The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
(Page 2 of 6)
For navigation, the Apollo craft wouldn't have to rely solely on their onboard systems: Earth-based radar would track them, and mission control would send up course corrections as long as it could maintain radio contact. But during what were probably the most critical stages of a lunar mission, radio contact would be impossible. The long, curving trajectory of the spacecraft would bring it closest to the moon on the side facing away from Earth, so that's where it had to enter lunar orbit and deploy the landing module--but of course, there would be no line of sight with Earth-based tracking stations. And when the returning command module entered Earth's atmosphere, friction from its descent would heat the air around it and create a cloud of ions that would jam any radio transmissions.
The heart of the navigation and control system was Doc Draper's brainchild, the inertial measurement unit, or IMU. The IMU was basically a disc surrounded by two concentric rings inside a spherical housing about a foot and a half across. The outer ring was attached to the housing by two hinges, so it could spin around one axis; the second ring was attached to the first one and spun around a perpendicular axis; and the disc spun around an axis perpendicular to the second ring's, so it had perfect freedom of motion in three dimensions. On the disc--the inertial platform--were three accelerometers and three gyroscopes, also aligned in three different directions. If the IMU housing rotated, the gyros would register the motion, and motors would turn the rings to maintain the platform's orientation: imagine a waiter who holds a tray of glasses parallel to the ground--even as he runs up and down walls and across the ceiling. If the inertial platform's orientation remained perfectly stable, data from the accelerometers could locate the IMU anywhere in space by reference to its original position.
But the platform wasn't perfectly stable. To allow for midflight course corrections, the Instrumentation Lab also designed a telescope and sextant that together could help locate the craft in space. Using an eyepiece on the command module's console, an astronaut could find a trio of landmarks--say, Earth's horizon, the moon's, and Alpha Centauri--and press a button. The onboard computer would calculate the craft's position from the angles between the sightings.
The IMU and the sighting optics had to provide virtually error-free information, and their design had to take into account the eccentricities of operation in space; hundreds of Instrumentation Lab engineers worked on them. Nonetheless, they were largely elaborations on existing technologies. The design of the Apollo guidance computer, however, took the Instrumentation Lab into uncharted waters.
Silicon Dawn
In the annals of technology, the most important event of 1961 may not have been JFK's unveiling of the lunar program but, rather, an announcement a few months earlier from a four-year-old company called Fairchild Semiconductor: the first commercial release of a computer chip. An early example of an integrated circuit, it combined multiple electronic components in a single piece of silicon.
Today, when Intel can cram a billion transistors onto a chip, the advantages of integrated circuits seem obvious. But that wasn't the case in 1961. For one thing, the new chips didn't hold a billion transistors each; they held three. Integrated circuits would, in principle, take up about 40 percent less space than so-called core transistors, which consisted of wires wound around magnets. But they also demanded more electricity, a serious drawback in spacecraft with limited resources. What's more, it was not at all clear that integrated circuits could be mass-produced with the reliability that spaceflight required. NASA administrators originally specified that the Apollo flight computer would use the larger core transistors.
Apollo's Rocket Scientists by Larry Hardesty
Hello Larry,
I would point out that there is no such thing as a Rocket Scientist. Engineers design Rockets, so it should be 'Rocket Engineer'. Even NASA recognises this.
Scientists are not Engineers and vice versa unless they have the necessary qualifications. Engineers should get credit for their achievements.
Rocket Engineer, Ph.D
http://www.Engology.com
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
This document is part of the “How-To Guide for Most Common Measurements” centralized resource portal. This tutorial provides a detailed guide for measurement and device considerations to take temperature measurements using thermocouples. Get an introduction to thermocouples, which are inexpensive sensing devices widely used with PC-based data acquisition systems. Also review some specific thermocouple examples and learn how thermocouples work and ways to integrate them into a data acquisition measurement system.
View full PDF >Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
Apollo17
1 Comment
Apollo's Rocket Scientists
Hi Larry,
Good article. I was intrigued by the history of the accelerometer platform. In 1972 I had an internship at Draper Labs working for a guy named Woolsey (if memory serves me) on the Apollo 17 project specifically related to Guidance Nav and Control. Somewhere in my attic I still have the heavy manuals I was given on the GNC system, and we were measuring variations in data off the accelerometer for that mission. It was to be the last moon shot though I don't think we were aware of this until the launch. I would be interested to know if you or research colleagues would have been aware of Bill Woolsey or any of the other scientists who worked on the Apollo 17 mission, and if you could suggest where I can research those times late in the Apollo program from a Draper perspective. Best wishes, P. DeSimone
Reply
LarryH
11 Comments
Re: Apollo's Rocket Scientists
I didn't come across the name Woolsey in my research on the story, but the best place to begin an exploration of the Instrumentation Lab's role in the Apollo mission would probably be David Mindell's book Digital Apollo. Eldon Hall's book Journey to the Moon is also fascinating reading, but it's more about the technical details of the system's development than it is about the people at the lab. (It's also harder to find than David's book.)
Reply