Orbiter Autopsies
What NASA will learn from dissecting Atlantis, Discovery, and Endeavour
- By Greg Freiherr
- Air & Space magazine, May 2012
The day Discovery completed its 39th and final flight — March 9, 2011 — a tug pulled the vehicle into an Orbiter Processing Facility at the Kennedy Space Center for a thorough examination.
Scott Andrews
(Page 3 of 4)
NASA tried to remedy the problem by giving wires a protective covering, an arduous process that may not have had the desired effect. “So we want to go back and look at the wiring to see if there’s anything to be learned,” says Francisco J. Hernandez, deputy chief engineer for orbiter propulsion and power subsystems. “The wiring methods and design are very similar to what is done in the aircraft world, so this is something that is not only potentially applicable to future space vehicles but also maybe to the aviation community.”
In addition, engineers will examine shuttle avionics for signs of “tin whiskers,” wispy extrusions of tin molecules in circuit-board soldering that expand in zero gravity. Knowing the extent of their growth over time could help operators of satellites that use the same tin soldering predict when the satellites could fail. “Long whiskers are a great way to short out a circuit,” says Shannon. “We had a satellite short out, and we think tin whiskers was the most likely cause.”
Orbiter autopsies may also benefit the space station: Cooling systems there use a highly corrosive type of ammonia that was also used on the shuttle. So engineers are examining orbiter cooling systems for signs of damage. “These kinds of failures sneak up on you, and they are not necessarily easy to find,” says Thomas M. Simon, commercial crew assistant chief engineer. “So even if we find [only] a couple issues, the relative cost of these studies compared with losing a mission or setting up an entire test program is a big savings to the agency.”
Analyzing orbiter elevons could yield dividends as well. Each orbiter has four of these control surfaces, two on the trailing edge of each wing. Elevons roll the spacecraft left and right, and pitch the nose up and down. During a pre-launch test for STS-101, which launched on May 19, 2000, the actuators that controlled Atlantis’ elevons failed. NASA followed up by testing every actuator on every orbiter and discovered that in some cases hydraulic fluid had accumulated in tight spaces instead of flowing freely. The problem was traced to microscopic silt, contaminants in the hydraulic system that impede flow like plaque slows blood in the body.
NASA prescribed regular exercise: moving the actuator at varying speeds to force the fluid to circulate better and dislodge the silt. Hooking external filters to the hydraulics removed the silt from the lines. The desilting restored full motion to the actuators, but NASA engineers worried that the devices might have experienced other types of degradation.
Over the last 10 years, every shuttle elevon actuator except two had been refurbished, so NASA could not analyze them for the effects of long-term use. Atlantis has its original actuators; Hernandez expects to get his hands on at least one. “There are types of degradation that don’t get to the point where they affect top-level functionality,” says Hernandez. “The idea is to understand this degradation and to build techniques to catch and prevent degraded hardware before it manifests at a top level of functionality.” Knowing how space shuttle actuators degrade could, again, mean a lot to the aviation industry, which employs similar hardware in commercial and military aircraft. By publishing articles in scholarly journals and agency technical publications, NASA engineers will share knowledge gained from the orbiter autopsies.
In addition to their degraded actuators, the orbiters have aging plumbing lines leading into the main engines that could prove troublesome. Years ago, routine inspections revealed cracks in the flow liners of the feed lines, which carry liquid hydrogen from the external tank to the shuttle main engines. “If they had broken off, they could have gone into the engine and caused a catastrophic failure,” says Seriale-Grush.
NASA replaced the flow liners, but had no way of knowing if there were cracks higher up. While the orbiters were still flying, removing the 12-inch-diameter feed lines would have cost millions of dollars, an unjustifiable expense considering there was no evidence of damage. It would be like removing a person’s colon to see if there was cancer, just because the patient was getting old.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »





Comments (8)
Very interesting article, but a few more photos of the actual work going on and referenced in the article would have been nice. EDITORS' REPLY: More photos can be found in the print version of the magazine. This is true for most of our stories.
Posted by Andrew Evans on March 26,2012 | 07:27 AM
How sad; for many engineers this is like having to peform an autopsy on your best friend.
Posted by alloycowboy on March 29,2012 | 09:17 PM
An article interesting in its own right. I look forward to the final autopsy report.
Posted by ErnestPayne on April 4,2012 | 03:28 PM
It's always heart-breaking to take apart an old friend. Moth-balling in flyable condition (like Wright-Patterson) has a different kind of nostalgia. Prep'ing her to seen and maybe, if we're really lucky, to be touched by Millions of admirers is the highest honor that an icon could hope for. Her crews know what a fine bird she was. All the best.
Posted by Steve Tobey on April 4,2012 | 06:13 PM
I agree with getting research on the orbiters; but when it is completed, all the items need to be put back unless they WILL be required for a future mission and then use substitutes. The flight deck should be exact. If not it will be like anything else the government works on. They destroy it and in a few decades, they want to rebuild it the way it was originally.
Posted by Ted Taylor on April 4,2012 | 08:12 PM
Great article in a great magazine that never fails to stir my imagination. Well done. I am curious, however, as to why there are usually more photos in the print version than the web version. I have largely ignored the print version simply because I thought I was getting everything - and possibly more - in the web version. It seems I had it backwards.
EDITORS' REPLY: The print magazine has material (both text and photos) that does not appear on the website, and the website has material that does not appear in the print magazine. We'd like people to enjoy both.
Posted by Woodrow Dick Jr. on April 5,2012 | 09:28 AM
Fascinating story of the loved Orbiters. I followed their lives religiously and wished the adventures could have continued. So much was accomplished in those 30 years and they literally "flew" by. Hopefully, there will be money directed to our future in space and these wonderful projects can continue.
Posted by Gregory Ruddell on April 6,2012 | 06:33 PM
We all know the space shuttles are just machines, but it is hard to deny their contributions to our knowledge and even in their disassembly, they are helping us to push our advance into space forward, which is a noble thing. With the shuttles going to museums, I for one am more than ready for the next big step. A private, more cost efficient way into low Earth orbit is great, but can NASA still inspire? How about a nuclear-powered ship for taking people to Mars and back in 6 months, not 2 1/2 years? Maybe something we could put the name "Enterprise" on with a straight face, just like the first shuttle.
Posted by Mark on April 8,2012 | 12:09 PM