See site in english Voir le site en francais
Website skin:
home  download  forum  link  contact

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Why the roll manuver?  (Read 7503 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
31 August 2004, 09:30:52
Hello,

I was just thinking.. Why do american craft, always need to make a roll manuver right after takeoff? Or in other
words, why isn't the launchpad already oriented in the right direction to start with. Appart from being slightly
inefficient it also creates a risk that something might go wrong, while you roll around. Engine gimbal could
malfunctions, pitchover might not work out correctly and all that. Is there some physics reason for this, or does it
come down to mundane things such as it is easier to bring the spacecraft from the VAB if the pad is facing the other
direction that needed?

I mean, Baikonur was able to rotate the pads prior to liftoff, so that proper azimuth was selected. It is kind of
simplistic, but very effectively gets the job done.


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline Pierre

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 233
  • Karma: 3
Reply #1 - 31 August 2004, 10:21:59
Hi Janez "DocHoliday"!

Looks like you also downloaded the new Shuttle 3.6 Beta with the nice automated launch sequence!
I think the roll sequence in US Shuttle launch is due to the "pitch" of the main engines, not aligned with "axis" of main
body. When you light them up, this angle causes the whole assembly to travel a bit "forward" as it's it vertical position on
the launchpad. And I guess you want to go away from all ground buildings and rather toward coast for safety reasons.
Then, you have to "roll" to benefit the fact you can easier make thrust vector go through center of gravity of Shuttle +
Ext.Tank (+ Booster till separation) and balance the weight, plus reduced drag if you figure positon "upside down" vs "heads
up" with flight path while in atmosphere.
I'm just trying to guess, there really is a good reason for rolling... otherwise they wouldn't do it!

Pierre



Offline Shirson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
  • Karma: 0
Reply #2 - 31 August 2004, 10:44:41
Quote
DocHoliday wrote:
Hello,

I was just thinking.. Why do american craft, always need to make a roll manuver right after takeoff? Or in other
words, why isn't the launchpad already oriented in the right direction to start with.

For PR, Show. I mean spectacle for massmedia. Cool show means favour of taxpayers. Favour of taxpayers means
real money in NASA budget.
I can't see any other reason for not-right direction of LP.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
For rabid astrounauts pair a.e. -  not a big detour.

Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
Reply #3 - 31 August 2004, 12:08:54
hehhe, thanks to both. But I doubt PR would be worth the risk.. and R&D for engine gimbal if not needed otherwise.

Pierre you make a good point. But Apollo didn't have pitched engines and they too did the roll after liftoff... Possibly
even Gemini and Mercury. It must be more to it :)


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline reekchaa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • Country: United States us
  • Karma: 2
Reply #4 - 01 September 2004, 06:28:55
The ..um... Gravity.. of things, and stuff, is.. uh.. Calibrated.. to synaptically twist.. with the Equatorial Align.. no... but
the ReDirection of things uh... uh... ..Okay.. maybe this IS a question for Gene.  ..Mr. Harm?


~ the Reekchaa

Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
Reply #5 - 01 September 2004, 07:55:40
:lol:


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline tjohns

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: 0
Reply #6 - 01 September 2004, 14:05:55
Because they can't yaw!

Since each launch uses a slightly different launch heading (to get into a specific inclination), they can't afford a specific
launch platform for each. So the make a "general" platform, but need to alter the launch heading during ascent. Since most
ships don't yaw (left-right) easily, the obvious thing to do is to roll to the correct ship attitude, and use the pitch
manouver to "pull" the nose down to the right heading.

Trev



Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
Reply #7 - 01 September 2004, 14:19:59
Thanks Trev

I asked the same question over at the main forum and got quite a few answers, mostly with respect to the HUGE
mass as opposed to easy of gimballing, generalism of the launch site as you say and facility weather safety, but
yours too is quite logical :)

Although if you rotated the pad (assuming the mass of the whole sucker wasn't restricting), you'd just set up the
correct azimuth for every flight and just need the pitchover.. :) assuming also you could be that accurate... and then
just null out the discrepancies later in the ascent.

Which direction do the STS engines gimbal? Assuming from what you say, they can only pitch up/down..? not
sideways then...


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline tjohns

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: 0
Reply #8 - 04 September 2004, 05:09:37
I'd say (well, guess) they gimbal in all 3 directions, but the point is it's a LOT easier to rotate a cylinder-shaped object
on it's long axis (the roll manouver) than on an axis perpendicular to it (pitch or yaw). Then it comes down to things like
drag & stress...consider doing left-hand turn in the atmosphere with that tail on the back of the Shuttle!

Trev


Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
Reply #9 - 07 September 2004, 12:25:05
I'd say the tail'd be history :)

Anyway, thanks for enlightening an ignorant mind.

Cheers :)


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline AphelionHellion

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
  • Karma: 0
Reply #10 - 16 September 2004, 08:15:24
Interesting discussion.
I always figured it was to test out the gimbals in all three axes. If there's a malfunction, they know right away!
:)

(kidding, sorta)


< [yellow]C[/yellow]arpe [yellow]N[/yellow]octem! >

Offline Donamy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 38
  • Karma: 0
Reply #11 - 16 September 2004, 08:46:32
They are tested very thouroughly before launch. ;)


Starbird

  • Guest
Reply #12 - 01 October 2004, 07:44:58
I believe the Russian launch pads do rotate, so the launcher is already set to the correct azimuth. They just need to launch
and pitch over without any roll.


Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
Reply #13 - 01 October 2004, 08:39:22
Yup Starbird, that why I was curious as to why Americans didn't use the same logic. Seems a simple way of doing it.
Obviously the Russians designed the pad to be rotatable from the start and their launchers are not as heavy. Don't
know how they would have launched a launcher of Nova type (the one that was similar to US Saturn in size?) or
bigger.

Americans just started from a different angle and there is no need to change it now. Engine gimballing at this point
appears to be far more economical and safe than (redesigning for) pad rotation..

Cheers,


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline reekchaa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • Country: United States us
  • Karma: 2
Reply #14 - 02 October 2004, 01:50:50
In Mike Melvill's mindset... "Why NOT the Roll?" :)


~ the Reekchaa

DocHoliday - remotely

  • Guest
Reply #15 - 02 October 2004, 21:45:28
I always had a thing for the "why not?" mentality :)

"The bumblebee is completely unaerodynamical and by all laws of physics should not fly. It doesn't know it, so it flies.
Why not?" :)


Offline reekchaa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • Country: United States us
  • Karma: 2
Reply #16 - 03 October 2004, 06:45:22
Good Point.  
WHY NOTs propel revolutionary advancements.  Many Unexplained Phenomenon are created by forces
too 'naive' to Doubt the Endless Possibilities.  ( The Cosmic Egg // Quantum Physics )

Learning the Rules of reality can be what keeps you thinking outside Schrodinger's Box. :)


~ the Reekchaa

JC

  • Guest
Reply #17 - 10 January 2005, 20:04:39
Quote
DocHoliday wrote:
Hello,

I was just thinking.. Why do american craft, always need to make a roll manuver right after takeoff? Or in other
words, why isn't the launchpad already oriented in the right direction to start with. Appart from being slightly
inefficient it also creates a risk that something might go wrong, while you roll around. Engine gimbal could
malfunctions, pitchover might not work out correctly and all that. Is there some physics reason for this, or does it
come down to mundane things such as it is easier to bring the spacecraft from the VAB if the pad is facing the other
direction that needed?

I mean, Baikonur was able to rotate the pads prior to liftoff, so that proper azimuth was selected. It is kind of
simplistic, but very effectively gets the job done.


Has to do with the people factor (Astronauts).  G forces (3+) are easier to withstand when the body is orientated so the forces are
felt in the manner the human boby is built to handle. Upright with force against the spine.  All American space craft go up with the
astronauts on their heads.  That way, the G forces push the astronauts' back and down (onto their butts) into the couches.  This
spreads the load of acceleration over the astronauts' back and seat area verses rightside up and all that force on the astronauts
upperback and shoulders (Shoulder straps).

Upsidedown also gives the astronaut a visual horizon reference in the event the crafts' flight instruments go haywire.

As to other reasons, launch azimuths from Cape Canavaral are limited to prevent overflight of land, or more specifically, populated
areas.  This dates back to the formation of the Atlantic Missile Test Range back in the '50's by the U.S. Air Force so missiles that go
off flight path don't come down on people when the vehicle's flight worthiness is destroy by Range Safety.

As to why the Russians rotate the entire pad to achieve launch azimuth?  Different strokes for different folks.  I'm not that familiar
with the Soviet Space Program history.  Based on other Soviet history subjects that I've read up on (Atomic Weapons), making the
launch pad to rotate the vehicle for flight azimuth would allow the launch vehicles' guidance system to be that much simpler.

Regards



Offline Starcrasher

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
Reply #18 - 11 January 2005, 03:13:07
Did a search and found an answer to your question at :
http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/facts/faq07.html

and also found a nice little animation so that the rest of us might be able to understand. hehe
http://kids.msfc.nasa.gov/rockets/shuttle/launch.asp

-----------------------------
WHY DOES THE SHUTTLE ROLL JUST AFTER LIFTOFF?

The following answer and translation are provided by Ken Jenks
(kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov).

The "Ascent Guidance and Flight Control Training Manual," ASC G&C 2102,
says:

"During the vertical rise phase, the launch pad attitude is
commanded until an I-loaded V(rel) sufficient to assure launch tower
clearance is achieved. Then, the tilt maneuver (roll program)
orients the vehicle to a heads down attitude required to generate a
negative q-alpha, which in turn alleviates structural loading. Other
advantages with this attitude are performance gain, decreased abort
maneuver complexity, improved S-band look angles, and crew view of
the horizon. The tilt maneuver is also required to start gaining
downrange velocity to achieve the main engine cutoff (MECO) target
in second stage."

This really is a good answer, but it's couched in NASA jargon. I'll try
to interpret.

1) We wait until the Shuttle clears the tower before rolling.

2) Then, we roll the Shuttle around so that the angle of attack
between the wind caused by passage through the atmosphere (the
"relative wind" ) and the chord of the wings (the imaginary line
between the leading edge and the trailing edge) is a slightly
negative angle ("a negative q-alpha" ). This causes a little bit of
"downward" force (toward the belly of the Orbiter, or the +Z
direction) and this force "alleviates structural loading."
We have to be careful about those wings -- they're about the
most "delicate" part of the vehicle.

3) The new attitude (after the roll) also allows us to carry more
mass to orbit, or to achieve a higher orbit with the same mass, or
to change the orbit to a higher or lower inclination than would be
the case if we didn't roll ("performance gain" ).

4) The new attitude allows the crew to fly a less complicated
flight path if they had to execute one of the more dangerous abort
maneuvers, the Return To Launch Site ("decreased abort maneuver
complexity" ).

5) The new attitude improves the ability for ground-based radio
antennae to have a good line-of-sight signal with the S-band radio
antennae on the Orbiter ("improved S-band look angles" ).

6) The new attitude allows the crew to see the horizon, which is a
helpful (but not mandatory) part of piloting any flying machine.

7) The new attitude orients the Shuttle so that the body is
more nearly parallel with the ground, and the nose to the east
(usually). This allows the thrust from the engines to add velocity
in the correct direction to eventually achieve orbit. Remember:
velocity is a vector quantity made of both speed and direction.
The Shuttle has to have a large horizontal component to its
velocity and a very small vertical component to attain orbit.

This all begs the question, "Why isn't the launch pad oriented to give
this nice attitude to begin with? Why does the Shuttle need to roll to
achieve that attitude?" The answer is that the pads were leftovers
from the Apollo days. The Shuttle straddles two flame trenches -- one
for the Solid Rocket Motor exhaust, one for the Space Shuttle Main
Engine exhaust. (You can see the effects of this on any daytime
launch. The SRM exhaust is dirty gray garbage, and the SSME exhaust is
fluffy white steam. Watch for the difference between the "top"
[Orbiter side] and the "bottom" [External Tank side] of the stack.) The
access tower and other support and service structure are all oriented
basically the same way they were for the Saturn V's. (A side note: the
Saturn V's also had a roll program. Don't ask me why -- I'm a Shuttle
guy.)

I checked with a buddy in Ascent Dynamics. He added that the "roll
maneuver" is really a maneuver in all three axes: roll, pitch and yaw.
The roll component of that maneuver is performed for the reasons
stated. The pitch component controls loading on the wings by keeping
the angle of attack (q-alpha) within a tight tolerance. The yaw
component is used to determine the orbital inclination. The total
maneuver is really expressed as a "quaternion," a grad-level-math
concept for combining all three rotation matrices in one four-element
array.



Offline amaury

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Karma: 0
Reply #19 - 16 January 2005, 14:15:13
sort of a mix of Orbitauts' answers...


Offline DocHoliday

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2475
  • Karma: 2
Reply #20 - 17 January 2005, 13:30:07
Indeed. Thanks everybody. Now I really know! :)


~~~

"Mood is a matter of choice. I choose to have fun!" -Vidmarism No 15

Offline freespace2dotcom

  • Legend
  • ******
  • Posts: 2251
  • Karma: 1
Reply #21 - 17 January 2005, 13:42:21
Now we all really know! :)



Offline Mauiman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
  • Karma: 0
Reply #22 - 01 August 2005, 03:21:27
They are probally just a bunch of show offs :lol: :lol:

:sunk:

End of line


I sure do love cruising through the asteroid feilds wrecklessly.
- Mauiman Captain and Owner of the Starship U.S.S. Celtic Blood NX-1007389 (Sovereign Class)

Offline wardogg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: 0
Reply #23 - 01 August 2005, 03:45:47
I just downloaded the new shuttle fleet...I think its 3.8something....anyway how do you turn the autopilot off prior to
launch...whats the fun of watching the computer do it.   I know its more realistic and everything but I was just
wondering.


Offline Simonpro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 546
  • Karma: 0
Reply #24 - 01 August 2005, 13:37:21
I think you press 'P'


« Last Edit: 01 August 2005, 13:37:21 by Simonpro »
-------------------------------