• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Question...

C

CTho9305

Elite Member
Would a scaled-up heat pipe on the shuttle help in the event of losing multiple tiles? They move heat pretty fast... would it be possible to spread the heat out effectively enough that the shuttle makes it through the period of highest intensity heat? Or would having more than 1 or 2 tiles missing mean that so much heat would get in that even spreading it wouldn't help?

How much weight would such a system add?
 
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
I'm sure if it was an effective solution the engineers would have included it.
Click to expand...

Presumably yes. My question is more of a "why isn't it effective" than "engineers are stupid" since I'm pretty sure they know more than I do 😉. Maybe they didn't have reliable heatpipes 22 years ago, or they weigh a lot, or that situation isn't survivable anyway. Just wondering what the reason is 🙂
 
Originally posted by: CTho9305
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
I'm sure if it was an effective solution the engineers would have included it.
Click to expand...
Presumably yes. My question is more of a "why isn't it effective" than "engineers are stupid" since I'm pretty sure they know more than I do 😉. Maybe they didn't have reliable heatpipes 22 years ago, or they weigh a lot, or that situation isn't survivable anyway. Just wondering what the reason is 🙂
Click to expand...
We aren't all NASA engineers, FYI.
 
Originally posted by: CTho9305
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
I'm sure if it was an effective solution the engineers would have included it.
Click to expand...

Presumably yes. My question is more of a "why isn't it effective" than "engineers are stupid" since I'm pretty sure they know more than I do 😉. Maybe they didn't have reliable heatpipes 22 years ago, or they weigh a lot, or that situation isn't survivable anyway. Just wondering what the reason is 🙂
Click to expand...

In that case, I have no idea then since I'm not an engineer. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: CTho9305
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
I'm sure if it was an effective solution the engineers would have included it.
Click to expand...
Presumably yes. My question is more of a "why isn't it effective" than "engineers are stupid" since I'm pretty sure they know more than I do 😉. Maybe they didn't have reliable heatpipes 22 years ago, or they weigh a lot, or that situation isn't survivable anyway. Just wondering what the reason is 🙂
Click to expand...
We aren't all NASA engineers, FYI.
Click to expand...

I've seen some pretty knowledgeable people here. People who might be able to say "a heatpipe that could do the job would weight 10 tons" or "the heatpipe would melt" or something else useful.
 
Ok, you have 20,000 tiles on a shuttle. You're going to need 20,000 little heat pipes, ort bigger heat pipes that connect to multiple tiles.
Second, heat pipes do not get rid of heat, they simply move it somewhere else (typically in PCs, they'll move it fro mthe profcessor to a heatsink in front of a fan). Where do you suggest they move the heat too, from the bottom of the wings to the top of the wings?

Even if there were some benefit to heating the top of the wings instead of the bottom, they'd have to move the heat from the bottom, through the inside of the wing, to the top, thus completely removing the point of the tiles, which is to keep the heat from penetrating to the inside of the shuttle.
 
Originally posted by: notfred
Ok, you have 20,000 tiles on a shuttle. You're going to need 20,000 little heat pipes, ort bigger heat pipes that connect to multiple tiles.
Second, heat pipes do not get rid of heat, they simply move it somewhere else (typically in PCs, they'll move it fro mthe profcessor to a heatsink in front of a fan). Where do you suggest they move the heat too, from the bottom of the wings to the top of the wings?

Even if there were some benefit to heating the top of the wings instead of the bottom, they'd have to move the heat from the bottom, through the inside of the wing, to the top, thus completely removing the point of the tiles, which is to keep the heat from penetrating to the inside of the shuttle.
Click to expand...
Of course you don't want heat inside the shuttle. But once it gets trhough the insulating tiles and into the shuttle, you had BETTER do something with it unless you want to fall apart. The idea is that in case of a problem with the tiles in one area, you might survive.

Obviously the heat is going inside the shuttle if you lose tiles. But... the way I understand it, if you lose multiple tiles in one spot, that spot gets so hot the structure in that location melts quickly. If you spread it out across the whole bottom of the shuttle (down the fuselage and both wings), then, would the WHOLE thing melt? Would it melt as fast? Would it stay together long enough to reach a slow speed so it no longer heats up?

Lets say it takes 1000 watts behind the insulatino to melt the metal above the missing tiles. If heat is coming in because of missing tiles at 5000 watts (insulation slows how fast the heat gets in), stuff melts right now. But if you can get the heat away, to other parts of the shuttle, then no given area will be heated too fast. Maybe nothing will melt, maybe everything will melt. I don't know.
 
Originally posted by: CTho9305
Of course you don't want heat inside the shuttle. But once it gets trhough the insulating tiles and into the shuttle, you had BETTER do something with it unless you want to fall apart. The idea is that in case of a problem with the tiles in one area, you might survive.

Obviously the heat is going inside the shuttle if you lose tiles. But... the way I understand it, if you lose multiple tiles in one spot, that spot gets so hot the structure in that location melts quickly. If you spread it out across the whole bottom of the shuttle (down the fuselage and both wings), then, would the WHOLE thing melt? Would it melt as fast? Would it stay together long enough to reach a slow speed so it no longer heats up?

Lets say it takes 1000 watts behind the insulatino to melt the metal above the missing tiles. If heat is coming in because of missing tiles at 5000 watts (insulation slows how fast the heat gets in), stuff melts right now. But if you can get the heat away, to other parts of the shuttle, then no given area will be heated too fast. Maybe nothing will melt, maybe everything will melt. I don't know.
Click to expand...

The main problem I see with that is the extreme temperatures on reentry. I don't think there's a heat pipe in existance that could handle that much heat and still fit the size/weight requirements to be on the shuttle. I would guess that the pipe would quickly lose it's ability to transfer the heat and you would only buy a few seconds.
 
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
The main problem I see with that is the extreme temperatures on reentry. I don't think there's a heat pipe in existance that could handle that much heat and still fit the size/weight requirements to be on the shuttle. I would guess that the pipe would quickly lose it's ability to transfer the heat and you would only buy a few seconds.
Click to expand...

That may be true, but consider this: take a paper cup, put some water in it, and try to light the bottom on fire. It won't light until the water has boiled off. Assuming the heatpipe works, its evaporation/condensation might make it stay cooler longer.
 
Originally posted by: CTho9305
That may be true, but consider this: take a paper cup, put some water in it, and try to light the bottom on fire. It won't light until the water has boiled off. Assuming the heatpipe works, its evaporation/condensation might make it stay cooler longer.
Click to expand...

it may not burn until the water boils off if you heat it w/ a cigarette lighter, but I bet it will if you use a welding torch.
 
Originally posted by: notfred
Originally posted by: CTho9305
That may be true, but consider this: take a paper cup, put some water in it, and try to light the bottom on fire. It won't light until the water has boiled off. Assuming the heatpipe works, its evaporation/condensation might make it stay cooler longer.
Click to expand...

it may not burn until the water boils off if you heat it w/ a cigarette lighter, but I bet it will if you use a welding torch.
Click to expand...

Right, because the cup doesn't get the heat to the water fast enough. How about thin copper/etc?
 
Originally posted by: CTho9305
Originally posted by: Heisenberg
The main problem I see with that is the extreme temperatures on reentry. I don't think there's a heat pipe in existance that could handle that much heat and still fit the size/weight requirements to be on the shuttle. I would guess that the pipe would quickly lose it's ability to transfer the heat and you would only buy a few seconds.
Click to expand...

That may be true, but consider this: take a paper cup, put some water in it, and try to light the bottom on fire. It won't light until the water has boiled off. Assuming the heatpipe works, its evaporation/condensation might make it stay cooler longer.
Click to expand...

True, but try that same thing with a blowtorch. The water will evaporate nearly instantaneously and won't significantly delay the cup bursting into flames. The parameters involved in space flight are extreme. It's hard to have any comprehension of them in everyday life.

Edit: Even if the cup was copper, it wouldn't matter. The water would still evaporate too quickly to do any good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top