Why do we still expect “successful failures” on rocket launches and not just scale up or scale down the same design on successful rocket ships and launch pads to make bigger or smaller ships with more stable structural material?
In: 1598
Think of it as a very complex system with many different variables. Each of these variables are either tested or modeled (or both) to predict the desired outcome.
Many of these variables rely upon assumptions. Sometimes these assumptions are a bit off…enough to cause a catastrophic failure.
By obtaining data points from the launch these assumptions can be re-tuned from hard data thus getting the variables closer to the optimum value. It’s an iterative process that takes time, patience and lots of money!
Think of it as a very complex system with many different variables. Each of these variables are either tested or modeled (or both) to predict the desired outcome.
Many of these variables rely upon assumptions. Sometimes these assumptions are a bit off…enough to cause a catastrophic failure.
By obtaining data points from the launch these assumptions can be re-tuned from hard data thus getting the variables closer to the optimum value. It’s an iterative process that takes time, patience and lots of money!
Lego, Gundam models, toys, ikea furniture, all come with instructions. Yet it all fks up some how. It’s always that one missing screw or component that is essential to making everything work. There are no second chances in space. Successful failures help find the missing piece.
Lego, Gundam models, toys, ikea furniture, all come with instructions. Yet it all fks up some how. It’s always that one missing screw or component that is essential to making everything work. There are no second chances in space. Successful failures help find the missing piece.
Square–cube law most things don’t scale. think of a cube of steel a 10″x10″x10″=1,000 cubic inches it would weigh 283.3lbs A cube of 100″x100″x100″ weighs 283,300lbs and a cube of 1000″x1000″x1000″ weighs 283,000,000lbs. stresses on the Rockets are different depending on size because the surface area isn’t proportionate to the volume. scaling it up or down wouldn’t make an equivalent but an entirely different rocket,
Square–cube law most things don’t scale. think of a cube of steel a 10″x10″x10″=1,000 cubic inches it would weigh 283.3lbs A cube of 100″x100″x100″ weighs 283,300lbs and a cube of 1000″x1000″x1000″ weighs 283,000,000lbs. stresses on the Rockets are different depending on size because the surface area isn’t proportionate to the volume. scaling it up or down wouldn’t make an equivalent but an entirely different rocket,
In the simplest of terms, rockets completely consume the capabilities of the materials and designs they consist of.
You can’t scale up a materials melting point, ability to tolerate vibration or compression.
In typical designs that you are more accustomed to, the machine does not stress every aspect of the components. Internal combustion engines are not approaching the melting point of iron, buildings are not right on the edge of crushing their materials . It’s possible to make things bigger and not exceed the capabilities of the materials because you weren’t close to them to start with.
In the simplest of terms, rockets completely consume the capabilities of the materials and designs they consist of.
You can’t scale up a materials melting point, ability to tolerate vibration or compression.
In typical designs that you are more accustomed to, the machine does not stress every aspect of the components. Internal combustion engines are not approaching the melting point of iron, buildings are not right on the edge of crushing their materials . It’s possible to make things bigger and not exceed the capabilities of the materials because you weren’t close to them to start with.
Latest Answers