White, Molly

NASA Technical Reports Server

MPCV Aerosciences 
M
ul
ti-
P
ur
po
se
 C
re
w
 V
eh
ic
le
 (M
P
C
V
) 
National Aeronautics & Space Administration 
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center 
Houston, TX 77058 
Apollo IV (AS-501) 
Convective Heating Predictions of Flight Data 
May 18, 2012 
Molly White 
MPCV Aerosciences 
NASA-JSC-EG3 
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20120009532 2019-08-30T20:35:21+00:00Z
Page 2 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Contents 
Motivation 
Background 
Convective Heating Predictions to Flight Data Comparisons 
Conclusions 
Page 3 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Motivation 
Since the Apollo vehicle was designed, our methodologies for 
designing the thermal protection system (TPS) to protect 
humans from the extreme temperatures of re-entry have 
changed significantly. 
MPCV Aerosciences is currently in the process of designing a 
capsule similar to, but different from, the Apollo Command 
Module. We can utilize the Apollo IV flight data to assess 
our current tools and methodologies, and extrapolate the 
results to MPCV.  
One critical area of concern is the aftbody separated region 
convective heating environments. Apollo designers used 
ablative TPS in this area, whereas MPCV is using reusable 
TPS. The ablative TPS can withstand much more severe 
environments. 
The following analysis evaluates the computational fluid 
dynamics (CFD) best practices for the MPCV 
Aerosciences Aerothermal Database in comparison to 
Apollo IV flight data.  
The time history heat fluxes of 17 aftbody calorimeters from 
Apollo IV are available for comparison to current Database 
methodologies. 
Page 4 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Apollo Flight Testing (up to Apollo VI) 
Mission Spacecraft Description Launch date Launch Site 
PA-1 BP-6 First Pad Abort Nov 7, 1963 White Sands 
A-001 BP-12 Transonic Abort May 13, 1964 White Sands 
AS-101 BP-13 Nominal launch and exit environment May 28, 1964 Cape Kennedy 
AS-102 BP-15 Nominal launch and exit environment Sept 18, 1964 Cape Kennedy 
AS-002 BP-23 Maximum dynamic pressure abort Dec 8, 1964 White Sands 
AS-103 BP-16 Micrometeoroid experiment Feb 16, 1965 Cape Kennedy 
A-003 BP-22 Low-altitude abort May 19, 1965 White Sands 
AS-104 BP-26 Micrometeoroid experiment and SM RCS launch environment May 25, 1965 Cape Kennedy 
PA-2 BP-23A Second pad abort June 29, 1965 White Sands 
AS-105 BP-9A Micrometeoroid experiment and SM RCS launch environment July 30, 1965 Cape Kennedy 
A-004 SC-002 Power-on tumbling boundary abort Jan 20, 1966 White Sands 
AS-201 SC-009 Supercircular entry with high heat rate Feb 26, 1966 Cape Kennedy 
AS-202 SC-011 Supercircular entry with high heat load Aug 25, 1966 Cape Kennedy 
Apollo IV/
AS-501 CM-017 Supercircular entry at lunar return velocity Nov 9, 1967 Cape Kennedy 
Apollo 6/ 
AS-502 CM-020 Supercircular entry at lunar return velocity April 4, 1968 Cape Kennedy 
Page 5 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Recovery Photos of Apollo IV 
Re-Entry Conditions - The Apollo IV Capsule 
entered at an angle of attack of 156.84 degrees 
with a velocity of 36545 ft/s (11.1 km/s) at entry 
interface (400000 ft).  
Page 6 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Apollo IV Capsule Now 
*Opposite side of 
calorimeter locations 
Page 7 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
CFD Methodology 
The grid used for computations was a 
block structured grid consisting of 16 
blocks with 14,285,460 points (107712 
surface cells). The grid had 128 off-
body points and was a full 360 degree 
three-dimensional grid. 
Data-Parallel Line Relaxation (DPLR) 
DPLR is a CFD solver developed at NASA Ames Research 
Center for hypersonic flow field problems. It is a parallel, 
full three-dimensional Navier-Stokes CFD solver including 
models for finite-rate reaction kinetics, thermal and 
chemical non-equilibrium and ionized flow physics. 
  Number of Database Points - 23 solutions 
  Flow Types - Laminar and Turbulent using the Baldwin-
Lomax turbulence model 
  Wall Catalycity - Fully-Catalytic 
  Wall Boundary Condition - Radiative Equilibrium Wall 
  Surface Emissivity - 0.85 
  Atmospheric/Chemistry Model 
  Vel ≤ 8.0 km/s, 5 species air 
  Vel > 8.0 km/s, 11 species air 
 Turbulent surface statistics, and points tracked for 
convergence 
Page 8 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Apollo IV Trajectory and Database Points 
Out-of-date MPCV 
Trajectories for reference 
Page 9 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Apollo IV (AS-501/CM 017) Geometry 
Size - The Apollo Capsule had a maximum diameter of 3.91 meters and the aftbody was a 
33° cone.  
Features - The Apollo IV backshell was not completely smooth, whereas the grid was 
smooth. There were RCS engine nozzles (Pitch, Roll and Yaw), a simulated umbilical 
cavity on the windward centerline, umbilical housing on the leeward centerline, vents, 
windows, LES tower leg wells, and even two EVA handrails on the Apollo IV backshell. 
Command Module is currently located at Stennis Space Center.  
Surface Coatings - The aftbody heatshield material was Avcoat coated with titanium 
dioxide paint followed by mylar tape and H-film tape. This means we are unsure of the 
catalycity and emissivity of the backshell. The windward backshell Avcoat did experience 
some charring which would be partially catalytic. 
•  Titanium Dioxide paint – fairly low catalycity1 
•  Virgin Avcoat  – highly catalytic, Charred Avcoat – partially catalytic1 
•  Calorimeters 12-20 - Avcoat appeared to be charred 
•  Emissivity of 0.85 is typical of carbonaceous ablators1 
•  Calorimeters (constantan foil) – nearly fully catalytic, probably lower emissivity, not in radiative 
equilibrium 
Page 10 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Aftbody Features and Gauge Locations 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
Windward Leeward 
Page 11 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Postflight Calorimeter Pictures 
Calorimeter 25 
Calorimeter 14 
Page 12 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Comparisons of DPLR Results to Flight Data 
Caveats for Comparisons 
•  Some error was introduced due to digitizing the flight data from reports. 
Measurement resolution uncertainty is shown in the error bars, but this 
does not include other sources of error (such as digitization). 
•  There is also uncertainty in the BET, and thus the Database solution 
points chosen for comparisons. 
•  Gage locations used for data extraction are “pre-installation” locations. 
•  The DPLR solutions were run on a smooth grid, whereas the flight data 
includes the influence of features and RCS firings, etc. 
Page 13 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 12 – Windward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 150 btu/ft2/s (so 3 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 14 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 13 – Windward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 100 btu/ft2/s (so 2 btu/ft2/s) 
Reθ ≈ 237 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 15 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 14 – Windward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 100 btu/ft2/s (so 2 btu/ft2/s) 
Reθ ≈ 207 Reθ ≈ 287 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 16 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 15 – Windward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 100 btu/ft2/s (so 2 btu/ft2/s) 
Reθ ≈ 202 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 17 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 16 – Windward Off-Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 100 btu/ft2/s (so 2 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 18 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 17 – Windward Off-Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 75 btu/ft2/s (so 1.5 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 19 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 18 – Shoulder 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 75 btu/ft2/s (so 1.5 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 20 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 19 – Shoulder 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 75 btu/ft2/s (so 1.5 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 21 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 20 – Shoulder 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 75 btu/ft2/s (so 1.5 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 22 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 21 – Leeward –y-axis 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 23 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 22 – Leeward –y-axis 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 24 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 23 – Leeward –y-axis 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 25 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 24 – Leeward Off-Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 26 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 25 – Leeward Off-Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 27 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 26 – Leeward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 28 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 27 – Leeward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 29 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gauge 28 – Leeward Centerline 
** Reported data uncertainty is ±2% of the 
range, which is 50 btu/ft2/s (so 1 btu/ft2/s) 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 30 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Which is Hotter?? Orion or Apollo? 
Heatshield – heating scales as 1/√r, so Apollo has higher heat fluxes 
Windward Backshell – Orion has higher heat fluxes due to the larger backshell angle 
Separated Backshell – Variable  
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
H
ea
t F
lu
x 
Page 31 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Conclusions 
Windward Gauges (12-17) – Apollo IV Flight Data compare extremely well with DPLR 
laminar predictions when the flow is laminar, and also well to DPLR Baldwin-Lomax 
turbulent predictions when the flow is turbulent. At peak heating, the turbulent non-
catalytic backshell solution matches very well. 
Shoulder Gauges (18-20) – Apollo IV Flight Data is over predicted by DPLR Baldwin-
Lomax solutions and matches fairly well with the laminar predictions. 
Separation Line Gauges (21-22) – Apollo IV Flight Data matches the laminar predictions 
later on, the turbulent full-catalytic over-predicts, and the turbulent non-catalytic matches 
at peak heating. 
Separated Gauges –  
 23-24: Flight Data matches the turbulent predictions, and laminar under-predicts the flight 
data. 
 25: The laminar predictions are greater than the turbulent predictions for this area, and 
the flight data are somewhere in-between, but fairly close to the laminar levels. 
 26-28: (Centerline) The DPLR laminar predictions are very close to the flight data, with 
the turbulent over-predicting. After transition, the turbulent matches very well with the 
flight data. 
Page 32 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
References 
1Wright, M. J., Prabhu, D. K., and Martinez, E. R., “Analysis of Apollo Command Module 
Afterbody Heating Part I: AS-202,” Journal of Thermophysics and Heat Transfer, Vol. 
20, No. 1, 2006, pp. 16-30. 
Lee, D. B., Bertin, J. J., and Goodrich, W. D., “The Aerothermodynamic Environment of 
the Apollo Command Module During Superorbital Entry,” NASA TN D-6792, April 1972. 
Lee, D. B., Bertin, J. J., and Ried, R. C., “Apollo Reentry Heating,” NASA Project Apollo 
Working Paper No. 1089 (NASA-TM-X-66780), Sept. 13 1963. 
Hillje, E., “Entry Aerodynamics at Lunar Return Conditions Obtained from the Flight of 
Apollo IV (AS-501),” NASA TN D-5399, Oct. 1969.  
Apollo IV Mission Evaluation Team, “Apollo IV Mission Report,” MSC-PA-R-68-1, Jan. 7, 
1968. 
Wright, M. J., Milos, F. S., and Tran, P., “Survey of Afterbody Aeroheating Flight Data for 
Planetary Probe Thermal Protection System Design,” 38th AIAA Thermophysics 
Conference, AIAA 2005-4815, June 2005. 
Page 33 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Back Up 
Page 34 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Time Traces of Transition – Apollo IV Data 
Backshell Transition 
Page 35 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Apollo IV Instrumentation Types and Layout 
V∞ 
Page 36 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Gage Locations 
Preflight Location Postflight Location 
r theta r theta 
12 26.5 93 26.5 93.72 
13 50 85 50 85.32 
14 83.4 82 83.38 82.62 
15 104 101 104 101.48 
16 26.3 138 26.33 137.93 
17 78.9 137 78.88 137.07 
18 18.2 179 18.2 179.42 
19 18.5 225 18.5 225 
20 18.5 264 18.2 269.98 
21 52.5 179 52.5 178.98 
22 78.9 189 78.88 189.02 
23 104 191 104 191.48 
24 50 229 50 226.85 
25 78.9 226 78.88 226.17 
26 50 272 50 271.97 
27 78.9 268 78.88 267.83 
28 104 275 104 274.83 
Page 37 MPCV Aerosciences - Molly White molly.e.white@nasa.gov 
Sample Separated Region Time Traces 
Backshell Transition 
0.9 btu/ft2/s 
1.0 btu/ft2/s 
0.5 btu/ft2/s 
0.4 btu/ft2/s 
Reported uncertainty 
is ±2% of the range, 
which for these gauges 
is 50 btu/ft2/s 
(so 1 btu/ft2/s) 


Apollo IV (AS-501): Convective Heating Predictions of Flight Data

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server