National Aeronautics and Space Administration

SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM

Fundamentals of Launch Vehicle Ablative

Thermal Protection System (TPS) Materials
TFAWS2017 READINESS ASSESSM ENT

Darrell Davis
 CFD, Miniver, Design, and Thermal…

What is TPS?
Thermal Protection System
A system designed to protect a
spacecraft from exposure to thermal
environments
Ascent/Re-entry
Natural Environments
Orbital Environments

Different classes of TPS

Ablators
Insulators
Multi-Layer Insulation (MLI)
Blankets
 Which TPS To Use?
• Many factors determine which TPS to use
• Weight
• Processing
• Purpose
• Optical Properties
• Exposure to Environments
• Special Properties
• RF Transmissivity
• Durability during processing

• Collaboration with Materials & Processing to determine which material is best

Ablators

• Ablative materials are designed to provide thermal protection through

loss of mass.
• Mechanical removal & pyrolysis gases takes energy
• Exposes relatively cooler material
 Ablative Materials – MCC-1

• First flight of Marshall Convergent Coating

(MCC-1) was in 1996.
• Prior to that, SRB used Marshall Sprayable
Ablator (MSA)
• MSA had low tensile strength
• MSA had wasteful batch process
• Surface imperfections required frequent
repair
• Lot of “pop-offs” that would damage orbiter
tiles

• Developed CST technology to remove issues

• Able to choose durable epoxy
• No batch issues
• Easily monitor flow rates

MSA pop-off
 Ablative Materials – MCC-1
• Marshall Convergent Coating (MCC-1)
• Two part epoxy adhesive filled with
ground cork and glass ecospheres.

• Sprayable ablative TPS developed for

Space Shuttle.

• Uses Convergent Spray Technology (CST)

developed at MSFC.
MCC-1 Spraying from Nozzle
• Primary SRB acreage TPS

MCC-1 Cross-Section and Surface

Ablative Materials – MCC-1

• Uses Convergent Spray Technology (CST) developed at MSFC.

• Can use a wide range of liquid and solid ingredients to create other materials
Ablative Materials – MCC-1

• Technology Transfer
• MCC-1 is used on other launch vehicles

SeaLaunch
Payload Fairings
Titan IV
Payload Fairings

Delta IV
Nosecones
Intertank
 Ablative Materials – MCC-1

•Technology Transfer
•Convergent Spray Technology is used in non-space
applications
•Epoxy filled with abrasive flint tested on road surfaces

•Skid Resistant

•Durable

•EPA Compliant
Ablative Materials – MCC-1

•Technology Transfer
•Acrylic filled with recycled rubber tested on two MSFC
building roofs

•Weathers well

•EPA Compliant

•Uses recycled
automobile tires
Ablative Materials – MCC-1

•Technology Transfer
• Convergent Spray Technology is used in non-space
applications
• Unknown proprietary liquids and solids
Ablative Materials – MCC-1

•Technology Transfer
• Convergent Spray Technology is used in non-space
applications
• Unknown proprietary liquids and solids
Ablative Materials – MCC-1

•MCC-1 is the main acreage TPS for the Space Shuttle Solid
Rocket Booster (SRB)

• Nosecap

• Frustum

• Forward Skirt

• Aft Skirt

• Systems Tunnel
 Ablative Materials – MCC-1

• MCC-1 application to Frustum

• Spray parameters are controlled by computer software
programs developed for each component.

• Table rotation speed

• Stand-off distance

• Vertical movement of arm

• Constituent flow velocity

 Ablative Materials - P50 Sheet Cork

• Insulative properties of cork have been known since ancient times

• Cork is the bark of the Cork Oak tree
• Grown mainly in Spain and Portugal

• Cork cells are small irregular pentagonal or hexagonal prisms.

• 50% of cork is gas enclosed in cells
• Low Conductivity
• No convection between cell structure
• Low radiation between cells.
 Ablative Materials - P50 Sheet Cork

• Cork has been used as a TPS from the beginning of space flight
• P50 cork is a composite of ground cork and phenolic binders
• Sheets of cork are purchased in relatively small sheets in specific
thicknesses.
• Sheet cork is used in areas that are hard to spray
• It is easy to cut and machine
Ablative Materials - P50 Sheet Cork

•. After the cork has been cut to shape, adhesive is applied to the both the
cork and the substrate in defined thicknesses

• The hardware is then completely covered by a vacuum bag for a

minimum of 8 hours. This helps ensure proper bonding.
Ablative Materials - P50 Sheet Cork

• Because of this labor intensive process and the small stock size,
sheet cork is not recommended for large areas
 Close Out Materials

•. Close out materials are hand applied and are used in areas where applying
cork is not convenient, in final assembly operations, and for repairs.

• For shuttle operations there were two close out materials used:
• BTA (Booster Trowellable Ablator)
• Thermal Ablative Compound (RT-455)

• For SLS operations, only RT-455 is used.

RT-455 closeout on the Diagonal Strut

 Close Out Materials
•. Booster Trowelable Ablator (BTA) is a mix of Epoxy, Glass Ecospheres and
ground cork.
• A vacuum mixer is required for processing.

• RT-455 is a mix of Polyamide Resin, Epoxy Resin, and ground cork

• RT-455 can be mixed by hand or by a mechanical mixer

BTA closeout on BSM Housing

 SF-EPDM

• Silica Filled Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer

• High Temperature Rubber

• Used in High Heat / High Shear areas

• For shuttle: Protuberances during re-entry

• Also used as a weatherseal on Factory Joints

SF-EPDM
 Topcoats

• Why are the TPS materials white on the Booster?

• Ablative TPS materials are covered with a moisture barrier topcoat.
• Prevent fungus growth and moisture absorption from the ambient
environment
Topcoats
• Hypalon is an environmentally complain polyethylene paint
• Made by Gaco Western,technically called GacoFlex.
• Referred to as Hypalon because it contains Hypalon rubber
• Percholoethylene free and lead free
• Used on SLS hardware processed in Florida.

• Acrymax is an acrylic latex elastomer paint

• Used on SLS hardware processed in Utah
Shuttle RSRB

Difference between SRB and RSRM

Forward Separation Motors

Frustum
Forward Skirt
Nose Cap Igniter/S&A
(pilot and
drogue Forward Segment With Igniter
parachutes)
Three Main Forward-Center
Parachutes Segment
Avionics Aft-Center Segment
Avionics
Three Aft Attach Struts
Systems Tunnel (ET attach ring)
Aft Segment
With Nozzle

Case Stiffener Rings

Thrust Vector Actuators
Supplied by Thiokol/ATK Aft Exit Cone
Supplied by USBI/USA Aft Separation
Aft Skirt
Motor
SRB Nosecap

Acreage:
MCC-1
 SRB Frustum
BSM Cover Plate
(not shown):
Cork

Closeout around
BSM Cover Plate:
BTA

Altitude Pressure Port:

Glass Phenolic

Acreage:
MCC-1

Trailing Edge:
MCC-1 over
BTA

Separation Ring:
Cork
 SRB Forward Skirt

Acreage:
MCC-1

Access Door:
Bare

Forward Skirt Camera:

Cover: Machined Cork
Aft Face: BTA

Range Safety System Antenna:

SLA-220
 SRB Forward Skirt
ET Observation Camera
Forward Attach Fitting
BTA
(Thrust Post):
Cork

Forward Skirt
Joint TPS:
Cork

Range Safety Crossover:

Boltcatcher
Cork
(Remains with ET):
BTA and RT455
Machined Cork
 Boltcatcher

ET SRB
SLA-561 Machined cork used
after Columbia

Silicone based
with cork filler

Used prior to
Columbia accident
 SRB Forward Skirt

Closeout:
Forward Skirt Cover:
RT455
Cork
 RSRM Motor Case
Factory Joint: GEI Run GEI Run
EPDM Cork RT455

Systems Tunnel Cover:

MCC-1
 RSRM Motor Case
Field Joint:
Field Joint:
Cork
RT455

System Tunnel Closeout: Heater Cable Closeout: Heater Cable Closeout:

Cork Cork RT455
 Attach Ring and Aft Strut
ETAR Forward Web:
Porta-Pull Repair:
Froth Pak Foam
PDL
Over Cork

Strut Cover: Outboard Cover: Field Joint

EPDM Cork Cork and RT-455
 Attach Ring and Aft Strut
Upper Strut:
IEA Box Cover: Cork
Cork RT455 over fracture plane

ETAR Aft Web: Diagonal Strut:

Froth Pak Foam Cork
Cork RT455 over fracture plane
 Attach Ring Camera
Camera Body: Note: Off gassing of foam
Machined Cork constituents

Close Out:
BTA
Field
Joint

IEA Box:
Cork with RT455 Closeout Aft Forward
 RSRM Motor Case – Aft Segment
TVC Access Doors Aft Crossover Housing
Bare Aluminum MCC-1

Aft Skirt
Joint TPS:
Cork

Stiffener Rings: Active Stiffener Stubs:

EPDM EPDM
Foam applied for water impact protection
 SRB Aft Skirt
Actuator Support Bracket:
Kick Ring:
Cork
Phenolic Laminate

Aft Fastener Row:

Acreage: MCC-1 over
MCC-1 Cork and BTA
 SRB Thermal Curtain

Aft Skirt RSRM

Nozzle
Inner and Outer
Blanket
Astroquartz
Fiberglass

Viton-Coated
Nylon
RSRM Nozzle

Nozzle Plug Nozzle Exit Cone

Cork Cork
Post-Flight
Post-Flight
Post-Flight
Post-Flight
Post-Flight
Post-Flight

SRB components have the RSRM components are shipped

TPS removed, are refurbished, back to Utah via train for inspection
and are kept at KSC. and refurbishment. The cases will
be loaded with propellant and
shipped back to KSC.
 How Did We Get To This Point?

• Many factors in determining which ablative TPS to use.

• Processing
• Weight
• Recession Rate
• Insulative Properties (low conductivity, high capacitance)
• Special Properties (RF transmissive, withstand lightning strikes,
etc.)

• Typically a collaboration between Materials/Processes and Thermal to

determine which materials to use in which application.
 How Did We Get To This Point?
Analysis
• Once a TPS is selected, the next challenge is to determine the required thickness
• Structural analysis determines substrate temperature limit
• Need enough TPS to protect substrate
• Additional TPS adds weight to component
• With ablative materials, must account for surface ablation
• Conductive path and thermal capacitance values change with time
• Once a material reaches its ablation temperature, analytical surface
ablation begins.

Flow Flow Flow

TPS

Substrate
Natural Environments

• Analysis begins with applying natural environments.

• Especially important for Cryoinsulation
• Ambient environments will affect boil-off of cryogenic liquids
• Also affect ice/frost formation on TPS surface
• For SRB, initial temperatures affect electronics, high-stress areas,
PMBT, etc.

Direct Solar Sky Radiation

Diffuse Solar
Ground Reflected
Solar
Emitted Radiation

Forced Convection

Ground Radiation
 Induced Environments

• External thermal environments are provided by MSFC’s Aerosciences Branch

269120 Aft 285301 Aft 269020 Aft
269121 Side 285302 Side
285601 Aft
389601 Aft 285602 Side
389602 Side 379601 Aft
379602 Side
270002
265101
270001
Heating vs Time for Body Point 379602, SRB Aft Skirt toward Center RS-25
270201 285501 Aft (Side)
379201 Aft
285502 Side
270000

270202 25.00
Load(Tw=0F) = 1176.2 BTU/ft^2

20.00
q (BTU/ft^2-s)

389501 Aft 15.00

389502 Side q_dotr,379602
q_dotc,Tw = 0,379602
379501 Aft 10.00
379502 Side q_dott,Tw = 0,379602

5.00

0.00
0 50 100 150
Time(s)
 Analysis

• Data required for TPS sizing analysis

• Geometry – MSFC’s Structural & Mechanical Design Branch (EV32)
• Materials – TPS and Substrate – MSFC’s Materials Lab (EM) and EV32
• Substrate Temperature Limit – EM and EV32
• Natural Environments – MSFC’s Natural Environments Branch (EV44)
• Induced Environments – MSFC’s Aerosciences Branch (EV33)
• Material Properties – MSFC’s Materials Lab (EM)
• Density
• Specific Heat
• Conductivity
• Absorptivity and emissivity
• Ablation Temperature
• TPS Recession Rate – Typically generated by a Thermal group
• This is where we begin to differ from a true chemical ablation analysis
Thermogravimetric Analysis

• A ground sample of the material is place in the crucible.

• The crucible is heated by small furnace, typically in an inert environment.
• A balance weighs the sample as various components offgas.
• Is used to generate an ablation temperature.
• Different criteria have been used to define ablation temperature.
 Analysis

• Data required for TPS sizing analysis

• Geometry – MSFC’s Structural & Mechanical Design Branch (EV32)
• Materials – TPS and Substrate – MSFC’s Materials Lab (EM) and EV32
• Substrate Temperature Limit – EM and EV32
• Natural Environments – MSFC’s Natural Environments Branch (EV44)
• Induced Environments – MSFC’s Aerosciences Branch (EV33)
• Material Properties – MSFC’s Materials Lab (EM)
• Density
• Specific Heat
• Conductivity
• Absorptivity and emissivity
• Ablation Temperature
• TPS Recession Rate – Typically generated by a Thermal group
• This is where we begin to differ from a true chemical ablation analysis
• Conservative process developed at beginning of Shuttle program
• Proven methodology
• No schedule or funding for testing required to validate chemical
ablation analysis
MSFC’s Hot Gas Facility (HGF)
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
 MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
• Mach 4 Aerothermodynamic testing facility for Thermal Protection System
materials.

• Combustion driven – lean mixture of gaseous Hydrogen (GH2) and missile

grade air.
o
• Capable of temperatures of 1440 – 2400 F and total pressures of 100 – 220 psia.

• 300kW radiant lamp system provides plume environment simulation. The only
Mach 4 convective facility that can provide radiant environment.

• Shutter system in test section allows flow to become stable before insertion of
test panel.

• Infrared (IR) thermal imaging/video capabilities allow for real-time surface

temperature measurements.

• The HGF is reasonably small, inexpensive in operation, very flexible and efficient,
and is operated with a small, highly experienced crew.
 MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)

• Heritage facility dates to the 1970’s.

• Current facility was constructed in the 1980’s

• Many updates since then.

• Improvements to the combustor to provide more uniform flow – 1990’s
• Panel insertion system – 1994
• 300kW radiant lamp – 1995
• Water cooled test section – 2013
• New combustor – 2017
• Enlarged throat downstream of test section - 2017
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
New Combustor

Resonator Fuel Injector

Baffle Plate
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
New Combustor
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
New Combustor
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
New Combustor
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)

Picture of test section

 MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
Hot Gas Facility
GH2 Supply
IR Camera
Flow Direction Video Camera

Nozzle
Test Section
Throat
Insertion System
Combustion
Chamber

Air Supply
GN2 Ejector and
TPS Testing and Analysis
Exhaust Section
Darrell Davis/EV34
 MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)

Inconel
Nozzle Test Section 2nd Throat Diffuser Ejector Diffuser

Throat

Igniter

Support Structure Combustor 2nd Throat GN2 Ejector Subsonic Diffuser

Transition Section
 Purpose of RHGF1

•Data required for TPS sizing analysis

• Geometry – MSFC’s Structural & Mechanical Design Branch (EV32)
• Materials – TPS and Substrate – MSFC’s Materials Lab (EM) and EV32
• Substrate Temperature Limit – EM and EV32
• Natural Environments – MSFC’s Natural Environments Branch (EV44)
• Induced Environments – MSFC’s Aerosciences Branch (EV33)
• Material Properties –
• Density
• Specific Heat
• Conductivity
• Absorptivity and emissivity
• Ablation Temperature
• TPS Recession Rate – Typically generated by a Thermal group
• This is where we begin to differ from a true chemical ablation analysis
MSFC’s Redesigned Hot Gas Facility (RHGF1)
Scraping Process
Scraping Process
 Recession Rate Curve

Rdot = a*qcw b
100

MCC-1 Design Line

MCC-1 Nominal Line
MCC-1 w/3216 95% Design Curve
10
Nominal Curve
Recession Rate (mils/sec)

0.1

0.01
1 10 100
Qdot Cold Wall (BFS)
Analysis Results

SLS Aft Exit Cone

800 0.4

TPS Surface Temperature

Char/Pyrolysis Layer
700 0.35

600 0.3

Thickness (inches)
Temperature (F)

500 0.25

TPS Thickness
400 0.2

300 0.15

200 0.1

Substrate Temperature
100 0.05

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Time (seconds)
Conservatisms in SRB TPS Sizing

1. Continous Mach 4 shear environment in test facility

2. Removing char before post-test measurements
3. The RHGF1 generates enthalpy levels higher than flight. Testing has
shown that a higher enthalpy at the same heat rate will generate
more recession
4. These parameters generate a conservative recession. We then generate
a 95% design equation for analysis
5. And use a 99.7% Aeroheating flight environment for analysis
6. Analysis assumes total loss of material at ablation temperature.
Does not account for insulative properties of remaining char
7. Recession rate does not account for effects of paint. Nor are the
thermophysical properties of paint used in analysis.
This is why…..

We look like this in testing And this in post-flight

 Why Don’t We Change

• Conservative process developed at beginning of Shuttle program

• Proven methodology

• No schedule or funding for testing required to validate chemical ablation analysis

• Conservative approach adds mass, but at a lower complexity

• 10-1 payload mass ratio for SRB.

• The cost trade-off of developing a fully characterized TPS multi-environment

ablation test program was chosen at the expense of mass.
Still More Testing

• Most of the time, more, specific testing is required.

• Non-Thermal environments
• Specific design issues
• In-Flight anomaly
• Material changes
Qualification Testing

• Once we have determined desired TPS material and thickness we do

verification and qualification testing.

• Previous testing determined a recession rate for specific TPS materials.

Qualification testing is focused on testing the entire TPS system
at expected flight environments.

• Verification and qualification testing will ensure that the combination of all
materials in the Thermal Protection System will not degrade the
overall performance.
Hypalon
Weatherproofing
Topcoat

Ablator

Primer
Topcoat
Substrate Pretreatment
Qualification Testing

• The RHGF1 cannot match the exact flight aeroheating profile.

• The intent is to match the peak heat rates and integrate load.

• Again, the intent is to be conservative, not exact.

Qualification Testing

• If the TPS material is new, or the testing involves a material obsolescence

issue, the TPS is still not qualified for use on a flight vehicle.

• There are several requirements for TPS on a flight vehicle.

• Shock/Vibration
• Fungus
• Humidity
• Lightning
• Ice/Hail
• Flora/Fauna
• Rain
• Salt Fog
• Sand/Dust
• Solar Radiation/Ultraviolet
• 180 Day Pad Stay

• Fortunately, most of these requirements are met by Beach Exposure Testing

Beach Exposure Testing

• Painted qualification test panels are placed on stands near the beach
• Typically for 180 days
• Panels are monitored occasionally to document degradation
• Panels are brought to RHGF1 for testing
• Pass/Fail requirement is no increase in recession or debris generation
Lightning Strike Testing

• Ensure effects of impact does not generate secondary debris

• Ensure substrate temperature limit is not violated

Lightning Strike Testing

High Energy Lightning Simulator – Redstone Technical Test Center

Lightning Strike Testing
Lightning Strike Testing
Vibration Testing

• Ensure TPS system can withstand flight vibration environments

• No degradation of materials
• No debonds generated
• No debris
Pyro Shock Testing

Pyro charges are placed on the back of a steel plate with a RHGF1
panel bolted to it.

TPS panel will be taken to RHGF1 and tested to ensure no hidden TPS
cracks or debonds from the substrate.
Debris Generation Testing
• RHGF1 can be used to determine the likelihood of debris generation
• Typically the facility is not conservative for debris generation
• Debris is generated by increasing pressure in a void
• Must have time for pressure to build before void is exposed
• Low heat rate, long duration testing is more conservative for
debris generation
• Because of high shear environment, voids tend to vent before
enough pressure can build up
Debris Generation Testing

Post-Flight
observation of
cork “spalling”
Debris Impact Testing

• After the Columbia accident, all TPS materials were tested for debris
impact effects

• Photos of cork after ice impact testing.

• Ensure impact doesn’t generate secondary debris
• Ensure substrate temperature limit is not violated
Age Life Testing

• Most components of TPS materials have shelf life limits and cannot be
used past that date.
• However, the expectation is that, once the material has been sprayed,
or mixed, it is stable.
• This was not too bad of an assumption during shuttle operations.
• For SLS, Booster hardware is already being processed.
• MCC-1 sprays are expected later this year.
• With current schedule, it could be two years before material flies.
• Longer for EM-2.
• Currently, all TPS materials and topcoat combinations are undergoing
Age life testing.
• Panels are stored in a controlled environment until approximately
6 months prior to test.
• Spend next 6 months at the Beach Exposure Facility.
• Zero Time (baseline) panels have already been tested
• Will test at 3 and 6 years for Florida TPS/paint/bond systems
• Will test at 2, 5, and 8 years for Utah TPS/paint/bond systems
Material Obsolescence Issues

• Over the past 40 years of using the same TPS materials, vendors
change components.
• When we are aware of it, we need to test to ensure the change
had no effect on TPS ablation performance.
• Clay used in catalyst in RT-455 component
• Vendor that makes component used in RT-455 closes.
• Facility changes

• Also have concerns when components are out of spec.

• They may be close enough that a problem is not expected, but
must test to verify.
• Amount of “fines” in ground cork
• Too much bark in ground cork
• Too much moisture in ground cork
• Sprayed MCC-1 density is too low
More Testing

• If the TPS passes all of the described testing, it is now qualified

for use on a flight vehicle.
• We often say that if it can pass our testing, it won’t have any
problem flying on a vehicle.

• However, there are times when more testing is required.

• There are times that the TPS is exposed to an environment
that is unique and is not adequately enveloped by existing
testing.
• Testing is not cheap, but it is cheaper than an In-Flight
Anomaly (IFA) investigation.
• Don’t fly on a “gut feel”.
More Testing

• For the Ares vehicle, Hydrazine exhaust plumes from Roll Control
and Reaction Control thrusters would impinge on Cork and NCFI
Cryoinsulation.
• A search of historical data did not uncover and information on
how Hydrazine exhaust plumes would affect TPS.
• Shear levels
• Chemical incompatibility
• Effect of duty cycle

• The TPS needed to be tested in an actual thruster plume.

• Ensure recession rate curve was as good as, or better than,
heritage data.
• Didn’t want to under design TPS thickness
 More Testing

• Reaction Control testing was

performed at the AMPAC test
facility in Niagara Falls, NY

• Used a MONARC 445, 100 lbf

thrust monopropellant Hydrazine
thruster

• Generated 0 – 25 BTU/ft2 sec

• Constant heat rate – compare to

heritage recession rate.
More Testing

Same process as RHGF1: Calibration, Test, Measure, Scrape, Measure

More Testing

• Cork ablation was less than historical database

• NCFI 24-124 was similar to historical database
• Surface roughness makes measurement difficult. With small
recession thickness, measurement errors are magnified.
• Overall, analytical uses of existing recession rates are conservative.
 More Testing
• Roll Control thruster testing at Aerojet test facility in Sacramento, California

• Used a MR-80C, 625 lbf thrust monopropellant Hydrazine thruster

• Generated 0 – 50 BTU/ft2 sec
• Piggyback test
• Not able to maintain constant heat rate.
• Unable to plot recession rate versus heat rate.
 More Testing

Pre-Test Post-Test

Post-Scrape
More Testing
More Testing

Predicted Recession
Ares BDM Testing

• In the Ares design, the Booster Separation Motors (BSM) were turned and
pointed upward, and renamed Booster Deceleration Motors (BDM)
• In this configuration, the plume would impinge on several TPS
materials
• This created a new, untested, extreme environment.
• High temperature, short duration, particulate.
• More Testing!
Ares BDM Testing

• The first test was performed at MSFC’s East Test Area

 Ares BDM Testing

• The test was instrumented,

but the main objective was
to see if the foam would
survive.

• As you can see in the

second picture, the plume
wrapped around the
backside and burned most
of our instrumentation leads.

• The foam did survive.

• A lot of times, the most

important thing you learn in
a test is what NOT to do
next time!
Ares BDM Testing

• The next tests were at ATK in Utah.

• You can see the improvements from the previous test
Ares BDM Testing

Instrumentation
Panel SF-EPDM
MCC-1
BTA

Boundary
Layer
Plate

Post-test Photographs
 Ares BDM Testing

Motor fires for 0.8 – 1.0 seconds

Ares BDM Testing

Ares 1-X post-flight showing the effects of the BDM plume on foam used
for water impact mitigation
Differences between SLS and Shuttle

Thermal Curtain pre-ignition environments for SLS increased over

heritage Shuttle
 Thermal Curtain
• Viton/nylon layer in necessary for structural integrity during ignition overpressure
• Pre-launch SLS radiation environments increased
• SLS ascent environments were enveloped by Shuttle heritage
• Need design to protect 7 second Main Engine firing
 Thermal Curtain
• The pre-ignition environment is purely a radiant environment.
• Tested at MSFC’s Test Stand 300’s radiant lamp bank.
• Viton/Nylon sample tested at a heat rate lower than design.
• Results showed the necessity of a design change.
Thermal Curtain

• Layer of highly reflective Gentex material added to Thermal Curtain layers.

• Since ascent environments are less than heritage Shuttle, Gentex only has
to survive through the 7 second pre-ignition stage.
Thermal Curtain

• The Gentex layer is only required to survive one exposure.

• Since it performed so well, it was tested two more times to simulate
potential launch scrubs after Main Engine start.

After first test After second test After third test

 Core Stage Green Run
Core Stage plans a 500 second
Green Run on an actual flight Core
Stage to verify the Main Propulsion
System.

Testing will be at the Stennis Space

Center

Base Heat Shield is protected

by P50 cork and is sized for
flight.
Core Stage Green Run

• Base Heat Shield is protected by P50 cork and is sized for flight.
• Need additional TPS to protect for 500 second Green Run.
• However, we know our sizing methodology is conservative – there
won’t be as much ablation as we predict.
• So, there will be a lot of added cork still left on the flight vehicle.
• More weight to carry – Core Stage is a 1:1 ratio
• Removing additional cork is time consuming and labor intensive
• Produces dust that can damage surrounding hardware
• May have to reapply Hypalon topcoat with an unqualified method

• Additional P50 is not a reasonable solution.

• Cannot attach any design solutions to test stand.
• Flight P50 cork cannot exceed 300 degrees F to maintain virgin
properties
• Mitigating solution cannot cause slip in schedule to install, or remove.
Core Stage Green Run

• Proposed solution was to add reflective film to reflect radiant energy and
add a layer of cryoinsulation foam to limit conduction.

• Proof of concept testing at RHGF1

• Use radiant lamp and allow test area supply air to flow over panel to
simulate cooling effect of ingested air.

• EV33, MSFC’s Aerosciences Branch provided both the flow rate for
ingested air from a CFD model, and a Green Run radiant environment.
Core Stage Green Run

• First test was to verify the need for reflective film.

Pre-Test Post-Test
Core Stage Green Run

• Next test was to verify the advantage of reflective film.

Pre-Test Post-Test
Core Stage Green Run

• Results of the test were so successful that future testing will remove the
S-180 and test the foil directly over the flight cork.

• Thermocouples will monitor surface temperature of cork.

• If this design is selected, it’s possible that the foil may be left on for flight.
• Not as a thermal design requirement, but to reduce processing time.
Cryoinsulation

• Part II – Cryoinsulation – Analysis and Testing