Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
With impressive speed and candor, Rocket Factory Augsburg (RFA) has provided an update on the anomaly that caused last week's rocket firing at SaxaVord in Shetland, Scotland, to end explosively.
The first stage of RFA's rocket explodes on the SaxaVord launchpad
Brieschenk described the anomaly as "a very unusual one." The leading theory is that there was a fire in an oxygen pump, which is difficult to contain and certainly more than the systems on the stage and launch pad could handle. The damage rapidly spread to the other engines, and despite the stage triggering an emergency stop, the explosion happened shortly after.
The horizontal jet of flame from the base of the stage was indicative of the severity of the damage. Brieschenk explained that the compromised engines had damaged the manifold to such an extent that kerosene began leaking from the vent lines. "That was really the point of no return," he said.
The kerosene fueled the fire. The flames grew more intense and eventually became an oxygen-fed blaze so severe that "large portions of engines were simply combusted." Brieschenk said the CO2 and water fire suppression systems were not adequately sized to deal with the unfolding damage.
Despite the inevitable delay following the explosion, Brieschenk was keen to highlight that the stage collapsed in a manner which caused it to topple away from the launch pad's umbilical tower. As a result, the pad remained relatively unscathed, aside from elements like the launch stool that were designed to support the stage.
Although Brieschenk said RFA was confident in the design of the offending turbopump, he also noted that more than 100 improvements were being made to the next first stage, which is currently under construction. Many of these improvements aim to prevent a repeat of the SaxaVord incident, where a single turbopump failure led to the loss of the entire stage.
The need to wait for the completion of this first stage, originally intended for the second flight of the RFA One, means that the inaugural launch has been postponed to 2025. The other components, like the second stage, for example, are already at SaxaVord.
The company said it was being as transparent as possible regarding the mishap and was sharing its own raw footage of the incident. It wrote: "Maybe other companies or prospective engineers can learn from it."
You can watch the vid here. Brieschenk concluded: "Enjoy the footage. It is very spectacular, and it has cost us quite some money to generate."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by anubi on Friday August 30, @10:51PM (8 children)
The tiniest little detail will ruin the grandest of plans. That is the biggest lesson my stint in industry taught me.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by corey on Saturday August 31, @12:58AM (7 children)
Yep. I have been testing my latest prototype PCB hardware for work and the assembler has installed a 1M resistor instead of a 100k in the power regulator voltage setting circuit. Meant that instead of outputting 3.3V, it went to 23V which promptly killed all the ICs on the board within a second. I’m trying to determine what’s not dead. But it was initially powered on by a colleague who didn’t check everything. Anyway, lesson learned to check critical things like this.
(Score: 2) by corey on Saturday August 31, @01:01AM (3 children)
Oh and with regards to TFA, I enjoyed the video (apart from being on LinkedIn). The guy seems really upfront and apolitical which is great to see for once. I wish them success for the future. Rocketry is hard. NASA and the Russians destroyed dozens before launching successfully back in the heydays.
(Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Saturday August 31, @02:36AM
Yeah - I'll second your comment about upfront and apolitical. I was mentally poking a little fun at him for doing a press release in a T-shirt, and for needing a shave, for uncombed hair, and a funny accent. All of that was just in fun though - obviously he's been a busy man, and he's under a lot of pressure. He delivered a clear, concise statement that seems 100% honest, and devoid of political sucking up. That is refreshing.
A MAN Just Won a Gold Medal for Punching a Woman in the Face
(Score: 2) by driverless on Saturday August 31, @03:11AM
That's one thing you need to keep in mind when you read about stuff like this, often-catastrophic failures are part of the learning process, and there were many, many of them in every rocket development process. Have a look at film footage of the US' early attempts to launch satellites, and then ponder the fact that years later when they launched the first astronauts there was still a one in three chance they'd die during the launch. That's worse odds than Russian roulette.
Nowadays we expect everything to go right the first time, or close to it, which was never the case in the past.
(Score: 3, Funny) by driverless on Saturday August 31, @03:19AM
From the description of SaxaVord:
So they've got a giant ignition source not far from an equally large high-proof alcohol store. Now all they need to do is to build a fireworks factory a bit further up to provide a more target-rich environment.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RS3 on Saturday August 31, @02:24AM
Oh gosh, sorry to hear. That's a difficult one. We (EEs) try to design in safeguards, margins for error, etc., but that's a difficult one.
Hindsight is 20/20.
I'd suggest: a separation between the 3.3V regulator and the rest of the circuits. Cut a trace if you have to, then jumper it when you're sure things are okay. Connect a "dummy load" power resistor to the 3.3V output to be sure the 3.3V is working properly (before connecting 3.3V to the rest of the circuits).
Most regulation is done in cascade. Running 23V into a 3.3V regulator might be a bit dangerous. Many 3.3V regs. use 5V in, which often comes from 9V or 12V. But maybe your design doesn't have other voltages?
Another safeguard, esp. for prototyping, is called a "crowbar" circuit. Just do a websearch on that and look at images. Post any questions and I'll do my best to answer.
Did you lose some expensive ICs?
Assuming it's all SMD, do you have a hot air rework station?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 31, @02:25AM
It's been years, but I recall bringing up new boards on lab-bench power supplies: For stuff running on DC, starting at a very low voltage and with a low setting for the current limit. For things with an integrated AC power supply, powered up through a variac*, starting at low voltage. Always while measuring test points on the board.
This helps to keep the smoke inside all those little components.
* Note that variacs don't isolate from the line, for high voltage testing (like an old TV HV power supply) a true isolation transformer is usually recommended.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Snotnose on Saturday August 31, @04:42AM
Not to threadjack, but in the early 80s we got a lot of boards (10 boards per lot) where they had put capacitors where pull up resistors should have gone. Turns out RAM gets flaky when it's address and data lines are charging caps instead of being pulled up. Who knew?
Ended up being cheaper trashing the whole lot instead of R&R'ing the caps, probably because who knows what else went wrong at the factory?
Bad decisions, great stories