Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Shakes, Bakes, and Rattles Lunar Spaceship

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the shake-rattle-and-roll dept.

coondoggie writes to tell us that NASA has apparently successfully concluded putting the new Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter through its paces. Using vibration and rotation tests NASA scientists were able to determine the center of gravity and were also able to observe the structural integrity during the vibration tests used to simulate launch aboard an Atlas rocket. "It is expected that the LRO will by the end of the year make its way to NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida for final launch preparations. The orbiter and the Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite, a mission to smack into the moon in search of water ice, are scheduled to launch atop an Atlas V rocket from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida sometime between Feb. 27, 2009 and the end of March 2009."

44 comments

  1. Not necessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Like the columbia, I am sure nasa engineers will make sure those things happen naturally.

  2. FRYING damnit, what about FRYING?!?! by StefanJ · · Score: 4, Funny

    Seriously. We need to test the hell out of this thing:

    * Test monster-proofness of hatches and bulkheads.
    * Ensure that air filters can handle sapient moon-dust clouds.

    Oh . . . this is just a damn unmanned orbiter?

    OK. Please forget this post. I'll use it again when they test the Orion lunar craft.

    1. Re:FRYING damnit, what about FRYING?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Recent google search: How to tell if my galactic neighbors are velociraptors

    2. Re:FRYING damnit, what about FRYING?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget raptor proofing. These bastards are mean AND smart.

    3. Re:FRYING damnit, what about FRYING?!?! by Perf · · Score: 1

      * Test monster-proofness of hatches and bulkheads.

      Yeah, but what if a piece of foam breaks off the Godzilla suit? Can it withstand that?

    4. Re:FRYING damnit, what about FRYING?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * Test monster-proofness of hatches and bulkheads.

      Yeah, but what if a piece of foam breaks off the Godzilla suit? Can it withstand that?

      Low, man. Low.

  3. Young Zaphod Plays it Safe by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To paraphrase, "So the engineers tested the ship against every conceivable thing that they knew it could withstand." I'm sure the spaceship is now safe.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    1. Re:Young Zaphod Plays it Safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well typically you don't put things through things that you know it couldn't withstand. That is unless you are trying to destroy it.

    2. Re:Young Zaphod Plays it Safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How was the engineers able know what the ship could withstand beforehand? By the same methodology that lets engineers know that software has no bugs before an release? If that's the case, I can't really blame them for doing Quality Assurance.

    3. Re:Young Zaphod Plays it Safe by Amorymeltzer · · Score: 1

      It's just the first step in NASA's plan to make sure the Moon is "perfectly safe."

      --
      I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
  4. Yes, but by rarel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will it blend?

    1. Re:Yes, but by muhadeeb · · Score: 1

      Shaken,not stirred?

  5. Will they use Judas Priest to test it? by h.ross.perot · · Score: 4, Funny

    "But that's just the beginning, the orbiter will soon undergo four days of acoustics testing during which the spacecraft is placed near massive, multistory, wall-sized speakers that simulate the noise-induced vibrations of launch" Sweet... sign me up, brother.. it'll bring the bong..

    --
    ... I'll have a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster with a side of Plutonium Nyborg ...
    1. Re:Will they use Judas Priest to test it? by frankmu · · Score: 1

      Fire!!! Bomber!!! (sorry, bad Macross 7 joke)

      --
      Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.
    2. Re:Will they use Judas Priest to test it? by Ginnungagap42 · · Score: 1

      I was recently up at GSFC and got a chance to see the acoustic test chambers firsthand. The big horn (yes, there is a little one too) sits at the top of the acoustic test chamber and is roughly the size of a Volkswagen Beetle. They weren't testing at that point, but I'm informed that the whole building shakes when they fire this thing up. It simulates the noise and vibration of a launch. Definitely loud enough to annoy the neighbors. I wanted one for my living room.

  6. Wait by bobwrit · · Score: 0

    Wait a second, NASA has been saying that the LRO will strike in october of this year. And now it's in march? I think their being fickle.

    --
    -- (this is a sig) My Computer Programming Forumhttp://www.programers.co.nr/
    1. Re:Wait by mweather · · Score: 2, Funny

      It'll be released sometime between the release of Playstation Home and Duke Nukem Forever.

  7. I hope not! by Thelasko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    . Using vibration and rotation tests NASA scientists were able to determine the center of gravity...

    That should be:

    . Using vibration and rotation tests NASA scientists were able to confirm the center of gravity...

    If they couldn't determine the center of gravity before they built the thing, they have some serious issues. Vibration characteristics are a bit more difficult, but I suspect the folks at NASA are smart enough determine those before they built the thing too.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    1. Re:I hope not! by Tmack · · Score: 3, Informative

      . Using vibration and rotation tests NASA scientists were able to determine the center of gravity...

      If they couldn't determine the center of gravity before they built the thing, they have some serious issues. /p>

      THAT should be: If they couldn't engineer the thing with the center of gravity exactly where they want it... Center of Gravity and Center of Lift are usually two things aircraft are designed around. Hopefully a rocket based craft would be designed with the center of lift centered in the engine cluster, with the vector pointing generally up the middle and through the center of Gravity of the whole ship. Vectored or differential thrust shifting this lift vector around that CG point to change where its going. If you dont put the CG where you want it, it doesnt fly where you want it to. Granted, the CG of the capsule is high enough on the rocket and of low enough mass that its CG point can probably be off a good bit and still be compensated for, but the CG should still be an easy engineering calculation given the computer models, etc. They should even have the CG pinpointed for every load scenario of passengers and other cargo items, so they can load the craft without displacing the CG too greatly.

      Tm

      --
      Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
    2. Re:I hope not! by vbraga · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, it's only a confirmation of design phase estimates and calculations. If it's slightly off where it's required to be, small weights can be added to put it where it should. Some fine grained measures must also be taken for attitude control.

      (English is not my first language, so, if there's something wrong with my post, I'll be glad to know and learn =))

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    3. Re:I hope not! by KingKiki217 · · Score: 0, Redundant

      OK. I'm not normally a grammar Nazi, but if you'd like:
      If it's slightly off (of/from) where it's required to be, small weights can be added to put it where it should (be).

      "Some fine grained measures must also be taken for attitude control."
      'measures' should be 'measurements'.

      But these are all nit-picky things, and you're much more coherent than most of the native English speakers that I know.

    4. Re:I hope not! by Bob+Loblaw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That should be:

      . Using vibration and rotation tests NASA scientists were able to confirm the center of gravity...

      If they couldn't determine the center of gravity before they built the thing, they have some serious issues

      It is the difference between theory and reality.

      Due to non-homogenous material like composite honeycomb panels and things notoriously difficult to model like wiring bundles, you have to do a mass properties test to know (and adjust) the mass distribution within some tolerance permitted by the launch vehicle.

      Otherwise, spin stablized orbital injection burns might not give enough forward thrust due to product of inertia wobble.

  8. The center of gravity is important. by Poromenos1 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Hmm... Center of gravity... For space... These days I'm more and more convinced that these scientists are just pulling our leg.

    "Hey Mort, let's ask them for billions so we can build something to send to space!"
    "Haha, space? Where do you come up with this stuff?"
    "Yeah, it'll be great!"

    ...months pass...

    "I have another idea, let's tell them we need to determine the center of gravity!"
    "The center of *gravity* for *spacecraft*? Right after we told them we found water on Mars? Isn't it a bit obvious?"
    "No man, it'll be great, you'll see! They actually think we sent a robot to Mars, they'll easily fall for this."

    --
    Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
    1. Re:The center of gravity is important. by snl2587 · · Score: 2

      Hmm... Center of gravity... For space... These days I'm more and more convinced that these scientists are just pulling our leg.

      They probably did spend way too much money doing it, but testing for the center of gravity is important if you actually want it to get into space and in the right direction. And in the extreme case, it keeps the rocket from arching back down to earth.

    2. Re:The center of gravity is important. by Vertana · · Score: 0

      It's important when they consider how much fuel is gonna be required for launch and at what angle to the center of the earth they should launch it at for the craft to get the right amount of thrust and height for orbit.

      --
      "The best way to accelerate a Macintosh is at 9.8m/sec^2" -Marcus Dolengo
    3. Re:The center of gravity is important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I happen to be an aerospace engineer (formerly at JPL), and the center of gravity is actually extremely important after launch as well. NASA is not pulling your leg.

      You may replace the "center of gravity" with "mass distribution" or "center of mass" if it makes you feel better. The term is a hold-over from the early days, and is a term of art than any engineer would recognize and understand. You just need the contextual information that an engineering education provides.

      The actual product of the test is both a location of the center of mass of the spacecraft and a mass distribution matrix, commonly called an inertia matrix or inertia tensor.

      The attitude control system (my specialty) requires very accurate knowledge of where the center of gravity and the geometric centers are. These are used to compute both control and disturbance torques on the spacecraft. Without a C.G test it is almost impossible to get the pointing performance (sub-arc-second) many of the payloads require on modern spacecraft. The CAD/Solidworks models are rarely good enough for this, and although some things can be done to estimate the C.G. in-orbit, you still have to get through launch and initial checkout with whatever data you launched with. C.Gs are estimated in space to handle things like fuel loss.

    4. Re:The center of gravity is important. by everphilski · · Score: 1

      You must be one of those people that thinks an orbiting spacecraft is not subject to the forces of gravity, huh?

    5. Re:The center of gravity is important. by Poromenos1 · · Score: 1

      I know, I'm an engineer myself, it's just funnier to think that all this is just an elaborate prank :P

      --
      Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
    6. Re:The center of gravity is important. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "They probably did spend way too much money doing it, but testing for the center of gravity is important if you actually want it to get into space and in the right direction."

      Whooooshhhh!!!

      Center of *gravity* on an ungravity scenario? Center of *masses* it's what they have tested for. Yes, for common speech it's just the same, but this is Slashdot: go out and let your nerd license on the table.

    7. Re:The center of gravity is important. by snl2587 · · Score: 1

      Center of *gravity* on an ungravity scenario?

      I must point out that despite the center of mass being the more correct way to describe it under all scenarios, in this case I'm correct. During lift-off, gravity still acts on the object uniformally. If it is not placed in correct alignment based in its center of mass/gravity, the shuttle will be off balance, if even by a little bit, and would need a course-correction. In practice it wouldn't make much of a difference, but still...

      I'll keep my card, thank you very much.

  9. This is routine testing by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's normal stuff. I used to work for a company that built satellites. One of their test fixtures was a shake table connected to a water-cooled voice-coil actuator with a megawatt amplifier driving it. They had accelerometer data from actual launches, and they'd use that to drive the shake table.

  10. What about the smell test? by FlyingSquidStudios · · Score: 1

    Will it be able to stand the odor of 80 billion tons of green cheese?

    --
    http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
  11. 5 ton shake table by Jeff1946 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I remember visiting a facility in Brooklyn shake testing a 5 ton piece of gear for a Navy ship. When we got out of the car we noticed the parking meter was vibrating due to vibrations being transferred to the earth. I'm sure the folks living nearby must have enjoyed it when stuff fell over in their apartments. Later the gear was shock tested by attaching it to a barge and setting off explosive charges in the water. This was done in an old flooded slate quarry.

    1. Re:5 ton shake table by Agripa · · Score: 1

      That is nothing. The place I was working at in Covina was doing a full scale dead load creep tests when the Whittier Narrows earthquake occured. The three story tall deal load machine failed the test . . .

  12. What happened to the Indian & Japanese spacesh by heroine · · Score: 1

    NASA gets a lot of microscopic attention for a spaceship which won't even launch until the next president, if the moon program still exists by then. Meanwhile there are still developments with an Indian spaceship which is supposed to launch this year & the Japanese spaceship put out another movie from the actual moon yesterday, just in a format no-one can play.

  13. So, does that mean the Easy Bake oven goes to by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    "QUEASY Bake"?

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  14. Re:What happened to the Indian & Japanese spac by bsdphx · · Score: 1

    Info on the Indian spacecraft can be found at http://www.chandrayaan-i.com/

    As for the attention LRO is getting... well good! The various instruments on this orbiter will provide massive amounts of data, useful in several fields of science. It's also an important step for the planned presence on the moon.

  15. Robot scouts ftw! by damburger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It seems NASAs automated probes are doing a bit better than the manned program. If they do well enough, will it cause Project Constellation to be cut back or canceled?

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:Robot scouts ftw! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've been doing better for awhile now. The first unmanned mission to another planet (Venus) happened in 1962. Nineteen-freakin-sixty-two.

      Except for Apollo, manned spaceflight has accomplished nothing.

      The Space Shuttle is the short bus of the U.S. space program

    2. Re:Robot scouts ftw! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, for multiple reasons:
      1. "The gap".
      2. Most of the unmanned work has been done by the Science Mission Directorate (SMD). Most of the Constellation money is going to the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD). SMD's budget has suffered to free up funding for Constellation. ESMD will fight hard to protect that funding.
      3. "Sunk Costs" may be a fallacy, but it's still a pretty compelling argument when you're talking about billions.
      4. Constellation is providing jobs in well-represented congressional districts. Elected officials from Texas and Alabama will protect that.

  16. Open-Source the Darn thing by failedlogic · · Score: 0

    This - http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/01/1344232 (3D Printing for Everyone) is a great opportunity for the community to develop lunar spaceships. If they can make a Lego-kit with a working scale engine, remote control and propellant - I open-source develop the heck out of this thing!

    Anyone else?

    1. Re:Open-Source the Darn thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm either confused with what you are suggesting, or you are confused about the capabilities of 3D printers.

      3D printers normally print in non-structural materials, generally with accuracy and surface texture unsuitable for direct use, and are size restricted.

      And are quite expensive.

      If you just want to make a pretty model to look at, just use a modeling program.