航空航天港

 找回密码
 注册会员

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

返回列表
楼主: cmj9808
收起左侧

[美国发射] 2015年6月28日22:21,Dragon C9/Falcon 9 v1.1自卡角执行CRS SpX-7任务发射失败

[复制链接]
 楼主| cmj9808 发表于 2015-10-9 12:41 | 显示全部楼层
事故调查完成,确认氦气瓶支架为故障点,调查报告将在RTF前提交FAA
Joshua Brost, SpaceX: investigation into June failure confirms failed strut was cause, submitting final report to FAA in next month. #ispcs


https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/652139326004850688
siweifdu 发表于 2015-10-9 12:46 | 显示全部楼层
cmj9808 发表于 2015-10-9 12:41
事故调查完成,确认氦气瓶支架为故障点,调查报告将在RTF前提交FAA

求目前在国内打开这个链接的办法~

点评

唉,刚才想用百度搜狐等等等的国内地图,看看KSC的布局都不让了。不知道为什么要为外国人保密。  发表于 2015-10-9 13:20
需要外企的vpn,或者翻墙软件  发表于 2015-10-9 12:51
siweifdu 发表于 2015-10-9 14:56 | 显示全部楼层
cmj9808 发表于 2015-10-9 12:41
事故调查完成,确认氦气瓶支架为故障点,调查报告将在RTF前提交FAA

要羡慕一下C版,反正之前用的代理在反法西斯军训前后都坏了,目前工作都不顺心,唉
 楼主| cmj9808 发表于 2015-10-9 23:44 | 显示全部楼层
siweifdu 发表于 2015-10-9 14:56
要羡慕一下C版,反正之前用的代理在反法西斯军训前后都坏了,目前工作都不顺心,唉

所以我把内容和链接都贴上来,虽然这么做有违知识产权,但大部分网友可能都没有这个便利。
回复 支持 1 反对 0

使用道具 举报

zimu 发表于 2015-10-10 18:30 | 显示全部楼层
cmj9808 发表于 2015-10-9 23:44
所以我把内容和链接都贴上来,虽然这么做有违知识产权,但大部分网友可能都没有这个便利。

推文和微博这类短文都不受版权保护的. 转发无妨
mingleigh 发表于 2015-10-10 20:47 | 显示全部楼层
zimu 发表于 2015-10-10 18:30
推文和微博这类短文都不受版权保护的.  转发无妨

帮把推文贴上
000.jpg
lemoncap 发表于 2015-10-11 14:52 | 显示全部楼层
SpaceX 某一经理一家之言。
就是比较小道的http://spacenews.com/spacex-wrap ... lure-investigation/
也只是说“spacex-wrapping-up-falcon-9-failure-investigation“

何况美国质疑的人也不少,如Dave Huntsman
 楼主| cmj9808 发表于 2016-7-26 12:21 | 显示全部楼层
本月13号举行的参议院听证会上出现了搞笑的一幕。当参议员Nelson向NASA载人探索部(也就是负责SLS和Orion的部门)的副局长Bill Gerstenmaier询问NASA从OA和SpX的发射事故中学到了什么,没想到后者的回答却是NASA对私人航天公司解决问题的效率感到震惊,SpX在事故两天后就找到了故障原因并在Mcgregor进行了重演,换作NASA这项工作通常需要半年时间。如果说NASA从事故中学到了什么,那就是如果辅以正确的激励手段和合同架构,私人公司可以以更高的效率来完成一件工作。
As the hearing concluded, Nelson asked Gerstenmaier what lessons were learned from the Orbital ATK and SpaceX commercial cargo failures in 2014 and 2015 respectively.  Gerstenmaier responded that he learned how quickly the private sector can react and find solutions. Orbital ATK found an alternative launch service provider (United Launch Alliance) to continue launching its Cygnus cargo spacecraft while it solved the problem with the Antares rocket. SpaceX diagnosed the problem with its Falcon 9 rocket and was in a test facility to verify it within two days.  That was “faster than I could have ever done.. …It would have been half a year” to get the contracts and test sequence in place. “I think what we really learned is that the private sector, if we give them the right incentives and we have the contracting structures set up, they can deliver the capabilities that we, at NASA, need in a very effective manner.”

http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/news/senators-want-continuity-for-nasas-exploration-program
神级猎鹰 发表于 2016-7-26 13:13 | 显示全部楼层
的确如此。在国有企业和私有企业都工作过的人可以证明。为公家做事的目标是不出错,为私人老板做事如果没有效率就会挨骂、被炒鱿鱼。
回复 支持 0 反对 1

使用道具 举报

hkhtg090201 发表于 2016-12-14 13:24 | 显示全部楼层
NASA要花2年时间(才能彻底?)完成这次失败的调查.

NASA Will Take 2 Years to Complete Investigation into 2015 Falcon 9 Failure                                                                          Posted  byDoug Messier    on December 13, 2016, at 5:38 pm   in News



hkhtg090201 发表于 2018-3-13 07:38 | 显示全部楼层
2年多了,


NASA Independent Review Team SpaceX CRS-7 Accident Investigation Report Public Summary (nasa.gov)
hkhtg090201 发表于 2018-3-14 07:30 | 显示全部楼层

这里说是设计错误导致,和当初不一样?


NASA: Falcon 9 Failure in 2015 Caused by “Design Error”
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2018 ... aused-design-error/

zimu 发表于 2018-3-14 12:53 | 显示全部楼层
hkhtg090201 发表于 2018-3-14 07:30
这里说是设计错误导致,和当初不一样?

报告链接: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/public_summary_nasa_irt_spacex_crs-7_final.pdf
最主要的一段在这里:
--------------------------
It is important to note that the IRT’s conclusions regarding the direct, and immediate causes are
consistent with the determination made by the SpaceX AIT investigation findings. Where the
IRT differs with SpaceX is in regards to the initiating cause. SpaceX in their AIT report
identifies “material defect” as the “most probable” cause for the rod end breaking. However, the
IRT’s view is that while “rod end breakage due to material defect” is credible, the IRT does not
denote it a “most probable” since the IRT also views “rod end manufacturing damage”, “rod end
strut mis-installation”, “rod end collateral damage” or some other part of the axial strut breaking
as equally credible causes to have liberated the COPV. Lastly, the key technical finding by the
IRT with regard to this failure was that it was due to a design error: SpaceX chose to use an
industrial grade (as opposed to aerospace grade) 17-4 PH SS (precipitation-hardening stainless
steel) cast part (the “Rod End”) in a critical load path under cryogenic conditions and strenuous
flight environments. The implementation was done without adequate screening or testing of the
industrial grade part, without regard to the manufacturer’s recommendations for a 4:1 factor of
safety when using their industrial grade part in an application, and without proper modeling or
adequate load testing of the part under predicted flight conditions. This design error is directly
related to the Falcon 9 CRS-7 launch failure as a “credible” cause.
------------------------
归因的思路不一样. 大家都认可事故的"直接"原因是一致的. 只不过再往下挖, spaceX认为支架的制造质量问题是主因,  调查组则是全流程分析认为spaceX在选材(工业级而非航天级), 检查流程, 安全余量标定选取方面有待改进, 认为是design error. 把调查组的这些东西都实现, 结果是什么: 支架质量过关. 很难说谁对谁错.

spaceX在事故后我记得是改为自造. 但材料到底是否换了不得而知. 不过随后的30多次发射都没问题, 至少这个问题显然是得到了有效解决.

有个东西很有意思: 调查组认为spaceX需要改进文档体系.  估计是和很多互联网企业一样, 业务迭代得快, 很多时候业务跑在文档前头了.

点评

谢谢!  发表于 2018-3-14 14:23
Palpatine 发表于 2018-3-15 05:39 | 显示全部楼层
zimu 发表于 2018-3-14 12:53
报告链接: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/public_summary_nasa_irt_spacex_crs- ...

调查发现的还有一个特别互联网的问题,spx的telemetry直接用tcp/ip包发送所以乱序和有缓存,导致有一部分还在二级电脑的缓存里面一起炸了。
 楼主| cmj9808 发表于 2018-3-15 14:42 | 显示全部楼层
zimu 发表于 2018-3-14 12:53
报告链接: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/public_summary_nasa_irt_spacex_crs- ...

看了一下,NASA似乎并没有把责任归咎于哪一方。SpX的责任在于承包商已经在说明里明确要求留出4倍余量,但SpX只留出了3倍(承包商标称10000 lbs安全承力,SpX实际使用环境最大承力为3500 lbs),而承包商的责任在于部件质检流程存在漏洞,部件损坏时的实际承力只有2000 lbs,此时尚未达到标称10000 lbs安全承力的1/4(2500 lbs),所以即使SpX按照要求留出了4倍余量,也无法完全避免此类事故。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册会员

本版积分规则

QQ|申请友链|旗下论坛|小黑屋|手机版|航空航天港 ( 豫ICP备12024513号 )

GMT+8, 2018-9-26 18:39 , Processed in 0.323977 second(s), 23 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表