panel.a And 

Al.l.owec:l 'l'o Cool.. 

• bquirea 35,000 'l'on Preaa. 

• ... Proceaaea ADd 'l'ool.ing bqUired. 

Option 7 - J:ztruded Panel 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

187 

Page 2 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.4.4.5 Alternate Panel Construction (#CV-STR-015-C) 

Objective 

Develop and evaluate alternative panel construction methods for the L02 tank barrel panels. 

Approach 

(a) Define a point of depanure & Identify concept options for skin panels. 

(b) Estimate weight deltas,producibility, and cost. 

(c) Evaluate options. 

(d) Select preferred option. 

Options Studied - L02 Tank 

Option 1 - Machine Panel With Tee Stiffeners (Baseline) 

Option 2 - Machined Blade-Stiffened Panel 

Option 3 - Machined Waffle Panel 

Option 4 - Machined lsogrid Panel 

Option 5 - Welded Panel 

Option 6 - Mechanically Fastened Stiffened Panel 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel 

Key Study Results 

All options were compared to the Option 1 Reference Configuration. Option 2 had an 8% decrease 

in weight and ranked 2nd lowest cost. Option 3 had a 5% increase in weight and was the 5th 

lowest cost. Option 4 had 12% decrease in weight and was 3rd lowest cost Option 5 had the same 

weight as baseline and had the highest costs. Option 6 had an increase weight of 1% and was 4th 

lowest cost Option 7 had no weight increase. Cost estimates could not be perfonned on this option 

due to insufficient data. 

Conclusions 

Seven alternative construction methods were studied. The longitudinal tee-stiffened panels offered 

excellent synergism with ET and related tooling, and were lower in costs. Option 2 was eliminated 

due to poor External Tank synergism and comJ'licated intennediate frame attachment. Option 3 was 

eliminated due to excessive DDT &E costs. Option 4, although requiring additional development 

work, may be an attractive method of construction due to the possibility of eliminating intennediate 

frames and weight. Option 5's ET synergism was excellent but was eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 6 also had excellent ET synergism, but was also eliminated due to excessive 

DDT &E costs. Option 7 could be the most promising of all the if the technology proves to be 

feasible. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain Option 1 as Baseline. Continue to study the following viable alternative designs during 

Cycle 1: 

Option 1 - M/C panel with tee stiffeners (Baseline) 

Option 4 - Machined isogrid panel 

Follow the progress and development of Option 7 

188 
National Launch System 1192 

JC 

Cycle Zero Structures Data Packo.ge 

][ •Machined Panel W/T .. -Stiffeninq. 

•Synerqiatic W/ External Tank. 

•Otilizea Exiatinq ZT Proceaaea 

An4 Toolinq. 

Opt1on 1 - Base11ne Panel (P.O.D.) 

•Deaiqn Conaiatant With Maximum 

Axial Load. 

l r • Machined Panel W/ Blade-Stiffeninq. 

• May Not Ot11ize ET Proceaaea 

Ancl Toolinq. 

Opt1on 2 - Mach.Blada-St1ff. Panel 

• Deaiqn Conaiatant With Maximum 

Axial Load. 

• Machined Waffle Panel W/ Lonq. ' 

Tranav. stiffen!Ag. 

• Rev Proceaaea ADd Tooling 

Raquired. 

• Deaiqned For Maxiaum Axial ' 

Opt1on 3 - Mach1ned Waffle Panel Benclinq Loaclinq Conclitiona · 

• Machined Iao-Qricl Panel With 

Multi-Directional Stiffeninq. 

• Rev Procea .. a ADd Tooling 

RaqllUed. 

• Deaiqned For Maxiawa Benclinq 

Condition• ' Bi-Directional 

Loacling. tion 4 - Machined Iso r1d Panel 

Option 

•Machined Panel With W.lcS.d 

.....r &xtrucS.d T--st1ffening. 

•Similar To External Tank. 

•New Proceaaea Ancl Tooliaq Raquired. 

•Deaiqn Conaiatant With Maximum 

Axial Load Diatr~tion. 

• Skin With Machined Slota To 

Accept &xtruaiona. 

• Extruded T .. stiffenera. 

• Mechanicall.y A .. eebled. 

• Rev Proceaaea Ancl Toolinq 

Option 6 - Mechanically Fastened Panel Raquired. 

I r 

• Panel• &xtruclecl Throuqh Circular Die 

(strinqera Extruded On OUtaicle Of Circle). 

• After Panela Are Extruded They Are Beatecl 

Ancl Rolled OUt Into Flat Panel• Ancl 

Allovecl To Cool. 

• Require• 35,000 Ton Pr•••· 

• New Proceaaea Ancl Tool.iaq ~ired. 

Option 7 - Extruded Panel 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

189 

Page 2 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFr BLANK 

190 
, 

::a· 

( ' 

1'1'1 

0 

m 

0 

2 

G') 

'l) 

~ 

II p 

f'·1 

t!J ,I .'- ; 

l~ 

~ 2 

(•~ ~ 

:z 

-

'"' .""i 

.z 

--4 

s 

2 

!»' 

f!j 

I 

-\0 

-

2 

0 

-·~ 

:!! 

r 

:<: 

!"'' 

0 

3-S-011 

(CV-STR-22) 

Slosh Baffle Requirements & 

Design Definition 

Prepared By: Derek A. Townsend 

(504)257 -0021 

Approved By: M. R. Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1991 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

" 
-ts 

NLS L02 Tank Slosh Baffle 3-S-011 

Objective 

DAT.91 

( 

• Perform Studies On The L02 Tank Slosh Baffle To Assess 

Potential Changes To The Reference Configuration. 

Approach 

• Task 1 - Evaluate Sensitivity Of The Slosh Damping 

Requirement 

• Task 2 - Assess A Common Baffle Design With Unique 

Applications 

- 1.5 Stage (Full Length Baffle) 

- HLLV (Partial Length Baffle) 

• Task 3 - Assess The Feasibility Of Integral Baffles Using 

L02 Tank Frames 

• Prepare Conclusions & Recommendations 

• Identify Potential Cycle 1 Tasks 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
-\0 

c.,J 

( ' 

3-S-011 

(CV-STR-22) 

Appendix 1 

• Sensitivity To Slosh Damping Reqmt 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Slosh Damp~~g Sensit_iyl~Y 3-S-011 

Background 

• Reference Configuration Slosh Baffle Design Is Based On 

1% Minimum Slosh Damping Requirement 

• Controls Analysis & Previous Launch Vehicle Reqmts. 

Indicate That Requirement May Be As High As 4°/o 

• Damping Requirement 

-Slosh Damping To Be Provided In The Critical Region 

ro When Slosh Mass To Vehicle Mass Ratio Is> 10o/o 

.J:o. 

DAT.9t 

( 

-In The Region Where Slosh Mass Is Critical To Control 

Stability, Up To 4o/o Of Critical Damping Or Less Is Reqd. 

• Early ET Requirement For 4o/o Was Reduced To 1°/o Due To 

Greater Than Anticipated Guidance Control System Stability. 

The Applicability Of The 4°/o Slosh Criteria Will Also Be 

Determined By Control System Stability. 

/JIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY~~'=MS 

( ( 
..-

\0 

IJ\ 

( 

Slosh Baffle Comparisons 

Intermediate 

8.5 Xn 2571.60 Frame 

Nomln~~A cf:2~ 1 \w 1 w~j2!:1.00 

Localized Cllplng Clearance 

To Main Frame Aft Dome 

Baffles 

- - - - 314.0 

Across Flats 

•FWD 

-

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle 

*Ref ET Baffle Weight= 1500 lbs 

::::>AT.91336 

3-S-011 

.... 36.00 

[4°/o Reqrnt I 

Baffle Weight 

28801bs* 

II -

11% Reqnli] 

Baffle Weight 

23451bs* 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Conclusions 3-S-011 

-

~ 

DAT.91 

( 

• 1% Requirement Requires 5 x 25.88 Deep Baffles 

• 4o/o Requirement Requires 9 x 32.00 Deep Baffles 

•In Order To Meet The 4o/o Critera, Slosh Baffles Will Have 

To Be Placed In The L02 Aft Dome 

• Common Core Baffles· Are Designed By 1.5 Stage 

Requirements 

• Additional Weight Impact Of 535 lbs For A 4°k Damping 

Baffle Configuration (Over Reference 1o/o Design) 

IWARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY~~r:MS 

( ( 
-

~ 

( 

/ 

Recommendation 3-S-011 

• Work With Controls Panel To Finalize Damping 

Requirement For Cycle 1 

• Update Cycle 1 Baseline Configuration To Reflect 

Selected Oamping Requirement 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.9i336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
-\() 

3-5011 

(CV-STR-22) 

Appendix 2 

00 

• 1.5 Stage/HLL V Unique Baffle Configurations 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91 MANNED SPACE SYP~EMS 

( ( ( 
Unig_ue Baff_le _Configurations 3-5-011 

Background 

• The Reference Common Core L02 Baffle Configuration 

Is Designed By 1.5 Stage Vehicle Requirements. 

Objective 

• Assess If The Common Core Baffle Design Can Be 

Adapted For Unique Vehicle Applications 

~ Approach 

DAT.9i336 

• Using The Reference Configuration As The 1.5 

Stage Assess The L02 Baffle HLLV Vehicle 

Requirements For Both 1 o/o & 4o/o Slosh Damping 

• Define The Potential Omissions/Modifications To 

The Reference When Installing HLLV Baffle 

Configuration 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
1 o/o 1.5 Stage Slosh Baffle Conf. 3-S-011 

G N 

I 8 

Ul 

• Reference Common Core Configuration 

Xn 2571.60 Xn 2711.30 Xn 2851.00 

No~~n~ k I J 1. I i f I ........_ I >< ::s\c:: i Jac: :s ::I 

1.0 Min. 

Intermediate Clearance 

Frame 

314.0 

4 FWD Across Flats 

Xn 2643.95 Xn 2778.65 

I 

Localized Cliping 

To Main Frame 

DAT.91 

( ( 

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY~TEMS 

( 
t-.J 

0 

-

( ' 

1% HLLV Stage Slosh Baffle 3-S-011 

Xn 2571.60 Xn 2711.30 Xn 2851.00 

--! 1 1 1 L 1 Jj 1 J~~o~~nal 

Baffle Attached To 1.0 Min. 

Main Frame Clearance 

Install LH2 Fwd 

... FWD 

314.0 

Across Flats 

Omit Fwd 2 Baffles I Xn27~8.65 

..------'oc::: w 

• Weight Impact -492 lbs From Reference 

DAT.91336 

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle 

hiARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
4% 1.5 Stage Slosh Baffle Conf. 3-S-011 

• Recommended Reference Common Core Configuration 

s 

DAT.9' 

( 

No~~n~ l u-- Xn2851.00 

I >< «,., i ( :au I i I W i I ;t ======-. I 

Xn 2571.60 

Intermediate Clearance 

Frame 

314.0 

Across Flats .. FWD 

( 

.... 36.00 

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle 

Aft Dome 

Baffles 

~HARTIN IHARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY~TEMS 

( 
s 

( 

4o/o HLLV Tank Slosh Baffle 

• Unique HLL V Configuration 

Xn 2571.60 8.5 

Fwd Attach At 

Main Frame 

Xn 2711.30 

Xn 2851.00 

I 

Clearance 

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle 

11111

FWD -- lnstl LH2 Fwd 

Dome Frame 

3-S-011 

.... 44.00 

314.0 

Across Flats 

Aft Dome 

Baffles 

• Weight Impact -526 lbs From Reference 4o/o Configuration 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
R 

4°/o HLLV Tank Slosh Baffle 3-S-011 

• HLL V Configuration Derived From Common Core 

Xn 2571.60 

.I 

Fwd Attach At 

Main Frame 

Xn 2711.30 

lnstl LH2 Fwd 

Xn 2851.00 

I 

Clearance 

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle _.FWD 

-

Omit Fwd 2 Baffles 

.... 36.00 

314.0 

Across Flats 

Aft Dome 

Baffles 

• Weight Impact -4171bs From Reference 4°/o Configuration 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Recommendation 3-S-011 

Conclusions 

• 400 - 500 lbs Of Weight Can Be Saved On The HLL V 

Vehicle If A Non-common Baffle Is Used 

• Unique Designs Save Very Little Weight 

• HLL V Baffle Is Best Configured By Deleting Frames 

Rather Than Developing A Unique Design 

Recommendation 

~ • Maintain Common Baffle Design On Reference 

Configuration Unless HLLV Becomes Weight Critical 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
3-S-011 

(CV-STR-22) 

Appendix 3 

~ • Integral Baffle Feasibility Study 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( . ( 
9 

( 

lntearal Baffle Sensitivities 3-S-011 

Issue 

• The Change Of L02 Tank Skin Design From Smooth To A 

Machined 'T' Stiffened Panel Allows For An Integral 

Intermediate Frame/Baffle Design To Be Considered 

Objective 

• Evaluate The Feasibility & Potential Advantages/ 

Disadvantages To An Integral Baffle Design 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

OAT.91336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

~ 
Integral 4°/o Slosh Baffle Conf. 

• Common Core Configuration 

~ 00 

DAT.91 

( 

Xn 2571.60 

Intermediate 

Frame 

.. FWD ~ 

( 

Xn 2851.00 

I 

3-S-011 

14 36.00 

Anti-Vortex 

Baffle 

Aft Dome 

Baffles 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY~TEMS 

( 
~ 

( ' 

Evaluation 3-S-011 

+ More Efficient Design Could Have Potential Weight 

Savings 

+ Reduced Number Of Parts 

+Eliminates External Baffle Assembly Tooling Position & 

Baffle Insertion Operation 

+ Inherent Increase In Baffle Stiffness 

+ Better Adapts To Unique HLLV & 1.5 Stage Configurations 

- Limited Access For Frame Assembly & Inspection 

- Additional Manufacturing Flow Time (Increase In Number 

Of Turnovers From Welding Tool To Mechanical Assy) 

- Reduced Commonality With ET 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.9~336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Recommendation 3-S-011 

Conclusions 

• Integral Baffles Appear To Be An Attractive Proposition 

For An Alternative Design 

• No Major Manufacturing Impacts With Integral Baffles 

• Integral Baffles Are More Attractive With A One Piece 

Barrel 

Recommendations 

s • Define & Evaluate An Integral Baffle Design During 

Cycle 1 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.9~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
t.,) 

--

( ' 

Items For Cycle 1 Study 3-S-011 

• Finalize Damping Requirement For Cycle 1 & Update 

Reference Configuration 

• Define & Evaluate An Integral Baffle Design 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91336 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.4.4.6 Alternate Slosh Baffles(#J-S-011) 

Objective 

Perform studies on the L02 tank slosh baffle to assess potential changes to the reference 

configuration. 

Approach 

(a) Evaluate sensitivity of the slosh damping requirement 

(b) Assess a common baffle with unique applications. 

(c) Assess the feasibility of integral baftles using L02 tank frames. 

Options Studied 

(a) 1% vs 4% Slosh damping requimnent 

(b) HLL V vs 1.5 Stage configurations. 

(c) Integral baffle concept 

Key Study Results 

The reference was designed to meet a 1% damping requirement Recent conttols analysis indicates 

that 4% may be required. A 4% damping capability requires an increase in baffle depth plus an 

additional 4 baffles. A 4% baffle configuration will add baffles to the aft dome for an overall -" 

weight impact of 535 lbs. The full baffle configuration is required for 1.5 Stage, a 400-500 lbs of 

weight saving can be achieved on the less cricticallUL V slosh baffle by omiting the two forward 

baffles. By integrating the baffles with the intermediate frames a more efficient design could be 

achieved with potential weight savings. In addition an integral baffle design would reduce the 

number of pans and eliminate the external baffle assembly tooling position and the baftle insertion 

operation. 

Conclusions 

Baffle damping requirements significantly impact the configuration and must therefore be 

established prior to further design work. The baffle configuration is driven by 1.5 Stage slosh 

requirements. An integral baffle and frame design appears to be an attractive proposition for an 

alternative design. 

Study Recommendations 

During Cycle 1 finalize the damping requirement and update the baseline configuration. The 

reference configuration is designed for 1.5 Stage and should remain common unless HLL V weight 

savings are requin:d. A study should be performed during Cycle 1 to define the weight savings and 

manufacturing impacts for an integral baffle and frame design. 

212 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

xn 2571.60 I 32.oo 

314.0 

Across Flats 

xn 2571.60 

- LH2 Fwd 

Dome Frame 

Xn 

36.00 

j4% Reqmt I 

Baffle Weight 

2880 lbs 

j1% Reqrnt I 

Baffle Weight 

2345 lbs 

1% - 4% Slosh Baftle Comparision 

xn 2851.00 

I 

4FWD 

- Fwd 2 Baffles 

1.5 Stage 

Config. 

Baffle Weight 

2880 lbs 

Config .j 

Baffle Weight 

2463 lbs 

4% 1.5 Stage - HLL V Configuration Comparision 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.001 Book 1 for more detailed results. 

213 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.4.4.6 Alternate Slosh Baffles(#3-S-Oll) 

Objective 

Perform studies on the L02 tank slosh baffle to assess potential changes to the reference 

configuration. 

Approach 

(a) Evaluate sensitivity of the slosh damping requirement 

(b) Assess a common baffle with unique applications. 

(c) Assess the feasibility of integral baffles using L02 tank frames. 

Options Studied 

(a) 1% vs 4% Slosh damping requirement 

(b) HLL V vs 1.5 Stage configurations. 

(c) Integral baffle concept. 

Key Study Results 

The reference was designed to meet a 1% damping requirement Recent controls analysis indicates 

that 4% may be required. A 4% damping capability requires an increase in baffle depth plus an 

additional 4 baffles. A 4% baffle configuration will add baffles to the aft dome for an overall 

weight impact of 535 lbs. The full baffle configuration is required for 1.5 Stage, a 400-500 lbs of 

weight saving can be achieved on the less cricticallll.L V slosh baftle by omiting the two forward 

baffles. By integrating the baffles with the intermediate frames a more efficient design could be 

achieved with potential weight savings. In addition an integral baffle design would reduce the 

number of parts and eliminate the external baffle assembly tooling position and the baffle insertion 

operation. 

Conclusions 

Baffle damping requirements significantly impact the configuration and must therefore be 

established prior to further design work. The baffle configuration is driven by 1.5 Stage slosh 

requirements. An integral baffle and frame design appears to be an attractive proposition for an 

alternative design. 

Study Recommendations 

During Cycle 1 finalize the damping requirement and update the baseline configuration. The 

reference configuration is designed for 1.5 Stage and should remain common unless HLL V weight 

savings are required. A study should be performed during Cycle 1 to define the weight savings and 

manufacturing impacts for an integral baffle and frame design. 

214 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

Xn 2571. 60 I 32.oo 

314.0 

Across Flats 

Xn 

36.00 

14% Reqrnt I 

Baffle Weight 

2880 lbs 

j1% Reqrnt I 

Baffle Weight 

2345 lbs 

1% - 4% Slosh Baffie Comparision 

Xn 2571.60 

LH2 Fwd 

Xn 2851.00 

I 

4

FWD 

Fwd 2 Baffles 

Anti-Vort 

4% 1.5 Stage - HLL V Configuration Comparision 

Additional Information 

1.5 Stage 

Config. 

Baffle Weight 

2880 lbs 

Config.j 

Baffle Weight 

2463 lbs 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

215 

Page 2 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

216 
N 

--.J 

J 

"' a 

2 

" ;;; 

~; 

.. ] 

l-/"' 

r·. 

,: ... ;.; 

~· 

c 

... 

::-: 

r~ 

:<;; 

.!"" 

c 

( ' 

CV-DI-01A 

L02/LH2 Tank Access 

Trade Study 

Prepared By : Wayne Waguespack 

(504)257-0032 

Approved By: R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Objectives And Approach CV-DI-01-A 

Objective 

• Determine Internal Access Requirements For The NLS 

Core Tankage And Assess Potential Access Solutions. 

Approach 

• Investigate STS External Tank Access Capability. 

• Research Actual Tank Access History During Processing 

N 

~ At KSC. 

• Evaluate Need For Access During Build At MAF. 

• Develop NLS Tank Access Requirements. 

• Develop Options For Providing Access. 

• Evaluate Options Against Requirements·~ 

• Document Study And Prepare Conclusions. 

n'1ARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.' 11262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( I 

( ( 
( 

Ground Rules And Assumptions 

• Utilize MSFC Cycle 0 Reference Configuration As 

Defined On 9/27/91 

- Core Tankage 

- Propulsion Module 

-lnterstage Design And CTV Location. 

• CPR 488 Type SOFI Required On L02 And LH2. 

~ External Surfaces. 

• Utilize Existing Access Equipment If Possible. 

CV-DI-01-A 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
t..,) 

~ 

ET Access Capability L02 , cv-o1-o1-A 

+Z +Z 1 L02 Siphon Ftg 

36" Manhole 

Fwd ·Nose Cap 

L02 Fwd Ogive 

Cover Plate 

36" Manhole 

Aft Dome 

IJIJARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.~· q1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

-. 

( ( ( 
( 

, 

ET Access Capability LH2 

N 

N 

-

WRW.NLS.91262 

LH2 Siphon Ftg 

36" Manhole 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

CV-DI-01-A 

LH2 Aft Dome 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

External Tank Access Tooling 

;1#1 \\\~-, /~l:JlJ:-~\ 

\ ~~ \ ~~\ \ i ~-~-1 

l

r1 ;Y 

l .. ' ."' I \I 

,,·J l~ 

lr~ . ~· ., ~~~ · .. ~ ·,.~ :A: .. ' 

1::~ i'Vtt ""~ / i \ ·--.J .> i 

i 

~¥ f1 l=..........l' . iY. \. 

CV-DI-01-A 

~\ . 

I \ . 

{§ 

~~ 

~ . I -~ t~ ~ ~-1 I ·--~.J _,. i 

i r.y.=--...... .I . 

~. \ rY 

L02 Internal Access Platform Set 

llt'7ART/N MARIETTA 

WRWJ' - q1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
N 

N 

V) 

( 

External Tank Access Tooling -- - ---~--------------------- -------------~---- -----------------

CV-DI-01-A 

L02 Aft Dome Access Kit 

~:;;..---- ----··-=t•• ---~-- .. <>· ... • -· :--,.... // I. "'<.:· 

. f r I ")1 I' ~ •' 

LH2 Aft Dome Access Kit 

(Manhole Protector) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
External Tank Access Tooling CV-DI-01-A 

~ 

I \ 

LH2 Internal Access Platform Set 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.f''. - q1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

External Tank Access Tooling CV-DI-01-A 

~ 

LH2 Tank Internal Access Equipment (1 Man) 

IWARTIN IWARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

External Tank Access History At KSC cv-o1-o1-A 

ET Number No. Of Entries Reason For Entry LH2 L02 

1 2 1 Diffuser Changeout 

2 1 - ECO Sensor Changeout 

8 - 1 Diffuser Changeout 

23,27,29, 19 - "Scheduled" ECO Clip Mod 

32-47 

Total 22 2 

Note : All Tank Entries Were Made Thru The Aft Domes Using 

The L02/LH2 AFT Dome Access Kits. Vehicles Were 

Located In The V AB, No Tank Entries Were Made On 

The Pad. 

/JftARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.' 11262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( ( 

-

L02 Access Capability On ET cv-o1-o1-A 

Horizontal Position After Major Weld And Prior To Cleaning 

And TPS Application 

Access Location Process Operation 

Welding • Remove Close-out Weld 

Mandrel. 

~ 

L02 Fwd Internal 

• Remove Debris Cleaning Cover Plate Mechanical • Complete lnstl Of Fwd Slosh 

Assy Baffle 

• Tie In Aft Baffle. 

• Clean Up And X-Ray (After 

Proof Test). 

L02 Aft Dome None 

MARTIN MARIE7TA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Access Capability On ET (Cont) cv-o1-o1-A 

During Cleaning ,TPS Application And Final Assy 

Access Location 

Cell E (Vertical) Cleaning Probe lnstl 

Cell G,H (Vertical) Heat Duct lnstl L02Fwd For TPS Curing Cover Plate 

Fina_l Assy (Horizontal) Fwd Mast Installation 

~ 00 L02 Aft Sensor 

Cell E {Vertical) Mast lnstl. 

Siphon Screen lnstl 

L02 Aft Dome 

Cell G,H {Vertical) Heat Duct lnstl 

For TPS Curing 

Final Assy {Horizontal) Contingency 

Access Only 

IJ.'TARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.N. 11262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS ,- .... ..._ 

I " 

( ( ( 
N 

~ 

LH2 Tank Access Cetpability Qn ET CV-DI-01-A 

Horizontal Position After Major Weld And Prior To Cleaning 

And TPS Application 

Access Location Process Operation 

Welding • Remove Close-out Weld 

Mandrel. 

·Clean Tank 

LH2 Fwd Dome Mechanical • lnstall1129 Frame Stabilizer 

Assy • Install Fwd Sensor Mast 

Supports. 

• Clean Up And X-Ray (After 

Proof Test). 

LH2 Aft Dome None 

fltiARTIN fltiARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
LH2 Access Capability On ET (Cont) CV-DI-01-A 

During Cleaning ,TPS Application And Final Assy 

Access Location 

Cell E (Vertical) Cleaning Probe lnstl 

Cell B,C,D (Vertical) Heat Duct lnstl 

LH2 Fwd Dome For TPS Curing 

Final Assy (Horizontal) Contingency Access 

Only 

~ Cell A (Vertical) Inspect For 

Condensation 

LH2 Aft Sensor 

Cell E (Vertical) Mast lnstl. 

LH2 Aft Dome Siphon Screen lnstl 

Cell D (Vertical) Heat Duct lnstl 

For TPS Curing 

Final Assy (Horizontal) Fwd Sensor Mast lnstl 

IYIART/N MARIETTA 

WRWY 91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( ' 

NLS Manhole Size CV-DI-01-A 

OSHA Requirements 

• OSHA Chapter XVII, Section 1910.106, Para Vb Specifies That Pressure Vessel 

Be Built In Accordance With The ASME Code For Boiler And Pressure Vessels. 

Section VIII , Division 2 , Para AD-1 020·1 Of The ASME Code Specifies A Minimum 

Dia Of 15" For Access. 

MIL-STD-1472 Requirements (Human Factors) 

• Para 5.7.8.3 of MIL·STD-1472 Specifies That Min Dia Of Circular Hatches Shall 

Be 30.0". 

~ ET Tooling Installation Requirements - • Max Size Of Tooling That Must Be Passed 

Thru The Manhole Is 22.0" x 26.0". 

• This Results In A' Min Requirement Of 

36.0" In Dla. 

36.0 

DIA 

Close Out Weld Mandrel --

Removal Tool , Installed 

In Tank At 20 Degree Angle 

WRW.NLS.91262 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS Core Tank Access Reqmts Summary cv-o1-o1-A 

Build At MAF 

·Same As ET: 

- Access Manhole In Fwd Dome Of L02 Tank 

- Access Manhole In Aft Dome Of L02 Tank 

- Access Manhole In Fwd Dome Of LH2 Tank 

- Access Manhole In Aft Dome Of LH2 Tank 

N KSC Processing 

~ • No Planned Requirement 

• Potential For Contingency Access Only 

- VAB 

-PAD 

/JIIARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.~·· - 91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
to-) 

~ 

~ 

( 

NLS Core Tank Access Reqmts Sum(Cont) cv-o1-o1-A 

During Build At MAF - Based On ET Capability 

Build Location Requirement 

Major Welding Remove Close-out Weld Mandrel 

Tie In Slosh Baffles , Install Fwd 

Mechanical Assy Sensor Mast Supports , Clean up And 

X-Ray 

Internal Cleaning Cleaning Probe Installation 

TPS Application Heat Duct Attachment For TPS Curing , 

Both Domes 

Vertical Position Aft L02/LH2 Sensor Mast And Siphon 

Screen Installation 

Horizontal Position Fwd L02/LH2 Sensor Mast Installation 

(After Tank Stacking) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
N 

~ 

NLS L02 Tank Acc~ss R~guirements CV-DI-01-A 

Horizontal Position After Major Weld And Prior To Cleaning 

And TPS Application 

Access Location Process Operation 

Welding • Remove Close-out Weld 

Mandrel. 

L02 Fwd Dome Internal • Remove Debris Cleaning 

Mechanical • Complete lnstl Of Fwd Slosh 

Assy Baffle 

• Tie In Aft Baffle. 

• Clean Up And X-Ray (After 

Proof Test). 

L02 Aft Dome None 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.f''' 'l1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
N 

Vl 

V\ 

(' 

NLS L02 Tank Access Requirements( Cent) cv-DI-01-A 

During Cleaning ,TPS Application And Final Assy 

Access Location 

Cell E (Vertical) Cleaning Probe lnstl 

L02 Fwd Dome Cell M (Vertical) Heat Duct lnstl 

For TPS Curing 

Final Assy (Horizontal) Fwd Mast Installation 

L02 Aft Sensor 

Cell E (Vertical) Mast lnstl. 

Siphon Screen lnstl 

L02 Aft Dome 

Cell M (Vertical) Heat Duct lnstl 

For TPS Curing 

Final Assy (Horizontal) Contingency 

Access Only 

WIART/N MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS LH2 Tank Access Requirements cv-o1-o1-A 

Horizontal Position After Major Weld And Prior To Cleaning 

And TPS Ap.plication 

Access Location I Process 

Welding 

~I LH2 Fwd Dome 1 Mechanical 

Assy 

LH2 Aft Dome 

WRW,,.. "1262 

( ( 

Operation 

• Remove Close-o,ut Weld 

Mandrel. 

• Clean Tank 

• lnstall1129 Frame Stabilizer 

• Install Fwd Sensor Mast 

Supports. 

• Clean Up And X-Ray (After 

Proof Test). 

None 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

NLS LH2 Tank Access Requirements( Cant) cv-ol-o1-A 

During Cleaning .TPS Application And Final Assy 

N 

~ 

-...1 

Access Location 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

LH2 Aft Dome 

WRW.NLS.9~ 262 

Cell E {Vertical) 

Cell N {Vertical) 

Final Assy {Horizontal) 

Cell A {Vertical) 

Cell E {Vertical) 

Cell N {Horizontal) 

Final Assy {Horizontal) 

Cleaning Probe lnstl 

Heat Duct lnstl 

For TPS Curing 

Contingency Access 

Only 

Inspect For 

Condensation 

LH2 Aft Sensor 

Mast lnstl. 

Siphon Screen lnstl 

Heat Duct lnstl 

For TPS Curing 

Fwd Sensor Mast lnstl 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Op~ions (NLS L02 Tank) CV-DI-01-A 

• Option 1· Baseline {MSFC Ref Cycle 0 Design). 

• Option 2- Relocate Aft Dome Feedline Penetrations To Allow 

For The Addition Of A 30" Dia Manhole In Bottom Of Tank. 

Relocate Fwd Dome Manhole To Match ET. 

• Option 3· Design Aft Dome Feedline Penetration To Be Bolted 

On Which Would Allow Removal For Access. Relocate Fwd 

~ Dome To Match ET. 

co 

• Option 4- Provide Smaller Manhole In Aft Dome Without 

Relocating Feedlines. Relocate Fwd Dome Manhole To Match 

ET. 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

WRW.NI - ... 1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 

,, 
L02 9Ptioll1 (MSFC Cycle 0) 

+Z 36" Dla Manhole 

N 

~ 

Fwd Dome 

WRW.NlS.91262 

+Z 

Aft Dome 

CV-DI-01-A 

SRB Cross Beam 

(HLLV Only) 

No Tank Access Available 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Option 2 

+Z 

~ 

-36" Dla Manhole, Located 

Same As ET LH2 Fwd Dome 

Fwd Dome 

Relocate Feedllnes To 

Provide Room For A 

Manhole 

WRW.NL~ ~ • 262 

( ( 

+Z 

CV-DI-01-A 

SRB Cross Beam 

(HLLV Only) 

Manhole 

Aft Dome 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
L02 Option 3 

+Z 

~ 

-

Fwd Dome 

WRW.NLS.91262 

36" Dla Manhole , Located 

Same As ET LH2 Fwd Dome 

Design -Z Feedllne Ftg -

To Be Bolted On To Allow 

Tank Access. 

+Z 

CV-DI-01-A 

SRB Cross Beam 

(HLLV Only) 

Aft Dome 

/JIIARTIN /JI1ARIE7TA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 O~tion 4 , cv-o1-o1-A 

~ N 

WRW.Nlr '262 

( 

+Z 

- 36" Dla Manhole , Located 

Same As ET LH2 Fwd Dome 

Add 20" Dla Manhole 

Fwd Dome 

( 

+Z 

Aft Dome 

SRB Cross Beam 

(HLLV Only) 

IJI7ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
NL~ L02 Access Option Summary CV-DI-01-A 

LL 

Activity 

Removal Of Close-Out 

Weld Mandrel Thru Fwd 

Manhole 

(Welding) 

Complete lnstl Of Fwd 

Slosh Baffle. Access 

Thru Fwd Manhole 

(Mech Assy) 

<1: Tie In Aft Baffle. Access 

:i Thru Fwd Manhole. 

~ (Mech Assy ) 

~~ 9 Clean Up And X-ray. 

5 Access Thru Fwd 

1D Manhole. 

(Mech Assy) 

Install Internal Cleaning 1>""" """'''''''' ';1 

Probe Thru Fwd 

Manhole 

(Cell -E , Vertical) 

Install Heat Ducts For 

TPS Curing Thru Both 

Domes 

(Cell - M , Vertical) 

WRW.NLS.91262 

Option 2 

Yes 

Yes 

Option 3 

Yes 

Yes 

Requires Removal 

Of Feedllne Fitting 

And Mods To 

Aft Heat Duct 

Option 4 

Yes 

Yes 

/JIIART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS L02 Access Option Summary (Cont) cv-o1-01-A 

Activity Option 2 

Install Aft Level Sensor 

Mast. Access Thru Aft 

u.. Manhole. Yes 

<( (Cell· E , Vertical) ::E 

1- Install Siphon Screen. 

<( Access Thru Aft 

c Manhole. 

..J (Cell • E , Vertical) -:::) 

m Install Fwd Level Sensor 

Mast. Access Thru Fwd 

Manhole. Yes Yes 

N• _ (Final Assy - Horizontal) 

t 

Install Tank Entry 

CJ I Tooling Thru Aft 

.5 Manhole 

(/) 

(/) 

CD 

g I Contingency Access 0: Thru Fwd Dome 

0 

U) 

~ 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.Nl' '262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

NL~ L02 Tank Evaluation ~urn (Fwd Dome) cv-o1-u1-A 

Criteria Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 

Can A Common Cleaning Probe R. Location Be Achlved Between ET & YES YES YES 

NLS 

Is There Provisions For Connection 

Of TPS Cure Heat Ducts YES YES YES YES 

Can Existing Tank Access Platforms 

•• 

YES YES YES 

Be Utilized Without Modifications (Use LH2 Tooling) (Use LH2 Tooling) (Use LH2 Tooling) 

Can Weld Close Out Mandrel Be 

YES YES YES YES 

Removed Thru Fwd Manhole 

N 

~ What Is The Extent Of The MAJOR MINOR MINOR MINOR 

Rdellgn Acce11 Toolng , U11 LH2 Acceaa Toolng, U11 LH2 Acceaa Toolng, U11 LH2 Acceaa Tooling, 

Tooling And Facility Mods R.-. .. aNnlng Probe And CINnlng And TPS Cleenlng And TPS CIHnlng And TPS 

TPS Hilt Duc:t Appllc8tlon Hardware Application Hlrd-re Application H~rdw•• 

What Is The Estimated Reference NONE NONE NONE Weight Impact 

Is Internal Access Feasible After 

Tank 

Is Contingency 

Stacking At MAF 

Before 

Stacking 

Payload ~No;~ 

-~ }})!,..___ 

YES 

YES 

YES 

YES ~~~~ 

~- Access At KSC 

Feasible - ~ 

After 

Stacking 

Payload ~No!~ ,,, ~~?~ ~~?~ ~~?~ 

* Requires Aft Dome Manhole To Install Access Tooling. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NlS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NL~ L02 Tank Evaluation ~um (Aft Dome) cv-ol-lii-A 

Criteria Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 

.. 

YES Is There Provisions For Connection YES Requires Removal YES 

Of TPS Cure Heat Ducts Of Siphon Fitting 

can 

Be 

can 

Utilized 

Tank 

Existing 

Be 

Without 

Tank 

Manufactured 

Acces 

Modifications 

Platforms 

Using 

.. •• --~ 

.. 

What 

Existing 

Is The 

ET Tooling 

Extent Of 

And 

The 

Processes 

MAJOR MINOR 

YES 

.. 

Significant 

~ Significant NO Ta Opening For TPI Provlclo Adopter For TPS . Relocete TPS Hut Duct Relocete TPS Heot Duc:t ~ Tooling And FaciiHy Mods HMt Duct, Uneble To 

Accou Tri For FIMI Any tiNt Duct And ProVIde Adopter And Provide Adopter :r 

What Is The Estimated Reference +90 lbs +201bs +60 lbs Weight Impact 

Is Internal Access Feasible Alter 

.. 

YES •• YES Tank Stacking At MAF 

Is Contingency Access At KSC 

~ YES 

~ YES Feasible 

* Requires Removal Of Siphon Ftg And Feedllne Assy 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.Nlr -•262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Conclusions - NLS L02 Tank Access CV-DI-0 a-A 

N 

~ 

• Option 2 Is Perferred : 

- Allows Tank To Be Manufactured Using Existing ET Tooling 

And Processes. 

-Provides Internal Access To Tank At MAF. 

- Provides Contingency Access To Tank At KSC Prior To 

Payload Mating. 

/JIIARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Options (NLS LH2 Tank) CV-DI-01-A 

• Option 1- Baseline (MSFC Ref Cycle 0 Design). 

• Option 2- Design Aft Dome Sump As "Bolt On" To Allow Access. 

Relocate Fwd Dome Manhole To Match ET. 

• Option 3- Adopt MSFC Alternate Prop Arrangement An Add 30" 

Dia Manhole To Aft Dome Cap.Relocate Fwd Dome Manhole To 

~ Match ET. 

00 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.tJ' "'1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( { 
LH2 Option 1 (MSFC Cycle 0) CV-DI-01-A 

36" Dla Manhole 

+Z +Z 

~ 

48" Dla Sump 

Fwd Dome Aft Dome 

No Tank Access Available 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.9~ 262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
LH2 Option 2 . cv-o1-o1-A 

+Z 

~ 

Fwd Dome 

WRW.Nl,. .. 1262 

( 

36" Dla Manhole 

Located Same As ET 

Design 48" Dla Sump 

To Be Bolted On To 

Allow Tank Access 

( 

+Z 

Aft Dome 

~ARTIN MARIETTA 

M~NNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
LH2 Option 3 

+Z 

~ 

-

Fwd Dome 

WRW.NLS.91262 

( 

36" Dla Manhole 

Located Same As ET 

Use Alternate Prop 

Arrangement , Delete 

Sump , Add 30"Dia 

Manhole To Dome Cap 

CV-DI-01-A 

+Z 

Aft Dome 

/JttART/N /JttARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NL$ LH2 Access Option ~ummary 

~ N 

u. 

c:C 

:E 

~ Q 

...1 

-::::» 

m 

Activity 

Removal Of Close-Out 

Weld Mandrel Thru Fwd 

Manhole 

(Welding) 

lnstall1129 Frame 

Stabilizer. Access Thru 

Fwd Manhole. 

(Mech Assy) 

Install Fwd Level Sensor 

Mast Supports. Access 

Thru Fwd Manhole. 

(Mech Assy) 

Clean Up And X-ray • 

Access Thru Fwd 

Manhole. 

(Mech Assy) 

Install Internal Cleaning 11""" """"' "'''"'"'"')I 

Probe Thru Fwd 

Manhole 

(Cell -E , Vertical) 

Install Heat Ducts For 

TPS Curing Thru Both 

Domes 

(Cell - N , Horizontal) 

WRW.NI ,. 1262 

( ( 

Option 2 

Yes 

CV-DI-01-A 

Option 3 

Yes 

Yes 

n-IARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

NLS LH2 Access Option Summary (Cont) cv-ot-o ··A 

~ ~ 

u. 

c:( 

:E 

~ Q 

..1 

::) -

m 

a 

Activity 

Install Aft Level Sensor 

Mast. Access Thru Aft 

Manhole. 

(Cell • E , Vertical) 

Install Siphon Screen. 

Access Thru Aft 

Manhole. 

(Cell • E , Vertical) 

Check For Condensation 

After Proof Test. Access 

Thru Aft Manhole. 

(Cell-A , Vertical) 

Install Fwd Level Sensor 

Mast. Access Thru Aft 

Manhole. 

(Final Assy • Horizontal) 

.5 Install Tank Entry 

m Tooling Thru Aft 

8 Manhole 

e 

Q. 

o I Contingency Access 

~ Thru Fwd Dome 

WRW.NLS.91262 

Option 2 Option 3 

Yes Yes 

Yes 

IJI7ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Nlb LH2 Tank Evaluation ~um (Fwd Dome)cv-ol-u-.-A 

Criteria Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 

Can 

Location 

A Common 

Be Achlved 

Cleaning 

Between 

Probe 

ET & 

~ YES YES 

NLS 

Is There Provisions For Connection YES YES YES Of TPS Cure Heat Ducts 

Can Existing Tank Acces Platforms 

•• YES YES Be Utilized WHhout Modifications 

Can Weld Close Out Mandrel Be 

YES YES YES Removed Thru Fwd Manhole 

~ 

What Is The Extent Of The MAJOR 

NONE RdellgnAcce.aToollng, NONE Tooling And FaciiHy Mods Relocate a..,.. ...... Anll 

TPS Heat Duct 

What Is The Estimated Reference NONE NONE Weight Impact 

Is Internal Access Feasible After 

~ ~ YES Tank Stacking At MAF 

Is Contingency Access At KSC 

~-~ YES Feasible 

• Requires Aft Dome Manhole To Install Access Tooling. 

,._,ARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NI ,.. "1262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

NL~ LH2 Tank Evaluation ~um (Aft Dome) cv-ol-tJ·-A 

Criteria Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 

Is There Provisions For Connection 

~ .. 

YES Of TPS Cure Heat Ducts 

Can Existing Tank Acces Platforms aw ~ YES 

Be Utilized Without Modifications 

Can Tank Be Manufactured Using 

~ ~ YES 

Existing ET Tooling And Processes 

What Is The Extent Of The MAJOR MINOR MINOR NO T•r* Opening For TPS 

Tooling And FacUlty Mods Hut Duct, Uubl• To Provlct. Ad8pt., For TPS Provlct. Ad•pt.r For TPS 

Access Ter* For RIWI Aaay HMtDuct HeetDuct 

~ VI 

What Is The Estimated 

Weight Impact Reference +201bs -1141bs 

Is Internal Access Feasible After 

---aw Tank Stacking At MAF YES 

Is Contingency Access At KSC 

~--· YES Feasible 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Conclusions - (NLS LH2 1 ank Access) CV-01-0·•·A 

~ 

• Option 3 Is Preferred : 

- Allows Tank To Be Manufactured Using Existing ET Tooling 

And Processes. 

-Provides Internal Access To Tank At MAF. 

-Provides Contingency Access To Tank At KSC. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.Nl,. ~262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Conclusions And Recommendations CV-DI-01-A 

Conclusions 

• Commonality With ET Tooling And Facilities Can Be Improved By .Incorporating 

The Preferred Options Identified By This Study. 

• Incorporation Of The Recommended Options Also Provides A Contingency 

Access Capability. ' · 

Recommendations 

~ • Incorporate Results Of This Study Into Cycle 1 Reference Configuration 

-..~ Definition. 

• Evaluate Impact Of Single L02 Feedllne Currently Under Consideration By 

MSFC Propulsion. 

•Initiate A Study To Evaluate If A Level Sensor Mast Can Be Designed That Can Be 

Installed Without The Need For Internal Access. 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91262 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1!92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge Page 1 

5.2.4.4.2 Tank Access Trade Study(#CV -DI-01-A) 

Objective 

This trade study evaluated if additional tank access should be provided in the reference 

configuration Core Tankage. The Cycle 0 baseline contains a 36in diameter manhole in the 

forward domes of both L02 and LH2 Tanks. No manholes are provided in the aft domes. 

Approach 

(a) Investigate STS ET access capability 

(b) Research actual tank access history at KSC 

(c) Evaluate need for access during build at MAF 

(d) Develop NLS Tank access requirements 

(e) Develop and evaluate options for providing access 

Options Studied - L02 Tank 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn .; relocate FJL's; Add 30in 0 M/hole in Aft Cap 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn.; revise L02 F/L Outlets as removable 

Option 4 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location; retain FJL loc'n; Add small Manhole in Aft Cap 

Options Studied - LH2 Tank (Reference only) 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location; make Aft Ui2 tank sump removable 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn.; delete Sump, Add 30in Dia Manhole in Dome Cap 

Key Study Results 

24 tank ennies were made on ET at KSC(all on firSt 30 tanks). Mll..-SlD-1472 specifies that 

minimum manhole size is 30 inches. Existing Weld mandrel is 22in x 26in and is removed thru 

fwd dome. This requires a 36 in dia hole. For build at MAF similar access requirements to ET are 

required. This requires a manhole in each dome. Fwd manhole needs to be in same location on ET 

& NLS as tanks are processed thru the same facilities. Location is primarily driven by cleaning 

probe insertion in Cell E. KSC access is contingency only. 

Conclusions 

Option 2 is preferred for the L02 tank this option allows the NLS to be manufactured using ET 

tooling and facilities. It also provides for internal access at MAF and contingency access at KSC. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate Option 2(1..02 Tank). Perfonn a feasibility study to evaluate 

if the level sensors can be designed for removal and installation from the outside. (see 5.2.6.4.1) 

25b 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Packllge Page 2 

36 in dia manhole at 

this location on both 

L02 & LH2 tanks 

(No manhole in 

either aft dome) 

NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

L02 Fwd Dome 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

Relocated 

F/L Outlets 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

LH2Aft Dome 

Proposed Update to NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

Addatloal n ormation 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

259 

30 india 

manhole 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.6.4.2 Tank Access Trade Study(#CV -DI-01-A) 

Objective 

This trade study evaluated if additional tank access should be provided in the reference 

configuration Core Tankage. The Cycle 0 baseline contains a 36in diameter manhole in the 

forward domes of both L02 and LH2 Tanks. No manholes are provided in the aft domes. 

Approach 

(a) Investigate STS ET access capability 

(b) Research actual tank access history at KSC 

(c) Evaluate need for access dming build at MAF 

(d) Develop NLS Tank access requirements 

(e) Develop and evaluate options for providing access 

Options Studied • LH2 Tank 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location & make Aft LH2 tank sump removable 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to BT locm; ddete Sump & Add 30in Dia Manhole in Dome Cap 

Options Studied • L02 Tank (Reference only) 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn.; relocate F/L's; add 30in 0 M/hole in Aft Cap 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn.; revise L02 FJL Outlets as removable 

Option 4 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location; retain FJL loc'n; add small Manhole in Aft Cap 

Key Study Results 

24 tank entries were made on ET at KSC(all on first 30 tanks). MIL-STD-1472 specifies that 

minimum manhole size is 30 inches. Existing Weld mandrel is 22in x 26in and is removed thru 

fwd dome. This requires a 36 in dia hole. For build at MAF similar access requirements to ET are 

required. This requires a manhole in each dome. Fwd manhole needs to be in same location on 

ET & NLS as tanks are processed thru the same facilities. Location is primarily driven by cleaning 

probe insertion in Cell E. KSC access is contingency only. 

Conclusions 

Option 3 is preferred for the LH2 tank. This option allows the NLS to be manufactured using ET 

tooling and facilities. It also provides for internal access at MAF and contingency access at KSC. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate Option 3(LH2 Tank). Perform a feasibility study to evaluate 

if the level sensors can be designed for removal and installation from the outside. (see 5.2.6.4.1) 

260 

--
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge Page 2 

36 in dia manhole at 

this location on both 

L02 & LH2 tanks 

{No manhole in 

either aft dome) 

NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

L02 Fwd Dome 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

Relocated 

F/L Outlets 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

LH2Aft Dome 

Proposed Update to NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

Add1t1onal ormat1on 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

261 

30 india 

manhole 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.4.4.2 Tank Access Trade Study(#CV-DI-01-A) 

Objective 

This trade study evaluated if additional tank access should be provided in the reference 

configuration Core Tankage. The Cycle 0 baseline contains a 36in diameter manhole in the 

forward domes of both L02 and LH2 Tanks. No manholes are provided in the aft domes. 

Approach 

(a) Investigate STS ET access capability 

(b) Research actual tank access history at KSC 

(c) Evaluate need for access during build at MAF 

(d) Develop NLS Tank access requirements 

(e) Develop and evaluate options for providing access 

Options Studied - L02 Tank 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn .; relocate F/L's; Add 30in 0 M.lhole in Aft Cap 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole 10 ET loctn.; revise 1..02 F/L Oudets as removable 

Option 4 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location; retain F/L loc'n; Add small Manhole in Aft Cap 

Options Studied - LH2 Tank (Reference only) 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location; make Aft lR2 tank sump removable 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole 10 ET locm.; delete Sump, Add 30in Dia Manhole in Dome Cap 

Key Study Results 

24 tank entries were made on ET at KSC(all on fmt 30 tanks). MIL-STD-1472 specifies that 

minimum manhole size is 30 inches. Existing Weld mandrel is 22in x 26in and is removed thru 

fwd dome. This requires a 36 in dia hole. For build at MAF similar access requirements 10 ET are 

required. This requires a inanhole in each dome. Fwd manhole needs 10 be in same location on ET 

& NLS as tanks are processed thru the same facilities. Location is primarily driven by cleaning 

probe insertion in Cell E. KSC access is contingency only. 

Conclusions 

Option 2 is preferred for the 1..02 tank this option allows the NLS to be manufactured using ET 

tooling and facilities. It also provides for internal access at MAF and contingency access at KSC. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate Option 2(L02 Tank). Petform a feasibility study to evaluate 

if the level sensors can be designed for removal and installation from the outside. (see 6.2.6.4.1) 

262 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

36 in dia manhole at 

this location on both 

L02 & LH2 tanks 

(No manhole in 

either aft dome) 

NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

L02 Fwd Dome 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

Relocated 

F/L Outlets 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

LH2Aft Dome 

Proposed Update to NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

Addahoal n ormataon 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

263 

30 india 

manhole 

30 india 

manhole 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.6.4.2 Tank Access Trade Study(#CV-DI-01-A) 

Objective 

This trade study evaluated if additional tank access should be provided in the reference 

configuration Core Tankage. The Cycle 0 baseline contains a 36in diameter manhole in the 

forward domes of both L02 and LH2 Tanks. No manholes are provided in the aft domes. 

Approach 

(a) Investigate STS ET access capability 

(b) Research actual tank access history at KSC 

(c) Evaluate need for access during build at MAF 

(d) Develop NLS Tank access requirements 

(e) Develop and evaluate options for providing access 

Options Studied - LH2 Tank 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location & make Aft LH2 tank sump removable 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn; delete Sump & Add 30in Dia Manhole in Dome Cap 

Options Studied - L02 Tank (Reference only) 

Option 1 - Cycle 0 Baseline 

Option 2 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn.; relocate F/L's; add 30in 0 M/hole in Aft Cap 

Option 3 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET loctn.; revise L02 FIL Outlets as removable 

Option 4 - Relocate Fwd Manhole to ET location; retain F!L loc'n; add small Manhole in Aft Cap 

Key Study Results 

24 tank entries were made on ET at KSC(all on first 30 tanks). Mll..-SID-1472 specifies that 

minimum manhole size is 30 inches. Existing Weld mandrel is 22in x 26in and is removed thru 

fwd dome. This requires a 36 in dia hole. For build at MAF similar access requirements to ET are 

required. This requires a manhole in each dome. Fwd manhole needs to be in same location on 

ET & NLS as tanks are processed thru the same facilities. Location is primarily driven by cleaning 

probe insertion in Cell E. KSC access is contingency only. 

Conclusions 

Option 3 is preferred for the LH2 tank. This option allows the NLS to be manufactured using ET 

tooling and facilities. It also provides for internal access at MAF and contingency access at KSC. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate Option 3(LH2 Tank). Perform a feasibility study to evaluate 

if the level sensors can be designed for removal and installation from the outside. (see 6.2.6.4.1), 

264 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

36 in dia manhole at 

this location on both 

L02 & LH2 tanks 

(No manhole in 

either aft dome) 

NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

L02 Fwd Dome 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

Relocated 

F/L Outlets 

Relocated 

36in dia 

manhole 

LH2 Aft Dome 

Proposed Update to NLS Cycle 0 Baseline 

Addataonal n ormataon 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

265 

30 india 

manhole 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFf BLANK 

266 
to.) 

~ 

""C 

::c 

"" ("') 

m 

tj 

-.. ~-

G) 

""0 

~.., 

,..., 

i'TI 

ro ,-

l• 

;.:'!_ 

;:r;: 

:!' 

0 

-1 

~ CV-DI-018 0 

Alternate Transportation Attachment 

Points Evaluation 

Prepared by : R .B. Newton 

(504)257 0389 

Rev: Initial 

Date January 8, 1992 

Approved by : R .. Simms 

IWART/N /WAR/ETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
t,) 

~ 

( 

Objective and Approach CV-DI-018 

Objective 

• Evaluate if the core stage can be handled and transported 

when supported using an alternate transportation approach 

Approach 

• Determine manufacturing preference for core tankage 

and core stage handling and transportation 

• Assess impact to core tankage design 

• Prepare conclusions and recommendations 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
$ 

( 

Transporter Comparison 

Z restraint location TBD .. . 

NLV weight 163646 lb 

428651b ET weight 66000 lb 

CV- Dl-018 

1378271b 

231231b 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 0 

Handling Loads - Hoisting at MAF VAB CV- Dl- 018 

74008 X 2 )( 1.4 

::2072221b 

41814 X 2 X1.4 

:1170801b 

( 

Hoisting load factors 

MMMC Tool design manuel 

Vertical ± 2.0 

Include 15 deg cone angle 

Remove 

from Stack 

35564 X 2 X1.4 

:996001b Horizontal 

holst 

( 

Holst and 

rotate 

38444 X 2 X 1.4 

:1076431b 

32192 X 2 X1.4 

:901381b 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
Handling Loads - Final assembly 

ti 

-

STN 

2473.8 

STN 

4058 

Assemble PM 

35564 X 1 X1.4 

=49790 lb ult 

(without PM) 

STN 

2473.8 

25822 X 1 X1.4 

36150 lb ult 

38444 X1 

X1.4 

::53821 lb 

(Without PM) 

Install engines 

STN 

4194.65 

thrust structureand 

propulsion equip etc 

30,000 lb approx 

STN 

4194.65 

137827 X 1.0 X 

1.4 

=1929571b ult 

( 

CV- Dl- 018 

r94fu 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ t.) 

Handling- Compl·ete Vehicle on Barge CV- Dl- 018 

Support 

STN 

2473.8 STN4122 

1720.85 

ring""-. 198! 283 ~ 210.2 1138.4 

" • ~ ~ .... ,~ 72 lllj 

( 

t 

25822 X 2.5 X 1.4 

:903771b ult 

Compression load 780 lblln ult 

(compares wlth28001b In Standing 

47 kt loaded case) 

Transport load factors (Water transport ) 

RefSP 8077 

Longitudinal ± .5 

Lateral ± 2.5 

Vertical ± 2.5 

( 

114554 lb Ult 

137827X 2.5 X 1.4 

= 4823941b ult 

~ARTIN MARIETTA I 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ \.1.) 

Handling Loads - Hoist at KSC VAB CV- Dl- 018 

25822 X 2 X1.4 

=72301 lb ult 

STN 

2473.8 

25822 X 2 X1.4 

= 72301 lb ult 

137827 X 2.0 X 1.4 

=385920 lb ult 

STN 

4194.65 

Hoisting load factors 

MMMC Tool design manual 

Vertical + 2.0 

Include 15 deg cone angle 

137827 X 2.0 X 1.4 

:385920 lb ult 

lt-7ARTIN tt-7ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Support At Fwd Skirt CV- Dl- 01 B 

+Z 

o --.! 8 bolts at 7.22 pitch as ET 

Holst and 

16 bolts at 3.61 pitch transport Frame ~"tR·c;:a~ as ET 

Flight conical 

27 bolts at adapter( ref) 

Y fl ~ \\ · Y \ 4.893 pitch 

~ ~ 

Pitches based on 165.5 rad 

-z 

.16 

EXISTING TOOLING BOLT LOCATIONS PER ET 

Bolt circle radius = 166.21 Section AA 

·~tfett:trai:17ii:dik;i:~J:1 

[i£~Hole dla .61 dla J~;:::: :mmw .. .-Y.o!'Z :wzew·emrtrem::.n-:·=q·: ......xw-=-J9:::::::: 

n-tA RTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Conclusions and Recommendations CV- Dl-018 

Conclusions 

• Alternate transportation approach has no Impact on ref. configuration 

core tankage sizing 

• Fwd ring can be attached using Fwd sklrtllnterstage attachment 

hardware holes 

N 

~ Recommendations 

• Adopt alternate transportation approach 

• eliminates need for additional hardware on 1.5 stage liT 

- permits core tankage and core Stage T and H 

• Define with the aft structure panel the prefered location of the aft 

transportation ring 

MARTIN JI.1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.1.4.7 Alt. Trans Attach Points (#CV-DI-018) 

Objective 

Evaluate whether the Core Stage can be handled and transported when supported using an alternate 

transponation approach. 

Approach 

(a) Determine manufactming preference for core tankage andcore stage handling and 

transportation. 

(b) Defme the handling loads for each step of assembly,hoisting and transportation. 

(c) Assess impact on core tankage design. 

(d) Prepare conclusions and recommendations. 

Options Studied 

Option 1 - Suppon as on ET - at SRB beam and aft LH2 tank frame. 

Option 2 - Suppon at Fwd frame of Fwd skin and major frame in propulsion module. 

Key Study Results 

The ET transponer was designed for the 75,000 lb max standard weight ET. It was concluded that 

new transporters will be needed for the 163,000 lb Core stage. Therefore this task concentrated on 

the option (2) alternate support. 

The loads at suppon points for each assembly, position, hoist and uanspon event, including barge 

shipment to KSC where determined and found to have no impact to the reference configuration. 

Conclusions 

(a) Alternate transportation approaeh has no impact on ref.configuration core tankage sizing. 

(b) Fwd ring can be attached using Fwd slcirtlinterstage attachment hardware holes. 

Study Recommendations 

(a) Adopt alternate transportation approach: 

- Eliminates need for additional hardware on l.Sstage Vf - Permits Core Tankage and Core Stage transportation and handling. 

(b) Defme with the aft structure panel the preferred location of the aft transportation ring. 

276 

--
National Launch System Cycle Zero Structures Data Packllge Page 2 

Option ll Et support system ET weight 66000 lb 

..... ~:::==il~~~:~:i:r~~~ z restraint 

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIII 

42865 lb 23123 lb 

New transporter needed: 

• Heaviervehicle 

• Longer vehicle 

• lower vehicle clearance for roll rings.(roll rings 

are needed to provide access to pod engines) ~ 

Option 2> Alternate support system NLV weight 163646 lb 

137827 lb 

•1.5 stage does not need heavy frame at stn 4058 

~ .... Z restraint 

location TBD 

•Both Hllv and 1.5 stage have a massive frame at stn 4194 

•1.5 stage does not need a heavy frame at stn 2985 

pesign loads at 

support points 

Rgistinq lgad tactora 

Vertical ± 

Cone angle 15 deg 

.581 ttaasgatt lo1d 

factoz::a 

Vertical +2.5 

lateral ±2.5 

25822 X 2.5 X 1.4 

•90377 lb ult 

25822 X 2 Xl. 4 

137827 X 2.5 

•482394 lb ult 

Hoisting 

STN 

2473.8 Barge transport 

STN 

4194.65 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

277 

45821'7 lb ult 

15 deg 

1.4 
National lAunch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.1.4.7 Alt. Trans Attach Points (#CV-DI-OlB) 

Objective 

Evaluate whether the Core Stage can be handled and ttansported when supponed using an alternate 

transportation approach. 

Approach 

(a) Determine manufacturing preference for core tankage andcore stage handling and 

transponation. · 

(b) Defme the handling loads for each step of assembly ,hoisting and transponation. 

(c) Assess impact on core tankage design. 

(d) Prepare conclusions and recommendations. 

Options Studied 

Option 1 - Suppon as on ET- at SRB beam and aft LH2 tank frame. 

Option 2 - Suppon at Fwd frame of Fwd skirt and major frame in propulsion module. 

Key Study Results 

The ET transponer was designed for the 75,000 lb max standard weight ET. It was concluded that 

new transponers will be needed for the 163,000 lb Core stage. Therefore this task concentrated on 

the option (2) alternate suppon. 

The loads at support points for each assembly, position, hoist and transport event, including barge 

shipment to KSC where detennined and found to have no impact to the reference configuration. 

Conclusions 

(a) Alternate transportation approach has no impact on ref.configuration core tankage sizing. 

(b) Fwd ring can be attached using Fwd slc:irtlinterstage attachment hardware holes. 

Study Recommendations 

(a) Adopt alternate transponation approach: 

- Eliminates need for additional hardware on 1.5stage 1/1' - Pennits Core Tankage and Core Stage transportation and handling. 

(b) Define with the aft structure panel the preferred location of the aft transportation ring. 

278 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

Option 1) Et support s~stem ET weight 66000 lb 

Z restraint 

42865 lb 23123 lb 

New transporter needed: 

• Heaviervehicle 

• Longer vehicle 

• lower vehicle clearance tor roll rings.(roll rings 

are needed to provide access to pod engines) 

Page 2 

Qption 21 support s~stem NLV weight 163646 lb 

137827 lb 

•1.5 stage does not need heavy frame at stn 4058 

~ .... Z restraint 

location TBD 

•Both Hllv and 1.5 stage have a massive frame at stn 4194 

•1.5 stage does not need a heavy frame at stn 2985 

Design loads at 

support points 

Ho1ftt1nq lpad factors 

Vertical ± 

Cone angle 15 deg 

Sea transport load 

tactors 

Vertical 

lateral 

+2.5 

±2.5 

25822 X 2.5 X 1.4 

•90377 lb ult. 137827 X 2.5 X 

•482394 lb ult 

Xl.4 

ult 

Hoisting 

STN 

2473.8 Barge transport 

STN 

4194.65 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

279 

458211 lb ult 

15 deg 

1.4 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFr BLANK 

280 
tj 

0 

~ 

I 

;g 

11' 

0 

~ 

2 

G) 

-o 

~ 

C') 

iTI 

l!.l 

r-

~ 

2 

~ 

..... ,, 

0 

-1 

"'!'J 

~ CV-STR-14A 

1-.J 

00 

.... 

Forward Skirt Structural Reference 

Configuration Enhancements 

Prepared By : Anthony C Grotefeld 

(504)257-5284 

Rev: -Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

Approved By: M.R. Simms 

ACG92014 A'IARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Fwd Skirt Design Definition CV-STR-14A 

Objective 

• Study And Evaluate Enhancements To 

The Cycle 0 Reference Forward Skirt Structure And 

Recommend Potential Modifications 

Approach 

• Obtain Detail Definition From MSFC 

• Identify Potential Study Items 

~ • Define, Evaluate And Analyze Selected Study Items 

• Identify Recommended Changes To Ref. Configuration 

• Produce Forward Skirt Part Definition 

- Usage And/Or Similarity Of ET Parts • NLS Part Commonality 

• Identify Candidates For Further Study 

ACG92014 MARTIN /IIIA.RIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
N 

00 

w 

Groundrules & Assumptions CV-STR-14A 

Ground Rules 

• Forward Skirt Structure Definition Per MSFC Reference 

Layout NLS-0008 Dated 8/27/91 

• Mass Properties As Defined On 10/7/91 

·Loads & Factors From Memo ToP. Thomson From Bart 

Graham, Dated 5/10/91 

Assumptions 

• Access Doors And Vent Are In The lnterstage 

• Encapsulated Payload 1/F Between lnterstage And 

Forward Skirt 

• Loads Evenly Distributed (From lnterstage To Forward 

Skirt) 

·Common Skirt For 1.5 Stage And HLLV 

ACG92014 IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
1'-.) 

~ 

Reference Geometry Definition CV-STR-14A 

- From NLS Reference Layout NLS -0008 08/27/91 

.25 

96.00 

r11.631_u 

[]I llf3.75 

_jL1.88 t 

47.00 

I 

A~ + 5.00 

+ r_ 

t _J..___.2.50 L.-

A ..I 

SECTION A-A 

ACG92014 IJI7ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE r"VSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Potential Study Items CV-STR-14A 

• Alternate Fwd Skirt To lnterstage Interface Concept 

• Shell Penetration Definition 

• Potential Use Of ET Tooling To Build Forward Skirt 

• Stringer Pitch Revision 

• Sizing Changes 

~ Related Tasks (Results Not Incorporated In This Study) 

External Hardware Definition 

v. 

• CV-STR - 14G 

• CV-STR -16H 

• CV-STR - 16D 

• CV-D1-01-B 

• 3-S-001-B 

ACG92014 

TPS Reference Definition 

Transportation And Handling 

Alternate Transportation Attach Points 

Skin Stiffener Pitch Sensivity 

JI.1'A RTIN ,._,ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
N 

00 

01 

Recommended Changes 

Study Item Recommendation 

• Alternate 1/F Concept Confirm Option 1 Feasablllty 

During Cycle 1 

• Shell Penetration Defn Add Penetrations 

• Stringer Pitch Revise Method Of 

Dimension Dimensioning 

• Potential Use Of ET Use ETToollng As 

Tooling To Build Appropriate 

Fwd Skirt 

• Sizing Changes (a) Incorporate 1" Of TPS 

(b) Incorporate Aft Chord 

Section 

• Reference Part N/A 

Definition 

lncorp • Now Incorporated In MSFC Baseline Layouts 

Accepted· Agreed But Not Yet Incorporated 

Pending • Being Evaluated By MSFC 

ACG92014 

( ( 

CV-STR-14A 

Back Up Wt(Lb) Status Data Impact 

Append • 443 Pending 

1 

Append N/A Accepted 

2 

Append N/A Incorporated 

3 

Append N/A N/A 

4 

Append + 213 Accepted 

5 -157 Accepted 

Append N/A N/A 

6 

I 

' 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SVSTEMS 

( 
N 

~ 

ACG92014 

CV-STR-14A 

Appendix 1 

• Alternate Interface Concept 

~ARTIIV IYTARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Alternate Interface Concepts CV-STR-14A 

Issue 

• Current Reference For Forward Skirt/Conical Adapter 

Interface Requires Internal Access For Installation Of 

Attach Hardware 

Objective 

• Define And Evaluate Alternate Forward Skirt/Conical 

~ Adapter Interfaces 

ACG92014 llt'tARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTeMS 

( ( ( 
N 

~ 

( 

Reference Fwd 1/F Attach't CV-STR-14A 

Skin 

(Conical 

Adapter) 

Stringer 

(Conical 

Adapter) 

Stringer 

(Forward 

Skirt) 

ACG92014 

Internally Installed 

Fasteners 

©®llilD© £!.\@Jt!ljp>il@}lf 

Aft Frame 

!Fw@l ®~Dirtt 

Klckrlng 

/JITARTIN ,._.,ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
<( 

,... 

~ 

I 

a: 

tUJ 

I 

> 0 

-c 

Cl) 

·--c 

:::J 

..., 

UJ 

"' c 

0 

·-..., 

c. 

0 

I 

290 
N 

\0 

-

~ 

Option 1 - External 1/F 

Externally Installed 

Fastener 

Chord Similar To 

ET liT Fwd Chord 

ACG92014 

( 

CV-STR-14A 

©©rnlU© C\@Jt!l[p.>1l®11 

fwd Skirt 

WTARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ N 

Option 2 - Recessed Ext 1/F CV-STR-14A 

Machined pocket 

Externally Installed 

Fastener 

ACG92014 

( 

©®11ilncs b.\@1f!llf)1l®rr 

Roll Ring Forging 

Extruded Forward Chord 

!Fwd Skirt 

Insert Or Nutplate 

/J'TA RTIIV /JII'ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~VSTEMS 

( ( 
~ Ul 

Option 3 - Internal 1/F 

Internally Installed 

Fastener 

ACG92014 

©®lftl0© ~@l@l!P)U®!r 

Roll Ring Forging 

( 

CV-STR-14A 

Extruded Fwd Chord 

Fwcdl Skirt 

~ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Option 4 - Conical External 1/F CV-STR-14A 

Externally Installed 

~ Fastener 

ACG92014 

( ( 

©®(Jil0© ~~lpl1l®lf 

Nutplate 

Extruded Fwd Chord 

IVIART/IV MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ VI 

{ 

Option 5 - Cylindrical Ext 1/F CV-STR-14A 

Externally Installed 

Fastener 

ACG92014 

©®!ftl~© ~@lt!llfjft®lf 

Extruded Fwd Chord 

Nutplate 

/JI1ARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
/ 

Option - Eval'n-Coarse Screen 

Criteria 

HIW lnstn 

1/F Tooling 

Complexity 

Joint 

Integrity 

Part 

Complexity 

Backup 

Ftg's Req'd 

Jnt Suscept 

to Aero Htg 

Potential Use 

of ET Tooling 

Wt Impact 

to Reference +41 * 

Option 2 

,,,~?f.~''l External :::::#?:: External 

Better Than 1 Similar to 

Reference Reference 

Good 

Simple 

Extrusion 

No 

-443 

Good 

No 

No- Local 

C/0 Req'd 

-133 

* To Accommodate Bolt Offset 

ACG92014 

( ( 

Similar to 

Reference 

Good 

No 

No 

-133 

CV-STR-14A 

Option 5 

External External 

Excellent Exellent 

Simple 1 Simple 

Extrusion Extrusion 

No No 

No No 

-144 -144 

IWARTIIV /JI1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ ...J 

Conclusions 

• Reference Configuration 

+ Joint Not Susceptible To Aeroheatlng 

- Requires Internal Access 

- Requires Additional Backup Fittings 

- Heaviest Option 

• Option 1 

+ External Access And Good Joint Integrity 

+ Potential Use Of ET Tooling 

- Aeroheatlng Impact 

• Option 2 

+ External Access And Good Joint Integrity 

- Complex Parts/Machining 

• Option 3 

+ Simple Interface With Good Joint Integrity 

- Internal Access 

- Complex Parts 

• Option 4 

+ External Access And Excellent Joint Integrity 

+ Lightweight 

- Conical Interface Drives Complex Tooling 

• Option 5 

ACG92014 

+ External Access And Excellent Joint Integrity 

+ Lightweight 

- Cylindrical Interface Drives Complex Tooling 

CV-STR-14A 

/JITARTIN /JITARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 00 

Conclusions &Recommendat'n CV-STR-14A 

Conclusion 

• Option 1 Is Prefered 

- Simple External Interface 

- Potential Use Of ET Tooling 

- Good Load Paths, No Need For Backup Fittings 

Recommendations 

Determine If An External Flange is Acceptable For 

Aeroheating. If So, Incorporate Option 1 During 

Cycle 1 

ACG92014 IVIARTIN IVIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

ACG92014 

CV-STR-14A 

Appendix 2 

• Shell Penetration Definition 

/JitA RTIIV /tiTARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Shell Penetration Definition CV-STR-14A 

G02 P/L Aperture 

~30Deg 

I -Z I -Y +Z I Xn 2473.8 f' I I I I I I I I I I I I 

6 4 I 2 1 I 13/ 15 I 17 96.00 18 

I 

~ -I - _ ~-J!q_ ~ j_ t---J- Xn 2521.8 

0 8 1 I I I 

I I I ....c:_ 

I I I Xn 2569.8 

-Z .y +Z 130.0 Typ 

G02 Vent Aperture ' Fwd 

CIT Aperture --1 + 

ACG92014 IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
w 

0 

...... 

( 

G02 P/L Penetration CV-STR-14A 

Panel #3 - NLS Ref Convfiguration 

G02 Pressline 

Aperture* 

2.0 Ref --f----1 

42.90 

48.16 

Xn 2473.80 

* Cutouts Positioned 

Relative to Panel 

as ET lntertank 

-----+- Xn 2514.64 

Xn 2521.8 

L.....-.,_ Xn 2522.65 

LH2 CIT Aperture * 

L I i I] Xn 2569.80 

• Frame at Xn 2521.8 Interferes WithG02 P/L & LH2 CIT Cutouts 

ACG92014 1117ARTIN IVIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
G02 P/L Penetration CV-STR-14A 

Panel #3 - Alternate Configuration 

Xn 2473.80 

G02 Pressllne 

Aperture 

2.0 Ref • , 

n t Xn 2512.8 Xn 2515.55 

Xn 2521.8 

s 

LH2 CIT Aperture 

50.00 

L1 I 1-xn 2569.80 

Position Cutouts & Relocate Pressline As Shown 

ACG92014 n-7ARTIIV IY1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE f:VSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Ul 

0 

Ul 

G02 P/L Penetration CV-STR-14A 

Conclusion 

• Cutouts Positioned Relative to ET lntertank Interfere 

with Frame 

Recommendation 

• Relocate Cutouts 1.00 Forward of Frame and Revise 

Shell Accordingly 

• Add Penetrations For Cabletray, G02 Pressline And 

G02 Vent During Cycle 1 

ACG92014 WTARTIN IWARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

ACG92014 

( 

CV-STR-14A 

Appendix 3 

• Stringer Pitch Dimensioning 

1117ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE F"-STEMS 

( ( 
/ 

Stringer Pitch CV-STR-14A 

Conclusion 

• 7.33 Pitch Quoted on Ref Configuration and Layouts is 

Correct if Measured at Top of Stiffeners 

• ET Drawings/Tooling Utilize 7.20 Measured at ISL 

(2.5° Pitch) 

Recommendation 

~ • Revise Method of Dimensioning to Quote Pitch at ISL 

VI 

ACG92014 ~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Ref Stringer Geometry CV-STR-14A 

~_.~----~~----~=---------~-ISL 

165.0 R 

Reference: 144 Stringers@ 7.33 Pitch (Measured at Top of 

Hat) 

Proposed: 144 Stringers@ 7.20 Pitch (2.5° Pitch Measured 

at ISL - Same as ET) 

ACG92014 JllfARTIN JWARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
C) 

c <(~ ·--

0 ~>< 0 

,... ·- 1- •-c 

a:c 1- 1-CI) w U'Jc. ..... •c. 0 t)<C Cl) 

0 

:::J 

• 

307 
Vl 

0 

00 

/ 

Use Of ET Tooling In F/S Build CV-STR-14A 

Study Results 

• The Following Tools Can Be Used To Fabricate The 

Forward Skirt 

- 'C' Frame Riviter 

- 90 degree Frame Segment To 180 degree ET Frame 

Splice Tool 

- ET Master Drill Jigs (On Major Assembly Tool) 

- Small Tools ie Drill Motors, Slings And Handling 

Equipment 

• 3 New Tools Are Required 

-Fwd Skirt 1/F Tool 

- Combined Tack And Final Assembly Tool 

-Systems Installation Tool 

• New 1/F Tool Can Be Eliminated If Results Of Appendix 1 

Are Incorporated 

• See Mfg, Tooling And Facilities Trade CV-STR-16 For 

Further Details 

ACG92014 IWARTIN IWARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE S"<;TEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

Use Of ET Tooling In F/S Build CV-STR-14A 

Conclusions 

• ET Tooling Can Be Used For Some Aspects Of The Fwd Skirt 

Build 

• Depending On Selected Configuration, 2 To 3 New Tools Are 

Required To Supplement The ET Tooling 

Recommendations 

• Use ET Tooling As Appropriate To Fabricate Forward Skirt 

ACG92014 ~ARTIN /IITARIE'TTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
w 

-

0 

ACG92014 

( 

CV-STR-14A 

Appendix 5 

Sizing Changes 

• Impact Of No TPS 

• Stress Analysis 

( -

/JII'A RTIIV /JII'ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
IJ.) 

--

( 

No TPS Impacts CV-STR-14A 

Issue 

• Reference Fwd Skirt Does Not Have TPS But Current Fwd 

Skirt Was Not Designed For Heating Rates Produced 

During Launch Without TPS. 

Impacts 

TPS Stringer Thk Skin Thk Weight Impact 

Thk Ref. Reqd.* Ref. Reqd.* Stringer Skin 

.00 .071 .090 .063 .120 +1961bs +5691bs 

• Total Weight Impact +7651bs 

* Based On Remtec Heating Data 

ACG92014 I»ARTIIV MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

-

N 

No TPS Impacts CV-STR-14A 

Conclusion 

• Total Weight Impact Of 765 lbs Required To Withstand 

Aeroheating Environment Without The Addition Of TPS 

See Study CV-STR-14H For Further Details 

Recommendation 

• Incorporate 1" Of TPS On Fwd Skirt 

ACG92014 /JITARTIN ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
w 

-

w 

( 

F/S Alternate Chord Sect'n CV-STR-14A 

Issue 

• ET Chord Used On Reference Aft Skirt 1/F Is 

Larger And Heavier Than NLS Structural 

Requirements Indicated 

Objective 

ACG92014 

• Determine If An Alternate Aft Chord Be Substituted 

That It Would Result In A Lower Weight 

JI.'T.ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Alternate Chord Section CV-STR-14A 

.... 1.69 ... 1 

.380 Dla Hole -----... ~1 1.11 (ET) I ... 

+ 

.38 

f _J .58 

1.1-) 

--1:1. 

ACG92014 

( 

.50R 

4.25 

~~J.-

( 

.630 2.50 REF REF--_

30----~ ... ~-

j_ f.- (ET) ... 1 1.12 

t 

.460 

.440 

<en 

I 1-.. .... (ET) 

.563 

Dla 

1.00 R 

5.00 

REF 

4.800 

(ET) 

_l 

.12s .... 1 ,._. 

,_,ARTIIV MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
c.,.) 

-

VI 

( 

F/S Alternate Chord Sect'n CV-STR-14A 

Conclusions 

• 157 lbs Weight Savings For Alternate Chord 

• Alternate Chord Is Feasible And Meets Load 

Requirements 

Recommendation 

- Incorporate Alternate Chord In Cycle 1 Baseline 

ACG92014 llt1ARTIN llt1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
. ' . 

~(0 ..->< 

I •- a:-c t-C UJQ) 

.c. >C. o<C 

c 

0 

·-..... 

·-

c 

·-..... 

Cl) 

c 

..... 

... 

as 

c. 

t: 

• 

316 
~ 

-....:a 

Fwd Skirt Sructural Definition 

Shell Definition 

• Part Configuration -Recommended 

Configuration 

-Aft Chords 

- Panels 1 Thru 8 

-z -Y +Z 

CV-STR-14A 

96

I ; : P1 ; P3 ; : P1 ; P1 ; : P1 : / ~ : : P1 : P1 i . -· .. - . Xn 

2473

•

8 

~ -I j_ l:mme...2 xn 2521.8 

CD 3 2 lCD I 4 0 0 

-Z .y +Y 

Fwd 

+ 

ACG92014 WTARTIN ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Fwd Skirt Panel Definition 

~ 

-

00 

-···--

Part 

P1 

P1 

P1 

P1 

P1 

P1 

P-2 

P-3 

ACG92014 

( 

Title Part Status 

ET Mod. ... _ ... I WI'!!-

Panel1 v 

Panel2 

Panel4 ~ Panel5 

Panel7 " PanelS ~ 

Panel3 v 

PanelS v 

( 

CV-STR-14A - - ~ 

Remarks 

~ 

Panels 1 ,2,4,5, 7 & 8 Are 

>Identical. 

~ 

,....Panel31s Unique. 

Cutouts For err, G02 

, ... Press Line 

Penetrations Are 

-....Located In This Panel. 

The G02 Ventline 

Penetration Is Located 

In Panel& 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
" 

w 

-\0 

F/Skirt Aft Chord & Frame Def'n CV-STR-14A 

Part Title Part Status Remarks ET Mod New 

CD 1 Chord, Aft, Panel 1 ~ I" 

&8 

C02 Chord, Aft, Panel ~ Similar To ET liT 

3&6 > Forward Chords(I/F liT 

~ To L02 Tank) 

CD3 Chord, Aft Panel 

2&7 .~ 

CD4 Chord, Aft, Panel 4 - ~ Similar To ET liT Chord But 

&5 With Revised Hole Pattern 

F1 Frame 2473.8 ~ 

F2 Frame 2521.8 ~ 

ACG92014 ~ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

~ 

Candidates For Further Study CV-STR-14A 

• Determine If An External 1/F Between Fwd Skirt And 

lnterstage Is Acceptable For Aeroheating 

• Redefine Forward Skirt Configuration Based On Results 

Of This Trade And The Following Related Trades: 

CV-STR-14G External Hardware Definition 

CV-STR-14H TPS Reference Definition 

CV- D1 -01 B Alt Trans Attach Points 

3- S-001 A Alt Panel Construction 

3- S-001 B Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity 

3- S-001 C Alt Fwd Skirt Configuration 

• Obtain Better Definition Of P/L Loads And Incorporate 

Any Load Eccentricities 

ACG92014 /JITARTIN IYIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( . ( 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Datil Package Page 1 

S. 2. 3. 4 .1 Forward Skirt Trade Study (#CV -STR-l4A) 

Objective 

The study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference Forward Skirt structure and 

recommended potential modifications. 

Approach 

(a) Obtain Forward Skirt detail definition from MSFC. 

(b) Define, evaluate and analyze selected study items. 

(c) Identify recommended changes to Ref. configuration. 

(d) Produce Forward Skin part definition. 

(e) Identify candidates for further study. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Alternate Fwd Skirt to Interstage I/F concept 

Item 2 - Shell penetration definition. 

Item 3 - Potential use of ET tooling to build Fwd Skirt. 

Item 4 - Stringer pitch dimensioning approach. 

Item 5 - Sizing changes and impact of no TPS. 

Item 6 - Fwd Skirt part definition. 

Key Study Results 

Five 1/Fs were developed and compared with the Reference configuration. Option 1 with its 

external fastener installation and good joint integrity is preferred. It is the lightest option and 

reduces weight by 443 lbs. 

Shell penetrations for 002 Pressline, cabletray and 002 vent were investigated. Cabletray and 

002 Pressline penetrations interfere with the intermediate frame.and require relocating 1.0 inch 

forward. 

The Fwd Skin structure can be manufactured on ET intertan.k tooling with the addition of one new 

tool for tacking and fmal assembly (ref 5.2.1.4.3). 

Part sizing analysis showed a weight saving of 157 lbs by substituting an alternate aft I/F chord: 

analysis indicated a weight impact of 764 lbs if the structure is sized as a heatsink to withstand 

aeroheating without use of TPS (ref 5.2.1.4.2). 

Conclusions 

Several enhancements to the Cycle 0 Fwd Skin structure definition were studied. Incorporation of 

these enhancements will reduce weight by 600 lbs and improve producibility. In addition, the 

potential use of ET Intertank tooling for Fwd Skirt fabrication was confmned. 

Study Recommendations 

The Reference definition should be revised to reflect the enhancements proposed in this study. 

Determine if an extemali/F flange is acceptable from a aeroheating aspect 

lncorpcnte extemali/F between Fwd Skirt and Interstage (Cycle 1 Task). 

Incorporate relocated err and G02 Pressline penetrations. 

Substiblte alternate aft chord. 

Incorporate 1" of TPS on Fwd Skirt acreage. 

321 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Pacluzge 

ALTERNATE INTERFACE 

Reference 

n El_Option t 1 

- ~ 

Option t 3 Option t 4 

ALTERNATE CHORD 

. 380 DIA 

HOLE 

t 

~ 1.69 l.ll(ET) :t 

.25 

.38 

4 

.50R 

Alternate 

Aft Chord 

Additional Information 

T 

.460 

.440 

(ET) 

Reference 

Aft Chord 

Option t 2 

Option t 5 

... 

5.00 

REF 

+ 4.800 

_1 .125~ ~ 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

322 

Page 2 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.3.4.1 Forward Skirt Trade Study (#CV-STR-14A) 

Objective 

The study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference Forward Skirt structure and 

recommended potential modifications. 

Approach 

(a) Obtain Forward Skirt detail definition from MSFC. 

(b) Define, evaluate and analyze selected study items. 

(c) Identify recommended changes to Ref.configuration. 

(d) Produce Forward Skirt part definition. 

(e) Identify candidates for further study. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Alternate Fwd Skirt to Interstage 1/F concept 

Item 2- Shell penetration definition. 

Item 3 - Potential use of ET tooling to build Fwd. Skirt. 

Item 4 - Stringer pitch dimensioning approach. 

Item 5- Sizing changes and impact of no TPS. 

Item 6 - Fwd Skin part defmition. 

Key Study Results 

Five I/F's were developed and compared with the Reference configuration. Option 1 with its 

external fastener installation and good joint integrity is preferred. It is the lightest option and 

reduces weight by 443 lbs. 

Shell penetrations for G02 Pressline, cabletray and G02 vent were investigated. Cabletray and 

G02 Pressline penetrations interfere with the intermediate frame.and require relocating 1.0 inch 

forward. 

The Fwd Skirt structure can be manufactured on ET intertank tooling with the addition of one new 

tool for tacking and final assembly (ref 6.2.1.4.3). 

Part sizing analysis showed a weight saving of 157 lbs by substituting an alternate aft 1/F chord: 

analysis indicated a weight impact of 764 lbs if the structure is sized as a heatsink to withstand 

aeroheating without use of TPS (ref 6.2.1.4.2). 

Conclusions 

Several enhancements to the Cycle 0 Fwd Skirt structure definition were studied. Incorporation of 

these enhancements will reduce weight by 600 lbs and improve producibility. In addition, the 

potential use of ET Intertank tooling for Fwd Skirt fabrication was confirmed. 

Study Recommendations 

The Reference definition should be revised to reflect the enhancements proposed in this study. 

Detennine if an externali/F flange is acceptable from a aeroheating aspect. 

Incorporate external 1/F between Fwd Skirt and Interstage (Cycle 1 Task). 

Incorporate relocated CIT and G02 Pressline penetrations. 

Substihlte alternate aft chord. 

Incorporate 1" of TPS on Fwd Skirt acreage. 

323 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

Reference 

n 

Option t 3 

ALTERNATE INTERFACE 

BOption t 1 ~ 

~ 

ALTERNATE CHORD 

Option t 2 

Option # 5 

. 380 DIA 

HOLE 

1.69 :t- .630 r2.50 ... ~ 1.11(ET) RE_LF f!.:. 1.930 __ ~ 

. 2 5 rr---r~-~....-(E_J~_~..,----=-. \~;~ .38 

4 

.SOR 

Alternate 

Aft Chord 

Additional Information 

4 

.460 

.440 

(ET) 

.563 

Dia 

Reference 

Aft Chord 

l 

5.00 

REF 

+ 4.800 

_] 

.125 ~ 14--

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

324 

Page 2 
w 

N 

VI 

(' 

CV-STR-148 

L02 Tank Structural Reference 

Configuration Enhancements 

Prepared By: Derek A. Townsend 

(504)257-0021 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1991 

Approved By: M. R. Simms 

/J'1ARTIN /J'1ARIETTA 

DAT.91315 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
w 

~ 

NLS L02 Tank Definition CV-STR-148 

Objective 

• Study & Evaluate Enhancements To The Cycle 0 

Reference L02 Tank Structure And Recommend Potential 

Modifications 

Approach 

• Obtain Detail Definition From MSFC 

• Identify Potential Study Items 

• Define, Evaluate And Analyze Selected Study Items 

•Identify Recommended Changes To Ref. Configuration 

• Produce L02 Tank Part Definition 

- Usage And/Or Similarity Of ET Parts - NLS Part Commonality 

• Identify Candidates For Study During Cycle 1 

IWARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Vl 

!j 

( 

Groundrules & Approach CV-STR-148 

Ground rules 

• Tank Structure Definition Per MSFC Reference 

Layout NLS-0006 Dated 10/9/91 

• Mass Properties As Defined On 10/7/91 

• Loads & Factors From Memo ToP. Thompson From Bart 

Graham, Dated 5/1 0/91 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.9i315 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Potential Study Items CV-STR-148 

• Clarification Of Barrel/Frame Geometry Definition 

• Substitution Of Alternate Forward Dome Chord 

·Definition Of Reference Slosh Baffle 

• Definition Of Anti-Vortex Baffle 

• Definition Of External Hardware Mtg Provisions 

• Evaluation Of Dome Chord/Barrel Weld Land Mismatch 

• Level Sensor Mtg Provisions & Installation Approach 

~ ·Stress Analysis To Finalize Size & Qty Of Intermediate 

Frames 

Related Tasks ( Results Not Incorporated In This Task) 

• CV-STR-14G External Hardware Definition 

• CV-STR-14H TPS Reference Definition 

• CV-STR-16D Transportation & Handling 

• CV-DI-01 A Tank Access 

• 3-S-011 Slosh Baffle Reqmts & Definition 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( ( 

Recommended Changes CV-STR-148 

U) 

~ 

Study Item Recomendation Back Up 

Data 

Barrel/Frame Geom. Use New Geom & Frs Append.1 

Alt. Fwd Chord & Fr. Change Chord, Fr, & Geom Append.2 

Reference Baffle Def. Incorporate Option 3 Append.3 

Anti-Vortex Baffle Def. Incorporate Into Ref Append.4 

Ext. Hardware 1/F's Incorporate Into Ref Append.5 

Ch./Barrel Weld Lands M/c Chord Weld Lands Append.& 

Ref Part Definition N/A Append.7 

lncorp - Now Incorporated In MSFC Baseline Layouts 

Accepted- Agreed But Not Yet Incorporated 

* Weight Impacts Include 8°/o Contingency 

DAT.91315 

* Wt. Status Impact 

N/A lncorp. 

-471bs lncorp. 

7741bs Accepted 

I 

501bs Accepted 1 

181bs Accepted 

N/A lncorp. 

N/A N/A 

,._,ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Cl) 

• ~ 

w 

~ > Cl) 

--

• w 

0 

( 

D. 

Cll 

c c I W 

0 . ~ 

( ·-...., ~ 

·-

c 

·-..... 

G) 

c 

m.,.. >a 

...., ~ 

~>< G) 

.,... •-c ·- E 

a::c 0 I-G) G) 

UJc. " •a. G) 

~<C E 

a:s 

~ 

u. 

............. -

G) 

~ 

~ 

a:s 

m 

• 

330 
Reference Geometry Definition CV-STR-148 

Vl 

Vl 

-

Xn 2569.79 

I 

DAT.91315 

Xn 2708.95 

I 

--,3.50 

Xn 2640.80 

165.50 R 

OSL (Ref) 

Xn 2782.80 

Xn 2852.75 

I 

IJIIARTIN IJIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
lj.) 

lj.) 

t-l 

Proposed Geometry Definition CV-STR-148 

Xn 2569.80 Xn 2852.80 

I 

.. 

I 10.75--r-128.22~ L.- r9.8 .. 

1 -ls.oo I _-

ir I " u I .. I 11=1 ==tu~ * ... __;. 

I 

I 

Xn 2576.55 

I----

Xn 2711.775 

165.50 R 

OSL (Ref) 

I 

I 

I 

Xn 2611.775 1 

Xn 2644.66 

Xn 2676.95 

Xn 2746.475 

Xn 2778.89 

Xn 2810.825 

Xn 2851.00 

Note: See Appendix 2 For Further Update To This 

Proposed Geometry 

WTART/N IYIARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
CV-STR-148 

Appendix 2 

~ • Substitution Of Alternate Fwd Dome Chord & 

"' Frame (Including Geometry Update) 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91315 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Alt. Fwd Dome Chord & Frame CV-STR-148 

Reference Fwd Dome Chord 

Xn 2569.80 

f.--10.75 ... 

1 Xn 2576.55 

Varies1 0.00 .., 

~ 1 To 21.75 

==J 

• ET LH2 Tank Fwd Dome Chord 

• ET LH2 Tank Frame 1129.9 

• Fr Installed On Aft Face 

DAT.91~ 

( ( 

Alternate Fwd Dome Chord 

Xn 2569.80 

r--9.8 

I X~ 2571.30 

Fr Moved To ---.1 10.00 

Fwd Face 1 Constant 

==_j 

• ET L02 Tank Aft Dome Chord With 

Reduced Weld Lands 

• New Frame Based On ET Fr 1129.9 Lwr 

Segments For Both Upr & Lwr Segments 

• Fr lnstl On Fwd Face (Mfg Preference) 

/111ARTIN /111ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
(' ' 

Alt. Fwd Dome Chord & Frame CV-STR-148 

Modified Geometry* 

Xn 2569.80 Xn 2852.80 

1.. I 9.8 I ... , ... 1128.70 I .. I 

~ I I Xn 2571.30 I 

[~-~ I Modified 

DAT.91315 

Xn 2643.95 

Xn 2711.30 

165.50 R 

OSL (Ref) 

Xn 2778.65 Xn 2851.00 

* Update Geometry Recommended In 

Appendix 1 As Illustrated 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

, 
Alt. Fwd Dome Chord & Frame CV-STR-148 

Results 

• Standardizes L02/LH2 Tank Dome Chords & Frames 

• Improves Method Of Frame Assembly 

• Potential Weight Savings 50 lbs 

• No Major Manufacturing Impacts 

• Requires Modified Frame Locations & Barrel Lengths 

Recommendation 

~ • Change Fwd Dome Chord & Frame Segments 

• Revise Tank Geometry To Accommodated New Chord 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( - ( 
Cl) ~ 

~ 

w 

~ c rJJ 

C) > I Cl) 

·- ~ w tn (.) 

( Cl) 0.. 

Cl) c 0 I W G) z - z ..... ( 

..... ~ 

as 

m 

.J: 

tn 

0 mM -

en 

I ~>< Cl) 

,.., ·-

(.) 

O::c c 

1-CI) Cl) 

a.. en a. Cl) •a. ..... {;<~: Cl) 

a: 

..... 

0 

c 

0 

·-

... 

·-

c 

·-..... 

Cl) 

c 

1.0 • ,.. 
finition CV-STR-148 

-~efinition 

·=~~';:';:';:';:~~~~~~~~-=efinition Is ET L02 Tank Baffles "As Is" onfiguration & ET Slosh Baffle Usage 

________ ...... Authority Requirements For Slosh 

---·. ··- ~- ·---··--- ~idered To Date 

le Design Configurations 

---------·ce "As Is" ET Configuration 

==============~ Baffle - Aft Barrel Only 

================= Baffle - Both Barrel Length ---------ash Baffle Definition For Reference 

--------10sh Baffle Approach Using Ring Frames 

--------Is Being Studied Under 3-S-011 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
w 

w 

"' 

Damping Criteria CV-STR-148 

• For This Study Current ET Damping· Requirements 

Were Assumed 

- Slosh Damping Be Provided In The Critical Region 

When Slosh Mass To Vehicle Mass Ratio Is Greater 

Than 10o/o - In The Region Where Slosh Mass Is Critical To Control 

Stability, 1°/o Of Critical Damping Or Less Is Required 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.91315 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

~ 

0 

Dam~i_ng__Crlteria Explanation CV-STR-148 

• Simple Single Degree Of Freedom Equation of Motion 

Mx +ex+ kx = F 

Natural Frequency = w =}kiM 

Critical Damping = Cr = 2k/w 

• Critical Damping physically occurs when there is no 

resultant oscillation due to an external disturbance 

x(t) 

Undamped (c= 0) 

Critically Damped (c= Cr) 

time 

1 °/o damping is actually 1 °/o of critical 

damping i.e.: c = 0.01Cr 

/Jt7ARTIN /Jt7ARIETTA 

DAT.91~. MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
ET Baffle Definition CV-STR-148 

ET L02 Tank 

Xt 744.85 4.0 Nominal 

f 

25.88 tL ~--~;.,..___--~---~ 

322.24 

Across Flats 

Xt 745.10 Xt 780.39 Xt 815.68 Xt 851.00 

• Designed For 1°/c,Siosh Damping 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.913~5 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
I.IJ 

~ 

Opt 1 , ET Baffles CV-STR-148 

Barrel Intermediate Frame 

Rep·ositioned 

Redesigned Intermediate Frames 

1.00 Clearance I r- 1.25 Stiffener Height 

4.0 Nominal 1. 75 Maximum Int. Frs 

r 

25.88 

L~ "J/ "J/ ""J 322.24 

Across Flats 

I 

Xn 2745.10 

Xn 2780.39 Xn 2815.68 Xn 2851.00 

(Was Xn 2746.475) 

• Inadequate Damping For Control Authority 

• Insufficient Depth Available For Intermediate Frames 

• Requires Repositioning Intermediate Frames 

J1;1A RTIN IJ;tARIETTA 

OAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
I 

Opt 2- Extended ET Type BafflesCV-STR-148 

• Extended Length And Reduced Across Flats 

Fwd Barrel 8_

5 Nominal 6.0 Intermediate Frame 

1.0 Min. ---. I r-1.25 Stiffener Height 

25r-

*L Across Flats 

314.0 

Aft Barrel I 1 

Xn 2711.80 Xn 2758.20 Xn 2804.60 Xn 2851.00 f 

• Inadequate Damping For 1.5 Stage 

• Provides 1°/o Damping On HLLV 

• Provides For Reference Intermediate Frames 

• Across Flats Reduced From 322.24 

/HARTIN IHARIETTA 

DAT.9~345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Opt 3- Extended ET Type Baffles CV-STR-148 

6.0 Intermediate Frame 

Fr Moves 

To Aft Face 

Of Chord 

t "" 

Xn 2571.60 

I 

Xn 2711.30 

I 

8.5 Nominal 

Xn 2643.95 

I 

Localized Cliping 

To Main Frame 

• Adequate Damping For 1.5 Stage 

• Provides 1 °/o Damping On HLL V 

1.0 Min. 

Clearance 

Xn 2778.65 

• Provides For Reference Intermediate Frames 

• Across Flats Reduced From 322.24 

DAT.91' 

( ( 

Aft Barrel 

1.25 Stiffener 

Height 

Across Flats 

Xn 2851.00 

IVIARTIN IVIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
Vl 

~ 

VI 

( 

Option Evaluation 

Opt. Remarks 

1 + Uses ET Baffle Assy 

- Minimal Framing Height Available 

- Requires Repositioning Of lnt Frames 

2 +Can Be Installed Similar To ET 

+ Permits Req'd Intermediate Fr Height 

• Minimal Similarity To ET 

3 + Permits Req'd Intermediate Fr Height 

• Minimal Similarity To ET 

·Mid Barrel Clipping Required 

• Increased Weights lncl 8°/o Contingency 

Weight 

Impact 

Ref 

134 

774 

• Baffle Requirements Based On NSTS Requirements 

DAT.9~3~5 

CV-STR-148 

Meets Baffle Reqmts 

1.5 Stage HLLV 

No No 

No Yes 

Yes Yes 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
1,1.) 

~ 

0\ 

Recommendation CV-STR-148 

Recommendation 

• Select Option 3 For Reference Configuration 

• Work With Flight Mechanics Team To Finalize Damping 

Requirements 

Study Items Under 3-S-011 

• Optimize ET Type Baffle For NLS (Opt 3) 

• Common Baffle Design With Unique Applications 

- 1.5 Stage (Full Length Baffle) - HLLV (Partial Length Baffle) 

• Integral Baffles (Use Of Ring Frames As Baffles) 

• Sensitivity Of Baffle Design To Damping Requirements 

From 1% To 4o/o 

WIARTIN /J'1ARIETTA 

DAT.91~' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

CV-STR-148 

Appendix 4 

• Definition Of Reference Anti-Vortex Baffle ~ 

/JitARTIN /JitARIETTA 

DAT.91315 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Tank Ant-Vortex Definition CV-STR-148 

•• 160.0 ... L02 Aft Dome 

~ 00 

• 50 lbs Weight Impact To Reference 

DAT.91:' 

( ( 

........ .__33.0 

_l _1 soo• 

+. 

--

30.482 

Aft Dome Cap 

/JI1ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
0 

c 

0 

·-0 

·-

> 0 

~ 

D. 

C) 

..., 

:E 

(I) 

~ 

ca 

Dll.t) 

== ~>< -c

I •- ~ 

a:-c ca 

1-c J: 

(/)G) 

- .c. ca 

>c. c 

o<t ~ 

G) 

..., 

>< 

w 

.... 

0 

c 

0 

·-..., 

·-

c 

·-

.... 

G) 

c 

1.0 

...-

M 

..-

m 

• ..,.: 

c( 

349 Cl 
\.1) 

::s 

External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-148 

Objective 

• Define Locations For External Hardware Mounting 

Provisions On The L02 Tank 

Groundrules (Pending Completion Of CV-STR-14G) 

• Cable Tray/Pressure Line Ftg Interface Locations Are 

Based On Ref. Geometry 

• NLS Cable Tray Size Assumed Double In Volume & 

Weight To ET Cable Tray 

• Cable Tray & Press Line Centerlines In Same Radial 

Location As ET 

WIARTIN /J'TARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
l,l 

VI 

-

( 

External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-148 

• Cable Tray & Pressure Line Interfaces 

31° 31' 

2576.55 2851.00 

I 

L li 

A 

r. , . ,...... ' ' - ~ - ' ... ' • ... '·.I 

.. Fwd -

'.. r ·, , ·, -, .A.-- ,... - • .., • ~ • .I • 

External Ftg Attachment 

Similer To ET LH2 Tank 

Barrel 80914200998-001 

(See Drg Sht 5 View C) 

-ct. External Ftg 

L---:-:JI•J +Z 

• ••J 1- I Press Line 

I 3 42 Ref ~~ • 1 

A 

CableTray SlzeTBD ... , ~ I L.......L.~-1.75Ref -

I 

BarreiiSL /Section A-A JL External Ftg (31o31') 

n-tARTIN n-tARIETTA 

DAT.913i5 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-148 

~ 

VI 

N 

L02 Cable Tray, 

G02 Press Line 

Support, For Mtg 

Provisions See Drg 

80914160981 

47.0 R 

G02 Press 

Line 2.0 ID +Z 

J ~ I 

G02 Vent/Relief Line Support,·· 

For Mtg Provisions See Drg 

80914160984 

DAT.91~. 

( 

Modify Thes Dome Gores 

To Provide Mtg Provisions 

(Similar To ET) 

G02 Vent/Relief Valve 

L02 Fwd Dome 

Looking Aft 

/JitA RTIN /JitARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-148 

Recommendation 

·Add External Hardware Mtg Provisions To Reference 

\.lol 

VI 

\.lol 

DAT.913i5 

L02 Tank Definition -

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
mco 

~>< I •- a:-c 

1-c enG) 

.a. 

>a. 

o< 

c 

0 

·-.., 

"' :::J 

-

"' > w 

-'= (.) 

.., 

E "' 

tn 

·-

:! 

-c 

c 

"' ..J 

-c 

-

~ -

e 

.... 

m 

........... "' 

-c 

.... 

0 

.c 

0 

• 

354 
w 

VI 

VI 

Aft Chord/Barrel Mismatch CV-STR-148 

Issue 

• Weld Land Mismatch Occurs Between Aft Dome Chord 

And Barrel1 

- Chord Barrel Weld Land = .397; Barrel Weld Land = .32 

Recommendation 

• Modify Aft L02 Tank Barrel Weld Land To.387 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.913~5 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
c 

0 

·-

... 

·-c 

mr--- ·-..... ~>< CD 

c 

,.. ·-

•-c a:c t: 

1-CI) ca 

en c. a. 

,.,r 

•a. ~ [)..:a: c 

ca 

1-

N 

0 

...I 

• 

356 
\.IJ 

1.1\ 

..... 

( " 

, 

L02 Tank Shell Definition CV-STR-148 

• Part Configuration tF1 tF1 Intermediate Frames (6) 

r 

,.-

-

"" " 

+Z 

-z 

Fwd Dome 

DAT.91315 

""' 

-

""" 

_, 

..I 

F3111 F2lll F1 Major Frames 

anlllc:o 111 o 

~1112111~ It) ,.... co 

N Ill N Ill N 

+Y --- I I I I 

I I I I I 

FB1 AB1 

+Y +Z 

... FB2 ~AB2· · 

+Z --- --- +Z 

FB1 AB1 . 

FB1 AB1 

.y --- 1- .y 

FB1 AB1 

FB1 AB1 

.z --- .z 

FB1 AB1 

FB1 AB1 

+Y -- - +Y -z 

Barrel Aft Dome 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

VI 

00 

L02 Tank Shell Definition Cont. CV-STR-148 

Part Title Part Status Remarks ET Mod. New 

FD Fwd Dome Cap - - ~ Common To NLS LH2 Tank 

Fwd Dome 

FG1 Dome Gore Plain - ~ - ~ Similar To ET & NLS Fwd 

FG2 Dome Gore SRB* - ~ - LH2 Dome Gores, With 

FG3 Dome Gore Press - ~ - 1- Membrane Thickness 

FG4 Dome Gore Sensor - ~ - Modified For Proof Test 

FG5 Dome Gore Vent · - ~ - .- Requirements 

AD Aft Dome Cap - - ~ Requires 2 Feedline Outlets 

AG1 Dome Gore v - - F1 Frame 2851.0 - Outer Chord ~ - - ET L02 Aft Dome Chord 

-Frame - ~ - Fr Depth Increased To Meet 

Baffle Definition 

F2 Frame 2711.775 v - - Use LH2 Tank Fr 1377.35 

* Selected For Commonality With LH2 Fwd Dome 

IYIART/N IYIARIETTA 

DAT.91:_l. MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
IJ,) 

lll 

\0 

( 

L02 Tank Shell Definition 

Part Title Part Status 

ET Mod. New 

F3 Frame 2576.55* 

- Outer Chord - v - - Frame Segments - v -

AB1 Aft Barrel Panel - - v 

AB2 Aft Barrel Panel - - v 

FB1 Fwd Barrel Panel - - v 

FB2 Fwd Barrel Panel - - v 

CV-STR-148 

Remarks 

Use ET Fr 1129.9 

Use Frame Opposite To Aft 

L02 Fr 2851 For Baffle 

Support 

Unique Length Barrel Panel, 

But Based On ET Type LH2 

Machined Barrel Panel 

Similar To AB1 With CIT & 

Press Line 1/F's 

Similar To AB1 With Unique 

Membrane Thickness 

Similar To AB2 With CIT & 

Press Line 1/F's 

* Selected For Commonality With LH2 Fwd Dome 

JI.'TARTIN JI.'TARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Tank Shell Definition CV-STR-148 

Part Title Part Status Remarks ET Mod. New 

IF1 Intermediate Fr - - " Unique Size Intermediate 

{Typical 6 Places) Frame, Similar Construction 

To ET LH2 Tank Intermediate 

Frames 

I.IJ 

~ 

I 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

DAT.9134 -

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

0\ 

-

( 

Candidate Items For Cycle 1 

• Resize The L02 Tank Based On: 

- Cycle 1 Loads 

CV-STR-148 

- Local Impacts On Barrel Of SRB Punch Loads 

-Cycle 1 Ullage Pressure & Associated Proof Test 

Requirements 

- Cycle 1 Payload 1/F Loads (Assumed Equally Distributed 

For Cycle 0) 

- Optimization Of Intermediate Frame Sizes 

·Update Design Definition To Incorporate Results From: - CV-STR-14G External Hardware Definition 

- CV-STR-14H TPS Reference Definition 

- CV-DI-01 A Tank Access 

- 3-S-01 OB Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity 

- 3-S-011 Slosh Baffle Reqmts & Definition 

- AIR Other Panel Trades (eg. Single 

L02 Feedline) 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91315 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

~ 

Candidate Items For Cycle 1 CV-STR-148 

• Investigate Barrel Length Requirement & Maximum 

Manufacting Capability To Permit One Section (Eliminates 

2 Circumferential Welds) 

• Impact Assessment Of Using Common Domes In Both 

Tanks 

• Consider Use Of ET Aft LH2 Dome Cap Geometry For 

L02 Aft Dome 

IJ.'1ARTIN IJ.'1ARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
--

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Packiige Page 1 

5.2.4.4.1 Reference L02 Tank Enbancements(#CV-STR-148) 

Objective 

This study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference L02 Tank structure and 

recommended potential modifications 

Approach 

(a) Identify potential Study Items. 

(b) Defme, evaluate and analyze selected Study Items. 

(c) Identify recommended changes to the ref. Configuration. 

(d) Produce L02 Tank Part Definition. 

(e) Identify candidates for study during Cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Revised barrel and frame geometry. 

Item 2 - Alternate forward dome chord and frame. 

Item 3 - Reference Slosh Baffle definition. 

Item 4 - Anti-V onex Baffle definition. 

Item 5 - Definition of external hardware mounting provisions. 

Item 6 - Chord to barrel weld land mismatch. 

Item 7 - Reference part definition. 

Key Study Results 

The forward dome chord and frame were designed for Orbiter bi-pod loads and are inefficient for 

this application. The existing ET slosh baffle assembly will not provide the 1% damping required 

on NLS and must be extended to a full length baffle, with a subsequent weight impact of 77 4 lbs. 

Reference ET anti-vortex baffle must be modified for dual oudets. The aft barrel weld lands must 

be increased at the aft dome weld joint in order to accommodate the L02 aft dome chord thickness. 

Conclusions 

The Cycle 0 definition made use of existing ET assemblies with some modified components, plus 

common pans from the NLS LH2 tank. L02 tank weight and manufacturing complexity can be 

further improved by revising some of these components to better match NLS and L02 tank sizing 

requirements. These modified components can still be produced on ET tooling with the minor 

modifications already identified. 

Study Recommendations 

The reference Cycle 0 definition should be revised to reflect the enhancements proposed in this 

study: 

Revise reference definition to use aft chord & frame in forward location. 

Revise reference slosh batlle to proposed full length configmation. 

Include proposed Anti-Vortex Baffle definition. 

Incorporate the proposed defmition of external hardware mtg. provisions. 

Increase barrel weld land at dome chord welds to .387. 

363 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge 

~10.75~ 

I Xn 2576.55 I 

Fr Moved To 

Varies Fwd Face ---· 10.00 

1

10.00 To 

21.75 

J 

Constant 

Reference FWD Dome Chord Proposed FWD Dome Chord 

.-j:§l~Xf~t G:S: IAcr:s1

s

4 ·:1ats 

xn 2571.60 xn 2851.00' 

Proposed 1% Slosh Baffle Assembly 

33.0 

Baffle Assy 

Proposed Anti-Vortex Baffle Assembly 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

364 

Page 2 

.. ..._.., 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.4.4.1 Reference L02 Tank Enhancements(#CV-STR-148) 

Objective 

This study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference L02 Tank structure and 

recommended potential modifications 

Approach 

(a) Identify potential Study Items. 

(b) Define, evaluate and analyze selected Study Items. 

(c) Identify recommended changes to the ref. Configuration. 

(d) Produce L02 Tank Pan Definition. 

(e) Identify candidates for study during Cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Revised barrel and frame geometry. 

Item 2 - Alternate forward dome chord and frame. 

Item 3- Reference Slosh Baffle definition. 

Item 4 - Anti-Vortex Baffle definition. 

Item 5 - Definition of external hardware mounting provisions. 

Item 6 - Chord to barrel weld land mismatch. 

Item 7 - Reference pan definition. 

Key Study Results 

The forward dome chord and frame were designed for Orbiter bi-pod loads and are inefficient for 

this application. The existing ET slosh baffle assembly will not provide the 1% damping required 

on NLS and must be extended to a full length baffle, with a subsequent weight impact of 77 4 lbs. 

Reference ET anti-vortex baffle must be modified for dual outlets. The aft barrel weld lands must 

be increased at the aft dome weld joint in order to accommodate the L02 aft dome chord thickness. 

Conclusions 

The Cycle 0 definition made use of existing ET assemblies with some modified components, plus 

common parts from the NLS LH2 tank. L02 tank weight and manufacturing complexity can be 

further improved by revising some of these components to better match NLS and L02 tank sizing 

requirements. These modified components can still be produced on ET tooling with the minor 

modifications already identified. 

Study Recommendations 

The reference Cycle 0 definition should be revised to reflect the enhancements proposed in this 

study: 

Revise reference definition to use aft chord & frame in forward location. 

Revise reference slosh baffie to proposed full length configuration. 

Include proposed Anti-Vonex Baffle defmition. 

Incorporate the proposed definition of external hardware mtg. provisions. 

Increase barrel weld land at dome chord welds to .387. 

365 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

14-- 10.75 -:-:1 

I Xn 2576.55 

1 

r- 9.8-:1 

I X~ 2571. 30 I 

Varies 

1

10.00 To 

21.75 

J 

Fr Moved To 

Fwd Face .__,, 10.00 

Constant 

Reference FWD Dome Chord Proposed FWD Dome Chord 

~ r~t><t?kiZF ~ t r:.s IAcr::s4 

·:lats 

xn 2571.60 xn 2851.00' 

Proposed 1% Slosh Baftle Assembly 

33.0 

Baffle Assy 

Proposed Anti-Vortex Baftle Assembly 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

366 

Page 2 
\J.) 

~ 

CV-STR-14C 

lntertank Structural Reference 

Configuration Enhancements 

Prepared By: Derek A. Townsend 

(504)257-0021 

Rev: Initial 

Carl W Hedden 

(504)257-5507 

Date: January 8, 1991 

Approved By: M. R. Simms 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS lntertank Definition CV-STR-14C 

Objective 

• Study & Evaluate Enhancements To The Cycle 0 

Reference lntertank Structure And Recommend 

Potential Modifications 

Approach 

• Obtain Detail Definition From MSFC 

• Identify Potential Study Items 

~ • Define, Evaluate And Analyze Selected Study Items 

00 

•Identify Recommended Changes To Ref. Configuration 

• Produce L02 Tank Part Definition 

- Usage And/Or Similarity Of ET Parts - NLS Part Commonality 

• Identify Candidates For Further Study 

W1ARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
w 

$ 

( ~ ... 

Ground rules CV-STR-14C 

Groundrules 

• For lntertank Structure Definition Use MSFC 

Reference Layout NLS-001 0 Dated 10/22/91 

·Mass Properties As Defined On 10/7/91 

• Loads & Factors From Memo ToP. Thompson From 

Bart Graham, Dated 5/10/91 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91345 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
ET lntertank Major Elements CV-STR-14C 

w 

-...J 

0 

Thrust Panel (2) 

Fwd Flange 

SRB Beam 

Access Door 1 ~~ 

Aft Flange 

DAT.91::' 

( 

Fwd 

+ 

Thrust Panel Longeron (4) 

( 

-Y 

Skin/Stringer Panel (6) 

.+Z 

, • -Intermediate Ring 

Frame (4) 

Main Ring Frame 

SRB Thrust Fitting 

(2) 

ET Carrier Plate Assy 

IYTARTIIV IYTARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ 

-

lntertank Geometry CV-STR-14C 

• From NLS Reference System Definition, May 91 

- Length 270.35 (L02 Tank 1/F to LH2 Tank 1/F) 

14 270.35 ... I 

M M ,' 

Jl 

330.0 1/D 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
w 

-l 

N 

lntertank Geometry CV-STR-14C 

• From lntertank Panel Lead, 1 0/9/91 

Xn 2852.80 

L02 Tank 1/F 

I 

Xn 2897.1 Xn 3034.2 

Xn 2941.4 Xn3082.0 

Xn 2985.675 

-fr; I 

• 

l.. 20.00 I 165.00 R ,_L ISL (Ref) 

Xn 3123.15 

LH2 Tank 1/F 

I 

/111ARTIN /111ARIETTA 

DAT.91!l ~.- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( -

( 
w 

-..,J 

w 

Potential Study Items CV-STR-14C 

• Frame Mods Due To SRB Beam Omittance For 1.5 Stage 

• Shell Penetrations Definition 

•Impacts To Ref Of No TPS 

• Purge &Vent 

• Sizing Changes 

Related Tasks (Results Not Incorporated In This Task) 

• CV-STR-14G External Hardware Definition 

• CV-STR-14H TPS Reference Definition 

• 3-S-009 lntertank Configuration & 

Construction Trade 

I 

IYrARTIN /YrARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Recommended Changes CV-STR-14C 

~ ~ 

Study Item Recomendation Back Up 

Data 

1.5 Stage Fr2985 Mods Option 4 Append.1 

Shell Penetrations Add Penetrations Append.2 

Impacts Of No TPS lncorp. Weight Impact Append. 3 

Purge & Vent Study Further in Cycle 1 Append.4 

Sizing Mods Change Skin/Stiffeners Append. 5 

Ref Part Definition Append.& 

-

lncorp - Now Incorporated In MSFC Baseline Layouts 

Accepted- Agreed But Not Yet Incorporated 

DAT.9" 

( ( 

Wt. Status Impact 

80 lncorp. 

N/A Accepted 

-172 lncorp. 

N/A Accepted 

-172 lncorp. 

N/A lncorp. 

/JifARTIN /JifARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
/ 

CV-STR-14C 

Appendix 1 

~ • Fr Xn 2985.675 Mods For 1.5 Stage 

Vl 

/111ARTIN /111ARIETTA 

DAT.9'i345 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Frame Mods For 1.5 Staae CV-STR-14C 

Issue 

• SRB Beam, Frame Xn 2985.675, And Thrust Panel Have 

An Integral + Y Interface. When The SRB Beam Is 

Ommitted For 1.5 Stage These Interfaces Require Mods 

To The Frame. 

The Reference 1.5 Stage Has A 200 lb Weight Impact For 

Plug Plate & Associated Doublers, But No Allowance Or 

Details Of The Frame Joint. 

~ Objective 0'1 

·Define & Evaluate Options To Complete Fr Xn 2985.675 

To Thrust Panel Joint 

IJ.'TARTIN IJ.'TARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Groundrules & Options CV-STR-14C 

Ground rules 

• lntertank/Core Handling Will Not Be At SRB Ftg 

Interface As ET 

• The Reference 1.5 Stage Weight For The GSE Ftgs And 

Associated Plates & Doublers Is 200 lbs 

Options 

• Option 1 - Install SRB Ftg Without XBeam 

• Option 2 - Install Modified SRB Ftg Removing Beam & 

j SRB 1/F's 

• Option 3 - New Fabricated Fr/Thrust Panel Joint 

• Option 4 - Fabricated Joint With Modified Thrust Panel 

IJ-'TA RTIN IJ-'TARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Ref HLLV 

Xn 2985.675/SRB Ftg 1/F 

~ 00 

OAT.91~ 

( 

SRB Beam 

Xn 2985.675 

Fwd 

+ 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

_ _[_ 

B 

Gusset 

( 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Thrust 

Fitting 

l 

8 

Thrust Panel 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
I.IJ 

-....J 

\0 

Ref HLLV 

Fwd 

+ 

SRB Beam 

DAT.91345 

( 

View A-A 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Thrust 

Fitting 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

Thrust Panel 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

~ 

Ref HLLV 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Thrust 

Fitting 

Thrust Panel 

View B-B Fr 2985.675 

Looking Aft 

• SRB Beam & Gussets not Shown for Clarity 

/JITART/N /JITARIETTA 

0AT.91:" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
w 

00 

-

Option 1, Omit X Beam 

Xn 2985.675/SRB Ftg 1/F 

New Packing 

Plate 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

Xn 2985.675- - _[-

D 

( 

Gusset 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Thrust 

Fitting 

l 

D 

Fwd 

+ New Packing 

Plate 

__...,E~m:=:r:;::··:r4--!H 1 ~ Thrust Panel 

/JifA RTIN /JifARIETTA 

DAT.9~345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Option 1. Omit XBeam 

Vl 

00 

N 

New Packing 

· ·Plate 

Fwd 

+ 

New Packing 

Plate 

DAT.91!' 

( 

View C-C 

( 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Thrust 

Fitting 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

Thrust Panel 

~ARTIN /JitARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

0ption __ 1, ·omit X Beam 

IN 

00 

IN 

DAT.91345 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

I I' I I 'I _, 

View D-D 

Looking Aft 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Thrust 

Fitting 

Thrust Panel 

Fr 2985.675 

/IIIART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Opt 2, Modified SRB Ftg. 

Xn 2985.675/SRB Ftg 1/F 

New Pac"ing 

Plate. 

Modified .. . ~ . ThrUst········ 

~ Xn 2985.675 -f-Ill: r=== 

Fwd 

+ 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

New Packing 

Plate 

Gusset 

CV-STR-14C 

Machine To 

Match Thrust 

Panel Curvature 

l 

F 

141---Thrust Panel 

·Machine Off SRB/SRB Beam Interfaces Not Required 

/JI1ARTIN n-TARIETTA 

DAT.91!l ,-

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 

'· ( ( 
w 

00 

1.1'1 

Opt 2, Modified~B~ Ftg. 

Machine To 

Match Thurst 

Panel Cuntature 

.,..,,----------, ~"' '---1 

I 

CV-STR-14C 

Modified SRB 

Thrust Fitting 

Thrust Panel 

Porkchop 

Fitting (4) 

r 

1 L II j j II J 1 

~ 

DAT.91345 

View F-F 

Looking Aft 

Fr 2985.675 

11-fARTIN 11-fARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Opt 3, New Fabricated Joint 

Xn 2985.675/SRB Ftg 1/F 

~G 

Existing 

Porkchop Fitting 

Top Only (2) 

~ Xn 2985.675 - f-m--=z . crr: 

Fwd 

+ 

DAT.91' 

( 

NeW. Web 

Split:~ Plate 

Motfified 

Fitting ~G 

( 

CV-STR-14C 

• ~ Thrust Panel 

Plug Machined To 

Match Thrust 

Panel Curvature 

l 

H 

Pick-Up 

Existing Hole 

Patterns 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( -

Opt 3, New Fabricated Joint 

~ 

00 

....a 

New Web 

Joint Plate 

Fwd 

+ 

DAT.91345 

New Lower 

Fitting View E-E 

CV-STR-14C 

Existing Hole 

Pattern 

Existing Upr 

Porkchop 

Fitting (2) 

-.---JJ---- ..... Thrust Panel 

New Plug 

Plate 

WIARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
IJJ 

00 

00 

.. 

Opt 3, New Fabricated Joint 

Machine To 

· Match Thrust . - : . . . ' . - . . 

Panel Ct.nvatu~~ 

New Web 

Splice Plate 

I. J 

CV-STR-14C 

New Plug 

Plate 

Thrust Panel 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Existing Upr 

Porkchop 

Fitting (2) 

I -------------~~-------

Sect J-J 

DAT.91'" 

( 

I- J 

View H-H 

Looking Aft 

( 

Fr 2985.675 

/JITART/N /JITARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

Opt 4, Modified Thrust Panel CV-STR-14C 

New Filler 

Plate 

Existing Upr Porkchop 

Fitting (2) 

~K • ~ Thrust Panel 

SRB Ftg Bearing 

Hole Omitted 

From Thrust Panel 

~ Xn 2985.675 -[-I IF ~ §ftl~ l 

L 

Fwd 

+ 

DAT.9~345 

New Web 

Splice Plate 

Modified Lwr 

Porkchop Fitting ~K 

Omit Hole 

Patterns For 

SRB Ftg & 

Gusset Ftgs 

/JITARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Opt 4, Modified Thrust Panel CV-STR-14C 

8 

New Web 

Joint Plate 

New Filler 

·Plate 

Fwd 

+ 

Modified Thrust Panel 

For 1.5 Stage 

DAT.91~ ... 

( 

.t. I • ·.- -:- -:- -!· ·'- • '\ . //_.. ... -·-·-·········'······.::: ____ :· -:- -: 

. "•/" -....... 

-:- .. . 

-:- -:· -:- ..... , '·,,, ''• ··-··-···········-'···'"'" .-' ··' 

-:- ·:- ·:- -:· -:- -:- ·:· -:- ·:· ·:-

View K-K 

( 

Omit Hole 

Patterns For 

SRB Ftg & 

Gusset Ftgs 

Existing Upr 

Porkchop 

Fitting (2) 

New Lower 

Fitting 

Omit SRB Ftg 

Hole 

JJIIARTIN JJIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ 

-

( 

, 

Opt 4, Modified Thrust Panel CV-STR-14C 

Machine To 

Match Thrust 

Panel Curvature 

_______ ....,_ __ _ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

l 

' l 

I 

I 

' I 

I 

New Web 

Splice Plate 

New Filler 

. Plate 

Thrust Panel 

--------------

~M 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Existing Upr 

Porkchop · 

. Fitting (2) 

L;,..;_;...._:....-..;....--11-------------1---------J 

Sect M-M New Angle 

Clip 

~M 

View L-L 

Looking Aft 

Fr 2985.675 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
w 

\0 

N 

Option Evaluation CV-STR-14C 

Opt. Remarks 

1 + Uses ET SRB Ftgs, Porkchop Ftgs, Thrust Panels, & Gussets 

• Maximum Weight Penalty 

• Requires New Packing Plates 

• Complex Assy 

2 + Uses ET Porkchop Ftgs, Thrust Panels, & Gussets 

- SRB Ftgs Require Modlflng 

• Requires New Packing Plates 

- Com~lex Assy 

3 + Uses ET Upr Porkchop Ftgs & Thrust Panels 

+ Simplified Assy 

- Requires New Plug Plates & Lwr Ftgs 

4 + Lightest Option 

+ Simple Assy 

- Uses Unmachlned Unique Thrust Panel (Make From ET Part) 

·Jie_g_ulres New Filler Plates & Lwr Ftgs 

* • 200 lbs Allocated In Ref Config Weights 

•Increased Weights lncl8°/o Contingency 

Weight 

Impact* 

775 

323 

186 

80 

IYIA RTIN /JitARIETTA 

DAT.91::' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
w 

\C) 

w 

( ' 

Recommendation CV-STR-14C 

Recommendation 

• Incorporate Option 3 Into Reference Definition Of 1.5 

Stage lntertank 

Items For Further Study 

• More Producible SRB Beam to Panel/Frame Attachment 

for HLLV liT 

• Unique Thrust Panel Design for 1.5 Stage liT 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
• w 

(.) 

( 

D. 

(/) 

0 I w 

• z 

z 

( 

~ 

tn 

c 

0 

·-.... 

ca ON a... 

~>< 

.... 

Cl) 

I •- c 

a:-c Cl) 

1-c D. enG) -

.c. 

- >c. Cl) 

"-"" 

o< .c 

en 

~ 

c 

as 

t:: 

Cl) 

...., 

c -

• 

' 

394 
~ U\ 

lntertank Penetrations 

Vent Hole 

{Panel1 & 8) 

-Z 

L02 F/L Aperture 

{20" F /L, +Z & -Z) 

\ 

-Y 

CV-STR-14C 

SRB Beam 1/F 

{+Y & -V) 

RSS Antenna 

{Panel2 & 7) 

!! 1a =r4 1~2 '11 1. 13 l_5 I 117=:1 _1_::::~:~ 

-xn 2941.4 

'-l- ·- --- - Xn 2985.675 

-xn 3034.2 

--·- +--·- -xn 3082.0 

I . j t . I I . I It \ I . I I Xn 3123.15 

·Z -Y +Z \ \ +Y 

Access ET Carrier 

+ 

Door Plate Assy 

{GUCP 1/F) 

CIT Aperture 

GH2 P/L Aperture 

Fwd 

+ 

/J'tA RTIN n-tARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Feed line Penetration CV-STR-14C 

Objective 

• Assess L02 Feedline lntertank Penetration Clearances, 

And Define Any Stru·ctural Impacts 

Groundrules 

• NLS Feedline Geometry Definition Via Telephone And 

Per Fax Dated November 15, 91 From Dick Cloyd To Carl 

Hedden 

~ Assumptions 

0\ • Feedline Material As ET 

• Feedline Wall Thickness 

- Elbow .058 - .080 - Downcomer .050 Stock 

- Internal Duct .062 

• Elbow TPS Thickness .62 ±.25 

/111ARTIN IYIARIETTA 

DAT.91~ ·- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~w ·, ~ (J \ 

( . 

L02 Feedline Penetration CV-STR-14C 

Issues 

• Feedline Clearances With Frames & Skin Cutout - Static (Ambient Manufacturing Tolerances) 

- Thermal (L02 Fill 1st; LH2 Fill 1st; Cryo Filled) 

-Loads 

- Dynamic (In Flight) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
I.JJ 

\() 

co 

Feedline Loads & Dynamics CV-STR-14C 

Displacements At lntertank Penetration 

lntertank 

Penetration 

I 

'', Fwd I 

"' Forward Displacements 

• Manufacturing & Installation 

• Thermal 

- LH2 Fill First 

• Static Loads 

- L02 Fill 

• Aero Loads 

• Dynamic Loads 

-Lift Off 

-Maxg 

• L02 Aft Dome Displacement 

Feed line 

Hard point 

Aft Displacements 

• Manufacturing & Installation 

• Thermal 

- L02 Fill First 

• Dynamic Loads 

• LH2 Dome Displacement 

Jill A RTIN JIIIARIETTA 

DAT.91:" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

ET L02 F/L Geometry CV-STR-14C 

w 

~ 

Xt 1 01 0.577* 

ISL 

165.0 R 

' 

Xt 985.675 

5.3° Ref 

Fwd~ 

---

DAT.91345 

23.380 R Max Fwd Loc Max Aft Loc 

-- V- _i 

13.62 I~ ~~~ ~I S.Ot 

Xt 1034.2 

Xt 994.88 Xt 1031.38 

,..... ............ I 

17.0 ID Feed line 

18.4 Nominal OD 

With TPS 

I 

Xt 101 0.577* 

1... 36.50 ... 1 

11.143 

Nominal Feedline Clearance 

* Derived from L02 F/L Motion Study 1-27-86 

t Worst Case Thermal Displacement During Fill 

/J'TA RT/N /JITARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
8 

NLS L02 Feed line Geom. CV-STR-14C 

r-----, , ---- --; --- • Xn 3034.2 I L02 F/L 

(20.0 1.0.) 

-?-CL 

Xn 2985.675 (_ ~ I )__j 20.0 ID F~edllne I ~ 21.4 Nommal OD 

: I I< I~ I • I With TPS 

5.35 I . I~ ,I 

3.86 ~: r--45.o5o 11: r--3.o9o 

\ r- I'' 17.644 l : I u .. .c: ... , ~ x...._--:=,.\.-===t I I /\-I----.-

Nominal Penetration/Feedline 

Clearance 

12.647 R 3.114 ... 1 ~ 

C -) MSFC Supplied .835 .,.:.n.- 142.9401 •• Ji. 12.820 I 

/111ARTIN /111ARIETTA 

DAT.91~ ·- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

-

NLS L02 F/L Penetration CV-STR-14C 

Thermal Displacements Xn 3034.2 

LH2 Fill 1st = 3.982 Fwd* 1 ... I 

-CL 

' 

Xn 2985.675 

I 

l4.66 

14.910 I 14111 ~I r... 3.114 Nominal 

Clearance 

10.928--~ 

(Min) ...... r? ,.,.,... 1.322 Interference 

I I MSFC Supplied .... • L02 Fill 1st = 3.436 Aft* 

*=Thermal Displacement at Fill 

Interference Exist With Only Thermal Displacement Applied 

/JifA RTIN /J'tARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
s 

NLS L02 F/L Penetration CV-STR-14C 

Feedline Centralized For Max Clearances 

Xn 2985.675 

I 

Xn 3009.3 

(was 3016.9) 

7.3 Nominal • •• ... , 

Clearance 

Xn 3034.2 

-CL 

7.3 Nominal 

Clearance 

Reduced from xo to yo 

• This Option Shows Approximate Feedline Location To 

Give Maximum Fwd & Aft Clearance 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91~ - MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Conclusions CV-STR-14C 

• The Reference Configuration L02 Feed line Will Interfere 

With The Cutout Aft lntertank Structure With Only Thermal 

Displacements Applied 

·To Avoid Major Mods To Fr 3034.2 The Feedline 

Geometry Must Be Modified To Better Center The 

Feedline Between The Two Adjacent Frames 

• ET Studies Conclude That The Maximum Thermal 

Displacements Can Be Up To 5.0 Aft/4.0 Fwd & Occur 

During Tanking Only. NLS Displacements Will Be Larger 

s Due To Increased Length Of Feedline & 1.5 Stage Loading 

Conditions. 

• ET Worst Case Manufacturing Tolerances Can Further 

Reduce Clearances By 3.0 Aft & 2.0 Fwd 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

DAT.9~345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
i 

L02 Feedline Penetration CV-STR-14C 

Items For Further Study 

• Reassess Situation Based On Selected Cycle 1 Feed line 

Configuration 

• Detailed Feedline Motion Study 

IYIARTIN IY/ARIETTA 

DAT.91"" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
CV-STR-14C 

Appendix 3 

~ • lntertank Impacts Of No TPS 

MARTIN MARIE'TTA 

0AT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

No TPS Impacts CV-STR-14C 

Issue 

• Reference lntertank Does Not Have TPS But Current 

lntertank Was Not Designed For Heating Rates Produced 

During Launch Without TPS. 

Impacts 

TPS Stringer Thk Skin Thk Weight Impact 

Thk Ref. Reqd.* Ref. Reqd.* Stringer Skin 

.00 .071 .090 .150 .120 § 4461bs -618 lbs 

• Total Weight Impact -172 lbs 

* Based On Remtec Heating Data (Fwd Skirt Body Point 

Used Due To No Suitable lntertank Body Point) 

§ Minimum Required For Heat Sink Design Based On 

Assuming .1 00 Skin Thickness Required For Loads. 

Revised Weight Impact Would Include An Additional 

413 lbs (.100 To .120) 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

OAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
0~ 

~>< 

,.. ·- ..... •-c D:c c 

(I) t-(1) 

tnc. > 

•c. -c >c:c c:: 

c:c 0 

(I) 

C) 

1.. 

:::J 

D. 

• 

407 
~ 00 

lntertank Purae & Vent CV-STR-14C 

Issue 

• The lntertank Venting Is Passive And Controlled By 2 

Forward Aerovents And The Orifices Around The 

Subsytem Penetrations. The Reference lntertank Has 2 

Feedline Fairings For 20" L02 Feedlines Compared To 

The Single 17" L02 Feedline On ET 

Requirements 

• No Air Intrusion During Ascent 

• LH2 Dome Limit .21 psid 

• Maintain 02 Level Below 4o/o 

• Nitrogen Mass Flow Rate From Launch Complex GSE 

Is Limited To 110-134 Lbs/Min 

/JI1ARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91::' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

lntertank Purae & Vent CV-STR-14C 

• Total ET lntertank Vent Area 

Vent Item Area 

Min. Max. 

Vent Hole 5.66 6.31 

Vent Hole 5.66 6.31 

L02 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening .26 .47 

Umbilical Panel .11 .22 

Access Door .94 1.88 

§ L02 Feedllne Fairing 38.79 43.02 

GH2 Pressurization Line 4.16 5.88 

LH2 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening .20 .40 

Total 55.78 64.49 

jso Sq In Mea~ Total-Vent Area ~ 

WIARTIN MARIE7TA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

0 

-

lntertank Purae & Vent CV-STR-14C 

Fairing/Feedline Clearances ~ ........... .200 Ref 

L02 F/L Fairing 

1.170 Ref 

F/L with 

TPS 

Clearance Maintained & 

Measured at 30 Locs Shown 

Varlng from .200 To 1.170. 

~ ' := Seal { 

TFE Plastic Sheet 

• After The Seal lnstl The Actual Gap Is Measured In 30 Places as Above. The Gap 

Must Meet the Following Requirements: 

-Average of the 30 Gap Measurements Must be within Range .616 to .6771nches 

- Any Gap Measurement May be Less than Basic Dimension by .1 0 Inches Max. 

- Any Gap May Exceed the Basic Dim As Long As the Vent Area Req is Met. 

/111ARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91~·- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
lntertank Purge & Vent CV-STR-14C 

• Approx. NLS Reference lntertank Vent Area 

Approx. Area (Mean) 

Vent Item Duplicate Maintain 

ET Vent ET Config Area 

Vent Hole 5.99 5.99 

Vent Hole 5.99 5.99 

L02 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening 0 0 

~ Umbilical Panel .17 .17 

-- Access Door 1.41 1.41 

L02 Feedllne Fairing 95.46 41.12 

GH2 Pressurization Line 5.02 5.02 

LH2 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening .30 .30 

Total 94.68 60.0 

/JI7ARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91345 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

-

N 

lntertank Purae & Vent CV-STR-14C 

Conclusions 

·Current ET Vent Arrangement Requires Improvement 

- Labor Intensive Operation 

- High MRB Action 

• To Maintain Vent Area To ET Values Will Reduce Gap 

Between Feedline And Seal 

·To Maintain ET Dimensions Between Feedline And 

Seal May Impact Launch Complex GSE 

• NLS Cp Profile Will Differ From ET - Will Result In 

Different Flight ll p's 

lnARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91 ... - MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

I.JJ 

-

lntertank Purae & Vent CV-STR-14C 

Recommendation 

• Evaluate Alternate Methods Of Providing Appropriate 

Vent Area (e.g. Flex Seal Between Feedline And liT With 

Fixed Aerovents) 

• Perform A Venting Analysis To Determine Purge 

Requirements 

/JITARTIN /JITARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Cll 

' ~ 

w 

~ -.._....· 

> I U) 

• w 

0 

< n. 

U) 

0 

c: 

0 I w 

0 

• z 

z 

·-

< 

~ 

... 

"' (.) 

·-

.... 

·-

01t) -c 

0 ~>< :E 

?-., ·- C) C::c t-CI) c 

·-

en c. N 

·....._; 

•c. ·- ~<C en 

~ 

c 

"' t:: 

Cl) 

... 

c: -

• 

414 
~ 

-

VI 

I 

lntertank Sizina Mods CV-STR-14C 

• Panel Skin Thickness Can Be Significantly Reduced To 

Approximately .1 0 With TPS or .12 Bare 

-Weight Impact To Skin; 618 lbs Bare or 1031 lbs + TPS 

• Stiffener Thickness Of .071 Must Be Increased To .090 If 

lntertank Has No TPS 

Item For Further Study 

• Evaluate Panel Fore & Aft Attach Flanges For 

Potential Loads Greater Than ET 

WTARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
rtJ ~ ~ 

w 

frJJ . .._, > I r/J 

~ w 

0 

< 

~ 

rJJ 

0 I W 

z 

z 

< 

~ 

c 

0 

·-

... 

Oc.o ·-c ~>< ·-'1-

,.... ·- G) 

., c a:c 1-CI) ... ...._.. ~ (/)c_ "' •c. a. ~<C ~ 

c 

ca 

t: 

CD 

... 

c -

• 

416 
lntertank Part Definition CV-STR-14C 

81 

[!]~ 

~ 

...,J 

- P1 PS P2 o-IP1_~ --

P3 p~ ip~ -1- F1 

I 

--·--= --

--·-

- -·- ,-:::,.: 

--

--

0 ~ ___.1._ 

l= -~=~~ -F4 

-

I 

I -r-~ I --·- +-- 0 + -- ---F5 + 

. I . . Fwd 

-Z -Y +Z +Y 

+ 

!HARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
lntertank Part Definition 

~ 

.-

00 

Part 

F1 

F2 

F3 

F4 

F5 

P1 

P2 

P3 

P4 

P5 

81 

Title 

Frame 2897.1 

Frame 2941.4 

Frame 2985.675 

Frame 3034.2 

Frame 3082.0 

Panel {±Z) 

Panel 

Panel 

Thrust Panel (+V) 

Panel 

SRB Beam 

* 1.5 Stage Only 

DAT.91"' 

( 

Part Status 

ET Mod. New 

~ - - ~ - - ~ ~* -

~ - - ~ - - - - - - "' - - "' ~ 

"' ~* -

- - "' "' - -

( 

CV-STR-14C 

Remarks 

1.5 Stage Modified To 

Complete Fr Without XBeam 

Resized For NLS Loads 

1.5 Stage Modified To Omit 

SRB Ftg Hole 

HLLV Only 

/JI1ARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( ' 

Candidate Items For Cycle 1 CV-STR-14C 

• Resize The lntertank Based On Cycle 1 Loads 

·Perform A Frame/SRB Interface Beam Producability Study 

• Evaluate Alternate Methods Of Controlling L02 Feed line Vent 

Area 

• Re-evaluate Feedline Penetration Study Based On Selected 

Cycle 1 Feedline Configuration 

·Perform A Detailed Feedline Motion Study Once 

Configuration Is Finalized 

• Evaluate Alternate Thrust Panels For 1.5 Stage lntertank 

t • Update Design To Incorporate Results From: 

\0 - CV-STR-14G External Hardware Definition 

- CV-STR-14H TPS Reference Definition 

- 3-S-009A lntertank Commonality Assessment - AIR Other Panel Trades (e.g. Single L02 Feedline) 

NIARTIN NIARIETTA 

DAT.9"i345 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.5.4.1 Reference Intertank Enbancements(#CV -STR-14C) 

Objective 

This study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference Intertank structure and recommended 

potential modifications 

Approach 

(a) Identify potential Study Items. 

(b) Defme, evaluate and analyze selected Study Items. 

(c) Identify recommended changes to the ref. Configuration. 

(d) Produce Intertank Part Definition. 

(e) Identify candidates for study during Cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1- 1.5 Stage frame 2985 modifications. 

Item 2 - Shell penetrations definition. 

Item 3 - Impacts to reference for no TPS. 

Item 4 - Purge and vent 

Item 5 - Sizing changes. 

Item 6 - Reference part definition. 

Key Study Results 

The main frame, thrust panel, & ASRB Beam have an integral 1/F. When the SRB Beam is 

ommitted ( 1.5 Stage vehicle) the simplest option is to complete the 1/F with a new fabricated joint. ·~ 

The L02 feedline penetration was found to interfere with the panel cutout when thermal 

displacements were applied; clearance could be achieved by relocating the feedline to center it in the 

cutout. The reference skin/string~ panels were resized for a net impact of -172 lbs. The feedline 

fairing is used on ET intertanks as the primary vent area. On NLS the two larger L02 feedline 

fairing outlets will double the venting area if ET type clearances are maintained. This requires a 

modified design to reduce the venting area or a modification to the launch facility to increase the 

purge gas capacity. 

Conclusions 

Several enhancements to the Cycle 0 intertank definition were studied. The proposed 

modifications do not impact use of ET tooling. In addition, further potential enhancements were 

idendified for study during Cycle 1. 

Study Recommendations 

The reference definition should be revised to reflect that proposed in this study. 

Revised the frJASRB Beam 1/F to the new fabricated joinL 

Center the L02 feedline within the cuaout and study the feedline motion 

(Cycle 1 taU). 

Redefme the skin/sttinger sizing (Cycle 1 task). 

Study alternate methods of sealing the L02 fcedline penetrations and 

potential for a fixed vent area (Cycle 1 task). 

420 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

New Web 

Joint 

Panel 

New Plug 

New Lower Plate 

Fitting 

New Fabricated Frame/Thust Panel Joint (1.5 Stage Only) 

Xn 3034.2 

LH2 Fill 1st -

3.982 Fwd* 

Xn 2985.675 

I 

CL 

.322 Interference 

10.928 

(Min) L02 Fill 1st -

3.436 Aft* 

• Thennal displacement 

Reference L02 Feedline Penetration 

Vent Item Duplicate Maintain ET 

ET Config Vent Area 

Vent Hole 5.99 5.99 

Vent Hole 5.99 5.99 

L02 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening 0 0 

Umbilical Panel .17 .17 

Access Door 1. 41 1. 41 

L02 Feedline Fairing 95.46 41.12 

GH2 Pressurization Line 5.02 5.02 

LH2 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening .30 .30 

Total 94.68 60.00 

NLS Intertank Vent Area 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.001 Book 1 for more detailed results. 

421 

Page 2 
National LAunch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.5.4.1 Reference Intertank Enhancements(#CV-STR-14C) 

Objective 

This study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference lntenank structure and recommended 

potential modifications 

Approach 

(a) Identify potential Study Items. 

(b) Defme, evaluate and analyze selected Study Items. 

(c) Identify recommended changes to the ref.Configuration. 

(d) Produce lntenank Pan Definition. 

(e) Identify candidates for study during Cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - 1.5 Stage frame 2985 modifications. 

Item 2 - Shell penetrations definition. 

Item 3 - Impacts to reference for no TPS. 

Item 4 - Purge and vent 

Item 5 - Sizing changes. 

Item 6 - Reference pan definition. 

Key Study Results 

The main frame, thrust panel, & ASRB Beam have an integral I/F. When the SRB Beam is 

ommitted (1.5 Stage vehicle) the simplest option is to complete the IIF with a new fabricated joint '-.......,/ 

The L02 feedline penetration was found to interfere with the panel cutout when thennal 

displacements were applied; clearance could be achieved by relocating the feedline to center it in the 

cutout. The reference skin/stringer panels were resized for a net impact of -172lbs. The feedline 

fairing is used on ET intenanks as the primary vent area. On NLS the two larger L02 feedline 

fairing outlets will double the venting area if ET type clearances are maintained. This requires a 

modified design to reduce the venting area or a modification to the launch facility to increase the 

purge gas capacity. 

Conclusions 

Several enhancements to the Cycle 0 intenank defmition were studied. The proposed 

modifications do not impact use of ET tooling. In addition, further potential enhancements were 

idendified for study during Cycle 1. 

Study Recommendations 

The reference definition should be revised to reflect that proposed in this study. 

Revised the fr./ASRB Beam 1/F to the new fabricated joinL 

Center the L02 feedline within the cutout and study the feedline motion 

(Cycle 1 task). 

Redefme the skin/stringer sizing (Cycle 1 task). 

Study alternate methods of sealing the L02 feedline penetrations and 

potential for a fixed vent area (Cycle 1 task). 

422 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

New Web 

Joint 

New Lower 

Fitting 

Panel 

New Plug 

Plate 

New Fabricated Frame{I'hust Panel Joint (1.5 Stage Only) 

Xn 3034.2 

LH2 Fill 1st = 

3.982 Fwd* 

Xn 2985.675 

10.928 

(Min) 

I 

* Thermal displacement 

.322 Interference 

L02 Fill 1st 

3.436 Aft* 

Reference L02 Feedline Penettation 

Vent Item Duplicate Maintain ET 

ET Config Vent Area 

Vent Hole 5.99 5.99 

Vent Hole 5.99 5.99 

L02 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening 0 0 

Umbilical Panel .17 .17 

Access Door 1. 41 1. 41 

L02 Feedline Fairing 95.46 41.12 

GH2 Pressurization Line 5.02 5.02 

LH2 Tank Elect. Conduit Opening .30 .30 

Total 94.68 60.00 

NLS Intertank Vent Area 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

423 

Page 2 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFf BLANK 

424 
;g 

""' (') 

rTI 

0 

-,._ ...G") 

-.:; 

:...., 

•'' 

~-rr. 

; t'1 _, 

).s 

-·~ .:.. 

;.t: 

2 

0 

-i 

"11 

;= 

~ c 

~ 

N 

VI 

( 

CV-STR-140 

LH2 Tank Structural Reference 

Configuration Enhancements 

Prepared By: Derek A. Townsend 

(504)257-0021 Approved By: M.R.Simms 

Rev: Initial 

Carl Hedden 

(504)257 ·5507 

Date: January 8, 1991 

DAT.9~269 

/JI1ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS LH2 Tank Definition CV-STR-140 

Objective 

• Study & Evaluate Enhancements To The Cycle 0 

Reference LH2 Tank Structure And Recommend 

Potential Modifications 

Approach 

• Obtain Detail Definition From MSFC 

• Identify Potential Study Items 

~ • Define, Evaluate, And Analyze Selected Study Items 

•Identify Recommended Changes To Ref. Configuration 

• Produce LH2 Tank Part Definition 

- Usage And/Or Similarity Of ET Parts - NLS Part Commonality 

• Identify Candidates For Study During Cycle 1 

IWARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.912e:-" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

!:j 

( "' 

Approach & Groundrules CV-STR-140 

Ground rules 

• Tank Structure Definition Per MSFC Reference 

Layout NLS-0005 Dated 10/9/91 

• Mass Properties As Defined On 10/7/91 

• Loads & Factors From Memo ToP. Thompson From Bart 

Graham, Dated 5/10/91 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Potential Study Items CV-STR-140 

• Barrel/Frame Geometry Definition 

• Alternate Forward Dome Chord & Frame 

• External Hardware Interfaces 

• Dome Chord/Barrel Weld Land Mismatch 

• Handling Points Required By CV-STR-16D 

• Alt Aft Dome Gore Configuration 

• SRB Interfaces 

~ • RSS Interfaces & lntallation 

DAT.91,. 

( 

• Level Sensor Interfaces & lntallation 

• Frame Stablizer Configuration 

• Size & Qty Of Intermediate Frames 

• Barrel 1 A Impacts From PM Assessment 

·Vortex Baffle Definition 

( 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
Related Tasks 

• CV-STR-14G 

• CV-STR-14H 

• CV-STR-160 

• CV-DI-01A 

~ 

~ 

DAT.31269 

CV-STR-140 

External Hardware Definition 

TPS Reference Definition 

Transportation & Handling 

Tank Access 

n-1ARTIN n-1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Recommended Changes CV-STR-140 

~ 

~ 

Study Item Recomendation Back Up 

Data 

Barrel/Frame Geom. Use New Geom & Frs Append.1 

Alt. Fwd Chord & Fr. Change Chord & Fr Append. 2 

Ext. Hardware IfF's Incorporate Into Ref Append.3 

Ch./Barrel Weld Lands M/c Chord Weld Lands Append.4 

Handling Points Incorporate Option 3 Append.S 

Alt Aft Dome Config Incorporate Into Ref Append. 6 

Level Sensor lnstl. Adopt Opt 2 As Ref Append.7 

Ref Part Definition N/A Append.& 

lncorp - Now Incorporated In MSFC Baseline Layouts 

Accepted· Agreed But Not Yet Incorporated 

* Weight Impacts Include 8°/o Contingency 

DAT.91i 

( ( 

* Wt. Status Impact 

N/A lncorp. 

·471bs lncorp. 

181bs Accepted 

N/A lncorp. 

171bs Accepted 

-351bs Accepted 

6·151bs Accepted 

N/A N/A 

/J'rARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
• w 

0 

( 

Q. 

(/) 

0 I W 

z • z 

( 

c ~ 

0 

·-

... 

·-

c 

·-..... 

(I) 

c 

c,.. ~ 

-.::r>< a.. 

- ... 

,.. ·- (I) •-c O:c E 1-CI) 0 

tna. (I) 

•a. G [)c:t (I) 

E 

cu 

a.. 

LL 

........... -(I) 

a.. 

a.. 

cu 

m 

en 

<0 

C\1 • .-

0) 

....: 

< 

431 0 
Alternate Geometry Definition CV-STR-140 

Potential Enhancements 

• Standardize Barrels And Frames 

• Resolve Barrel 1 A Geometry Mismatch 

• Make 4058 Outer Chord Cross Section Symmetrical 

Approach 

• Modify Frame 3871 To Be Similar To Frs 3377.35 & 3623.8 

- ET Deep Fr Not Required 

e • Change Barrel2 Length To 240.45" As Barrels 3 & 4 

DAT.91'" 

( 

- Common Barrel Panels 

• Change Frame 3871 To 6.0" Wide As Frs 3377.35 & 3623.8 

- Common Frames 

·Modify Barrel1 Length To 179.25" 

- Unique Barrel From ET Could Modify Easily 

• Select Width For Fr 4058 And Adjust Barrel 1 A Length 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
Ref Geometry Definition 

Unique Panel Length 

Xn 3123.15 

240.45 

10.75 

Xn 3129.9 

240.2 

240.45 

Xn 3623.8 

Xn 3377.35 Xn 3871 

CV-STR-140 

Unique Frame 

Width 

11.394 

Xn 4122.65 

I 

48.950 

~9.8 ... , 

165.50 R 

OSL (Ref) 63.144 By Dlmn 

• a I 

Xn 4058 Xn 4121.15 

Geometry Will Not Add Up 

In This Area 

I 2 Standard Barrels &- Fra~~;] 

/IIIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

~ 

Ref Barrel Commonality CV-STR-140 

84 I 83 I 82 I 81 

Xn 3129.9 Xn 3623.8 Xn 4058 I 

+Y ---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

+Y ---

Xn 3377.35 Xn 3871 Xn 4120.85 

I I I 

B~P1 B3P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

B4P2 B3P2 B2P2 B1P2- ~a1aP2 

B3P1 B3P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

B3P1 B3P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

, B3P1 83P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

B3P1 83P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

B3P1 B3P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

B3P1 83P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

--- +Y 

---

---

---

--- , 

---

---

---

--- +V 

Clof 

Press Lines 

&err 

IJ!TARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Alternate Geometry Definition CV-STR-140 

Xn 3123.150 

240.45 

10.75 

Xn 3129.9 

Xn 3377.35 

D Modified 

240.45 

Xn 3623.8 Xn 4058 

I Xn 3870.25 ) 

13 Standard Barrels & Frames I 

DAT.9i269 

Xn 4122.65 

Xn 4121.15 

/IIJART/N /IIJARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Alternate Barrel Commonality CV-STR-140 

D Affected Panels 

B4 I B3 I B2 I B 1 

Xn 3129.9 Xn 3623.8 Xn 4058 

Xn 3377.35 Xn 3870.25 I Xn 4120.85 

I I I 

+Y --- ··, ... ,.,.... . ..... · --- +Y 1 

.L~2P1 B2P1 B2P1 81 P1 81 aP1 1 

~ 84P2 83P2 82P2 81P2- -81aP2 CLof 

0\ + Z --- --- Z Pre Ll es , '·'·' ) . . . . }:: .. , , ·..•... + ss n 

.·. B2P1 / ) B2Pt , B2P1 81 P1 81 aP1 & err ·.-· .... -:· ......... ::.: .. ::_.··::-::··:·.·. -/:·-:::->.·>.·.·-·:-:.,.;·:.:-:.:.---::·- ---

.· B2P1 <• . B2P1 B2P1 

.y ---II · .. · ··.',.'···· .. · ·,·,'.·· ..• '····· ., ··••• 

I ·. B2P1 ' B2A1 . B2P1 

-z ---

DAT.91' 

( 

.x,,:• ... ,· .. /· ... , •... ,, :, .. ,., ... , ..... ··. . 

·.·· : .·1 I 

82P1 

82P1 

82P1 

( 

81P1 

81P1 

B1P1 

B1P1 

B1P1 

B1aP1 

B1aP1 

B1aP1 

B1aP1 

B1aP1 

--- .y 

--- -z 

,._,A RTIN ,._,ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

Recommendation CV-STR-140 

Potential Enhancements 

·Barrel Commonality Can Be Improved By Revising 

Geometry (Barrel 2 Can Be Common To Barrel 3 & 4) 

• Frame 3377.35 Can Be Identical To Frames 3623.8 & 

3871 

• Frame 4058 Can Be Symmetrical (11.0 Wide) 

~ Recommendation 

-...1 

• Use New Geometry, Frames & Barrels 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.91269 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
CV-STR-140 

Appendix 2 

~ • Substitution Of Alternate Fwd Dome Chord & 

~ Frame (Including Geometry Update) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91'" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Alt. Fwd Dome Chord & Frame CV-STR-140 

~ 

w 

\0 

Reference Fwd Dome Chord 

Xn 3123.15 

~10.75 ~· 

Xn 3129.9 

Varles1 0.00 

To 21.75 

==j 

• ET LH2 Tank Fwd Dome Chord 

• ET LH2 Tank Frame 1129.9 

• Fr Installed On Aft Face 

DAT.91269 

Alternate Fwd Dome Chord 

Xn 3123.15 

(.---9.8 

I X~ 3124.65 

Fr Moved To ~1 10.00 

Fwd Face 1 constant 

==_j 

• ET L02 Tank Aft Dome Chord With 

Reduced Weld Lands 

• New Frame Based On ET Fr 1129.9 Lwr 

Segments For Both Upr & Lwr Segments 

• Fr lnstl On Fwd Face {Mfg Preference) 

/liT A RTIN /IITARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Alt. Fwd Dome Chord & Frame CV-STR-140 

Modified Geometry 

Xn 3123.15 

240.45 

xn 3124.65 

240.45 

6.00 I I 6.00 

TT 

I I Xn 3622.8!) 

Xn 3376.40 ,~ - -~- - .I .. · ........................ · ... · .. 

D Modified 

__, Xn 4122.65 

240.45 

~11.00--.1 

Xn 4058 Xn 4121.15 

xn 3869.30 

Modified Geometry Will Still Permit Increased Barrel 

Commonality Recommended By Appendix 1 

/JIIART/N /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.91f MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
t 

-

( 

Alt. Fwd Dome Chord & Frame CV-STR-140 

Results 

• Standardizes L02/LH2 Tank Dome Chords & Frames 

• Improves Method Of Frame Assembly 

• Potential Weight Savings 50 lbs 

• No Major Manufacturing Impacts 

• Requires Modified Frame Locations & Barrel 1 Length 

Recommendation 

• Change Fwd Dome Chord & Frame Segments 

• Revise Tank Geometry To Accommodated New Chord 

/JIJARTIN /JIJARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
til ~ ~ 

w 

1-

til 

> "-"" 

I til 

c 

0 

·-...., 

·-

c 

·-

.... 

(I) 

c 

(I) 

(.) 

ca 

.... 

... 

eM (I) 

...., 

-.::r>< c 

,.., ·-

-

CD a:c ... 

I-G) ca 

en c. ~ •c. -c ~<( ... 

cu 

::1: -

ca 

c 

... 

G) 

...., 

>< w 

• 

442 
t 

I.H 

External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-140 

Objective 

• Define Locations For External Hardware Mounting 

Provisions On The LH2 Tank 

Groundrules (Pending Completion Of CV-STR-14G) · 

• Cable Tray/Pressure Line Ftg Interface Locations Are 

Based On Ref. Geometry 

• NLS Cable Tray Size Assumed Double In Volume & 

Weight 

• Cable Tray & Press Line Centerlines In Same Radial 

Location As ET 

• L02 Feedlines Assumed On + Z Axis 

WIA RTIN JI.'IARIETTA 

DAT.9i2S9 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
t 

External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-140 

Cable Tray/Pressure Line Interfaces External Ftg Attachment 

• Similer To ET LH2 Tank ~A 

f l

-t7- - --(j-- -C~ _ ~ _ Barrei80914200998-001 

Lt... A \_(See Drg Sht 5 View C) 

31031' Fvvd -- External 

L l ~ I Ftg 

_ +Z Datum --...._1 

Ext Ftg Locations: 

Barrel 1 a = Xn 4092.6 

Barrel 1 = Xn 4028, Xn 3980.8, Xn 3916.2 

Cable 

Tray 

GH2 

P/L 

G02 

P/L 

Barrel 2 = Xn 3851.6, Xn 3787, Xn 3722.4, Xn 3657.8 

Barrel 3 = Xn 3593.2, Xn 3528.6, Xn 3464, Xn 3399.4 

Barrel 4 = Xn 3334.8, Xn 3270.2, Xn 3205.6, Xn 3151.84 

-..1 I~ 1.75 

~ Ref 

·"--Barrel ISL 

Section A-A 

(Typ) 

/JIIA RTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.912e .. , MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ' 
t 

VI 

( 

External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-140 

• Locations On ±Z, Based On Reference Geometry 

L02 Feed line + Z Axis 

Xn3377.35 

Xn3623.8 

= === II= === = 

L02 Feedline Support 

t 

331.0 0/D 

! 

Dome Chord Feedllne 

Support Interface Similar To 

80914140997 Sh 15 View V 

Frame Feedllne Support Interface Similar To 

80914500961 Sh 4 VIew R Fr Xn3377.35 

80914500961 Sh 13 View BL Frs Xn3623.8 & Xn3871 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-140 

t 

0\ 

L02 Cable Tray, 

· G02 Press Line 

Support, For Mtg 

Provisions See Drg 

80914160981 

47.0 R 

G02 Press 

Line 2.0 ID +Z 

J - I 

G02 vent/Relief Line Sueport, . For Nltg Pr.ovlslolls See Drg 80914160984 ... 

DAT.91' 

( 

Modify Thes Dome Gores 

To Provide Mtg Provisions 

{Similar To ET) 

G02 Vent/Relief Valve 

G02 Vent/Relief Line 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Looking Aft 

IJI1ART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ~ ( 
!5 

( 

External H/W Mtg Provisions CV-STR-140 

Recommendation 

• Add External Hardware Mtg Provisions To Reference 

LH2 Tank Definition 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.9'i269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
c~ 

~>< 

,... ., ·-

a:c 1-CI) 

U'Jc.. 

•c. 

~<C 

c: 

0 

·-..... 

as 

::::l 

-as 

.> 

w 

.c 

(.) 

a; 

E 

0 

·-

:E 

, 

c: 

as 

..J 

, 

-

Cl) 

~ 

-

G) 

a.. 

a.. 

ca 

m 

, ........... 

a.. 

0 

-'= 0 

• 

448 
£ 

( ' 

LH2 Tank Structural Definition CV-STR-140 

Issue 

• LH2 Aft Dome Utilizes A L02 Aft Dome Chord 

• Weld Land Mismatch Occurs Between Chord And 

LH2 Barrel 1 A & Dome Gores 

- Chord Gore Weld Land = .330; Gore Weld Land = .200 

- Chord Barrel Weld Land = .397; Barrel Weld Land = .320 

Recommendation 

• Modify ET Aft L02 Tank Chord 80912640001-001 

By Machining Gore Weld Land To. 210 And Barrel 

Weld Land To .330 

1 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

DAT.91269 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
II) 

~ ~ 

w 

1-

Ul __, 

U) >- 1 C/l 

G) ~ w 

(.) 0 

( 

m D.. 

Ul 

II-

... 0 

G) I W 

z ..... z 

c ( ~ 

-..... 

c 

·-0 

c. 

C) 

Cit) c 

·-- ~>< , 

,... ·- c ,...._.,' 

•-a m a:c J: t-CI) CIJc. olJ 

•c. c ~<C 0 

·-..... 

as 

t: 

0 

c. 

tn 

c 

ca 

... 

1- c 

' • (, 

..... 

en ..._, 

450 ~ 0 
( 

LH2 Tank Handling Point 1/F's CV-STR-140 

Objective 

• Define LH2 Tank Transportation & Handling Interfaces 

Approach 

• Obtain Transportation & Handling Locations Defined By 

Trade Study CV-STR-16D 

·Define, Evaluate & Analyze Handling Interfaces 

• Identify Tank Part Impacts 

~ • Recommend Selected Interface Configuration -

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.91269 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

1.1'1 

N 

LH2·Tank Handling Points 1/F's CV-STR-140 

• Transportation & Handling Point Locations Defined By 

CV-STR-160 

Xn4058 +Z 

Xn 4018* l II Xn 4098* 50 625o j ... 1 I I I II II II II II 1'1 II .. _ See View~ )YP I s~ View 2 

-- --,-t -/ / 

' I / 

--~---)-- +Y 

• Fwd 

Fwd Loc'ns Used For Core Tankage Handling, 

Aft Loc'ns Used For LH2 Tank Handling Only 

* Approx. Stringer Locations 

lnARTIN /J'tARIETTA 

DAT.91?'"' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( / ( 
( 

+Z Handling Point 1/F's CV-STR-140 

Xn 4018 Approx I Xn 4058 ---1 Xn 4098 Approx 

CL lnterm. Fr A-4... = ... ,.. = -I CLinterm. Fr 

5.416L_ ~ I-:- I ' r-Weld 

Ref I I I 1 1 1 ,I Additional 

CL Stringer ., - ...... --- 1/F Locn's 

See Detail B 

~ w 

Fwd 

CL Stringer -· - ~ 

10.832 Ref • ' 1/F Locn's Pattern Per 

View 1 (Shown) ET Drg 80914961960 Sh 4 

View 2 (Opposite) View C 

(Handling Tools Not Shown For Clarity) 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Fwd Handling Point 1/F's 

Handling Tool 

Handling Tool/ 1/F Locn's 

Barreii/F Locn's (4) 

...... , .... ~---~.,.. .. --+1-±.r--,/:;] \ ~ ' ' ~ 

I • I ~ I ' ,: ... .: 

See Detail C 

2PL 

2.50 

~ 

~ 8.0 Ref 

1.0 Ref · / Handling 1/F L 1/ Adapter Tool (Ref} 

I I '" c I I I. I I I 

' I I CL Stringer CL Stringer 

CV-STR-140 

L Stringer 

I 

Tapped Holes 

for 34L2·5 

r J-Kn 4018 Aprox 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

r 

I 

I 

Detail C 

Fwd 

t 

Section A-A 

Rotated 

(Handling Tool Not Shown For Clarity) 

II-'1A RTIN II-'1ARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
Aft Handling Point 1/F's CV-STR-140 

... 

... 

~ Handling 1/F 

e: Adapter Tool (Ref) 

Tool 1/F Hole Pattern To 

Match Fr 4058 

• 

+ 

Shear Hole 

.75 Dia 

D 

lxn4098 

Approx 

Fwd 

+ Sloted Hole 

.75 Radius 

CL sJringer CL Stringer 

I 

Tapped Holes 

for 34L2·5 ( 4 PL) 1

·

0 Ref Section D-D Detail B Rotated 

(Handling Tool Not Shown For Clarity) 

/J'IA RTIN /J'IARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
·' / 

-Z Handling Point 1/Fs CV-STR-140 

Xn 4018 Approxl Xn 4058 . I Xn 4098 Approx 

CL lnterm. Fr ~= ... 1~ =~ CL lnterm. Fr 

Weld 

~ 0\ 

• Fwd 

DAT.91?e-" 

( 

·o· 

• • • w • 

I 1- · --z 

View3 

See Detail E 

1/F Locn's Pattern Per 

ET Drg 80914961960 Sh 7 

Views H & J (2 PL) 

WIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( . ( 
-Z Aft Handling Point 1/F CV-STR-140 

Tool 1/F Hole Pattern To 

Match Fr 4058 

Shear Hole 

.75 Dia 

+~ fo o I ~·I + 0 1 0 ... 0 0 0 0 .. 

I 

Fwd 

t Slated Hole 

.75 Radius 

~ Handling 1/F -Z F lxn4098 

v. Approx ...,) Adapter Tool (Ref) 

CL Stringer CL Stringer 

1·0 Ref Section F-F 

DAT.91269 

2.75 

I 

Tapped Holes 

for 34L2-5 ( 4 PL) 

Detail E 

Hole Pattern Drilled After Assy Weld 

(Handling Tool Not Shown For Clarity) 

lnARTIN lnARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

VI 

00 

LH2·Tank Handling Points CV-STR-140 

Barrel Panel Commonality Impacts 

Xn 4058 

+Y 

81 

+Z 

.y 

-Z 

+Y 

--

Xn 3870.25 

I 

} B1P3 

--\ 

B1P2- -- B1P1 -- ) B1P4 -- B1P1 --) B1P1 -- B1P1 -- B1P1 --

Xn 4120.85 

I 

--- +Y 

B1aP3 --- •a1aP2 --- B1aP1 ---

B1aP4 --- B1aP1 --- B1aP5 --- B1aP6 --- B1aP1 --- +Y 

CLof 

Press Lines 

&CIT 

Modified Panels D 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91"- ... MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
~ 

v. 

\() 

LH2 Tank Handling Points CV-STR-140 

Recommendation 

• Incorporate The Transportation & Handling Points 

As Configured By This Study 

/lilA RTIN /IIIARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
CV-STR-140 

Appendix 6 

s • Alternate Aft Dome Configuration 

IWARTIN IWARIETTA 

DAT.9 ·, MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( -

( 
~ 

0\ 

-

( 

Alternate Aft Dome Config. CV-STR-140 

+Z Gores Designed By 

Orbiter Loads 

+Z Common To -Z 

(3 Types) 

ID a.,·, II +Y 

NLS Ref 

• ET Aft Dome Except Substitution Of 

Feedline Outlet Gore 

• Contains 5 Unique Gores 

• 3 Gores Designed By Orbiter Loads 

IE Cl I I + Y 

Alt. Configuration 

• 1/4 Panel Assy Common With ET -z 

1/4 Panels 

• Contains 2 Unique Gores 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Recommendation CV-STR-140 

Recommendation 

• Use -Z Quarter Panels In Place Of +Z 

Item For Further Study 

• Analyze + Y Gores For SRB Load Impacts To Determine 

If All Gores Can Be Common 

~ - 5 ft Stretch Isolates Dome From SRB Loads 

N 

MARTIN wtARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ' ( 
c 

0 

·-..., 

m 

Cr--. 

--

m 

..., ~>< U) 

,..., ·-

c 

O:c -

a.. I-G) 0 CIJc. U) •c. c >c:c C1) 0 CIJ 

, 

~-

LL 

• 

463 
~ 

Fwd Sensor Installation CV-STR-140 

Issue 

• Limited Access To LH2 Tank Fwd Dome After Core 

Stacking And Installation Of Feedlines Will Make LH2 

Tank Entry To Install Or Rework LH2 Fwd Dome Level 

Sensors Difficult. 

Objective 

• To Develop A Concept To Install/Rework LH2 Level 

Sensors Not Requiring Tank Access 

IYTARTIIV IYTARIETTA 

DAT.91?'- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

( 

Fwd Sensor lnstn Options CV-STR-140 

Reference - ET Mast 

Option 1 - Single Dome Cap Stinger 

Option 2 - Dual Stingers, Additional Radial Stinger In Gore 

Option 3 - Dual Stingers, Gore Stinger With Vertical lnstln 

Option 4 - Dual Stingers, With Additional Access 

~.~~ Option 5 - Triple Stingers, With Additional Access 

Option 6 - Dual Stingers, Additional Angled Stinger In Gore 

/111ARTIN /111ARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
.l:oo 

~ 

Ref. Config. Fwd Sensor Mtg. CV-STR-140 

Sta 3033.4 ' I 

3035.0 ~I 

3040.6--~ 

3044.6--~ 

3048.6---

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Feedthrough 

Plate 

Sta 3102.1 """"" I 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfi II 

3040.6 1 OOo/o + 

3044.6 1 00°/o (2) 

3048.6 1 00°/o -

3102.1 98°/o {2) 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

Sta 3035.0 

Sta 3129.9 

Requires Internal Access for Installation & maintenance 

IYIARTIN IYIARIET'TA 

DAT.91; MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( -

( 
~ 

( 

Opt 1 Fwd Sensor Config. 

Withdrawn 

Position 

1 I -- =====' .. ~_, ..... ::-.:.~.,.-::.:..:: .... - 1\ -~l-::.=--., ... 

~~·:: ~ ~:: -~ Sta 3033.4 -~ ........... 

3035.0 ---+-' 

3040.6 ------\---1 

3044.6 ----T"' 

3048.6---~ 

L02 Aft Dome 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

• Single Stinger 

Feedthrough 

Plate 

CV-STR-140 

Stinger 

Lsta3102.1 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfill 

3040.6 1 00°/o + 

3044.6 1 OOo/o (2) 

3048.6 1 00°/o • 

3102.1 98°k (2) 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

Sta 3035.0 

• Location Based On Utilizing Existing Feedthru Plate Location 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

DAT.91269 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Opt 2 Fwd Sensor Config. CV-STR-140 

Feedthrough 

Plate-~~ 

Sta 3033.4 -~ 

3035.0 ~ I 

3040.6-~ ......... 

3044.6--~ 

3048.6 ----.:1~ 

L02 Aft Dome 

/ 

liT Access / 

Door / 

/ 

• Dual Stinger 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfill 

3040.6 1 00°k + 

3044.6 1 00°A, (2) 

3048.6 1 00°k • 

/) 3102.1 98% (2) 

65.0 fi Sta 3102.1 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

Sta 3035.0 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

• 1 OOo/o Sensor Utilizes Existing Feedthru Plate Location 

• 98°/o Sensor Located On Unique Stinger 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

DAT.91?"'" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
$ 

Opt 3 Fwd Sensor Config. 

Feedthrough 

Plate-~~~ 

Sta 3033.4 ' I 

3035.0 " I 

3040.6 ----T----l 

3044.6 ---+---' 

3048.6 --~--l 

L02 Aft Dome 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

CV-STR-140 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfill 

3040.6 100°/o + 

3044.6 1 00°k (2) 

3048.6 1 OOo/o • 

3102.1 98°k (2) 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

Sta 3035.0 

Stinger 

liT Mainframe~----.., Lsta 3102.

1 

r 1 I 

• Dual Stinger 

• 100°k Sensor Utilizes Existing Feedthru Plate Location 

• 98°/o Sensor Located On Unique Stinger 

IVIART/N IVIARIETTA 

DAT.91269 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 0 

Opt 4 Fwd Sensor Config. 

Feedthrough 

Plate --~ 

Sta 3033.4 ~ · 

3035.0 ' I 

3040.6-~~ 

3044.6-~~ 

3048.6 ----4--' Stinger 

L02 Aft Dome /' 

LH2 Fwd Dome Added 

liT - Access 

Door 

• Dual Stinger 

CV-STR-140 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfill 

3040.6 1 00°/o + 

3044.6 1 00°/o (2) 

3048.6 100°/o • 

3102.1 98°k (2) 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

Sta 3035.0 

..--Sta 3102.1 

• 1 OOo/o Sensor Utilizes Existing Feedthru Plate Location 

• 98°k Sensor Located On Unique Stinger 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91,. MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
!J 

-

(' 

Opt 5 Fwd Sensor Config. CV-STR-140 

Feedthrough 

Plate ... \~ 

Sta 3033.4 "il • 

3035.0 \ I 

L02 Aft Dome 

3040.6 __ __. 

3044.6 __ ___. 

3048.6 -----J 

liT 

• Triple Stinger 

Access 

Door 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfill 

3040.6 1 00°k + 

3044.6 1 00°/o (2) 

3048.6 100°k • 

3102.1 98o/o (2) 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

, Sta 3035.0 

Stinger 

,...-----Sta 3102.1 

• Overfill Sensor Utilizes Existing Feedthru Plate Location 

• 1 00°/o & 98°/o Sensor Located On Unique Stingers 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.91269 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

....a 

N 

Opt 6 Fwd Sensor Config. 

' 

Feedthrough 

Plate --~.'L~~ 

Sta 3033.4 --T-' 

3035.0 .. I 

3040.6 ----;---' 

3044.6 -~:--' 

3048.6--~ 

L02 Aft Dome 

Withdrawn Position 

liT 

\ ·:=·===·· ··====~ 

• Dual Stinger 

CV-STR-140 

I Liquid Level Sensors (7) 

Sta 3033.4 Overfill 

3040.6 1 00°/o + 

3044.6 1 00°/o (2) 

3048.6 1 00°/o -

3102.1 98°/o (2) 

0 Ullage Temp Sensor 

Sta 3035.0 

r----Sta 31 02.1 

Stinger 

• 1 00°/o Sensor Utilizes Existing Feedthru Plate Location 

• 98o/o Sensor Located On Unique Stinger 

IWARTIN IWARIETTA 

DAT.91~'"' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

....,J 

loU 

Fwd Sensor Mounting 

• Optional Tripod Support 

LH2 Fwd Dome 

Attach Brackets 

Welded To Fwd 

Dome Cap 

-

Sensors 

CV-STR-140 

-

Support Bearing 

Tripod Support 

Installed Prior To 

Tankllntertank Mate 

I Tripod Attached to Inside of Dome Cap-1 

/111ARTIN /111ARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Fwd Sensor lnstn Evaluation CV-STR-140 

Options I 

I 

Critera I 

Ref 1 2 I 

lnstl & •Tank Access Reqd. + No Tank Access Reqd. + No Tank Access Reqd. 1 

., D.lfflcult.AfterStacklng .. can Not lnsti/Servlce • 2nd lnstl Thru Iff Acess Service After Stacking Door . ··••· .. ·. 

Penetrations • Existing Feed Thru • 1 In Dome Cap • 1 In Dome Cap 

- Addltlonal1 In Gore - Additional 1 In Gore I 

~ ~ 

Tank • Reference - Modified Dome Cap & - Modified Dome Cap & I 

I 

Gore Gore I 

Impacts I 

I 

Design + Uses ET Mast Assy .; 87!' Stinger Difficult To • 65" Stinger Difficult To 1 

Design With Adaquate Design With Adequate Integrity Stiffness Stiffness ·• I 

Weight • Reference 61bs 151bs 

I Impact I 

Major Impacts • Increased Weights lncl 8°/o Contingency 

/JI1A RT/N /JI1ARIETTA 

DAT.912Fn MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Fwd Sensor lnstn Evaluation CV-STR-140 

Critera Options 

3 4 5 

lnstl & + No Tank Access Reqd. + No Tank Access Reqd. + No Tank Access Reqd. 

• Additional Access Thru • Additional Access Thru Service A 2nd 1rr Door A 2nd 1rr Door 

Penetrations • 1 In Dome Cap • 1 In Dome Cap • 1 In Dome Cap 

- Addltlonal1 In Gore - Addltlonal1 In Gore - Additional 2 In Gore 

- Modified Dome Cap & - Modified Dome Cap & - Modified Dome Cap & 

Tank Gore Gore Gore 

~ V\ Impacts • Additional 1rr Access - Additional 1rr Access 

.Door Reqd Door Reqd 

Design • 34" Stinger May • 34" Stinger May + Short Stinger Design 

Integrity Require Stabllzer Suppt Require Stabllzer Suppt Dlslrable For Stiffness 

• Complex Gore Ftg Reqd 

Weight 191bs 201bs 31 lbs Impact --···-

Major Impacts •Increased Weights lncl8°k Contingency 

,._,ARTIN ,._,ARIETTA 

DAT.9126S MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Fwd Sensor lnstn Evaluation CV-STR-140 

Critera Options 

6 

lnstl & + No Tank Access Reqd. 

Service 

• Dlffercult To Gain 

Accesll t=6r t~stl ·. 

Penetrations • 1 In Dome Cap 

• Addltlonal11n Gore 

Tank 

• Modified Dome Cap & 

Gore 

!j 

0\ Impacts 

Design • 34" Stinger May 

Integrity Require Stabllzer Suppt 

Weight Sibs Impact 

Major Impacts 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

DAT.91?~- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Conclusions CV-STR-140 

• Option 1 Stinger Interferes With L02 Aft Dome In The 

Withdrawn Position 

• Option 2 Gives The Best Access During Installation & 

Removal 

• Option 3 Has A Very Complicated Gore Fitting For 

Vertical Installation 

• Options 4 & 5 Require An Additional lntertank Access 

Door In Close Proximity To The lntertank/LH2 Tank 

Bolted Interface 

:l • Option 6 Gives The Least Design Impacts But Is 

Differcult To Install 

( 

/JITARTIIV WTARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 00 

/ 

Recommendation CV-STR-140 

Recommendation 

• Incorporate Option 2 As Reference 

Items For Study In Cycle 1 

• Establish Sensor Requirements & Locations 

-Can 98o/o Fill Be Changed To 99o/o 

- 1 OOo/o Fill Level For NLS To Be Defined 

• Re-evaluate Options Based On Cycle 1 Sensor Locations 

/Jr7A RTIIV /JI7ARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
c 

0 

·-.., 

·-c 

Ca:> ·-

.... ~>< Cl) 

c 

,_ ·-

•-c .., 

a:c '-

1-CI) as 

en c. a. 

•c. ~ [)c:a: c 

"' 1-

N 

::1: 

..J 

• 

479 
LH2 Tank Dome Configurations CV-STR-140 

• Part Definition 

~ 

00 

0 

DAT.91r 

( 

+Z 

-Z 

Fwd Dome 

rv 

~ 

r-

~ 

.y 

~ 

~ 

+Z 

-VI I I I+Y 

-Z 

Aft Dome 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( - ( 
( 

LH2 Tank Dome Part Definition CV-STR-14D 

Part Title Part Status Remarks Exist. Mod. New 

FD Fwd Dome Cap - - ~ Common To NLS L02 Tank 

Fwd Dome 

FG1 Dome Gore Plain - ~ - 1

... Similar To ET Fwd LH2 

FG2 Dome Gore SRB - ~ - Dome & NLS Fwd L02 

FG3 Dome Gore Press - ~ - ~ Dome Gores, With 

FG4 Dome Gore Sensor - ~ - Membrane Thickness Mod 

FG5 Dome Gore Vent - ~ - 1

.,. For Proof Test Reqmts . 

AD Aft Dome Cap - - ~ Contains Sump 

AG1 Dome Gore ~ ,._ 

- - AG2 Dome Gore ~ - - Configuration Could Be 

AG3 Dome Gore ~ - - ~ Modified As Orbiter Loads 

AG4 Dome Gore v - - Are Eliminated {See 

v Appendix 6) AG5 Dome Gore - - I"' 

-- -----

lnARTIN tnARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

00 

N 

LH2 Tank Shell Definition CV-STR-140 

• Part Configuration 

Barrel Panels 

Xn 3129.9 Xn 3623.8 

Xn 3~77.35 1 Xn 3871 

I 

84 I 83 I 82 I 81 

Xn 4058 Xn 4120.85 I I 

+Y --- --- +Y 

83P1 83P1 B2P1 81P3 B1aP3 --- ---

84P2 B3P2 B2P2 81P2- -e1aP2 --- ---

83P1 83P1 B2P1 81P1 B1aP1 --- --- 83P1 B3P1 B2P1 B1P4 B1aP4 --- --- B3P1 B3P1 B2P1 81P1 B1aP1 --- --- 83P1 B3P1 B2P1 B1P1 B1aP5 --- --- B3P1 B3P1 B2P1 81P1 B1aP6 --- --- B3P1 B3P1 82P1 B1P1 B1aP1 

+Y F1 F2 F3 F4 FS F6 --- --- +Y 

Main Frames 

Clof 

Press Lines 

&err 

/JIIA RTIN /JIIARIETTA 

DAT.91'" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

00 

w 

LH2 Tank Main Frames 

Part Title Part Status 

Exist. Mod. New 

F1 Frame 3129.9 

- Outer Chord - " -

- Frame Segments - - " 

F2 Frame 4058 

" - Outer Chord - - - Frame Segments " - -

F3 Frame 3871 - " -

CV-STR-140 

Remarks 

+ Z Quandrant Modified To 

Delete Bi-Pod Attach, L02 

Feedline Changed To+ Z Locn 

Constant 1 0.0 Deep Frame 

New With ET Fr 2058 SRB 

1/F's, Orbiter 1/F's Omitted 

Use ET Fr 2058 Segments* 

Use ET Fr 1623.8 Modified For 

+ Z L02 Feedllnes 

* Segments Could Be Modified Because Of Absense Of Orbiter Loads 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.9~269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Tank Main Frames Cont. CV-STR-140 

Part 

~ 

00 

~ 

F4 

F5 

F6 

DAT.91' 

( 

- -

Title 

Frame 3623.8 

Frame 3377.35 

Frame 3129.9 - Outer Chord 

- Frame Segments 

Part Status Remarks Exist. Mod. New 

- v - Use ET Fr 1623.8 Modified For 

+ Z L02 Feedlines 

- v - Use ET Fr 1377.35 Modified 

For + Z L02 Feedlines 

- v - Use ET Fr TBD Modified For + 

Z L02 Feedlines 

v - - Use ET Fr 1129.9 Lower 

Segment Assys, In Place Of 

Upper & Lower Segments 

/JitARTIN /JitARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ' ( 
LH2 Tank Barrel Panels 

~ 

00 

Vt 

Part 

B1aP1 

B1aP2 

B1aP3 

B1aP4 

B1aP5 

B1aP6 

B1P1 

B1P2 

DAT.91269 

Title 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

Barrel Panel 

----

Part Status 

Exist. Mod. New 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

- - ~ 

( 

CV-STR-140 

Remarks 

Unique Length Barrel Panel, 

Based On ET Type LH2 

Machined Barrel Panel 

Similar To B1aP1 With CIT & 

Press Line 1/F's 

- Similar To B1aP1 With 

~ Ground Handling & 

Tooling 1/F's .. 

Unique Barrel Panel, Based 

On ET Barrel 1 Type LH2 

Machined Barrel Panel . 

Similar To B1 P1 With CIT & 

Press Line 1/F's 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
LH2 Tank Barrel Panels CV-STR-140 

Part Title Part Status Remarks Exist. Mod. New 

B1P3 Barrel Panel - v - } Similar To B1aP1 With 

B1P4 Barrel Panel - v - Ground Handling & Tooling 

1/F's 

B2P1 Barrel Panel - v - Modified ET Barrel 2 Type 

B2P2 Barrel Panel - v 

LH2 Machined Barrel Panel 

- Similar To B2P1 With CIT & 

t 

0'\ v Press Line 1/F's 

B3P1 Barrel Panel - - Modified ET Barrel 3 Type 

LH2 Machined Barrel Panel 

B3P2 Barrel Panel - v - Similar To B3P1 With CIT & 

Press Line 1/F's 

I'VIARTIN IWARIETTA 

DAT.91' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( . ( 
c 

-.::t 

~ 

I 

a: 

1- ct 

en ...... 

(f) 

...... I 

> (.) 

tn ~LS&UXILL 

Cl) 

.., 

ca 

·-

-c s·&~9& ux _ Cl) (I) 

E 

ICl) 

CJ 

ca 

c. 

Cl) en 

.., 

c S&.LL&& ux _ -

-ca 

::I 

C"' 

~ 

c 

~ 

C") 

LL 

w 

-

~ 

0 

... 

! 

E 

N s·s~~& ux _ ::I 

z 

:I: II 

..J ...... 

c 

-... CJ) 

co 

C\! 

...... 

en 

~ 

487 < Cl 
LH2 Tank Intermediate Frs 

~ 

00 

00 

Part 

IF1A 

IF1 

IF2 

IF3 

--

OAT.91' 

( 

Title 

Intermediate Fr 

Intermediate Fr 

Intermediate Fr 

Intermediate Fr 

Part Status 

Exist. Mod. New 

- - - - " - - " - - " " 

( 

CV-STR-140 

Remarks 

liii 

Unique Size Intermediate 

~ Frame, Similar 

Construction To ET LH2 

Tank ~ 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
Candidate Items For Cycle 1 CV-STR-140 

• Resize The LH2 Tank Based On: 

- Cycle 1 Loads 

- Cycle 1 Ullage Pressure & Associated Proof Test 

Requirements) 

- Impacts Frotr~ Aft Skirt Interface Loads 

- Optimization Of Intermediate Frame Sizes 

-Revise Frame 4058 (No Orbiter Loads) 

- Revise Aft Dome Gores (Reduced SRB Loads) 

• Update Design Definition To Incorporate Results From: 

~ - CV-STR-14G External Hardware Definition 

- CV-STR-14H TPS Reference Definition 

- CV-DI-01 A Tank Access 

- 3-S-OOSC Stiffener Pitch Sensitivity 

- AIR Other Panel Trades (eg. Single 

L02 Feedline) 

n-7ARTIN n-7ARIETTA 

DAT.91269 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
§ 

,, , 

Items For Cycle 1 Study CV-STR-140 

• Further Define Sensor Mast Concept 

• Re-evaluate Intermediate Frame Sizing 

• Study Weight Savings Benefit Of A Unique LH2 Tank 

Design For 1.5 Stage 

• Impact Of Aft Structure Loads On Barrel #1 

• Impact Assessment Of Using Common Domes In Both 

Tanks 

• Define The Aft Dome Vortex Baffle Concept 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

DAT.91~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.6.4.1 Reference LH2 Tank Enhancements(#CV-STR-140) 

Objective 

This study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference LH2 Tank structure and 

recommended potential modifications 

Approach 

(a) Identify, define, evaluate and analyze selected Study Items. 

(b) Identify recommended changes to the ref.Configuration. 

(c) Produce LH2 Tank Part Definition. 

(d) Identify candidates for study during Cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - ReviSed barrel and frame geometry. 

Item 2 - Alternate forward dome chord and frame. 

Item 3 - Def. of external hardware mounting provisions. 

Item 4 - Chord to barrel weld land mismatch. 

Item 5 - Defmition of handling points 

Item 6 - Alternate aft dome configuration 

Item 7 - Level sensor installation 

Item 8 - Reference pan definition. 

Key Study Results 

The fwd dome chord and frame were designed for Orbiter bi-pod loads and are inefficient for this 

application. The ref. used a L02 tank aft dome chord in the Ul2 tank aft dome, this creates a weld 

land mismatch requiring the chord weld lands to be reduced. ET level sensor installation requires 

internal assembly. In order to reduce the requirement for access a series of options were produced 

to show a method of installing level sensors on a mast thats installed externally thru the fwd dome. 

Conclusions 

The Cycle 0 definition made use of ET assemblies with some modified components. Weight and 

manufacturing complexity can be further improved by revising more of these components to better 

match NLS sizing requirements. These modified components can still be produced on ET tooling 

with the minor modifications already identified. Installation of level sensors without internal access 

was determined to be feasible. 

Study Recommendations 

The reference Cycle 0 definition should be revised to reflect the enhancements proposed in this 

study: 

Revise reference defmition to use L02 aft chord and revised LH2 fwd frame 

in forward location. 

Incorporate the proposed defmition of external hardware mtg. provisions. 

Increase barrel weld Jand at dome chord welds to .387. 

During Cycle 1 further define the level sensor installation and re-evaluate intennediate frame sizing. 

491 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Xn 3123.15 

10.75-:1 

n3129.91 

Xn 3123.15 .....,..__ 9 . 8--:J 

lxn, 3124. 65

1 

Varies 

_[

10.00 To 

21.75 

_j 

Fr Moved To _ __,, 

Fwd Face 10.00 

Constant 

REFERENCE FWD DOME CHORD PROPOSED FWD DOME CHORD 

34.0 

L02 Aft Dome 

I/T Access Door / 

Proposed Level Sensor lnslal1arion 

Gores Designed 

_......_11111!111-'l: By Orbiter ~ .... -...L 

Loads 

Common To 

-z 

NLS Ref Alt. Configuration 

Proposed Alternate Aft Dome GOIC Configuralion 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

492 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.6.4.1 Reference LH2 Tank Enhancements(#CV-STR-140) 

Objective 

This study evaluated enhancements to the Cycle 0 Reference LH2 Tank structure and 

recommended potential modifications 

Approach 

(a) Identify, define, evaluate and analyze selected Study Items. 

(b) Identify recommended changes to the ref.Configuration. 

(c) Produce LH2 Tank Part Definition. 

(d) Identify candidates for study during Cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Revised barrel and frame geometry. 

Item 2 - Alternate forward dome chord and frame. 

Item 3 - Def. of external hardware mounting provisions. 

Item 4 - Chord to barrel weld land mismatch. 

Item 5 - Definition of handling points 

Item 6 - Alternate aft dome configuration 

Item 7 - Level sensor installation 

Item 8 - Reference part definition. 

Key Study Results 

The fwd dome chord and frame were designed for Orbiter bi-pod loads and are inefficient for this 

application. The ref. used a L02 tank aft dome chord in the Ul2 tank aft dome, this creates a weld 

land mismatch requiring the chord weld lands to be reduced. ET level sensor installation requires 

internal assembly. In order to reduce the requirement for access a series of options were produced 

to show a method of installing level sensors on a mast thats installed externally thru the fwd dome. 

Conclusions 

The Cycle 0 definition made use of ET assemblies with some modified components. Weight and 

manufacturing complexity can be further improved by revising more of these components to better 

match NLS sizing requirements. These modified components can still be produced on ET tooling 

with the minor modifications already identified. Installation of level sensors without internal access 

was determined to be feasible. 

Study Recommendations 

The reference Cycle 0 definition should be revised to reflect the enhancements proposed in this 

study: 

Revise reference defmition to use L02 aft chord and revised LH2 fwd frame 

in forward location. 

Incorporate the proposed defmition of external hardware mtg. provisions. 

Increase barrel weld land at dome chord welds to .387. 

During Cycle 1 further define the level sensor installation and re-evaluate intermediate frame sizing. 

493 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Xn 3123.15 

10.75~ 

n3129.9j 

Xn 3123.15 ---:J 

I xn, 312 4 . 6 s

1 

Varies 

1

10.00 To 

21.75 

_l 

Fr Moved To 

Fwd Face 10.00 

Constant 

REFERENCE FWD DOME CHORD PROPOSED FWD DOME CHORD 

34.0 

L02 Aft Dome 

I/T Access Door ~ 

Proposed Level Sensor Installation 

Gores Designed 

_........11!!!11111111!!11~ By Orbiter ~ .... --."""'" 

Loads 

Common To 

-z 

NLS Ref Alt. Configuration 

Proposed Alternate Aft Dome Gore Configuration 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

494 
~ ~ I 

~ 

( 

CV-STR-14G 

NLS Core Tankage 

External Hardware Definition 

Prepared By : Wayne Waguespack 

(504)257 -0032 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

Approved By: R.Simms 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 0\ 

Objectives And Approach 

Objective 

• Study And Evaluate HLLV And 1.5 Stage External 

Cable Tray Requirements And Recommend A 

Configuration To Meet These Requirements. 

Approach 

CV-STR-14G 

• Investigate STS External Tank Cable Tray And Press Line 

Design. 

• Define Potential NLS Configuration. 

• Document Study And Prepare Conclusions. 

• Identify Items For Study During Cycle 1. ~ 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

WRW.Nl,.. '"'1350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

( 

Ground Rules And Assumptions 

• Utilize MSFC Cycle 0 Reference Configuration As 

Defined On 9/27/91 

- Core Tankage 

- Propulsion Module 

- lnterstage Design And CTV Location. 

• Increase Size Of Cable Tray To 7 X 11 Inches. 

CV-STR-14G 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
.. 

STS ET Cable Tray & Press Line Def CV-STR-14G 

L02 Cable Tray 

I 

.- - - ~- I E"A >. IN 

~ 00 

WRW.NL~ n1350 

( ( 

GH2 Press Line 

LH2 Cable Tray 

L02 Press Line 

~ART/N ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( 

STS ET Cable Tray & Press Line Def CV-STR-14G 

~ 

Typical L02 Cable Tray 

Suppa~ Fitting 

{VIew Looking Aft) 

WRW.NLS.91350 

·'-..._ .I ,, " ""· .. "'-... .. 

Typical LH2 Cable Tray 

Support Fitting 

/1.'1ARTIIV /1.'1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
STS ET Cable Tray & Press Line Def CV-STR-14G 

~-- Cable Tray To Orbiter 

----- LH2 Cable Tray 

---- Cable Tray To 

SRBs 

8 

IJI1ARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

NLS Ref Ext Hwd Configuration 

( 

CV-STR-14G 

Single Cable Tray 

( Extended Thru lntertank Area ) GH2 Press Line 

~ 

-

G02 Press Line 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NLS.91350 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS Alternate Ext Hdw Configuration CV-STR-14G 

s 

WRW.NLP "1350 

( 

Single Cable Tray 

( Extended Thru lntertank Area ) 

G02/GH2 Press Line Locations 

Reversed To Simplify Support 

Fitting Design On L02 Tank 

( 

Add SRB Cable Tray 

For HLLV 

Add SRB Cross-over 

Cable Tray For HLLV 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
Options Comparision 

Cable Tray G02 Press Line 

Typical L02 Support Fitting 

(VIew Looking Aft) 

( 

Cable Tray 

,_<-..... /. '-.. ........ 

Cable Tray 

_,_~ '•, 

( 

CV-STR-14G 

Typical L02 Support Fitting 

( VIew Looking Aft ) 

<· /.r '·· ............ 

G02 Press Line 

Cable Tray 

GH2 Press Llne7z~~ 

l .. 

~~G02 Press Line 

IJJ 

~ .... ..... 

1

::' -. 

·· ......... 

GH2 Press Line 

Typical LH2 Support Fitting 

Ref Configuration 

WRW.NLS.91350 

........ 

Typical LH2 Support Fitting 

Alt Configuration 

Swap GH2 I G02 Press Line Locations 

To Simplify Support Fitting Design 

MARTIN WTARIETTA 

. MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Conclusions And Recommendations CV-STR-14G 

Conclusions 

• For HLLV Add SRB Cable Tray Extension To LH2 Cable Tray. 

• For HLLV Add SRB Cross-over Cable Tray To Aft Skirt Def. 

• Swap GH2 I L02 Press Line Locations To Simplify Design 

Of Support Fittings On L02 Tank. 

Recommendations 

i · Incorporate Results Of This Study Into Cycle 1 Baseline. 

• Study The Following In Cycle 1 

- System Tunnel Approach. 

- Angular Location Of Cable Trays And Press Lines. 

- Refine Cable Tray Size. 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

WRW.NL~ 350 MANNED SPACE SYSTeMS 

( ( ( 
---

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

5.2.1.4.1 External Hardware Design Definition (#CV-STR-14G) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Study and evaluate HLL V external cable tray and press line requirements and recommend a 

configuration to meet these requirements. 

Approach 

(a) Investigate STS ET cable tray and press line design. 

(b) Study potential NLS configurations. 

(c) Document study results and prepare conclusions. 

(d) Identify items for study in cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Size and location of cable tray. 

Item 2 - Core Stage to SRB cable tray concept 

Item 3 - Location of press lines relative to cable tray. 

Key Study Results 

ET cable tray arrangement has separate cable trays on the L02 and LH2 tanks. These are located at 

different angular locations. The cable trays do not run along the intenank as their purpose is to feed 

cables into and out of the intertank. On NLS a different situation exist; primary cable routing is 

between the interstage and the propulsion module with only a few cables going into the intertank. 

Therefore the NLS cable tray should be continuous. A simplified attach sttucture can be devised if 

the location of the G02 and GH2 press lines is Reversed. Initial estimates indicate that the cable 

tray cross section needs to be about 3 times greater on NLS due to increased quantity of cables. 

Additional cable trays will be needed to provide for cable routing to the aft SRB attach as well as a 

cross over cable tray between port and stbd SRBs. 

Conclusions 

The proposed concept provides a continuous longitudinal cable tray and provides a means for 

routing cables to the solid rocket boosters. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate the proposed configuration. In cycle 1, study a system 

tunnel approach and angular location of cable tray/press lines and cable tray size. 

505 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

Cable 

Tray 

G02 Press 

Line 

Typical L02 Support Fitting 

( View Looking Aft ) 

GH2 Press 

Line 

Cable Tray 

G02 Press Line 

Typical LH2 Support Fitting 

Single Cable Tray 

( Extended Thru 

Intertank Area ) 

G02/GH2 Press Line 

Locations Reversed 

To Simplify Support 

Fitting Design On L02 

Tank 

SRB Cable Tray 

HLLV 

Cross-over 

Cable Tray 

For HLLV 

Proposed External Hardware Definition 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

506 

Page 2 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6.2.1.4.1 External Hardware Design Definition (#CV-STR-14G) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Study and evaluate 1.5 Stage external cable tray and press line requirements and recommend a 

configuration to meet these requirements. 

Approach 

(a) Investigate STS ET cable tray and press line design. 

(b) Study potential NLS configurations. 

(c) Document study results and prepare conclusions. 

(d) Identify items for study in cycle 1. 

Items Studied 

Item 1 - Size and location of cable tray. 

Item 2 - Location of press lines relative to cable tray. 

Key Study Results 

ET cable tray arrangement has separate cable trays on the 1..02 and LH2 tanks. These are located at 

different angular locations. The cable trays do not run along the intenank as their pwpose is to feed 

cables into and out of the intertank. On NLS a different situation exist; primary cable routing is 

between the interstage and the propulsion module with only a few cables going into the intenank. 

Therefore the NLS cable tray should be continuous. A simplified attach structure can be devised if 

the location of the G02 and GH2 press lines is Reversed. Initial estimates indicate that the cable 

tray cross section needs to be about 3 times greater on NLS due to increased quantity of cables. 

Conclusions 

The proposed concept provides a continuous longitudinal cable tray and provides a means for 

routing cables to the solid rocket boosters. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate the proposed configuration. In cycle 1, study a system 

tunnel approach and angular location of cable tray/press lines and cable tray size. 

507 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

Cable 

Tray 

G02 Press 

Line 

Typical L02 Support Fitting 

( View Looking Aft ) 

GH2 Press 

Line 

Cable Tray 

G02 Press Line 

Typical LH2 Support Fitting 

Single Cable Tray 

( Extended Thru 

Intertank Area ) 

G02/GH2 Press Line 

Locations Reversed 

To Simplify Support 

Fitting Design On L02 

Tank 

Proposed External Hardware Definition 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results. 

508 

Page 2 

.........,-

-..._, 
CV-STR-14H 

TPS Reference Definition 

~ 

Prepared By : Neil A Duncan 

(504)257 -0161 

Rev: Initial 

Date:January 8 , 1992 

NAD.0072 

Approved By:M.R.Simms 

/HARTIN IHARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
NLS TPS Ref Definition CV-STR-14H 

Objective 

• Prepare Recommended TPS Definition for the 

Reference NLS Core Vehicle 

Related Tasks 

• CV-STR-14-B 

• CV-STR-14-C 

~ • CV-STR-14-D 0 

L02 Tank Design Definition 

lntertank Design Definition 

LH2 Tank Design Definition 

Interface Hardware Definition 

External Hardware Definition 

Facility Impacts 

• CV-STR-14-F 

• CV-STR-14-G 

• CV-STR-16-B 

/JIIARTIN /JIIARIETTA 

NAD.007 "' 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Approach CV-STR-14H 

Part 1 

Evaluate Thermal Protection options for each individual 

element of the Core Vehicle 

Part 2 

Define & evaluate several Thermal Protection options for the 

~ entire Core Vehicle -

Identify Recommended changes to the Reference 

Configuration 

/J.'IARTIN /J.'IARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Study Items CV-STR-14H 

Aeroheating & ASRM shock impingement heating 

Propellant Conditioning - Ground & Flight 

Ice & Liquid Air Formation 

Influence of Vehicle Aeroheating & Propellant Temperature 

~ on Structure material properties 

Application of ET TPS Process I Manufacturing requirements 

to NLS configuration 

Sensitivity analyses - Variation in propellant conditioning 

assumptions 

- Freon 11 replacement at MAF 

IJ.'IARTIIV IJ.'IARIETTA 

NAD.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

-

~ 

( 

Ground rules CV-STR-14H 

• For Vehicle Definition Use MSFC Reference 

Definition Dated 8/28/91 

• Tank Length May Not Be Changed 

• Use Remtech Prelim Aeroheating data 

• No Deorbit Requirements Included 

• Impacts Associated With Localized TPS Closeouts 

Are Not Included in this Study . This Work was 

Deferred till ~ycle 1 

• Core Vehicle Defined as :- Forward Skirt , L02 Tank 

lntertank & LH2 Tank 

n.7ARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Assumptions CV-STR-14H 

• Use ET Criteria where the Reference Vehicle data 

is incomplete 

• ET type GN2 Purge in Fwd Skirt,lntertank & Propulsion 

Module 

• BX-250 SOFI Assumed For Barrel Acreage . CPR-488 

~ (SOFI used on ET Barrels) Withstands Higher Heating 

~ · Rates Than BX-250 , But also Requires Substrate Heating 

During Application . Lower NLS Heating Rates Allow Use 

of BX-250 Which Reduces Manufacturing Cost (no 

_Substrate Heating) 

J»ARTIN J»ARIETTA 

NAD.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Evaluation Criteria CV-STR-14H 

Criteria 

Core Vehicle Design 

Manufacturing 

~ Operability 

VI 

Performance I 

Weight 

Cost 

NAD.0072 

Rationale 

Identify any major vehicle design 

concerns associated with TPS options 

Assess impact to manufacturing based 

on structure & TPS design 

Identify operability impacts due to 

propellant conditioning requirements 

and ice or liquid air formation 

Identify relative performance of each 

option 

Identify any major cost differentials 

between options 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

01 

-

Study Outline CV-STR-14H 

Objective , Approach , Groundrules & Assumptions 

Part 1 - Core Element Thermal Evaluation 

Part 2- Core Vehicle Thermal Evaluation 

Conclusions & Recommendations 

Appendix 1 - Thermal Analysis 

Parametric Skin Temp vs Thickness vs TPS Thickness 

Appendix 2 - Fluid Conditioning Data 

Parametric Ground & Flight Conditioning Data 

Appendix 3 - Sensitivity Study 

Propellant Conditioning Variables 

Appendix 4 - TPS Data 

Spray Process on liT type Structures, Closeouts, Weights 

Appendix 5 • Freon Replacement 

Status of Freon replacement at MAF 

Appendix 6 - Ice & Liquid Air Formation 

Requirements, TPS, Ice/Frost Data, Saturn Data 

/JITA RTIN IW'ARIETTA 

NAD.007'" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
t.A 

--..J 

NAD.0072 

CV-STR-14H 

Part 1 

Core Element Thermal Evaluation 

• Aeroheating 

• Propellant Conditioning 

• Structural Design & 

Material Properties 

• TPS Manufacturing Issues 

• Operational & Safety Issues 

• Weight I Performance 

• Cost 

/JIIART/N /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
J: 

~ ,.. 

I 

a: 

~ 

en 

I 

> 0 tn 

... -::s 

en 

C1) 

a: 

t: 

·-

~ 

en 

-c 

... 

E 

0 

u. 

518 

(' 

..... g 

c:i 

< z 

'-" 
V\ 

Options - Forward Skirt 

Option 

Ref Configuration 

Option 1 

Heat Sink Design 

Option 2 

Nominal TPS thickness:.75" 

:o Option 3 

Nominal TPS thickness:1.0" 

Option 4 

Nominal TPS thickness=1.5" 

NAD.0072 

CV-STR-14H 

Rationale 

Point Of Departure 

( 

Defines Minimum Structure to 

Survive Heating Without TPS 

Partial Heat Sink I TPS Design 

Partial Heat Sink I TPS Design 

Reference Structure + TPS to 

protect from Aero heating affects 

IVIARTIN /JITARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Fwd Skirt- Configuration CV-STR-14H 

,...__96"~ 

.... .... 

- Fwd -- VI 

~ 

-... ·-.. . ._. 

NAD.007" 

( 

~ 

331" DIA 

, 

~ Fabricated Panel 

Typ 8 PI 

• Skin & Stringer Construction 

• ET type design 

• TPS Options assume sprayed 

TPS per ET processes 

IWARTIN !WAR/ETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( - ( 
Fwd Skirt- Results 

VI 

N 

-

/ 

' 

NAD.0072 

Ref Conflg 

Option 1 

Option 2 

Option 3 

Option 4 

TPS Structure - (Nom) t (In) 

None .135 

None .211 

.75" .157 

1.0" .149 

1.5" .136 

CV-STR-14H 

Structure TPS Total 

Wt ll (lbs) Wt ll (lbs) Wt ll (lbs) 

0 0 0 

+765 0 +765 

' 

+227 +159 +386 

+145 +213 +358 

+21 +319 +340 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Evaluation - Forward Skirt CV-STR-14H 

/ 

Ref Config Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 ' 

Bare Heats ink Nom TPS:.75 Nom TPS:1.0 Nom TPS:1.5 

Core Vehicle Aeroheatlng Additional TPS & Thermal Design causes Struc- Ref Design tural failure Required • Minimal Effort I 

I I 

I I 

ET Spray & Closeout Processes I 

Manufacturing Ref Ref No facility/tooling impacts 

U\ Significant Significant Ice worse than Ice same as ET Lesslcethan I 

~ : Operability Ice Formation Ice Formation ET@ L021/F @ L021/F ET@ L021/F 

@ L021/F @ L021/F Potential TPS damaae/reoalr rea'd ® KSC I 

Weight Metal Ref +765 +227 +145 +21 

Delta TPS - - +159 +213 +319 

(lbs} I, I Ref* +765* +386* I +358 +340 

Non-rec Ref 

Cost 

Ref TPS I Thermal Design = $120k 

Recurring Ref Ref Material Cost =$60k ~-~---- ------

CJ Least desireable impacts * Ice Wt Impact Unknown 

IWARTIN WTARIETTA 

NAD.Oo ... - MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

N 

~ 

Fwd Skirt Conclusions CV-STR-14H 

• Reference option cannot withstand Aeroheating environment 

• Lack of any TPS will cause significant Ice formation on the 

Reference option & Option 1 at the L02 Interface flange. 

Options 3 will perform in a manner similar to ET liT flange 

areas with respect to ice formation, while Options 2 & 4 will 

produce more & less Ice respectively than ET. 

Note that adding a two feet long 1.0"thlck TPS closeout (approx wt = 53 lbs) 

to the Reference & Option 1 Is possible to prevent local Ice formation but 

was not considered here • See Appendix 4 

• Adding 1.0" TPS saves approx 4001bs at very little additional 

cost compared to the Heatsink approach {Option 1) and 

eliminates Ice problem 

c- -OPtion 3 Recommended - ) 

IYTART/N WTARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
J: 

~ ,... 

I 

a: 

len 

I 

> 0 

tn 

...., -

:s 

tn 

(I) 

a: 

1::: -

524 
1..11 

N 

1..11 

Options - lntertank 

Option 

Ref Configuration 

Option 1 

Heat Sink Design 

Option 2 

Nominal TPS thickness:.75" 

CV-STR-14H 

Rationale 

Point Of Departure 

Defines Minimum Structure to 

Survive Heating Without TPS 

Partial Heat Sink I TPS Design 

Option 3 Partial Heat Sink I TPS Design 

Nominal TPS thickness=1.0" 

Option 4 Minimum Structure + TPS to 

Nominal TPS thickness=1.5" protect from Aeroheating affects 

I»ARTIN I»ARIETTA 

NA0.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
lntertank - Config CV-STR-14H 

~ 270.35 ... , Fabricated Panel 

~ Typ6PI 

M •• 

J I 

• ET liT type design 

VI 

~ II - . _.. 1'1 I • ~-33o.o 110 • All Panels similar to ET 

NAD.or-

( 

. 

• 

• TPS Options , assume 

sprayed TPS per ET 

processes \ 

Thrust Panel 

Typ 2 PI 

/111A RTIN /111ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ~ ( 
VI 

~ 

lntertank- Results CV-STR-14H 

TPS Structure Structure TPS Total - ' 

(Nom) t (In) Wt A (lbs) Wt A (lbs) Wt A (lbs) 

Ref Conflg None .230 0 0 0 

Option 1 None .222 -173 0 -173 

Option 2 .75" .192 -782 +348 -434 

Option 3 1.0" .186 -915 +464 -451 

Option 4 1.5" .181 -1009 +696 ·313 - ~~- --·-- -- ~-- -----·- -- ---- -

• .071 "stringer gage on Reference Is Inadequate, should be .090" min. 

but reference also has excess skin thickness. Reference assumed 

good based on some redistribution of mass from skins to stringers. 

• Results also Indicate that the thrust panels do not require TPS for 

Aeroheating or ASRM shock impingement. 

• Above results assume thrust panels are masked during TPS spray 

operations. 

JnARTIN lnARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Evaluation - lntertank CV-STR-14H 

/ 

Ref Config Option 1 Option 2 

"'\ 

Option 3 Option 4 

Bare Heatslnk Nom TPS:.75" Nom TPS:1.0" Nom TPS:1.5" 

Core Vehicle Ref Ref Additional TPS & Thermal Design 

Design Required • Minimal Effort 

I I 

Manufacturing Ref Ref ET Spray & Closeout Processes 

No facility/tooling Impacts 

Significant Ice Formation Ice worse than Ice same as ET Less Ice than ET 

@ LH2 & L02 1/Fs & ET@L02 & @L02& @L02& 

VI 

~I : Operability Liquid Air formation LH21/F'S LH21/Fs LH21/F's 

) 

on LH2Tank Potential TPS damage I repair req'd @ KSC 

Weight Metal 0 -173 -782 -915 -1009 

Delta TPS - - +348 +464 +696 

(lbs) I, 0* -173* -434* -451 -313 

Non-rec Ref Ref TPS I Thermal Design = $50k Cost 

Recurring Ref Ref Prod Ops & Material Cost = $366k -

CJ Least desireable impacts * Ice Wt Impact Unknown 

/JITART/N /JITARIETTA 

NAD.007~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
VI 

~ 

( 

liT Conclusions CV-STR-14H 

• All options survive Aeroheating environment 

• Lack of any TPS will cause significant Ice formation on the 

Reference & Option 1 at the L02 & LH2 Interface flanges. 

Option 3 will perform in a manner similar to ET liT flange 

areas with respect to ice formation, while Options 2 & 4 will 

produce more and less ice respectively than ET. 

Note that adding two 2 feet long X 1.0"thlck TPS closeouts {approx wt = 

531bs each) to the Reference & Option 1 is possible to prevent Ice 

formation but was not considered here • See Appendix 4 

• Option 3 saves approx 451 lbs at some additional cost 

compared to the Reference configuration with no ice problem. 

( Option 3 Recommended -) 

/J'1ARTIN /J'1ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
:I: 

lll::t 

,... 

I 

a: 

1-

UJ 

I 

> 0 

tn 

... -:::1 

tn 

Cl) 

a: 

~ 

c 

~ N 

0 

..J 

530 
VI 

w 

-

( ( 

Options- L02 Tank CV-STR-14H 

Option Rationale 

Ref Configuration 

.5" TPS on Domes 

Option 1 

Add .5" TPS to Barrel 

Option 2 

Add 1.0" TPS to Barrel 

Point Of Departure 

Adding TPS to Barrel 

Section Reduces Ice & 

May Improve Payload 

Adding 1.0"TPS to 

Barrel Section Reduces 

Ice Even More & May 

Improve Payload 

Note - Acreage TPS only , no flange or bracket Ice I frost closeouts 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
V\ 

U) 

N 

L02 Tank - Configuration CV-STR-14H 

I~ 504.26" _. I 

331"Dia 

1... 282.9& •I 

Reference Configuration 

- .5"TPS on Domes 

- Bare Barrel 

-5000 Gallons/Minute (GPM) 

- Helium Inject 

- 5 Hour Loading 

- 1 ET Vent Valve (Without 

Stroke Limiter) 

Options 1 & 2 add TPS to the Barrel 

/IITARTIN /Jt1ARIETTA 

NAD.007~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Ul 

I.JJ 

I.JJ 

( 

Results - Stress Analysis CV-STR-14H 

/ 

• Membrane is Sized by Proof Load for Weld Lands 

& Exceeds Heat Sink Design Requirements 

Lox Barrel Skin Gauge Skin Gauge for 

Ref Confia Heat Sink Only 

Fwd .170 .115 

Aft .215 .111 --- ---- ----- ~-- -·~__) 

Conclusion - L02 TPS Configuration is Independent of 

Membrane Aeroheating effects 

Jl.'tARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

~ 

~ 

L02 Results CV-STR-14H 

Payload penalty derivation 

Payload penalty derived by combining the following effects : 

- Payload reduction due to decreased LOX density , calculated 

as lost LOX density (lbs) X .075. The .075 factor is based on 

performance analysis experience , and a sensitivity analysis 

was performed against study results for this factor 

- Window penalty , due to launching off-optimum during hold 

- Additional TPS mass 

- Additional Vent Valve & Ducting mass 

WIA RTIIV /JITARIETTA 

NAD.007"' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
L02 Payload vs TPS CV-STR·-14H 

NLS Baseline Propellant Conditioning Parameters 

5000 Gpm, GHe Inject, 5 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-700 

, 

~ ·600 I 

IJI'O 

~as ·500 

0 

~ -400 a. 

~ -300 

~ - -200 as 

0 

1-

NAD.0072 

Opti9n 2 Option 1 Ref ~onfig 

Worst Payload Reduction 

1 Vent Valve - NLS Baseline 

2 Vent Valves 

.5" TPS __ 

Iced Bare 

.....- ...... 0 = ET density at end of replenish 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Vl 

\.IJ 

0\ 

L02 Ice I Frost Weight CV-STR-14H 

....... 

c 

--

= Q) 

c 

~ 

u 

-.c 

.. 

;; 

e 

IL 

-

8 

-

.05 ··i -----+-----1-+------+-----1 

.04 .... ····--·---··-·-·· ... ···-····-···-·----·~·····-····-·········-·········· .. ········'"·················"'·-·········································· 

.03 ... -·-·····----·--·-··•···· .... -·-----------.. ···-···-······-----···-········· .. ···-···············-···· ... 

.02 ~ --~,_+-----

.01 

0 

3 Assumes Ice/Frost 57 lb/ft 

for shallow build-up 

(See Appendix 6) 

500 

Weight of Ice/Frost (lbs) 

1000 

r • Even thin Ice/Frost build-up generates significant weight ~ 

• Actual build-up will depend on weather conditions and 

" variations in TPS thickness ~ 

IYTARTIN IYTARIETTA 

NAD.007? MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

t.U 

~ 

{ 

L02 Flight Results CV-STR-14H 

• Wall temperature & ullage pressure calculated for 

various TPS & skin gauges 

• TPS thickness & wall thickness do affect ullage pressure 

• Results meet NPSP requirements , but should be 

re-evaluated if autogenous flow rates are reduced 

in the future 

Conclusion - no impact on study results 

J»ART/N MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Evaluation - L02 Tank CV-STR-14H 

/ Ref Config Option 1 Option 2 

Bare .5" TPS 1.0" TPS 

Core Vehicle Design Ref Additional TPS Design Required 

Minimal Effort 

Manufacturing Ref ET Spray Processes 

Mods to Cell M required for L02 barrel spray 

Large Ice Much higher probability Ice Formation Operability Formation than ET of Ice formation 

same as ET 

~ Problem on anv alven dav 

oc 0 +324 

Performance (lbs) Ice Wt Impact Ice Wt Impact +195 

Unknown Unknown 

Non-rec Ref TPS Design $50K = $550k 

Cost Cell M Spray Fixture $500K 

Production Ops $29K 

Recurring Ref Material $60K = $89k 

'-. 

C1 Least desireable impacts 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

NAD.oor MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
L02 TPS Conclusions CV-STR-14H 

• All options satisfy known ground & flight requirements 

• Major uncertainties do exist regarding ice formation and 

possible retention during flight for configurations with less 

than the ET configuration of 1.0" nominal TPS (Ref & Option 1) 

• Reference option shows lowest cost approach , but does 

not address additional operational costs associated with Ice 

v. formation 

Vl 

\0 

• Option 2 provides the lowest risk approach with what was 

judged to be : 

- Relatively insignificant performance loss compared 

with Option 1 (-129 lbs) 

- Low cost increase 

( Option 2 Recommended ) 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
J: 

~ ,... 

I 

a: 

len 

I 

> (.) 

540 

~ 

8 ci "-""'" 

< z 
~ 

-

Options- LH2 Tank CV-STR-14H 

Option Rationale 

Ref Configuration Point Of Departure - .5" TPS on 

Domes & Barrels 

--

Option 2 1.0" TPS on Barrel Section 

1.0" TPS on Bbls Reduces Ice & May Improve Payload 

Note • Acreage TPS only , no flange or bracket ice I frost closeouts 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
LH2 - Ref Vehicle Config CV-STR-14H 

~--------1263.00" ... 1 

Vl 

~ 

Reference Configuration has 

.5"TPS on Domes & Barrels 

& 1 ET Vent Valve 

(without stroke limiter) 

1... 999.50" .. 

Option 1 has 1.0 TPS on the Barrels 

NAD.007? 

( ( 

331"01& 

IJ.'TARTIN n--TARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
LH2 Payload vs TPS CV-STR-14H 

5 Hour Min Load to Launch 

" ·1400 

.a 

.J 

I ·1200 

"D 

·1000 al 

0 

>. 

-800 al 

D. 

VI I -600 

.! ~ 

-400 

w 

ii 

0 

t1" BX - Option 1 

3 Vent Valves. 

2 Vent Valves .5" BX 

1 Vent Valve • \ NLS Baseline 

lnARTIN lnARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

t 

LH2 Ice I Frost Weight CV-STR-14H 

.05 

-.5 .04 •1 -•oooooooooouonuouoonooooo•oohoooo•••••••••••oouoooouooooo•noouono•••••••••••nounooooooouoouooouo...-.;oouoooouo .. oo .. oooooooooooouoooo•••••••••••••••••••••• 

-U) 

~ = .03 -· --·-···-·-·······-····--·····-···-··--·-·-·-······-····---··-···-·········-·····-··•···-········································ 

U I s .023 - 1 1 3 

1;; .02 Assumes Ice/Frost 57 lb/ft 

e for shallow build-up IL 8 .01 (See Appendix 6) 

-

0 500 : 1000 1500 Weight of Ice/Frost {lbs) 

761 

r • Even thin Ice/Frost build-up generates significant weight ~ 

• Only .023"of Ice required to negate 761 lbs of .5"TPS 

performance gain relative to Option 1 assuming TPS 

remains after launch (see previous TPS I Payload chart) 

• Actual build-up will depend on weather conditions and 

" variations in TPS thickness _.) 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

NAD.oo- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
LH2 Flight Results CV-STR-14H 

·Same as L02 flight results 

• Wall temperature & ullage pressure calculated for 

various TPS & skin gauges 

• TPS thickness & wall thickness do affect ullage pressure 

• Results meet NPSP requirements , but should be 

~ re-evaluated if autogenous flow rates are reduced 

in the future 

Conclusion - no impact on study results 

JnARTII';I /111ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Evaluation - LH2 Tank CV-STR-14H 

/ Ref Config Option 1 I 

.5" TPS 1.0" TPS 

Core Vehicle Design Ref No Impact 

Manufacturing Ref No Impact 

Much higher probability 

Operability than ET of Ice fonnatlon Ice Formation same as ET 

on any given day 

~ 0\ 

Performance (lbs) 0 -761 lbs 

Ice Wt Impact Unknown 

Non-rec Ref $0k 

Cost 

Recurring Ref Material = $60k 

\... 

C1 Least desireable impacts 

/J'1ARTIN /J'1ARIETTA 

NAD.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

LH2 Conclusions CV-STR-14H 

• Both options satisfy known ground & flight requirements 

• No significant cost difference between options , but the 

Reference option does not address additional operational 

costs associated with Ice formation 

• Major uncertainties do exist regarding ice formation and 

possible retention during flight for configurations with less 

U\ than the ET configuration of 1.0" nominal TPS. ~ 

• Option 1 shows a significant performace loss compared with 

the Reference. However, an ice build up of only .023" would 

negate the Reference advantage should the Ice remain after 

launch. 

( OPuo~ 1 Recommended--J 

/JI1ARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
CV-STR-14H 

Part 2 

Core Vehicle Thermal Protection 

~ 00 

hTARTIN /JirARIETTA 

NAD.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
U) 

l 

w 

~ > U) 

w 

0 

( ::1: Q. 

U) 

~ 0 

,.... w 

z I z a: ( 

~ 1-

en 

I 

> 0 

tn 

c 

0 

·-~ c( 

0 

C1) -(.) 

·- r- .., 

J: C1) 

- C1) (.) ~&:: en c > c D. ·- 0 0 C1) fn·- 1- Cl) 1.. ~~ ·-~ a1Q. - c. 1.. Cl) 0 .... Cl)Q -

::so C\1 0 C1) :t: LL ,.... 

0 a: 0 

\..-- ci ~ <( 

549 z 
VI 

~ 

Ref Configuration 

• Forward Skirt fails due 

to Aeroheatlng 

• Ice/Frost formation within 

2ft of L02 1/F 

CV-STR-14H 

• Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation 

within 2ft of LH21/F 

• Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation possible over 

entire LH2 barrel. Will occur with much greater 

frequency ~han on ET (ET has 1.0" TPS) 

r-- - - - -- - ~ 

• Significant Potential for 

Excessive Ice/Frost 

formation over entire 

L02 Barrel 

NAD.007" 

( 

\.. 

• Lowest Weight & Cost Core Option but: 

- Fails due to Aeroheating 

- No Estimate of Increased Weight & 

Cost for Ice & Liquid Air Formation ~ 

lnART/N ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
''Heatsink'' Vehicle CV-STR-14H 

• Ice/Frost formation within 

2ft of L021/F 

• Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation 

with in 2ft of LH2 1/F 

Ul 

Ul 

-

• Significant Potential for 

Excessive Ice/Frost 

formation over entire 

L02 Barrel 

NAD.0072 

• Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation possible over 

entire LH2 barrel. Will occur with much greater 

frequency ~han on ET (ET has 1.0" TPS) 

Compared with 

Ref Conflg 

Wt + 5921bs 

Cost - No Change 

• Low Cost Core Option (Same as Reference) 

• 592 lbs weight penalty to adjust for true 

Heatsink design 

• No Estimate of Increased Weight & 

Cost for Ice & Liquid Air Formation 

~ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

~ 

Full TPS Vehicle CV-STR-14H 

• Probability of Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation on 

Core is the same as ET to-day 

• No Performance, Operations or Safety uncertainty 

+3581bs ·1951bs ·4511bs +761 lbs 

,ll.!:\:!1!1 :\\'tt!:~::r•''~'·~~;;:!~,~~r:~!·~·,·~~·~;!~~·=•i:~;~•r:•• Itt•lli\IJII·\.11~ 

IJ~It)l SURFACES & .5" TPS ALL DOMES ~t~tll 

':~;~;i;l;~;~ :~~tit~:~:~:::~:};:::::;:: :=r~=~=~=::::f:=:=~===~::~m: :=~=~===~=~=~===~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= t i=~=t~=~=~:j:~=~===~t=}~ ~: ~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=t~=~=~=~=~=~; ~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=r· ~~~j{ · 

+2401bsfor 

,.__ __ :::~o....--__ __,__ 3 Flange TPS 

Closeouts 

Compared with 

Ref Config 

+ 7131bs 

+ $.72 M Non-Bee 

+ $1.1 M Recurring 

r -- ~ 

• Extra 121 lbs vs "Heatsink" option removes 

uncertainties due to Ice & Liquid Air 

• Cost Increase relatively low 

IJ.'JARTIN IJITARIETTA 

NAD.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Evaluation - Core Vehicle CV-STR-14H 

/ 

"""" Reference Heats Ink Full TPS 

(Nominal 1.0") 

Core Vehicle Design Fwd Skirt Falls Additional TPS 

due to Aeroheatlng Ref Design required 

Manufacturing Ref 

ET TPS Processes 

Ref Mods to Cell M required 

for L02 barrel sorav . 

Operability Significant potential for excessive No Ice Problem 

Ice I Frost & Liquid Air Formation (same as ET) 

~ 

>) Weight (lbs) 0 +592 +713 

Ice Wt Impact unknown 

Ice Wt Impact No Ice Problem 

unknown 

Non-rec Ref Ref = $.72M 

Cost 

Recurring Ref Ref = $1.1M 

Cl Least desireable impacts 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Conclusions CV-STR-14H 

• Reference Forward Skirt requires additional 

protection from Aeroheating. 

• Heatsink option solves Forward Skirt Aeroheating 

problem but not Ice I Frost & Liquid Air concerns. 

Core Tankage Weight increase 592 lbs. This option also 

is harder to re-design in response to increased heating 

rates than a TPS design (it is easier to spray more TPS 

~ than add more metal). 

• Neither of the above options includes increased 

Weight or Operations costs due to Ice formation. 

• 1.0"Nominal TPS + Flange closeouts adds an additional 

121 lbs compared with the Heatsink option , but deletes 

the Ice I Frost & Liquid Air problems. 

Cost Delta's are +$.72M Non-rec & +$1.1M Recurring 

lnARTIN JnARIETTA 

NAD.007~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 

'c 

. ( 
( 

Core Recommendations CV-STR-14H 

• Recommend the Full TPS option (1.0"nominal TPS) 

as lowest risk approach 

- Improves Launch Operations Significantly 

- Minimal Performance Penalty 

- Acreage Spraying of TPS is Relatively Inexpensive 

- Provides Margin for Changes in Environments 

:::: • Most TPS cost is in multiple ice frost I aeroheating 

Vl closeouts of cable tray & propellant line supports. 

Future efforts should be concentrated on tailoring 

requirements to avoid the need for TPS closeouts 

on these items. 

• Assess potential impact of De-orbit requirements on 

NLS TPS design. 

il'tARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

VI 

01 

NAD.007? 

( 

CV-STR-14H 

Appendices 

Appendix 1 - Thermal Analysis 

Parametric Skin Temp vs Thickness vs TPS Thickness 

Appendix 2- Fluid Conditioning Data 

Parametric Ground & Flight Conditioning Data 

Appendix 3 - Sensitivity Study 

Propellant Conditioning Variables 

Appendix 4 • TPS Data 

Spray Process on liT type Structures , Closeouts, Weights 

Appendix 5 - Freon Replacement 

Status of Freon replacement at MAE 

Appendix 6 - Ice & Llgujd Air Formation 

Requirements, TPS, Ice/Frost Data, Saturn Data 

/YTARTIN /YTARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
:I: 

~ ,... 

I 

a: 

len 

I 

> 0 

tn 

... -::J 

tn 

Cl) 

a: 

,.-tn 

>< 

·-

tn 

·-

-es-~ 

c (U 

Cl) c 

C.<( 

C.-

c(~ a.. 

Cl) 

.c 

1-

557 

~ 0 

0 

0 

c( 

z 
Assumptions CV-STR-14H 

• Nominal Remtech Prelim data modified to represent 

dispersed rates { 3 sigma ) 

• Thermal analyses of Fwd Skirt & lntertank assume an 

ET based factor to include stringer effects 

• Based upon heating rates , BX-250 can be used for 

~ domes & barrels { instead of CPR-488 on barrels & 

BX-250 on domes ) 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

NA0.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

Heating Rates CV-STR-14H 

• Rockwell data was received after work had begun using the Remtech data 

• The data were so similar that it was decided to continue using the 

Remtech data 

• Data shown are nominal rates 

Location 1 NLS 

Conflg 

Fwd Skirt 

& 

Remtech 

Body Heating Rate Heat Load 

Point (Btulft2 - sec) (Btu/ft2 ) 

~I L02Tank 

1.5 

HLLV 

BP7 

BP17 

.7852 

1.122 

74.51 

136.1 

lntertank 

LH2Tank 

1.5 

HLLV 

BPS 

BP17 

HLLV I BP18 

Shock 

1.5 

HLLV 

BP9 

BP19 

.7569 

1.122 

11.1 

.7298 

2.218 

71.61 

136.1 

667.2 

68.83 

205.3 

• Note that only the HLL V heating data were used in the subsequent 

evaluation section ( HLLV rates > 1.5 Rates) to define the reference vehicle 

IWART/N /WAR/ETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
1.5 Stage Bodypoints CV-STR-14H 

VI 

s 

NAD.007" 

( 

r--core Tankage 

7 

X 

8 

X 

9 

X 

Fwd Skirt L02 Tank lntertank LH2 Tank 

-1 

l 

• Body Point #7 used for both Fwd Skirt & L02 Tank 

I 

/JIIA RTIN /JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
HLLV Bodypoints CV-STR-14H 

~... Core Tankage .. I 

17 

X 

18 

19 

X 

~ Fwd Skirt L02 Tank lntertank LH2 Tank -

• Body Point #17 used for Fwd Skirt, L02 Tank and lntertank 

• Body Point #18 represents local heating on liT due to ASRM 

shock impingement 

( 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

~ 

Therm~l Analysis Runs CV-STR-14H 

Parameters Metal Thickness TPS Thickness 

(In) 

Location 1.5 HLLV 

Fwd Skirt - Stringer .053 .071 

-Skin .053 .063 

L02- Bare .1 ,.13,.16,.23,.3 .1 ,.156,.16,.23,.3 

-Insulated .1 & .3 .1 & .3 

lntertank - Stringer .071 .071 

-Skin ' .15 .15 

- Thrust Panels * - - LH2- Bare** - - -Insulated .1 & .3 .1 & .3 

Element Joints *** - - Note: Analysis results (curves) not available electronically 

* Massive enough not to require bulk TPS for Aero heating 

(In) 

0' .25' .50 

0' .25' .50 

0 

.25' .50 

0' .25' .50 

0' .25' .50 

-

- .25' .50' 1.0 

-

** Bare LH2 was not considered to be a viable option (excessive boil off) 

***No closeout of bolted 1/F's required due to aeroheating alone 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

~--

/JI7ARTIN /JI7ARIETTA 

NAD.007"' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( -

( 
:I: 

~ ,... 

I 

a: 

len 

I 

> 0 

cu 

.... 

cu 

c 

C) 

c 

C\1 

·-

c 

>< .2 

·-.... 

, ·-

c-c 

CD 5 

0 

, 

·-::s -

LL 

563 

~ 

8 

ci 

< z 
L02 Loading Assumptions CV-STR-14H 

• L02 Tank Volume 

- Overall Length 

- Dome Height 

- Total Mold Line Volume 

- Plus Feedllne Volume 

- Less Panel/Internals Volume 

- Less Ullage Volume (3.3o/o) 

- Total Liquid Volume 

2 

~ • Barrel Area = 1870 ft 

3 

• Bubble Volume = 40 ft 

= 504.26" 

= 124.375 

3 

= 20,982 ft 

:535 

:65 

:743 

= 20,709 ft3 

• Ambient Pressure= 14.65@ Vent Exit 

• Tlmeline = 5 hr. Min. Load and Replenish Plus 

3 hr. Max. Hold 

and = 2 hr. Min. Load and Replenish Plus 

6 hr. Max. Hold 

• GHe Inject = ET Nominal Rate 

• One ET Vent Valve CdA = 151n2 (Fully Open) 

• GHe Effects Assume Bubble Volume Not Refilled at End of Replenish Unless Stated on Plot 

• All Ice on Bare or Insulated Surfaces Falls Off a1 

Launch 

3 

• Nominal ET End of Replenish Density = 71.13 lb/ft 

• Icing Rate Follows 75°k of Liquid Level In Fastflll 

• Dome Heat Gains Per Current Thermal Data Book 

Nominal Cases 

NA0.007n 

( ( 

IWART/N /WAR/ETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
VI 

0\ 

VI 

LH2 Loading Assumptions CV-STR-14H 

• LH2 Liquid Volume 55,426 tt3 

- Based on ET Cryo Vented 

- Additional5 ft Barrel Volume 

• Ambient Pressure= 14.65@ Vent Exit 

• Nominal ET End of Replenish Density= 4.41 lb/ft3 

• Dome Heat Gains Per Current Thermal Data Book Nominal Cases 

• Tlmellne = 5 hr. Min. Load and Replenish Plus 

3 hr. Max. Hold 

and= 2 hr. Min. Load and Replenish Plus 

6 hr. Max. Hold 

• One ET Vent Valve CdA = 15 in 2 (Fully Open) 

• All Ice on Bare or Insulated Surfaces Falls Off at Launch 

IYIARTIIV MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
LH2 Propellant Conditioning CV-STR-14H 

• Effects Examined 

- Barrel TPS Thickness (.5" BX, 1.0" BX) 

- Vent Valve Quantity (1, 2 or 3 ET Vent Valves) 

- Loading Tlmellne (5 hrs. Min. and 2 hrs. Min.) 

• Criteria for Recommendation 

- Payload Increase or Decrease (Delta Payload) 

- Currently Independent of L02 Interaction 

lll 

~ 

• Payload Effects Based Conclusion 

- Reduced Fastflll Should Be Eliminated 

• 2 hr. Minimum Not Possible With Current ET Loading Procedure 

/JITARTIN JnARIETTA 

NAD.007"' MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

~ 

Flight CV-STR-14H 

Establish Expected Wall Temperature Ullage Pressure and NPSP 

Variations Due to Tank Skin and Insulation Thickness Changes 

• Baseline 

- NLS 1.5 Stage Trajectory 

- Pressurant Supply (Nominal- Steady State) 

L02 

3.0 Ibm/sec/engine 

700 Deg R 

LH2 

1.4 Ibm/sec/engine 

400 Deg R 

• SSME Start and Throttle Transients Modeled 

• Temperature Transients Due to Pressllne Also Included 

- Tank Sizes (Ambient) 

• 20631 ft L02 

• 55946 ft LH2 

- Analysis Does Not Consider Liquid Convection Currents 

/JI1A RT/N ll'1ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
v-

&1 

Flight Results CV-STR-14H 

• TPS Thickness and Wall Thickness Affects Ullage Pressure 

• Should Be Accounted for When Ullage Pressure Requirements Are Defined 

• TPS Thickness and Wall Thickness Affect NPSP 

• L02 

• 0 -1" TPS Thickness Range Is 1.5 °F (1.28 psi Vapor Pressure} 

• .1" • .3" Wall Thickness Range Is Negligible 

• Liquid Head Gives More Than Adequate Margin 

• LH2 

• .25" = 1" TPS Thickness Range Is .3 °F (.67 psi Vapor Pressure} 

• .1" • .3" Wall Thickness Range Is Negligible 

• Ullage Pressure Gives More Than Adequate Margin 

• Caveat: Reduction of Autogenous Flow Is Under Consideration • May Affect 

Results 

Note: Analysis results (curves} not available electronically 

IWART/N IWARIETTA 

NAD.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~PS ltrJ_p~ct OIJ Propulsion 

IJI 

$ 

NAD.0072 

• Propellant Conditioning 

- Propellant Density 

- Vent Valve Size 

- Replenish Time 

• Flight 

- Ullage Pressure 

- NPSP 

- Engine Start Requirements 

• Anti-geyser 

CV-STR-14H 

/nARTIN JnARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
:t: 

~ ,.. 

I 

a: 

len 

I 

> 0 

.... 

c 

ca --

(I)U) e.G) o_ 

a...c C.ca 

a..•t: 

M o ca 

>< .... > ·- tJ) p!lft 

-c ·- '-'' tnc 

CD-c c ~·­

cao c._ 

<( <( :t:: 

~-c ...,c 

·- 0 .:::0 

.... 

·-U) 

c 

(I) 

(/) 

570 
( 

L02 Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

Propellant Conditioning Variables 

• Several Variables were considered in addition to TPS Config 

-Fill Rate 1400 gpm (ET@ KSC) & 5000 gpm (NLS Spec) 

- GHe Inject (ET Rate) & no GHe Inject (NLS Baseline Uncertain) 

1 0°/o increase in GHe inject decreases payload 4.9 lbs 

~ - 1 , 2 or 3 ET Vent Valves ( Bare L02 Barrel Increases Boil Off) 

- 5 Hour (ET) or 2 Hour Loading (Possible Air Force 

Requirement) 

• Results are ·shown as Payload vs TPS & No of Vent Valves 

for variable Fill Rate , Loading Time & GHe Inject 

Note: Analysis results (curves) not available electronically 

/JI1ARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

Payload Factor Sensitivity · 

• Nominal Factor Is .064 lb Payload/lb Propellant With 6:1 Mixture Ratio 

• L02 Denslflcatlon Effects 

- Density at Optimum Hold Relatively Insensitive to Payload Factor Change 

- Delta Payload at Optimum Density Time Decreases 0.55 lb for 1 Oo/o Increase In 

Payload Factor (for 5000 GPM, .5" BX, 1 Vent Valve, GHe Inject, 5 Hour Minimum) 

VI 

t::l • LH2 Denslflcatlon Effects 

- Density at Optimum Hold Relatively Insensitive to Payload Factor Change 

- Delta Payload at Optimum Density Time Decreases 2.8 lb for 1 0°k Increase in 

Payload Factor (.5" BX, 1 Vent Valve, 2 Hour Minimum) 

IYTART/N /YTARIETTA 

NAD.007 , MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - . ( 
( 

L02 Payload vs TPS CV-STR-14H 

NLS Baseline Propellant Conditioning Parameters 

5000 Gpm, GHe Inject, 5 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-700 

., 

~ -600 

VI I 

~ i -500 

0 

~ -400 ~ 

~ -300 

~ 

- -200 as 

-

~ -100 

0 

NAD.0072 

Option 2 Option 1 Ref ~onfig 

Worst Payload Reduction 

1 Vent Valve - NLS Baseline 

2 Vent Valves 

1" TPS _ 

.5" TPS __ 

Iced Bare 

3 Vent Valves 

... - .... 0 = ET density at end of replenish 

~ART/N ~ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
L02 Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

No GHe Inject 

5000 Gpm, No GHe Inject, 5 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-700 

en -600 

.c 

...J 

I -500 

"'0 

~ "' 0 ~ ->-

a. "' 

... "' 

-Cb 

0 

- 1 Vent Valve 

"' ... 

0 

1- 0 

2 Vent Valves 

1" TPS 

3 Vent Valves 

Iced Bare 

J1.'1ARTIN IW'ARIETTA 

NAD.007~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
L02 Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

No GHe & Reduced Loading Time 

5000 Gpm, No GHe Inject, 2 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-1600 

rJ) -1400 

.c 

.....1 -1200 I 

"0 

"' -1000 0 

\A 

-...J -->-

\A -800 

a. "'

"' ....., -600 

--Q) -400 c 

-- -200 "' 1 Vent Valve ....., 

0 0 I- 2 Vent Valves 

3 Vent Valves 

/JitARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

...... 

0'\ 

L02 Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

Reduced Loading Time 

5000 Gpm, GHe Inject, 2 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-1600 

en -1400 

.c 

-: -1200 

"0 

CQ 

0 

-

>- CQ 

a. 

CQ 

....., 

-Cb 

0 

-CQ 

....., 

0 

...,_ 

1 Vent Valve 

2 Vent Valves 

3 Vent Valves 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

NAD.oo- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( - ( 
( 

L02 Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

ET Fill Rate & Short Fill Time 

1400 Gpm, No GHe Inject, 2 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-800 

U) -700 

.c 

.....1 -600 I 

t.A "C -500 

...J 

...J "' 0 

-

>- -400 

a. "'-300 "' ~ 

-Q) -200 

0 

- 1 Vent Valve -100 ~ "' 0 

1-- 0 

2 Vent Valves 

1" TPS 

. 5" TPS . 3 Vent Valves 

/JI1ARTIN /JI1AR/ETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Ul 

...., 

00 

L02 Sensitivity Analysis CV-STR-14H 

ET Fill Rate 

1400 Gpm, No GHe Inject, 5 Hr. Min. Load to Launch 

-800 

If) -700 

.c 

...J 

I 

'0 

"' 0 

->-

a. "'

"' ,fJ 

-Cb 

0 

- 1 Vent Valve 

"' ,fJ 

0 

1- 0 

2 Vent Valves 

1" TPS 

.5" TPS 3 Vent Valves 

IV/A RTIIV IVIARIETTA 

NAD.007 " MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
LH2 Payload vs TPS 

5 Hour Min Load to Launch 

-1400 

en 

~ -1200 

I 

'C 

CQ 

0 

-

>- CQ 

a.. 

CQ 

~ VI - ....,J Q) \() c 

NAD.0072 

-CQ 

~ 

0 

1-

CV-STR-14H 

1" BX - Option 1 

IJ-'7A RTIN IJ-'7ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
VI 

00 

0 

LH2 Payload vs TPS 

2 Hour Min Load to Launch 

-1400 

en 

.c 

...J -1200 

I 

'0 

"' -1000 

0 

-

>-

a. "' 

"' <fJ 

-Q) -400 

0 

-

"' -200 <fJ 

0 

t- 0 

2 Vent Valves 

1 Vent Valve 

NAO.oo--

( ( 

CV-STR-14H 

1" BX - Option 1 

5" BX 

' -NLS Baseline 

I»ARTIN I»ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
-

:J: 

~ ,.. 

I 

a: 

len 

I 

> (.) 

·-I-

:l 

~ 

(.) 

as 

.... 

:l 

c 

as 

<C:!: 

en 

D. 

1-

581 

§ 

ci 

<( 

z 
VI 

00 

N 

Spray Process CV-STR-14H 

• TPS Thickness on tank barrels is readily controlled 

with a tolerance of + .38" , - .00" 

• TPS spray thickness on skin I stringer type structures 

varies due to expanding foam masking some areas on 

the sides of stringers during successive spray gun 

passes 

• The following pages show four possible spray 

patterns which were considered for this study 

n--TARTIN n--TARIETTA 

NAD.OO""- MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
1..11 

00 

~ 

Stringer TPS Profile 

Option 1 

.5 + .38 

-.00 

5 +.38 

• -.00 

CV-STR-14H 

.5"min on skins 

gives .18 min 

on stringers 

.75" nominal TPS thickness used for mass properties 

JI.ITA RTIN JI.ITARIETTA 

NA0.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Stringer TPS Profile 

Option 2 

+.38 ~ .75 .. 00 

+.38 

.75 .. 00 

CV-STR-14H 

.75"min on skins 

gives .27 min on 

stringers 

1.0" nominal TPS thickness used for mass properties 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.007 " MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

00 

VI 

Stringer TPS Profile 

Option 3 

.5 Min + .2s 

-.00 

t 

1.4 + .38 

-.00 

1.4 +.38 

-.00 

CV-STR-14H 

1.4"min on skins 

required to give 

.5 min on stringers 

1.5" nominal TPS thickness used for mass properties 

I 

/J'1ARTIN /J'1ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Stringer TPS Profile 

VI 

00 

0'1 

Option 4 

.75 + .25 - •. 00 

1.7 + .38 

•. 00 

NAD.007'" 

( 

I 

1.7 + .38 

•. 00 

( 

CV-STR-14H 

1.7"min on skins 

required to give 

.75 min on stringers 

IWART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
VI 

~ 

Conclusions 

Option 1 

Option 2 

Option 3 

Option 4 

NAD.0072 

CV-STR-14H 

Viable option 

Viable option 

Viable option 

Excessive TPS thickness 

lnARTIN lnARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
:I: 

,... 

~ 

I 

a: 

It/) 

I 

> 0 

tn 

.... 

::::1 

0 

C1) 

t/) 

0 -

0 

tJ) 

0.. 

1-

588 

( 

.... 

8 

~ .._; 

z 
VI 

~ 

Ice I Liquid Air Suppression CV-STR-14H 

Assumes bare Fwd Skirt & liT 

Detail A 

.2S" Cryogenic 1/F --..j 1" 

j_ a·~__i r r I I I 1 I I 01 I .. I 1

1 I 1

0 1 11 : 1

1 .. 1

0 11 11 'I;' I;' I;' I I 110111 .."~; 11 '~;:"II :'I I 11 II;, 

11

;', 

11!11 11

; 11 

1

,:

111,:

110

11 11

,] 

T ~ 24" .... 1. 

Theoretical TPS Profile 

Detail A 

--.! + .38 Cryogenic 1/F I _i- o.o 

I:::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I 

1.... 24" .... 1. 

Manufacturing TPS Profile 

80 lbs per detail shown 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

NAD~0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Ul 

8 

Closeouts CV-STR-14H 

Flange Closeouts 

• Bolted joints between components 

• No TPS required for NLS heating rates 

• TPS is required for Ice/frost & liquid air prevention 

• No flange closeots used In Reference configuration 

• Three flange closeouts added to Full TPS option @ 

80 lbs per closeout 

Fwd Skirt & lntertank Closeouts 

• Definition of openings In the Reference Incomplete 

• Closeouts may be required for aeroheating 

• Design goal should be to minimize closeouts by 

designing heatslnk enclosures at each penetration 

• These closeouts not Included In current study 

Cable Tray & Propellant Line supports 

• Definition of supports in the Reference Incomplete 

• Design goal should be to minimize TPS closeouts for aeroheating 

• Supports on cryo-tankage will cause Ice/frost formation. 

·Requirements should try to accept Ice/frost formation to avoid 

costly TPS closeouts 

/'VTA RTIN /'VTARIETTA 

NAD.007, MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
TPS Weights CV-STR-14H 

VI 

10 

-

NAD,0072 

Reference * TPS MMMSS Confia 

Weights (LBS) NomTPS WT (LBS) ** 

Fwd Skirt 0 1.0" 

L02Tank 174.8 

-Domes .5" 

-Barrels 1.0" 

lntertank 12.6 1.0" 

LH2 Tank 825.7 

-Domes .5" 

-Barrels 1.0" 

~loseouts # 0 N/A 

* From MSFC Baseline Mass Properties 3/25/91 

** No contingency included 

# Flange or bolted joint closeouts 

213 

161 

353 

464 

161 

1322 

240 

' 

Note that L02 & LH2 results In CV-STR-14H contain performance 

related delta's In addition to TPS weight deltas. 

JnARTIN JnARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
J: 

~ ,.. 

I 

a: 

1-

C/) 

I 

> 0 

Lt) 

>< 

·-

-o 

c 

CD 

.., 

c 

CD 

E 

CD 

(.) 

as -

c. 

CD 

a: 

c 

0 

CD 

.... 

u. 

592 

C-!] 
( ( 

Freon Replacement CV-STR-14H 

• Montreal Protocol set worldwide Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) 

reduction goals in 1987 

• ET currently uses Freon 11 (a CFC) as a TPS blowing agent 

• EPA regulations (1988) set CFC production phase out schedule 

• Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 accelerated CFC phase out 

~ & established a Hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) phase out 

schedule 

- CFC production finishes 2000AD 

- HCFC production finishes 2015AD 

HCFC's also affect ozone layer but to a lesser degree than CFC's 

IJ.'JARTIN IJ.'JARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
v. 

Freon Replacement- Contd CV-STR-14H 

• ET (as an interim solution) will replace Freon 11 with Freon 141b 

(an HCFC) by 1998. Qualified foams using Freon 141b should be 

available by 1995. (An ALS developed foam SS-1228 from IPI is 

expected to replace BX-250 with a material cost reduction of 

approx 75°/o) 

• ET will pay all non-recurring costs 

'f. • Requirements to minimise air emissions I maximise reuse of 

HCFC's will cause an increase in recurring costs compared with 

current ET foam processing 

• Freon 141b replacement is TBD 

nrTARTIN nrTARIETTA 

NAD.007 "' 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
J: 

~ ,... 

I 

a: 

1-

en 

I 

> 0 

<D 

>< 

·-

-c 

c 

(I) 

c 

0 

·-..., 

ca 

E 

... 

0 

LL 

... 

·-<C 

-c 

·-

:::1 

c-

·-..J 

olJ 

(I) 

(.) -

595 

~ 0 

ci 

< z 
VI 

~ 

Ice & LiquidH Air Req'mts CV-STR-14H 

Level Ill SRD states that ice & liquid air formation is acceptable if 

not detrimental to vehicle systems I operation 

Ice Formation 

1.0 " TPS - ET Nominal - Ice does form & can scrub launch . 

. 5" TPS - Ice will form for more launches & will be 

thicker , ice formation still calculatable. 

Iced Bare - Much more difficult to predict ice formation , 

and thicker ice will form than for above cases. 

Very large uncertainties in ice density, conductivity, 

quantity & adhesion after launch. 

Is ASRM designed for ice debris? 

Safety /liquid air 

SOFI in contact with liquid air is a fire hazard. SOFI is self 

extinguishing in air. It is not self extinguishing if oxygen is above 

25o/o which happens if liquid air is present 

IJITARTIN /VIARIETTA 

NA0.007" MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
VI 

~ 

Ice Sensitivity CV-STR-14H 

• Saturn IB Experience Indicated Total of 6150 lbs. 

Adhered to Vehicle at Launch in One Case 

• Ice/Frost Density Varies from 6 thru 57 lb/ft~ Initial 

ice density is approx 57 lb/ft3 , decreasing as 

thickness increases 

• Ice/Frost Thermal Conductivity Varies About 50:1 

• Minimum Ice/Frost Accumulation Could Cause a 

Payload Penalty Greater Than Gain from Decreasing 

Barrel Insulation 

• Large Uncertainty Here Would Increase Required 

Flight Reserve 

JII1ARTIN JII1ARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
ua 

\0 

00 

Ice I Frost Weight CV-STR-14H 

.os··i ' 

:S .o4 ·j-···-L02. Tank-··-··················-························-·········· .. ····-······-······························· i I I ILH2 Tank 

! 

~ 

u 

.03 ••I --·-•••••••••-• ...... •••••••----···--··-·-,.·-••••••--.. •-· 

-.c 

.. 

u; .02 

e 

IL 

Cii u .01 -

3 Assumes Ice/Frost 57 lb/ft -llf---:lll_.~ ...... ,__ _ 

=-- for shallow build-up 

I I 

0 500 1000 1500 

Weight of Ice/Frost (lbs) 

• Even thin Ice/Frost build-up generates significant weight 

• Actual build-up will depend on weather conditions and 

variations in TPS thickness 

/JI1A RTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

NAD.OO"'~ MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
Ice Sensitivity CV-STR-14H 

• References 

- "Ice/Frost Formation on Cryogenic Propellant Tanks", 

TD-S&E-ASTN-XSG-10, January 1972, Chrysler Huntsville 

- Multiple Inter Company Correspondence, Chrysler Space 

Division, MAF, 10 October 1972 thru 7 February 1973, Saturn 18 

~ Ice/Frost Accumulation in Rain 

- "Saturn 18 Performance Effects of Ice/Frost Accumulation 

Prior to Launch", Chrysler Space Division, 18-AP-73-204, 

January 26, 1973 

n-JARTIN /JITARIETTA 

NAD.0072 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge 

5.2.1.4.2 TPS Reference Definition (#CV-STR-14-H) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Develop the recommended TPS definition for the Reference NLS Core Vehicle (acreage only) 

which will maintain propellant quality and protect vehicle structure/subsystems during pre-launch 

and ascent phases. 

Approach 

Part 1 - Evaluate thennal protection options individually for each major structural element of the 

core vehicle. 

Part 2- Evaluate thennal protection options for the entire Core Vehicle based on data generated 

in Part 1. Identify recommended changes to the Reference NLS Core Vehicle TPS. 

Part 2 Options Studied 

Reference Configuration; Heatsink Configuration; 1.0" TPS Configuration. 

Key Study Results 

Propellant conditioning during pre-launch and ascent is acceptable (with variations in performance) 

for all options. The Reference structure survives Aeroheating with the exception of the Forward 

Skirt. Modifying the Reference to provide a true Heatsink design adds mass to the Fwd Skirt & 

removes some from the Intenank. The L02 tank is adequate for heatsink as designed, while the 

LH2 tank must have some TPS to prevent excessive boil-off. 

The 1.0" TPS option was designed to avoid the ice & liquid air problem. Less than 1.0" of TPS 

on each component gives rise to a significant increase in the probability of ice & liquid air 

formation compared with ET. Ice & liquid air formation is hard to predict quantitatively. Ice may 

adhere after launch with subsequent performance(payload)impacts. There is a significant potential 

for launch delays due to ice. Ice debris & liquid air/flammability are safety issues. 

Conclusions 

The Heatsink option solves the problems with. the. Reference configuration. It shows that 592 lbs 

must be added to the Reference to develop a true Heatsink design, and this option still has 

additional unknown weight, cost, operability & safety impacts due to ice & liquid air formation. It 

is also harder to re-design for increased heating rates than an equivalent TPS design (easier to 

spray more TPS than add more metal). No cost increase is antisipated over the Reference option. 

There is an additional performance loss of 121lbs (vs the Heatsink) assuming 1.0" ofTPS on the 

entire Core. This avoids all the problems associated with ice & liquid air formation. The cost of 

applying acreage TPS is not felt to be prohibitive to avoid the above system level uncenainties I 

problems. Cost delta's are +$.72M Non-rec & +$1.1M Recurring. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise Cycle 0 baseline to incorporate 1.0" of TPS. 

600 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

REFERENCE CONFIGURATION • Forward Skirt fails due 

to Aeroheating 

• Significant Potential 

for Excessive 

Ice/Frost formation 

over entire L02 Barrel 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation 

within 2ft of LH2 I/F 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation possible 

over entire LH2 barrel. Will occur with much 

• Lowest Weiqht & Cost Core Option but: 

- Fwd Skirt fails due to Aeroheatinq 

- No Estimate of Increased Weiqht & 

Cost due to Ice & Liquid Air 

HEATSINK CONFIGURATION 

• Ice/Frost formation within 

2ft of L02 I/F 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation 

within 2ft of LH2 1/F 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation possible 

over entire LH2 barrel. Will occur with much 

!ET has 1.0• TPSl 

Compared with 

Bef Config 

Modified 

Heat sink 

Design 

Wt + 592 lbs 

Cost - No Chanqe 

• Low Cost Core Option (Same as Reference) 

.. 

• 592lbs weiqht added for true Heatsink desiqn 

for Excessive 

Ice/Frost formation 

over entire L02 Barrel 

• No Estimate of increased Weiqht & Cost for 

Ice & Liquid Air Formation 

1.0" TPS VEHICLE 

• Probability of Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation on 

Core is the same as ET to-day 

• No Performance, Operations or Safety uncertainty 

-~:~:~. :::::!:! :;:;::::: :;:::~::::::~:::::: ::!:!:!:!:!:::::;: :;:::::::::::;::: ~ :::::::::::::::::~: ;:::::::::::;: ~::::: l ~ 

j~;;;; 1. 0" TPS ALL CYLINDRICAL ··:!Q! ~:;:: SURFACES & • 5" Tl?S ALL DOMES .!8' . .. :::; +. ~:·.····!~······· ·~ · •.•.•.•.•.•.•.•. .. ·.·.·.·~·~···~::;·.~ •'•' ................. .•.•.•.•.•.•.•.• .. ~ _ .................. •.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•. ~ i •••••••••••••••••• ·.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.• ••••••••••••••• .. •.•.•.•.•.•.• •.•.•.' ~;·::: ;~ 

Compared with 

Ref Cgnf1g 

+ 713 lbs 

+ $.72 H Non-Rec 

+ $1.1 H Recurrinq 

3 Flange 

TPS Closeouts 

• Extra 121 lbs (vs Heatsink option) removes 

any uncertainties due to Ice & Liquid Air 

• Cost increase relatively low 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

601 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6.2.1.4.2 TPS Reference Definition (#CV-STR-14-H) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Develop the recommended TPS defmition for the Reference NLS Core Vehicle (acreage only) 

which will maintain propellant quality and protect vehicle structure/subsystems during pre-launch 

and ascent phases. 

Approach 

Part 1 - Evaluate thermal protection options individually for each major structural element of the 

core vehicle. 

Part 2- Evaluate thermal protection options for the entire Core Vehicle based on data generated 

in Part 1. Identify recommended changes to the Reference NLS Core Vehicle TPS. 

Part 2 Options Studied 

Reference Configuration; Heatsink Configuration; 1.0" TPS Configuration. 

Key Study Results 

Propellant conditioning during pre-launch and ascent is acceptable (with variations in performance) 

for all options. The Reference structure survives Aeroheating with the exception of the Forward 

Skin. Modifying the Reference to provide a true Heatsink design adds mass to the Fwd Skirt & 

removes some from the Intertank. The L02 tank is adequate for heatsink as designed, while the 

LH2 tank must have some TPS to prevent excessive boil-off. 

The 1.0" TPS option was designed to avoid the ice & liquid air problem. Less than 1.0" of TPS 

on each component gives rise to a significant increase in the probability of ice & liquid air 

formation compared with ET. Ice & liquid air fonnation is hard to predict quantitatively. Ice may 

adhere after launch with subsequent performance(payload)impacts. There is a significant potential 

for launch delays due to ice. Ice debris & liquid air/flammability are safety issues. 

Conclusions 

The Heatsink option solves the problems with.the.Reference configuration. It shows that 592 lbs 

must be added to the Reference to develop a true Heatsink design, and this option still has 

additional unknown weight, cost, operability & safety impacts due to ice & liquid air formation. It 

is also harder to re-design for increased heating rates than an equivalent TPS design (easier to 

spray more TPS than add more metal). No cost increase is antisipated over the Reference option. 

There is an additional performance loss of 121 lbs (vs the Heatsink) assuming 1.0" of TPS on the 

entire Core. This avoids all the problems associated with ice & liquid air formation. The cost of 

applying acreage TPS is not felt to be prohibitive to avoid the above system level uncertainties I 

problems. Cost delta's are +$.72M Non-rec & +$1.1M Recurring. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise Cycle 0 baseline to incorporate 1.0" of TPS. 

602 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Paclulge Page 2 

REFERENCE CONFIGURATION • Forward Skirt fails due 

to Aeroheating 

for Excessive 

Ice/Frost formation 

over entire L02 Barrel 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation 

within 2ft of LH2 I/F 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation possible 

over entire LH2 barrel. Will occur with much 

• Lowest Weight & Cost Core Option but: 

- Fwd Skirt fails due to Aeroheating 

- No Estimate of Increased Weight & 

Cost due to Ice & Liquid Air 

HEATSINK CONFIGURATION 

Modified 

Heatsink 

Design 

• Ice/Frost formation within 

+7 

• Significant Potential 

for Excessive 

Ice/Frost formation 

over entire L02 Barrel 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation 

within 2ft of LH2 I/F 

• Ice/Frost ' Liquid Air formation possible 

over entire LB2 barrel. Will occur with much 

(ET has 1.0" TPSI 

Compared with 

Ref Config 

Wt + 592 lbs 

Cost - No Change 

• Low Cost Core Option (Same as Reference) 

• 592lbs weight added for true Heatsink design 

• No Estimate of increased Weight & Cost for 

Ice & Liquid Air Formation 

1.0" TPS VEHICLE 

3 Flange 

TPS Closeouts 

• Probability of Ice/Frost & Liquid Air formation on 

Core is the same as ET to-day 

• No Performance, Operations or Safety uncertainty 

Compared with 

Ref Config 

+ 713 lbs 

+ $.72 M Non-Rec 

+ $1.1 M Recurring 

• Extra 121 lbs (vs Heatsink option) removes 

any uncertainties due to Ice & Liquid Air 

• Cost increase relatively low 

Additional Information 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

603 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

604 
~ 

~ 

E 

'"0 

::0 

rfl 

(} 

!1"1 

0 

:c:: 

~) 

'"'C 

~ "'' rr; 

~ I .. 

l .. . , 

~-

=" 

2 

0 

--! 

~ 

r 

~ 0 

§ 

CV-STR-16A 

Core Tankage 

Manufacturing Plan 

Prepared By: Robert J. Houston 

(504) 257-1510 

George R. Charron 

(504) 257-2917 

Approved By: Donald F. Lumley 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8,1992 

' MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

( 

Coretank - Manufacturing Plan 

Objective 

To Develop a Core Tankage Manufacturing, Tooling and Facilities Plan 

that Utilizes ET Tooling, Facilities and Infrastructure 

Groundrules 

• Build at Michoud Using ET Tooling & Facilities 

• NLS Production Requirement up to 13/yr 

• ET Production Requirement 8/yr 

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~vsTEMS 

( ( 
( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - lntertank 

§~ 

180° FRAMES 

T06A7395 

TACK 

T06A7391 

ASSEMBLY 

~ 

~ 

T06A7398 

RIVET 

T06A7424 

SYSTEMS INSTALL 

BRACKETS 

--

T06A7399 

FINISH/INSPECT 

T25L7272 

SOFI APPLY 

&TRIM 

TOCELLL 

L02/INTERTANK 

MATE 

--

/IIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - Forward Skirt 

T06AXXXX 

SKIRT TACK& -- ASSEMBLY ........ ~-

T06A7398 

RIVET 

T06AXXXX 

SYSTEMS INSTALL 

BRACKETS 

( 

T25L7272 

SOFI APPLY 

&TRIM 

TO CELLL 

L02/INTERTANK 

MATE 

--

MARTIN MARIE'T'T'A 

MANNED SPACE -vsTEMS 

( 
~ 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - Domes 

T01 A5001 .. T01 A6191 .. T01 A5132 ... 

GORE/GORE CHORD/QUARTER CHORD/ QUARTER 

TRIM/WELD PANEL TRIM PANEL WELD 

T01A5087 

HALF DOME 

TRIM& WELD 

TO ___ ....., T02A5003/ 

T01A5103 

DOME BODY 

TRIM&WELD 

T01A5005 

DOME BODY 

TO CAP 

TRIM& WELD 

T02A5083 

X-RAY 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
0\ 

-

0 

( 

Coretank Manufacturing flow_- Dome~ (Contd) 

T02A50031 

T02A5083 .. 

X-RAY 

LH2FWDDOME 

ASSEMBLY 

T02A7016 

ASSEMBLY 

LH2 AFT DOME & DRILL 

ASSEMBLy I DOME MECH I 

ASSEMBLY 

&DRILL 

L02FWDDOME 

ASSEMBLY 

L02AFTDOME 

ASSEMBLY T02A7017 

----.. ~ ASSEMBLY 

& DRILL 

t 

L02ANTI 

VORTEX 

ASSEMBLY 

( 

--

-

--

--

---1 ... ~ fgsAsoso ~~ LH2TANK tl~ WELD 2nd POS 

T02A6166 

MACHINE 

T02A6166 

MACHINE 

TO 

LH2 TANK SHORT 

.. BARREL I AFT DOME 

SUB ASSY WELD 

.. 

TO 

L02TANK 

---1 .. ~ MAJOR WELD 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~vsTEMS 

( 
0\ 

..... 

..... 

( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - Rings 

STA 3377,3624 AND 3871 RING ASSEMBLIES 

T04A5017 

WELD 

T08A7362 

ASSEMBLY 

STA 2711.3, and 4058 RING ASSEMBLIES 

T04A5017 

WELD 

-- T08A6005 

MACHINE 

-- TOT05A5019 

-- LH2 TANK WELD 

T08A6005 

MACHINE 

TO L02 TANK WELD 

--LH2 TANK SHORT 

BARREL I AFT DOME 

SUB ASSY WELD IN L02 

TANK WELD TOOL 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
0\ 

-

N 

( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - L02 Barrel 

(2) 10 ft + BAI:IRELS 

T04A5015 

TRIM&WELD 

.. 

T04A5102 

X-RAY 

T40S0343 

ROLL RING INSTALL 

( 

~ 

T03A6165 

TRIM 

TO_ 

L02TANK - WELD 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~.'STEMS 

( 
0\ 

1M 

-

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - L02 Major Weld 

BARRELS 

RING 

SLOSH BAFFLES 

DOMES 

J 

TOSAXXXX 

L02TANK 

ASSY&WELD 

TOSAXXXX ... - MECHANICAL -.. 

CELLF 

PROOF TEST 

TOSAXXXX 

POST PROOF 

X-RAY 

TO 

CELLP 

--

? 

IWARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
0\ 

-

~ 

( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - LH2 Barrels 

AFT BARREL 

T04A5015 

TRIM, WELD & X-RAY 

T04A5015 

TRIM, WELD & X-RAY 

FORWARD BARREL 

:k.:(';h \ ••... <I"-" .. ,,_ .. ~~f..'·'"·~. 

> >:;:~! ~?.;/'" -·•: .~.:'!~ "(:'~'//;~~'·f'il .',.;.,c ,-.):c.c\ (/·, .·~~ • • >" '·'S.:'<(',•il ~~, < ·'I""'·.;/' ~~-'?.?: ·~ ,--;J .. . >-~~ \ ' ... .:;/~ 

}t:~E~!:;'? ... -~ .. ... ·~·),,·~"" =---...- . .. -

UCII-\a\1 16 

TRIM&WELD 

T40S0343 

ROLL RING INSrLL 

T04A5102 

X-RAY 

T04A7086 

FRAME INSTALL 

-

T04A7086 T03A6165 

FRAME INSTALL TRIM 

TOTOi:5019 - LH2 TANK WELD 

- TOLH2TANK 

SHORT BARREL I 

AFT DOME SUB 

ASSYWELD 

~ TOT05A5019 

--~--~~-L~ ~ .. 

LH2 TANK WELD 

( 

T04A7003 

FRAME INSTALL 

T03A6165 

TRIM 

ltlfARTIN ltlfARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE 'STEMS 
( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - LH2 Major Weld 

5 FT BARREL 

4058 TEE RING 

L02 TANK ' WELIJ 

TOOL 

RING TO BARRE 

WELD 

LH2FORWARD 

~ DOME 

VI 

T05A5068 

WELD 

4058 TEE FRAME DETS 

t 

-- L02TANK WEL 

~ T ~~ ~ ITOOL ~PI AFT DOME TO 

T02A7436 

INSTALL 4058 FRAME 

MACHINE & DRILL 

BUILDING 451 

PROOF TEST 

NO LOADSPRESSURE ONLY 

BARREL WELD 

• 

T05A5019 

ASSEMBLY, 

TRIM&WELD 

TOSA7077 

POST PROOF 

X-RAY 

TO CELL P 

--

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
0\ 

-

0\ 

( 

Coretank Manufacturing Flow - Clean, TPS & Stack 

L02TANK 

/ 

LH2TANK 

CELLP 

EXTERNAL CLEAN 

AND PRIME 

CELLN 

CELLM 

APPLYTPS .. 

CELLL 

FWD SKIRT/L02 ~I TANKIINTERTAN 

SPLICE 

CELLE 

INTERNAL CLEAN TO 

CORE STAGE 

ASSEMBLY 

CELLE 

INTERNAL CLEAN 

( 

• 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE QVSTEMS 

( 
-

--

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.1.4.3 Manufacturing Plan (CV-STR-16A) 

Objective 

Develop a manufacturing plan for production of three core tanks for the Heavy Lift Launch 

Vehicle(lll.LV) and ten Stage-and-a-Half Vehicles per year concurrent with an NSTS External 

Tank production rate of eight per year. 

Approach 

(1) Develop manufacturing sequence flow for core tankage design. 

(2) Review ET major tooling capacities to determine new tooling requirements 

(3) Defme Tool and Facilities requirements(5.2.1.4.4 & 5.2.1.4.5) 

Groundrules and Assumptions 

Since the combined production rate for the NLS and ET assemblies (21) will not exceed the twenty 

four per year production rate capability of the tooling and facilities at MAF, it is assumed there will 

be no overall schedule impact 

Assume manufacture of the launch vehicle will utilize current ET manufacturing technologies and 

established processes. 

All construction will be at MAF using detail pans and sub-assemblies sub-contracted to outside 

suppliers. 

Key Study Results 

Manufacturing processes for the Core Tankage from receipt of the detail pans and assemblies 

through to the vertical assembly of the Liquid Hydrogen(LH2) Tank, Intertank(IT), Liquid 

Oxygen(L02) Tank and the Forward Skin, in the MAF Vertical Assembly Building(V AB) have 

been assessed. Subsequent assembly and test and checkout operations are addressed in a separate 

study. Manufacturing flow diagrams have been prepared to identify the core tankage major 

production activities through venical stacking in the V AB. 

All mechanically fastened subassembly operations maximize use of ET fixturing, and the existing 

large 'C'- frame riveter for automatic rivet installation. 

The LH2 and L02 tank barrel sequence flows are similar to ET and use ET fixtures, tooling, NDE 

facilities etc. The procured barrel skin panels, will be cleaned in the existing MAF facility prior to 

welding. Weld assembly, trim, and frame installation is to be accomplished on ET tooling and will 

utilize ET roll rings and roll ring installation tooling. 

H & J Rings will be procured, machined, stretched formed, aged and trimmed in 90° sections. 

These sections will be welded together to form the 36()0 rings, machined and drilled, etc. in the ET 

ring tools. 

617 
' 

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Dome fabrication will use the ET dome weld tooling; new adaptive tools will be required for the 

new design dome caps and fittings. A new tool is required for Ui2 Tank Aft Dome mechanical 

installations. 

New tooling will be required for the assembly of the Anti vonex and Slosh Baffle assemblies and 

will be located in the MAP Bldg 103. Elements of these assemblies will be procured from outside 

suppliers as preassembled subassemblies. 

LH2 and L02 tank assembly sequence will be similar to the ET process using existing tooling and 

facilities. The flow differs from ET only in that a new tool is required for L02 tank major weld 

operations. Internal and external clean and prime operations will use the ET LH2 tank processing 

cells, except that the L02 tank will be processed through the ET LH2 tank processing Cell P for 

external clean and prime; 1PS operations will be performed in re-activated Cells M & N. 

Intertank: assembly will use ET Intcrtank tooling. 

Forward Skin major assembly will use a dedicated assembly ftxture; subassembly activities will 

use ET Intertank tooling. The Skirt/L02 tank interface bolt hole pattern will be identical to ET 

L02/IT/LH2 Tank interface pattern and will use drill plates mastered from existing ET tooling. 

Core Tankage assembly is similar to the ET except Forward Skirt/L02 Tank/Intertank stack will be 

in Cell L. The assembly will be transferred to Cell A for stacking to the LH2 Tank and 1PS 

closeout of the lntertank/LH2 tank interface. The completed stack will be lowered to the horizontal 

position, and processed according to plans specified in lA CO studies. 

Conclusions 

The NLS Core Tankage Manufactming Plan has been developed for total assembly at the NASA -

Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF). The plan makes effective use of manufacturing areas, existing 

tooling and facility capacities, and infrastructure on a non-interference basis with the on-going 

External Tank (ET) project 

Study Recommendations 

Existing NLS program groundrule for building NLS Core Tankage using ET tooling and MAF 

facilities should be maintained. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

618 
-

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2.1.4.3 Manufacturing Plan (CV-STR-16A) 

Objective 

Develop a manufacturing plan for production of three core tanks for the Heavy Lift Launch 

Vehicle(HLLV) and ten Stage-and-a-Half Vehicles per year concurrent with an NSTS External 

Tank production rate of eight per year. 

Approach 

( 1) Develop manufacturing sequence flow for core tankage design. 

(2) Review ET major tooling capacities to determine new tooling requirements 

(3) Define Tool and Facilities requirements(6.2.1.4.4 & 6.2.1.4.5) 

Groundrules and Assumptions 

Since the combined production rate for the NLS and ET assemblies (21) will not exceed the twenty 

four per year production rate capability of the tooling and facilities at MAF, it is assumed there will 

be no overall schedule impact 

Assume manufacture of the launch vehicle will utilize current ET manufacturing technologies and 

established processes. 

All construction will be at MAF using detail pans and sub-assemblies sub-contracted to outside 

suppliers. 

Key Study Results 

Manufacturing processes for the Core Tankage from receipt of the detail pans and assemblies 

through to the vertical assembly of the Liquid Hydrogen(UI2) Tank, lntertank(IT), Liquid 

Oxygen(L02) Tank and the Forward Skin, in the MAF Vertical Assembly Building(VAB) have 

been assessed. Subsequent assembly and test and checkout operations are addressed in a separate 

study. Manufacturing flow diagrams have been prepared to identify the core tankage major 

production activities through vertical stacking in the V AB. 

All mechanically fastened subassembly operations maximize use of ET fix turing, and the existing 

large 'C'- frame riveter for automatic rivet installation. 

The LH2 and L02 tank barrel sequence flows are similar to ET and use ET fixtures, tooling, NDE 

facilities etc. The procured barrel skin panels, will be cleaned in the existing MAF facility prior to 

welding. Weld assembly, trim, and frame installation is to be accomplished on ET tooling and will 

utilize ET roll rings and roll ring installation tooling. 

H & J Rings will be procured, machined, stretched formed, aged and trimmed in 90° sections. 

These sections will be welded together to form the 36()0 rings, machined and drilled, etc. in the ET 

ring tools. 

619 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

Dome fabrication will use the ET dome weld tooling; new adaptive tools will be required for the 

new design dome caps and fittings. A new tool is required for LH2 Tank Aft Dome mechanical 

installations. 

New tooling will be required for the assembly of the Anti vortex and Slosh Baffle assemblies and 

will be located in the MAF Bldg 103. Elements of these assemblies will be procured from outside 

suppliers as preassembled subassemblies. 

LH2 and L02 tank assembly sequence will be similar to the ET process using existing tooling and 

facilities. The flow differs from ET only in that a new tool is required for L02 tank major weld 

operations. Internal and external clean and prime operations will use the ET LH2 tank processing 

cells, except that the L02 tank will be processed through the ET LH2 tank processing Cell P for 

external clean and prime; TPS operations will be performed in re-activated Cells M & N. 

lntenank assembly will use ET Intertank tooling. 

Forward Skirt major assembly will use a dedicated assembly fixture; subassembly activities will 

use ET Intenank tooling. The Skirt/L02 tank interface bolt hole pattern will be identical to ET 

L02/IT/LH2 Tank interface pattern and will use drill plates mastered from existing ET tooling. 

Core Tankage assembly is similar to the ET except Forward Skirt/L02 Tank/lntertank stack will be 

in Cell L. The assembly will be transferred to Cell A for stacking to the LH2 Tank and TPS 

closeout of the lntertank/LH2 tank interface. The completed stack will be lowered to the horizontal 

position, and processed according to plans specified in IACO studies. 

Conclusions 

The NLS Core Tankage Manufacturing Plan has been developed for total assembly at the NASA -

Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF). The plan makes effective use of manufacturing areas, existing 

tooling and facility capacities, and infrastructure on a non-interference basis with the on-going 

External Tank (E1) project 

Study Recommendations 

Existing NLS program groundrule for building NLS Core Tankage using ET tooling and MAF 

facilities should be maintained. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results 

620 
~ 

-

RH9',1'2/09 

( 

CV-STR-168 

Core Tankage 

Facilities Plan 

( 

Prepared By: Robert J. Houston 

(504) 257-1510 

George R. Charron 

(504) 257-2917 

Approved By: Donald F. Lumley 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8,1992 

,._,A RTIN ,._,ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

RH 91/1· 

( 

Core Tankage - Facilities Plan 

Objective 

To Identify the Facilities Locations and Modifications Necessary to 

Meet the Requirements Specified in the Tooling Plan CV-STR-16C and 

the Flows shown in the Manufacturing Plan CV-STR-16A Maximizing 

Utilization of the Existing External Tank Facilities and Infrastructure 

Groundrules 

• Build at Michoud Using ET Tooling & Facilities 

• NLS Production Requirement up to 13/yr 

• ET Production Requirement 8/yr 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( . ( 
( ( ( 

Core Tankage Modifications (1 03 & 420) 

e 

LH2Tank 

Mechanical 

• Foundation Mods 

• Floor Mods 

• Utilities 

Final Assembly 

• Crane Coverage 

• Floor Mods 

• Foundation Mods 

Fwd Skirt IPS 

& Systems 

• Foundation Mods 

• Utilities 

• Enclosure 

•HVAC 

New L02 

MaJor Weld 

• Floor Mods 

• Utilities 

RH 9 i /12i09 

Test & Checkout 

Cells 1 & 2 

• Crane Coverage 

• Floor Mods 

• Extend Cells1 0 ft 

• Apron Mods 

L02/LH2 PostProof Inspection 

• Foundations 

• Utilities 

Building 1 03 

Slosh & Anti-Vortex 

Baffle Assembly 

• Relocate AI-Li Crib 

• Floor Mods & Utilities 

LH2 Aft Dome 

Mechanical 

• Foundation Mods 

• Utility Mods 

Forward Skirts 

& Frames 

• Crane Coverage 

• Foundations 

• Utilities 

• Relocate Tool 

Fabrication (1 03) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

RH 91/1· 

( 

Core Tankage Modifications (11 0/114/131) 

L02/IT to LH2 Stack 

Cell A 

• Access Platforms 

• Closeout Room Mods 

•HVAC 

Ptlme & SOFI 

L02 Domes 

Cell M 

• Rotation Foundation 

• Utilities 

•HVACMods 

• Proportioner Room 

• Control Room 

[- ., 

SOFI LH2 Tanks 

Cell N 

• Utilities 

• HVAC Mods 

• Proportioner Room 

• Control Room 

LH2/L02 

Internal Clean 

Cell E 

• Cell Extension 

• New L02 Probe 

• Platforms 

( 

L02 External Clean 

Cell p 

• Rotation Foundation 

• Utilities 

• Mod Spray Boom 

L02 Proof Test 

Cell E 

• Platforms 

• Tank Fill Lines 

Fwd Skirt. L02 Tank 

& lntertank Stack 

Cell L 

• Platforms 

• Utilities 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ""YSTEMS 

( 
~ VI 

Core Tankage Modifications - 1 03 

Requirement 

• Rivet L02 & LH2 frames 

• Rivet forward skirt frames 

• Assemble forward skirts 

Tooling Effort 

• New frame tables 

• New skirt assembly fixture 

• New sustainer assembly fixture 

Work Scope 

• Frame table utilities 

• Assembly fixtures foundations & utilities 

Note: 

• The following work scope has been identified 

to the Core Tankage mod cost 

- 5 ton crane & crossover 

- Relocate tooling raw material, master 

model, tool inspection & tool fabrication 

-Reconfigure bulk commodities & prod. control 

-Reconfigure miscellaneous cribs 

M N P a 

4 r-· - n t r - - - --- - - 1 

1 

~ s::7 Z ~ ©1 I Existing I n n II d 0 I Vertical 

I a ( a a I a r~l @I . Riveting 

1 « « « « « « () , System s, . 

I 

7 

8 

9 

10 ------ --

11 • Bulk 

commodities 

12 I • 

13 I 0 

Forward skirt 

Off-Load 

Dolly 

rd skirt 

assembly 

Frame Assy Fixt 

Frame Off-Load 

Stands Tables 

M&P lab crib 

MRB crib 

Facilities T&H crib 

Tool electrical 

&SCC 

AI-Li & 

engr crib 

( 

ltiiARTIN MARIETTA 

RH 91/12/09 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage Modifications - 103 

Requirement 

• L02/LH2 major weld 

• L02/LH2 mechanical installations 

• L02/LH2 post-proof inspection 

Tooling Effort 

• Relocate LH2 mechanical installation T05A5069 

• New L02 major weld fixture T05AXXXX 

• Remove/surplus L02 rotation fixture T05A7419 

• Relocate two post-proof T05A70n's 

Work Scope 0\ 

~ • Floor & utility modifications for T05AXXX 

• Floor/foundation & utility mods for T05A5069 

• Foundation & utility mods for T05A 7077's 

RH 91/1~ 

( ( 

C D E F G 

1 ~D 0 ~ - - -1- - I I I 

,------------, 

I --T0 ~;~~ T05A7419 : 

2 I ..__ -•- - - _.. - - - __._ - - - ~ 

3 

4] 

51 

T05A5069 

I 

T05A7077 I 

location 

1 

• T05A5019 • 

Thru-Aisle 

I ·~;~;~::f?:~§~~:~ - 1Ii'II8fi:m:t''OSA70Tl ~ 

Currently stored 

in Building 303 

I 

r - - - - - ·- - - -· - - - -, 

I MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ..... VSTEIVIS 

( 
( ( 

Core Tankage Modifications - 103 

~ 

Requirement 

• Aft skirt bracket installation 

• Aft skirt SOFI 

• Aft skirt SOFI trim 

• Aft skirt systems installation 

Tooling Effort 

• Modify T06A7272 

- Bracket installation 

- SOFI spray 

• New trim & systems installation fixture 

Work Scope 

• T06A7272 enclosure 

- Partial walls & door 

- HVAC & utilities 

• Trim & systems installation fixture 

- Floor modifications 

- Platform HVAC & utilities 

RH 9 i/ i2/09 

A B C Existing 

4 T06A7386/7424 

Final Assembly 4 

5 

6 l ,A::\:~::t:''l't''~'''l f J 

T06A7272 

enclosure 

Trim & systems 

installation fixture 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage Modifications - 103 

Reguirement 

• LH2 aft dome mechanical 

Tooling Effort 

• Remove existing T02A7018 

• New LH2 aft dome mechanical tool 

Work Scope 

• Modify tool foundation/floor 

• Modify utilities 

~ 00 

RH 91/11 

( ( 

a 2 . 

3 . 

4 

Dome Mechanical Area 

R 

1 e® 

1 ••• 

I 0 

L--- -·-

Thru-Aisle 

ASRMArea 

s 

.... 

-New LH2 aft dome 

mechanical tool 

T02A7019 

IIIIARTIN IIIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE RVSTEMS 

( 
'-, 

Core Tankage Modifications - 103 

Requirement 

• L02 slosh baffle 

• L02/LH2 anti-vortex baffles 

Tooling Effort 

• New L02 slosh baffle fixture 

• New L02 slosh baffle offload 

• New L02/LH2 anti-vortex baffles fixture 

Work Scope 

• Relocate AI-Li crib 

• Provide utilities 

~ 

RH 9 i/ i 2109 

WSA Inventory Control Slosh baffle 

assembly 

Anti-vortex baffle 

fixture 

0~ 0 

Thru-Aisle 

Slosh baffle 

assembly offload 

IYIARTIN IYIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage Modifications - Cell F 

Requirement 

• Hydrostatic proof test L02 tanks 

Tooling Effort 

• Weld access platforms/ladders 

• Drying duct extensions 

• Drain line modification 

Work Scope 

• Tilt-up dome access platforms 

• Remove/modify 86 ft EL platform 

• Tilt-up crane access platforms 

~ • Standpipe modifications. 

RH 91/1 t 

( 

Elevations 

209 

198 

91 

81/83 

65/67 

56 

49 

VAB (110) Cell F 

75 ton Colby 

75 ton Ederer 

ET access platforms 

in up position 

New L02 dome access platforms 

in down position@ EL 81'/83' 

New tilt-up crane hook access 

platforms @ EL 65'/67' 

(Two@ 180°) 

Ground level 26 1 

" 

1 1 1 1 1 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE "VSTEMS 

( 
( ( 

Core Tankage Modifications - Cell E 

Reguirement 

• Internal clean LH2 & L02 tanks 

Tooling Effort 

• Drying duct extensions 

• Bottom washer modifications 

Work Scope 

• 5 ft stretch No Sump 

- Tilt-up L02 dome & crane access platforms 

-New L02 probe 

• 5 ft stretch with Sump 

$ - Lengthen cell & drop door 

- - Lower drop door sill 

- Tilt-up LH2 crane access platforms 

- New LH2 probe 

- ______...___ ----, [ , 

Elevations II [5 [ 175 ton Colby 

209 

~er Raised cell 

VAB (110) Cell E 

100 ro~&l~ 

Cell lid in 

up position 

~ : : 

t : ' . \. ./ ' .. 126 F i'> J --~ 

121 

103 

86 

69 

59/61 

42/44 

36 

New LH2 crane access 

platforms in down 

position @ EL 1 08' 

(Two@ 180°) 

ET access platforms 

in up position 

New L02 dome access 

platforms in down 

position @ EL 59'/61' 

(Two@ 180°) 

New L02 crane access 

platforms in down 

position@ EL 42'/44' 

(Two@ 180°) 

Ground level 26 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

RH 9 iIi 2/09 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage Modifications - Cell P 

Requirement 

• External clean & prime LH2 tanks 

• External clean L02 tanks Cell M Cell N 

Tooling Effort 

• New forward L02 dome spray platform 

• New forward L02 rotation fixture 

• Modify aft LH2 dome spray platform 

Work Scope 

• Forward L02 rotation fixture foundation 

• Forward L02 'platform utilities 

$ • Modify sidewasher 

N 

Building 131 

RH 91 I 1: 

( ( 

Cell P 

~= ... = ........ = .. J........o"'forward dome 

spray platform 

Aft dome 

spray platform 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE -vsTEMS 

( 
( ( ( 

Core Tankage Modifications - Cell N 

~ w 

Reguirement 

• SOFI LH2 tanks 

Tooling Effort 

• New forward dome spray platform 

• Relocate aft dome spray platform 

• Modify barrel spray carriage & 

platform 

Work Scope 

• Platform & spray carriage utilities 

• Extend spray carriage floor plates 

• Modify for spray control room 

• SOFI pot/proportioner room 

• SOFI supply lines 

RH 91/12/09 

Cell M Cell N Forward dome 

spray platform 

Barrel spray 

carriage 

Aft dome 

spray platform 

·:I:,!:.:::::::::·:·:·:·:=:=·=·=·=·=·:;:;:;:;:;:!I II pt:=:;=======::;==~==:=:::=:::::::=:=====~=== 1 

•• 

1 1 

, Pot/proportioner 

Building 131 

room 

Spray control 

room 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage Modifications - Cell M 

Requirement 

• Prime L02 tanks 

• SOFI L02 domes 

Tooling Effort 

• New roll fixtures 

• New dome spray platforms 

• New barrel spray carriage & platform 

Work Scope 

• Aft rotation fixture foundation 

• Spray carriage floor plates 

~ • Platform & spray carriage utilities 

• SOFI spray control room 

• SOFI pot/proportioner room 

• SOFI supply lines 

RH 91/1~ 

( 

Cell M 

( 

Cell N Cell P Forward dome 

spray platform 

~ II lr :~:~~ray 

H H II Aft dome 

spray platform 

DJ H n Spray control 

room 

=::;:::=u7 .. -=;===*'=::;. = , ,• •, , , ==+! p . oVproport1oner 

Building 131 

room 

SOFI storage 

room 

IYIA RTIN /filAR/ETTA 

MANNED SPACE "STEMS 

( 
( 

Core Tankage Modifications - Cell L 

~ VI 

Requirement 

• Stack L02 tank on intertank 

• Stack forward skirt on L02 tank 

Tooling Effort 

• lntertank stands 

• lntertank interior platforms 

Work Scope 

• Tilt-up intertank/L02 flange access 

platforms 

• Tilt-up L02/skirt flange access 

platforms 

• Tilt-up forward skirt crane access 

platforms 

RH 91/12/09 

High Bay (114) Celll 

20 ton crane with 

113' hook El 

112 

74n6 

69n1 

49 

New tilt-up forward skirt 

crane access platforms 

in down position @ El 7 4'n6' 

(Two@ 180°) 

New l02 tank/forward skirt 

flange access platform 

in down position @ El 69'n1' 

(360° Access) 

New intertank/l02 tank 

flange access platform 

in down position @ El 49' 

(360° Access) 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage Modifications - Cell A 

~ 0\ 

Requirement 

• Stack intertank/L02/forward skirt 

combination on LH2 tank 

• Closeout SOFI LH2/intertank flange 

Tooling Effort 

• None 

Work Scope 

• No stretch 

-Tilt-up forward skirt crane access 

platforms 

• 5 ft stretch delta 

- SOFI closeout enclosure 

• Raise tilt-up roof 

• New sliding doors 

• Flange access platforms 

• HVAC modifications 

RH 91/1 ~ 

( 

Elevations 

209 

198 

181 

1641171 

152 

132 

127 

117 

109 

86 

63 

75ton Colby 

75 ton Ederer 

V AB ( 11 0) Cell A 

Existing mobile crane 

hook access gantry 

for ET ogive 

New tilt-up crane 

hook access platforms 

@ EL 164'/171' 

(Two@ 180°) 

Relocated closeout 

room roof & new 

doors @ EL 132' 

26 1 

" 

1 

" 111 11 ' u 1 1 Ground level 

/lilA RTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE -vsTEMS 

( ( 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero 

5.2.1.4.4 Facilities Plan (CV-STR-16B) 

Objective 

Structures Data PackJJge Page 1 

Prepare a facilities plan for manufacture of the NLS reference configuration HLL V and 1.5 Stage 

vehicles at the NASA Michoud Assembly Facility, integrated with the existing External Tank 

- production. 

Approach 

(a) Analyze manufacturing plan 

(b) Determine requirements for foundations 

(c) Determine requirements for new and/or modified structures, cranage, suppon equipment and 

services 

(d) Prepare preliminary design layouts 

Key Study Results 

Structural assembly areas within the MAF Bldg 103 will be required for the new fixtures for L02 

Tank Major Weld, Forward Skin Assembly, Slosh Baffle Assembly and Frame Assembly. These 

positions will be located under existing crane coverage, except for the forward skin assembly tools 

which will be covered by an extension to the crane system, and will be supplied with all necessary 

utilities. 

An additional position with a reinforced foundation, located in the North East corner of building 

103, will be required for the new Aft Dome Mechanical Installation Fixture. 

Cells A, E, F and L will require modifications to add access platforms and stairs for installation 

and removal of handling equipment. Cell E may also require modification to raise the cell roof and 

lift door, to accommodate an aft dome sump, and a new probe and cover plate for the L02 Tank 

internal cleaning. 

Final Assembly and Test and Checkout operations are not included in this study but have been 

addresed in IACO studies 

Conclusions 

Manufacture of the cycle 0 reference configuration vehicles can be accommodated within the 

existing ET manufacturing facilities with relatively minor impact. 

Study Recommendations 

Existing NLS program groundrule for building NLS Core Tankage at the MAF has been confirmed 

and should be maintained. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.001 Book 1 for more detailed results. 

637 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero 

6.2.1.4.4 Facilities Plan (CV-STR-16B) 

Objective 

Structures Data Package Page 1 

Prepare a facilities plan for manufacture of the NLS reference configuration HLL V and 1.5 Stage 

vehicles at the NASA Michoud Assembly Facility, integrated with the existing External Tank 

production. 

Approach 

(a) Analyze manufactming plan 

(b) Detennine requirements for foundations 

(c) Determine requirements for new and/or modified structures, cranage, support equipment and 

services 

(d) Prepare preliminary design layouts 

Key Study Results 

Structural assembly areas within the MAF Bldg 103 will be required for the new fixtures for L02 

Tank Major Weld, Forward Skirt Assembly, Slosh Baffle Assembly and Frame Assembly. These 

positions will be located under existing crane coverage, except for the forward skirt assembly tools 

which will be covered by an extension to the crane system, and will be supplied with all necessary 

utilities. 

An additional position with a reinforced foundation, located in the North East corner of building 

103, will be required for the new Aft Dome Mechanical Installation Fixture. 

Cells A, E, F and L will require modifications to add access platforms and stairs for installation 

and removal of handling equipment. Cell E may also require modification to raise the cell roof and 

lift door, to accommodate an aft dome sump, and a new probe and cover plate for the L02 Tank 

internal cleaning. 

Final Assembly and Test and Checkout operations are not included in this· study but have been 

addresed in IACO studies 

Conclusions 

Manufacture of the cycle 0 reference configuration vehicles can be accommodated within the 

existing ET manufactming facilities with relatively minor impact. 

Study Recommendations 

Existing NLS program groundrule for building NLS Core Tankage at the MAF has been confirmed 

and should be maintained. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.001 Book 1 for more detailed results. 

638 
~ 1.0 

RH91/12/09 

f 

CV-STR-16C 

Core Tankage 

Tooling Plan 

Prepared By: Robert J. Houston 

(504) 257-1510 

George R. Charron 

(504) 257-2917 

Approved By: Donald F. Lumley 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8,1992 

rJIIARTIN rJIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Coretank- Tooling Plan 

Objective 

To Define the Tooling Requirements of the Manufacturing Flow shown 

in the Manufacturing Plan CV-STR-16A Maximizing Utilization of the ET 

Tooling, Facilities and Infrastructure 

a Groundrules 

• Build at Michoud Using ET Tooling & Facilities 

• NLS Production Requirement up to 13/yr 

• ET Production Requirement 8/yr 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

~, 

RH 91/1 ~ MANNED SPACE ~- ''3TEMS 

( ( ( 
, 

Core Tankage- Tooling 

Tool No. Description Modified New 

Domes 

• T02A5006 Dome Fittings & Outlets TWF X - • T02A5007 Roll Ring Barrel Fwd End X - • T02A5008 Dome Cap/L02 Outlet TWF X - • Fittings And Outlets TWF - X 

• DomeCapTWF 

• T02A7118 Vortex Baffle Assembly 

- X 

X - I 

• Dome Cap Machine Fixture - X 

• Dome Mech Assy LH2 Aft 

•T02A7045 LH2 Aft Dome Mech 3rd Pos 

- X i 

X - • T04A7018 Assy Fixture Aft Dome X -

~ 

- Barrels 

• T07A7005 Baffle Fwd Assy L02 Basic 0/HD X - • T07A7132 Fwd Slosh Baffle 2nd Pos X - • T04A7003 LH21nt Barrel Frame lnst Tool X - • T04A7086 LH2 Aft Barrel Ad Out & Fr lnst Fixt X - • T04A5015 Barrel Assembly Aft TWF X - • F78-4364 Control System For T04A5015 X - • F78-4369 Control System For T04A5015 X - • T04A7086 LH2 Aft BBL lnst Fixture X - • T03A6089 Barrel Trim Fixture X -

• F78-2326 Control System X -

• T04A7003 Barrel Frame lnst Fixture X -

• T02A7016 Barrel Mech Assy Fwd SRB X -

MARTIN MARIETTA 

RH 9 j I i 2/09 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Core Tankage- Tooling 

Tool No. 

Major Weld 

• T05A5019 

• T05A5068 

• 

• Bldg. 451 

• F78-2328 

• 

• 

•T05A7077 

Description 

LH2 Tank Assembly TWF 

LH2 Weld Fixture 2nd Posn Assy Fixt. 

L02 Tank lnstl 

LH2 Proof Test 

Control System For T05A5068 

L02 Weld Fix 

X-Ray & Mech. lnst. Fix. 

Off-Load Rotational Fix. 

~ lotertank 

N 

• T06A7424 (2) Access Platform Iff Interior 

Forward Skirt 

RH 91/1 ~ 

( 

• 

• 

• T06A7398 

• 

• T30K7272 

Skirt Frame Assy fixts 

Assembly fixture 

Vertical Drivmatic Riveting System 

System Installation Fixt 

SOFI Apply & Trim Fixt 

Ancillary Tooling 

• Sling, Dollies, Adapters, Covers 

( 

Modified New 

X - X -

- X 

X - X - - X 

- X 

X -

X -

- X 

- X 

X - - X 

X -

I 

- X I 

I 

/'JIIART/N /'JIIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE ~- "'=;TEMS 

( 
Core Tankage- Tooling 

~ ~ 

Tool No. 

Cells 

• Cell A 

• Cell N 

• Cell P 

• Cell E 

• Cell K 

• Cell F 

• Cell L 

• Cell M 

RH 9 ll 12/09 

Description 

Pedestals 

Spray Carriage/Platform 

Access Platform/Rot. Fixture 

Support Tooling 

Dome PrimefTPS 

Support Tooling 

L02 & lntertank TPS closout Tools 

System lnst Tooling 

Forward Skirt Adapter 

IT- L02 Tank- Fwd Skirt Splice Tool 

IT Support Structure I 

(4) Rotational Ring Forward 

(2) Rotational Fix. L02 

Access Platform Aft 

L02 SOFI Fixt 

Access Platform L02 Barrel 

Control System 

Access Platform Forward 

Modified New 

X - X -

X - - X 

X X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

- X 

/lilA RTIN /JIJARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero 

5.2.1.4.5 Tooling Impacts (CV-STR-16C) 

Objective 

Structures Data Packllge Page l 

Determine tooling impacts resulting from the integration of NLS vehicle production into the NASA 

External Tank manufacturing environment. 

Approach 

Analyze existing ET tooling to detennine the maximum capacity of each tool and/or facility in tenns 

of its major function, and to evaluate the capability to produce ET, HLL V and 1.5 Stage Vehicle 

core tankage. -

Key Study Results 

Modify existing Dome weld tooling to accommodate feedline fittings and outlet locations. 

New UI2 Aft Dome Mechanical Installation Tool required. 

Use existing ET tools for LH2 Tank assembly. 

New L02 Tank major weld assembly tool required due to capacity limitation. This tool will also 

weld the LH2 5 ft barrel to the STA 4058 "Tee" ring, and the aft dome assembly. 

Internal and external cleaning and LH2 Tank external finishing operations will be performed in the 

existing ET processing cells. TPS operations for both the L02 and LH2 tanks will be performed 

in reactivated Cells M & N repectively. New adaptor tooling will be provided in those tools and 

cells which use the Orbiter or SRB interfaces during ET processing. In addition, new suppon 

tooling will be required in Cell L for the Forward Sldrt/L02 Tankllntertank stack operation. 

A new dedicated fixture will be required for the Forward Skirt Assembly and for any non-ET 

compatible Frame Assemblies 

Conclusions 

The cycle 0 reference configuration NLS vehicles can be fabricated on the ET tooling with minor 

impact 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain NLS program groundrule to utilize ET tooling. 

Review tooling requirements for vehicle structural assembly and systems installations as design 

matures and make appropriate changes to ensure production capability and improved 

manufacnuing efficiency. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

644 
--

National Launch System 1 !92 Cycle Zero 

6.2.1.4.5 Tooling Impacts (CV-STR-16C) 

Objective 

Structures Data Package Page 1 

Determine tooling impacts resulting from the integration of NLS vehicle production into the NASA 

External Tank manufacturing environment. 

Approach 

Analyze existing ET tooling to determine the maximum capacity of each tool and/or facility in terms 

of its major function, and to evaluate the capability to produce ET, HLLV and 1.5 Stage Vehicle 

core tankage. 

Key Study Results 

Modify existing Dome weld tooling to accommodate feedline fittings and outlet locations. 

New LH2 Aft Dome Mechanical Installation Tool required. 

Use existing ET tools for LH2 Tank assembly. 

New L02 Tank major weld assembly tool required due to capacity limitation. This tool will also 

weld the LH2 5 ft barrel to the STA 4058 "Tee" ring, and the aft dome assembly. 

Internal and external cleaning and LH2 Tank external finishing operations will be performed in the 

existing ET processing cells. TPS operations for both the L02 and LH2 tanks will be performed 

in reactivated Cells M & N repectively. New adaptor tooling will be provided in those tools and 

cells which use the Orbiter or SRB interfaces during ET processing. In addition, new suppon 

tooling will be required in Cell L for the Forward Skirt/L02 Tankllntertank: stack operation. 

A new dedicated fixture will be required for the Forward Skin Assembly and for any non-ET 

compatible Frame Assemblies 

Conclusions 

The cycle 0 reference configuration NLS vehicles can be fabricated on the ET tooling with minor 

impact 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain NLS program groundrule to utilize ET tooling. 

Review tooling requirements for vehicle structural assembly and systems installations as design 

matures and make appropriate changes to ensure production capability and improved 

manufacturing efficiency. 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

645 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFf BLANK 

-.......,;·· 

646 
~ ...,J 

;g 

1'1111 

("') 

[Tl 

c 

~:.~ 

C; 

.-, 

-_. 

:~ 

~~-~ 

)"'r"; 

, .... 1 

;:·:. 

..,. 

::, 

;JC; 

z 

0 

-~ 

~ 

r-

~ 0 

CV-STR-160 

Transportation and Handling Requirements 

Prepared By: Robert L. Gallagher 

(504) 257-2861 

Robert J. Houston 

(504) 257-1510 

Rev: Initial 

Date: January 8, 1992 

Approved By: Donald F. Lumley 

IJI1ARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Groundrules And Assumptions 

• Core Tankage Manufactured at Michoud Assembly Facility 

- Vertical Celts Used for lntemal Clean, and TPS Application 

• Use Existing Handling & Locating Hardware Where Possible 

~ - Rotate During Core Stage Integration, Assy & Checkout 

00 

- Propulsion Module Handling Not Included In Study 

• Forward Skirt Assembled With L0211ntertank Assembly 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYP-~MS 

( ( ( 
~ 

( 

Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Objective 

Detennine Handling and Transportation Points Required on Core Tankage 

Subassemblies for Manufacturing of the Core Tankage and IACO!Transportation 

of the Core Stage. 

I'WARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Study Results- L02 Tank 

I I I I I I I I' ... ST A 2569.8 

I I I I I I I I I ... ST A 2852.8 

01 

~ 

Operation I Lift Posmon Lift Point Location (Sta) 

Straddle Carrier Belly Band at 2852.8 

& Fig. at 2569.8 

Mech. Assy JHoriz., Cells/Vert. Figs. at 2569.8 and 2852.8 

Horiz. to Vert. ---- ---------

IYIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY' ~MS 

( ( ( 
~ 

-

Transportation and Handling 

Study Results- LH2 Tank 

3- Attach Points per Station 

Locate 12()0 Apart, From -Y Axis 

Operation I Lift Position 

Cell E I Vert., 

Cell A/Vert 

Straddle CarTier 

Cell P I Horiz. 

Horiz. to Vert. & Tank Inversion 

CV-STR-160 

,.,. : ... , ~ STA. 3123 

... R I I fg I 1... STA.4018 

.. u I I 8 I I ST A. 4058 

STA. 4122 STA. 4098 

Lift Point Location (Sta) 

3- Fittings Located at 4098 and 4058 

3 - Fittings Located at 4018 and 4058 

Belly Band Located at 3123.15 and 

3865.15 Lateral Support at Figs. 

Roll Rings at 3123 and 4122 

Fig. at 3123 and Fittings at 4058 and 4018 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ N 

( 

Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Study Results - Fwd. Skirt I L02/Intertank 

Operation I Lift Position 

To Stack In Cell A 

( 

STA. 2284.8 

STA2569.8 

STA2852.8 

Lift Point Location (Sta) 

Fig. at 2284.8 

MARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SV,.... -eMS 

( 
e: 

1,1.) 

Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Study Results- Core Tankage Stack 

Roll Ring I Lift Adapter 

Installed In Cell A 

STA.4058 

Operation I Lift Poshlon 

Stack In Cell A, Vert. Support 

Uft Fr. Stack and Vert. To Horiz. 

J,·,·=·=·=·>=·=·=·J!ffill,.,.,.,,.,.:, ' STA 2284 8 ' ' . . I I I I I ST A 2569.8 

30 in. 

I 11911• STA.4018 

-Hl I I ST A. 4098 

Lift Point Location (Sta) 

3 - Places at 4058 and 4018 

Rtting at 2284.8 and 2 Fittings 

at 4058 and 4018 

NIART/N WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

( 

Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Study Results- Core Stage IACO & Ship 

Roll Ring 

/Roll Ring 

t 

Sta. 2473.8 

Operation I Lift Position 

IACO I Rotate Stage 

Transportation of Core Stage 

lntennedlate Support During 

PM Mate. Fining at Sta 4058 

and4018 + 

Sta. 4261.4 

Lift Point Location (Sta) 

Support at 2473.8 , Support and Drive at 

4261.4 

Vert, Support on Roll Ring at 2473.8 

Fixed SUpport on Roll Ring at 4261.4. 

Sea State Loads Apply 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

/IIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY' ~MS 

( ( 
( 

Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Study Results- LH2 Tank Loads 

STA. 4018 

n STA.4058 

b 

-8.0 

8: 

VI ~ 14487 STA.4058 r-~ u STA.4 098 .__ 

--~ j ~4.0 

12165. Core Tankage Stack 

LH2 Tank Only Load case a b Remarks 

1 26780 CeiiA,3-Pic 

2 19166 Horiz. to Vert., 2 - Pies -~ -

/IIIART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 0\ 

( 

Transportation and Handling CV-STR-160 

Summary- T & H Impacts to Core Tankage 

• Frames Required at Sta 4018 and 4098 

• Boh Attach Points Required at (3) Equally Spaced PosHions around 

circumference at Stations 4018, 4098 and 4058 (Mid Point at the "-Z'') 

• Use Flanges on L02, LH2 Tanks and Fwd. Skirt for Vert. and Horiz. Lifts and 

Stabilization Locations 

• Frames at Sta. 2852.8 and Flange at Sta. 2569.8 on L02 Tank and Sta. 3123 

on the LH2 Tank to Support Tankage During Straddle Carrier Transportation 

• Fwd. Skirt Flange to Support Core Tankage Static Weight in Vert. and Horiz. 

Attitudes 

• Roll Ring Attach Points on Fwd. Skirt Flange Sta. 2473.8 & Propulsion Module 

Sta. 4261.4 

• Roll Ring Positioned at Sta. 2473.8 and Locating Tooling at Sta. 4058 Support 

Core Tankage During P.M. Integration. 

• Sea State Shipping Loads Taken at Propulsion Module Roll Ring Position 

IIIIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SY -'=MS 

( ( 
/ 

I 

-· 

National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

5.2.1.4.6 Transportation & Handling Requirements (CV-STR-160) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Determine handling and transportation points required on Core Tankage subassemblies for 

manufacturing of the core tankage and IACO/fransportation of the Core Stage. 

Approach 

Analyze the core tankage subassemblies, assembly and IACO activities to determine the tooling and 

transportation interface point requirements for handling and processing operations enabling 

maximization of the existing ET tools, equipment and facilities. 

Key Study Results 

(1) Frames required at Sta 4018 and 4098. 

(2) Bolt attach points required at (3) equally spaced positions around Sta 4018, 4098 and 4058 

(Mid Point at the "-Z"). 

(3) Use flanges on L02, LH2 Tanks and Fwd. Skin for vertical and horizontal lifts and 

stabilization locations. 

(4) Frames at Sta. 2852.8 and flange at Sta. 2569.8 on L02 Tank and Sta. 3123.15 on the LH2 

Tank to support tankage dming straddle carrier transportation. 

(5) Fwd. Skirt flange to support Core Tankage static weight in vertical and horizontal attitudes. 

(6) Roll Ring attach points on Fwd. Skirt flange Sta. 2473.8 & Propulsion Module Sta. 4261.4. 

(7) Roll Ring at Sta. 2473.8 and locating tooling at Sta. 4058 support Core Tankage during P.M. 

integration. 

(8) Sea state shipping loads taken at Fwd skirt & propulsion module roll ring positions. 

Conclusions 

The defmed lifting point locations and methods of lifting, roll ring locations, and positions for 

processing cells and transportation adaptor tooling can be accommodated in the core tankage design 

without impact. A new transporter is required to accommodate the Core Stage which is 

considerably heavier than ET. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate the proposed configuration and new transporter 

requirement. In cycle 1, determine frame and flange sizes, and incorporate attachment holes for 

tooling adaptors. 

657 
National Launch System 1192 

L02Tank 

IIHciL May.JHoriz., Ceii6'Vert Flp. 111 25IU Mel 2152.1 

HoriL Ill Vert. 

-c:=lf\--- STA.-

IH+4,....__,_ 

-tlltt-a---STA-

...... LH2 Tank Only 

Fwd. Skirt I L02/Interank 

To StaGk In Cal A 

co .. Tenlr•r 8tN* 

Additional Information 

Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

CoN 81ageiAOO • Ship 

-

~· 

....... ,u. ...... u.-..--- 111001-.... . •..u ·-

Tia.,. .... ,.,a.. ... ................. MU 

...................... ., ... ... -~~-

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

658 

Page 2 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

6.2.1.4.6 Transportation & Handling Requirements (CV-STR-16D) 

Objective 

Page 1 

Determine handling and transportation points required on Core Tankage subassemblies for 

manufacturing of the core tankage and IACO!fransportation of the Core Stage. 

Approach 

Analyze the core tankage subassemblies, assembly and IACO activities to determine the tooling and 

transportation interface point requirements for handling and processing operations enabling 

maximization of the existing ET tools, equipment and facilities. 

Key Study Results 

(1) Frames required at Sta 4018 and 4098. 

(2) Bolt attach points required at (3) equally spaced positions around Sta 4018, 4098 and 4058 

(Mid Point at the "-Z"). 

(3) Use flanges on L02, LH2 Tanks and Fwd. Skirt for vertical and horizontal lifts and 

stabilization locations. 

(4) Frames at Sta. 2852.8 and flange at Sta. 2569.8 on L02 Tank and Sta. ~123.15 on the LH2 

Tank to support tankage dming straddle carrier transportation. 

(5) Fwd Skirt flange to support Core Tankage static weight in vertical and horizontal attitudes. 

(6) Roll Ring attach points on Fwd. Skin flange Sta. 2473.8 & Propulsion Module Sta. 4261.4. 

(7) Roll Ring at Sta. 2473.8 and locating tooling at Sta. 4058 support Core Tankage during P.M. 

integration. 

(8) Sea state shipping loads taken at Fwd skirt & propulsion module roll ring positions. 

Conclusions 

The defined lifting point locations and methods of lifting, roll ring locations, and positions for 

processing cells and transportation adaptor tooling can be accommodated in the core tankage design 

without impact. A new transporter is required to accommodate the Core Stage which is 

considerably heavier than ET. 

Study Recommendations 

Revise cycle 0 baseline to incorporate the proposed configuration and new transporter 

requirement. In cycle 1, determine frame and flange sizes, and incorporate attachment holes for 

tooling adaptors. 

659 
National Launch System 

L02Tank 

LH2 Tank Loada 

-==1~--- ITA.-

1.0 

~~~~~-~--~ 

~111-....---IT,.,_ 

...... LH2 Tank Only 

Fwd. Skirt I L02 /lntertank 

1192 

~..._ ..... --ITA.DM.e 

.,..~or+--''"-· 

ITA211U 

To SUe* In Cell A 

Additional Information 

Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

LH2Tank 

a.--/1.11-

Dol£1¥011., 

-- Gill Pl-. 

-.. -·--

Core Tankage Stack 

CoN StllgeiACO. Ship 

_,.,.._.....,._ 

___ .,. ...., .. a.--, ........ 1.111- ~~~~~~ 

_,.._ .... ..,........_.""""'·--- "' .... - ... 0.. .... ....... ~ ... -.......... -~--...... , ... --&..-~_ 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl Book 1 for more detailed results. 

660 

Page 2 

( 
~ 

-

CV-STR-17A 

Alternate Aft Skirt Configuration 

Prepared By : Nell A Duncan 

(504)257-0161 

Rev: Initial 

Date:January 8,1992 

NAD,0082 

Approved By: M.R.Simms 

htARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
§ 

Alternate Aft Skirt Definition CV-STR-17 A 

objective 

• Determine if an alternate Aft Skirt configuration is 

required or is beneficial for the core tankage 

Related Tasks 

• CV-STR-14-D 

• CV-STR-14-G 

LH2 Tank Design Definition 

External Hardware Definition 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

NAO.OOA2 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ w 

Approach CV-STR-17A 

• Identify Ref Aft Skirt Design 

• Define Alternate Aft Skirt Configurations 

• Identify Design & Manufacturing Impacts for each 

option 

• Identify Recommended changes to the Reference 

Configuration 

( 

IYIARTIN NIARIETTA 

NAD.0082 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Groundrules & Assumptions CV-STR-17A 

Ground rules 

• For Vehicle Definition Use MSFC Reference 

Definition Dated 8/28/91 , Supplemented by October 

9 -10th Structure Layouts {Config Freeze) 

• Maintain MSFC Aft Structure Frame Stations 

Assumptions 

~ • Alternate Aft Skirt fabrication techniques similar 

to the Reference Configuration 

/Y1ARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.QI\~2 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
~ 

( 

Ref Config Aft Skirt CV-STR-17A 

xN 4122.65 Aft Skirt 

Core--l 1 

Aft structure is a closed compartment 

consisting of a cylindrical structure , 

NAD.0082 

1 ... , ~~ 87_

7

.. internal thrust cone & rear heat shield 

,.... ·~· .1 

1.. 262.85" z ... 1 

Aft Structure 

Bolted Joint 1/F External "Super Zip" Stage 

with LH2 Tank Stiffeners Separation 

"" \ 

Thrust Cone 

Aft Skirt is Integral 

Part of Aft Structure 

/J'TA RTIN /J'TARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Reference Configuration 

c R~fB~Iled -.~~,rrt) 

XN 4122.65 

CV-STR-17A 

Fabricated Joint 

Integral to Aft Structure 

XN 4210.32 

1._ 87.67 Aft Skirt ~ 1 

Separation Plane 

I 

Sustalner Line 

• Aft Skirt Part of Aft Structure 

• 87.67" Long Skirt 

• Sustainer Penetration within Aft Structure 

/JITA RTIN tJ;TARIETTA 

NAD.00"2 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

Ref Config- Design & Manuf. CV-STR-17A 

• Fabricated structure with rivetted "I" section 

stiffeners - section properties constant around 

circumference 

• Additional stiffening & increased skin gauges 

are expected at holddown locations. Addition 

of larger integral or bolt-on stiffeners should not 

impact interface with the Core Vehicle. 

• Core I Aft Structure radial positioning critical 

during mating operations 

NAD.0082 

,._,ARTIN ,._,ARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 

Ref - LN2 Formation 

C/L 

ET 

! LH2 Aft ! Dome" 

~ ,.. 

.I I TPS Area 

I 

I 

Core .5" SOFI on 

LH2Tank 

Nitrogen Purge 

In Aft Structure Is 

MSFC Baseline 

Problems 

- LN2 build up inside Aft Structure 

- Nitrogen ice debris 

- Impact on component design & qual 

- Possible venting impact 

NAO.OOR2 

( ( 

CV-STR-17A 

N2 

LN2 & ice will 

form in the 

- 111 H crotch area & 

drip I fall 

down Into the 

Aft Structure 

Reference Configuration 

Core I Aft Skirt Joint 

/J'1ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ 

Ref - LN2 Ootions 

Annular 

TPS drip 

step 

IITl XN 4122.65 

•LN2 & Ice form on 

dome & Aft Struct 

•LN2 drips I runs 

down to 

Intermediate frame 

•Ice debris may be 

retained by frame 

Drain holes 

#1 Catch & Drain LN2 

#3 Switch to Helium purge 

does not liquify at LH2 temp 

{Helium is 5 X cost of N2) 

NAD.0082 

CV-STR-17A 

STA 

XN 4122.65 

1~: 12.0~-~ 

~ f!Jl~{.;{ot~·"'·'·'·"'·':b! 

BX250 Foam 

Remove foam from this area to 

allow for contraction I expansion 

Aft Structure 

... • No Access 

Frames prevent access after mate for TPS 

application , machining & Inspection 

#2 Foam Crotch Area After 

Core I Aft Structure Mate 

lnART/N MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 0 

Option 1 CV -STR-17 A 

Aft Skirt Welded to Core Vehicle 

New Aft Skirt 

Weld 

XN 4122.65 I XN 4134.65 

Bolted Joint Relocated 

From XN 4122.65 

1.. -.1 12.00 Aft Skirt 

XN 4210.32 

Se./'aratlon Plane 

Sustalner Line 

• Aft Skirt Welded to LH2 Frame 

• Part of Core Vehicle 

• 12" Long Skirt 

/J'1A RTIN /llrARIETTA 

NA0.()1'1~2 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
~ 

-

( ( 

Option 1 -Weld RequirementsCV-STR-17A 

• Maintain ET Mismatch Requirements 

{Max Mismatch 1 0°/o of land) 

• 6.0" Min Depth Required for Clamps & Supporting 

Tooling Weld skirt from 

... 36.0 ... 1 outside 

Chord . Clamps & Supports -----...._ ~ 

u ~~~r ---.:::r,:J~---=-L lJC -

Weld from Inside dome 

Chord I Gore Weld Skirt I LH2 weld 

• Chord Must Be Extended By Almost 2 Ft 

( 

• Gore/Dome Weld Must Be Repoitioned {Major Tooling Impact) 

( Welded Skirt Not Feasible ) 

/llfARTIN MARIETTA 

NAD.0082 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ N 

Option 2 

Short Bolt-on Skirt 

( New Bolted Joint ) 

XN 4122.65 XN 4134.65 

,... ..., 112.00 

Minimum Length 

Separate Aft Skirt 

• Separate Aft Skirt 

• Part of Core Vehicle 

•12" Long 

NAD.0082 

( ( 

CV-STR-17A 

XN 4210.32 

Separation Plane 

I 

Sustalner Line 

~ARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
~ w 

Option 2- Design & Manuf CV-STR-17A 

XN 4122.65 XN 4134.65 

I 

• Load path is less efficient than the reference but it is 

adequate . Tension loads carried in bending through two 

bolted joints instead of one . 

• Additional bolted joint adds weight , complexity & cost to 

the design 

• Core I Aft Structure radial positioning less critical 

during mating operations - more radial clearance 

• Fabrication method assumed similar to reference 

( 

~ARTIN ~ARIETTA 

NAD.0082 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Ootion 2 - LN2 Ootions CV-STR-17A 

Annular 

TPS drip 

step 

~ ~ 

,_ XN 4122.65 

•LN2 & Ice form on 

dome & Aft Struct 

•LN2 drips I runs 

down to 

Intermediate frame 

•Ice debris may be 

retained by frame 

Drain holes 

#1 Catch & Drain LN2 

#3 Switch to Helium purge 

does not liquify at LH2 temp 

(Helium is 5 X cost of N2) 

NAD.OOA2 

( 

STA 

XN 4122.65 

...._1: -12.0---1~: Aft Structure 

BX250Foam 

Remove foam from this area to 

allow for contraction I expansion 

Excellent access for TPS operations prior 

to Aft Structure mate 

#2 Foam Crotch Area After 

Core I Aft Structure Mate 

IWARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( 
~ VI 

Option 3 

Long Bolt-on Skirt 

c--N-ew_B_o-lte-d-Jo-in--t) 

XN 4122.65 

48.00 

Aft Skirt 

XN 4170.65 

·Separate Aft Skirt 

• Part of Core Vehicle 

• 48" Long 

CV-STR-17A 

XN 4210.32 I Separation Plane 

----; / 

Sustalner Line 

• Frame at XN 4170.65 is not part of skirt 

/JI1ARTIN /JI1ARIETTA 

NAD.0082 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
~ 01 

Option 3 - Design & Manuf CV-STR-17A 

XN 4122.65 XN 4170.65 

Core .- I .- Aft Structure m---------------~~ 

• Longer version of Option 2 

• Adequate load paths 

• Additional bolted joint adds weight , complexity & cost to 

the design 

• Core I Aft Structure radial positioning not critical 

during mating operations - large radial clearance 

• Crotch access harder but possible {Core Vehicle only) 

WTARTIN WTARIETTA 

NAO.()(IA2 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( 

Ootion 3 - LN2 Ootions CV-STR-17A 

Annular 

TPS drip 

step 

~ -..1 

-XN 4122.65 

•LN2 & Ice form on 

dome & Aft Struct 

•LN2 drips I runs 

down to 

Intermediate frame 

•Ice debris may be 

retained by frame 

Drain holes 

#1 Catch & Drain LN2 

#3 Switch to Helium purge 

does not liquify at LH2 temp 

{Helium is 5 X cost of N2) 

NAD.0082 

STA 

XN 4122.65 

1~: 12.0_...,-~ 

BX250 Foam 

Remove foam from this area to 

allow for contraction I expansion 

1.... 48.00" .... 1 

• 

Aft Structure 

~ required for access 

Acceptable access for TPS operations 

prior to mate 

#2 Foam Crotch Area After 

Core I Aft Structure Mate 

WIARTIN WIARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Externaii/F's CV-STR-17A 

External Cable Tray 

Press Lines ' 

Sustalner L02 Line ~ 

~ Penetration of Aft 

Structure 

Internal Routing to ASRM -

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

NAO.QOR2 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( ( ( 
( ( 

Cable Tray I Skirt 1/F's CV-STR-17A 

Reference Cable Tray 

Tray 

Cable Core Dl ~ ~ ~~~~r= 

Core to PM 

Cable Tray 1/F 

Reference Configuration 

0\ ~ Core to PM 

Core Cable Tray / Cable Tray 1/F 

? I 

Reference 

Cable Tray 

Option 2 

NAD.0082 

' Cross Over 

Cable Tray 

toASRM 

" Cross Over 

Cable Tray 

toASRM 

Core Cable Tray 

CrossOver 

Cable Tray 

toASRM 

Option 3 

\ 

Internal 

Core to PM 

Cable Tray 1/F 

WIARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
Evaluation Summary ·------· -----

PM Installation to Core 

No. of Bolted Joints 

Load Path Assessment 

LN2 & Ice Formation 

Ease of TPS Crotch 

Application 

lnstalatlon of Cross 

over Cable Tray 

Weight Impact 

Ref Conflg 

Yes- He Purge only 

Alternate Solution 

Not Possible 

After PM lnst'l 

Preferred 

NAD.0082 

( ( 

CV-STR-17A 

Option 2 

12" Skirt 

2 

After PM lnst'l 

+ 600 lbs 

Option 3 

48" Skirt 

2 

+ 600 lbs 

/llrARTIN MARIETTA 

MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

( 
( ( 

Conclusions &Recommendations 

Conclusions 

• All Options except Welded Skirt (Option 1) are Feasible 

• Reference Configuration has best Load Path 

• Weight Impact & Cost is Least on Reference 

• LN2 & Ice will form in Crotch on Reference 

~ Recommendations 

• Maintain Reference Configuration 

• Study LN2 & Nitrogen Ice Formation During Cycle 1 

• Consider Local Helium purge in Crotch Area only 

as another possible Solution 

( 

WIARTIN NTARIETTA 

NAD.0082 MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

5.2.7.4.1 Alternate Aft Skirt Configuration (#CV-STR-17-A) 

Objective 

To detennine if an alternate Aft Skin configuration is required or is beneficial for the Core Vehicle. 

Approach 

Define alternate Aft Skirt configurations. Identify design & manufacturing impacts for each 

option, and any recommended changes to the Reference Aft Skin configuration. 

Options Studied 

Reference configuration Aft Skirt (pan of Aft Structure) 

Option 1 - Aft Skin welded to Core Vehicle 

Option 2- Short (12") Bolt-On Skin (part of Core Vehicle) 

Option 3 -Long (48") Bolt-On Skin (part of Core Vehicle) 

Key Study Results 

Chord & weld geometry I tooling requirements were found to make Option 1 impractical. 

Options 2 & 3 add a new bolted joint which adds 600 lbs of weight & additional cost, but they also 

reduce the risk associated with Core I Aft Structure mate. 

Formation of LN2 & Nitrogen ice in the crotch area was identified as a potential problem. NitrOgen 

ice may break free causing ice debris during flight LN2 accumulation would impact component 

design & qualification, and LN2 boil-off would also impact Aft Compartment venting. Use of a 

drip tray within the Aft Structure to catch LN2 and drain it overboard is possible, but does not fully 

address the ice debris concern. A Helium purge in all or part of the Aft Structure is the only known 

alternate means of addressing this problem on the Reference configuration, as the crotch area 

cannot be foamed after core to Aft Structure mate due to lack of access (Helium is currently 

approximately 5 times the cost of Nitrogen gas). Options 2 & 3 offer increased design flexibility as 

they do allow foaming of the crotch prior to Core I Aft Structure mate thus eliminating the ice & 

liquid air problem. 

Conclusions 

With the exception of Option 1 all Options studied are feasible. Options 2 & 3 offer some increased 

design flexibility but have associated weight and cost impacts. 

Additional analysis is required to make a quantitative assessment of LN2 & Nitrogen ice formation. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the Reference Aft Skin configuration. Study the LN2 & ice debris problem further during 

Cycle 1. 

682 

{ 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package 

Sustainer Line 

\ 

No Access to Foam 

Crotch Area After Mate 

OPTION 1 - AFT SKIRT WELDED TO CORE VEHICLE 

XN 4122.65XN 4134.65 Weld Geometry --------------- ~~_,, 

New Aft Skirt Impractical 

Weld 

Page 2 

Fabricated Joint 

Integral to Aft_ 

Structure 

XN 4210.32 

Bolted Joint 

Relocated 

From XN 4122.65 

Sustainer Line 

\ \ 

OPTION 2 - SHORT BOLT-ON SKIRT 

XN 4122.65 XN 4134.65 ~N~e-w--B~o~1-t-e~d~J-o~i-n-t--~~~ 

~'-----------------~ 

XN 4210.32 

I 

Crotch Foaming 

Possible Prior~~...._....,+- 12" Aft Skirt 

to Mate 

OPTION 3 - LONG BOLT-ON SKIRT 

XN 4122.65 ~----------------~ 

Crotch Foaming 

Possible Prior 

to Mate 

( New Bolted Joint 

Additional Information 

Sustainer Line 

\ \ 

See Doc # MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

683 

XN 4210.32 

I 
National Launch System 1192 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 1 

6.2. 7.4 .1 Alternate Aft Skirt Configuration (#CV-STR-17-A) 

Objective 

To detennine if an alternate Aft Skirt configuration is required or is beneficial for the Core Vehicle. 

Approach 

Define alternate Aft Skirt configurations. Identify design & manufacturing impacts for each 

option, and any recommended changes to the Reference Aft Skirt configmation. 

Options Stuilied 

Reference configuration Aft Skirt (part of Aft Structure) 

Option 1 - Aft Skirt welded to Core Vehicle 

Option 2 - Short (12") Bolt-On Skirt (part of Core Vehicle) 

Option 3 -Long (48") Bolt-On Skin (part of Core Vehicle) 

Key Study Results 

Chord & weld geometry I tooling requirements were found to make Option 1 impractical. 

Options 2 & 3 add a new bolted joint which adds 600 lbs of weight & additional cost, but they also 

reduce the risk associated with Core I Aft Structure mate. 

Formation of LN2 & Nitrogen ice in the crotch area was identified as a potential problem. Nitrogen 

ice may break free causing ice debris during flight LN2 accumulation would impact component 

design & qualification, and LN2 boil-off would also impact Aft Compartment venting. Use of a 

drip tray within the Aft Structure to catch LN2 and drain it overboani is possible, but does not fully 

address the ice debris concern. A Helium purge in all or part of the Aft Structure is the only known 

alternate means of addressing this problem on the Reference configuration, as the crotch area 

cannot be foamed after core to Aft Structure mate due to lack of access (Helium is currently 

approximately 5 times the cost of Nitrogen gas). Options 2 & 3 offer increased design flexibility as 

they do allow foaming of the crotch prior to Core I Aft Structure mate thus eliminating the ice & 

liquid air problem. 

Conclusions 

With the exception of Option 1 all Options studied are feasible. Options 2 & 3 offer some increased 

design flexibility but have associated weight and cost impacts. 

Additional analysis is required to make a quantitative assessment of LN2 & Nitrogen ice fonnation. 

Study Recommendations 

Maintain the Reference Aft Skirt configuration. Study the LN2 & ice debris problem further during 

Cycle 1. , 

684 

,. 

• 
National Launch System 1/92 Cycle Zero Structures Data Package Page 2 

XN 

Sustainer Line 

\ 

No Access to Foam 

Crotch Area After Mate 

OPTION 1 - AFT SKIRT WELDED TO CORE VEHICLE 

XN 4122.65XN 4134.65 Weld Geometry 

-------........ New Aft Skirt Impractical 

Weld 

Fabricated Joint 

Integral to Aft 

Structure 

XN 4210.32 

Bolted Joint 

Relocated 

From XN 4122.65 

Sustainer Line 

\ \ 

OPTION 2 - SHORT BOLT-ON SKIRT 

XN 4122 . 65 XN 4134 ::..· 6.:.;5:.._ _______ _ 

New Bolted Joint ~'---------~ 

XN 4210.32 

I 

Crotch Foaming Sustainer Line 

Possible Prior ,....,.1--_.,+- 12" Aft Skirt 

to Mate 

OPTION 3 - LONG BOLT-ON SKIRT 

XN 4122.65 (,._N_e_w_B_o_l_t_e_d_J_o_~-· n-t--.. 

Crotch Foaming 

Possible Prior 

to Mate 

Additional Information 

See Doc# MMC.NLS.SR.OOl.Book 1 for more detailed results 

685 

\ \ 

XN 4210.32 

I 
·-

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

f 

I 

686