8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
1/63
EVALUATION
OF
HEA T- A N D
BLAST-PROTECTION MATERIALS
by
J
D
Morrison und
B
J
Lockrbart
F.
Kennedy
Space
Center
Kennedy Spuce Center, Fla. 32899
N A T I O N A L A E R O N A U T I C S A N D S PA C E A D M I N I S T R A T I O N W A S H I N G T O N , D.
C .
N O V E M B E R
1971
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
2/63
TECH LIBRARY KAFB,
NM
5 R e p o r t D o t e
Illlll
I
llli
I1lllllllll
8
I
Ill
November 1971
I
6.
P e rf o r m i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n C o d e
R e p o r t N o .
NASA TN
D - 6 4 8 4
T i t l e o n d S u b t it l e
7 . K e y w o r d s
Ablat ive Materials Rocket Exhaust
Thermal Prot ect on P la st ic Coatings
Performance T ests
Saturn V Launch Vehicles
2. G o v e rn m e n t A c c e s s i o n N o .
78.
D i s t r i b u t i o n S t o t e m e n t
Unlimited Distr ibut ion
Evaluat ion
of
Heat- and Blast-Protection Materials
9. S e c u r i t y C l o s s i f . (of t h i s r e p o r t )
20.
S e c u ri t y C l a s s i f . ( o f t h i s p a g e )
21.
N o . o f P o g e s
Unclass i f ied Unclass i f ied
59
,
A u t ho r ( s 1
J. D. Mo rrison and B. J. Lockhart
John
F.
Kennedy Space Center, Fl or id a
.
P e r f o r m i n g O r g o n i z o t i o n N a m e a n d A d d r e s s
22.
P r i c e
3.00
2. S pons o r i ng A genc y Nom e ond A dd r es s
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
0333327
3 .
R e c i p i e n t s C o t al o g N o .
8 .
P e r f o r m i n g
O r g a n i z o t i o n
Repo r t
No.
70. W or k U n i t N o .
7 7 .
C o n t r o c t
or
Grant NO.
73.
T y p e o f R e p o r t o n d P e r i o d C o v e r e d
Technical Note
74. S p o n s o r i n g A g e n c y C o d e
5 .
S upp lem en t a r y No t es
Prepared by Ma terials Testing Branch
,
Analytical Laboratories Division
6 . A b s t r a c t
A
program was ini tia te d a t the Kennedy Space Center i n December 1967 and
conducted through December 1969 by the Ma terials Te sting Branch, for the Design
Directorate, Mechanical Design Division,
t o
evaluate
the
performance of heat- and
blast-protection materials for ground support equipment used during the ApolIo/Saturn
launches.
Vendors supplying materials believed
t o
be genera lly suitab le
for
heat and blast
prote ction were contacted; some subsequently submitted su ffic ien t material for
launch-exposure te sts . Tests were made during the ApoIIo /Saturn
502,
503,
and
505
launches. Test s were als o made in a local laboratory, as an alternative t o the
restrictive requirements of launch-exposure tests
, o
determine
the
effects of torch-
flame exposure on ablative materials.
Fi ve m aterials were found to be satisfac tory in a ll major test categories. It was
determined that torch-flame tests can probably be utilized as an acceptable substitute
for the booster-engine-exhaust exposure te st for basic screening of candidate
materials.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
3/63
NO TIC E: Th is document was prepared under the sponsorsh ip of the Na tional Aeronau-
tic s and Space Adm inistration. Neither the Unite d States Government nor any person
acting on behalf
of
the Un ited States Government assumes any l ia b il it y resulting from
the use
o f
the information contained in this document, or warrants that such use wi l l be
free from p rivately owned rights .
The citation
o f
manufacturer's names
,
rademarks or other product identification in
th is
document does not cons titu te an'endorsement or approva l of the use of such commercial
products.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
4/63
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ..
1
MATERIALS ....................................... 2
TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS ...................... 2
Booster-Engine-Exhaust Exposure ..................... 2
F l e x i b i l i t y
.....................................
10
Flammabi l i ty .................................... 10
Exposure to Hypergolic Propellants .....................
Exposure to Liq uid Oxygen..
.........................
Torch Flame Exposure.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
CONCLUSIONS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19
REFERENCES
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20
Adhesion ...................................... 9
11
1 2
IL
LU ST RAT ION S
Figure Page
1
Test Fix ture (Pla te No. 1)with Panels on Mobile Launcher Deck,
for A/S
502
Launch. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .
2 Posi t ion of Te st F ixtu re Relat ive to Flam e Hole and Booster Engine . . 5
Plate No.
1
i th T est Panels F ol lowin g Exposure t o A/S 502
Launch 7
4 Te st Stand and Torc h wit h Sample in Place for Test ing
. . . . . . . . . .
15
4
3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
Tor ch F lame Impinging on Specimen During Te st (Thermocouple
is posi t ioned on back face of specimen.)
.................... 16
6
Specimen After Torch Flame Exposure
......................
17
...
I l l
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
5/63
11111 111111111111
Table
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1 6
T A B L E S
Page
Heat-Resistant Coatings Evaluated in the Init ial A/S
502
Launch-Exposure Test . .
.
.
. ..
. .
. . . . .
.
. .
. .
.
. . . .
.
. .
. .
.
.
Heat-Resistant Coatings First Evaluated in the A/S
503
and
A/S
505 Launch-Exposure Tests
.
.
. . . . . .
. . . . .
.
.
.
. .
. .
Pteparation of Coated Panels for A/S
502
Launch Exposure .
.
. . .
Results o f Booster Engine Exhaust Exposure, A/S
502
Launch . .
.
Refurbishment of Coating Ma terials F ollo win g A/S 502 Launch
Exposure . . . . ..
.
. . .. .
.
..
.
. . .
. . .
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . ..
.
.
Results of Booster Engine Exhaust Exposure, A/S 503 Launch .
. . .
Results o f Booster Engine Exh aust Exposure, A/S 505 Launch
.
.
.
Adhesion Characteristics of Fif tee n Ab lative Ma terials Evaluated
in the A/S 502 Launch-Exposure Test . .
. . . .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
.
Adhesion Characteristics o f Several Abla tive Mate rials Applied
to Bare Stee l . .
. . .
.
. .
.
.
.
. . .
.
. .
. .
. .
. ...
. .
. .
. . . . . . .
.
Adhesion Characteristics of Four Abla tive Ma teria ls Applied over
a D-65 Surface
.
..
. .. .
. .
.
.
. . . ..
. . .
. . .
.
.
.
. . . . . . . .
.
Flam mab i l i ty Characteristics of Fi f teen Ablat ive Mate r ia ls Evaluated
in the A/S
502
Launch-Exposure Tests
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
. . .
.
. .
FIammabiI ty Characteristics of Four Ablative Materials of Two
Dif ferent Thicknesses . . . . . . .
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FIammabiI ty Character ist ics of Fi v e Ablat ive Mater ia ls Tested in
Accordance wit h AS T M D6 3
5
.
. . . . .
.
. . .
. .
.
.
. . . . . . .
. .
. .
.
Results of LOX-Impact Tests on Ab lative Ma terials .
.
. . .
. . . . . . .
Summary of Torch Test Results . . . . . . .
.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
Summary of Results of Various T ests on Ab lative Mate rials .
. . .
.
.
.
A- 1
A-
2
A - 3
A-8
A - 1 4
A - 1 6
A - 1 9
A-23
A - 2 4
A- 24
A - 2 5
A - 2 6
A - 2 6
A - 2 7
A - 3 2
A - 3 4
iv
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
6/63
EVALUATION OF HEAT- AND BLAST-PROTECTION MATERIALS
by
J . D.
Morrison and
B. J.
Lockhart
John
F.
Kennedy Space Center
INTRODU CTlON
Th is is the summary report of a program, conducted by the M ateria ls Tes ting B ranch
(MT B) for the Design Directorate, Mech anical Design Division, at Kennedy Space
Center (KSC) t o evaluate the performance of heat- and blast-protection materials for
ground support equipment. The program, wh ich was in iti at ed i n December 1967 b y a
request from Mr. A. Ze iler , remained ac tiv e through December 1969, at which time the
experimental work was terminated.
The impetus for an evaluation program on heat- and blast-protection materials was
provided by:
The requiremen t for a means of pro tecting various items of ground support equip-
ment from heat and bla st effects during launch vehicle firings.
The lack o f sui table tes t data to indicate what types of materials could provide
adequate prote ction again st the heat fluxes generated by the Saturn V booster
engines.
The need for providing, adequate heat and blas t protection a t the lowe st overall
cost to NASA.
A t the ince ption of the evaluation pmgram, a single material, Dynatherm D-65 ,
was prim arily planned for applica tion to the launch structures at Launch Complex 39,
and some experience was gaine d w it h th is material during the A/S 501 aunch. It was
considered that a bas ic tes t requirement for any add itional candidate materials should
be exposure to the booster engine exhaust during an actual launch. Therefore,
it
was
with some urgency that plans were made to obtain materials for testing during the A/S
502
launch.
Contacts were made with vendors supplying materials believed to be generally suit-
able for heat and bla st protection. Those vendors indica ting an inter est in the program
were requested to provide su ffic ien t material in it ia l l y for launch-exposure tests, wi th
the understanding th at those m aterials performing well in the f ir st launch exposure would
be subjected to addit ional test ing
as
needed to determine the ir overa ll qua lif ications for
use at KSC.
1
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
7/63
M A T ERIALS
Candidate coatings for the program included ablativ e materials
,
assive insufators,
intumescent paints, and heat-resistant paints. A vendor source l i s t was supplied to the
M T B by the Mechanical Design Division.
As
a resu lt of in it ia l contacts made by the
MTB,
11
vendors indicated an interest in supplying materials for evaluation. Twenty-
seven materials supplied by these
11
vendors were used i n the fi rs t booster-engine-
exhaust exposure te st (the A/S
502
launch). Subsequen tly, other materials were sup-
p l i ed for evaluation b y some of these same vendors and by one vendor whose materials
were no t evaluated i n the in i t ia l test . A l is t ing of the
27
original t es t materials and
their sources is given in Table
1
Appendix). The additional m aterials and their sources
are l is ted in Table
2
(Appendix).
Te st samples for the in it ia l launch-exposure: te st were applied, in a thickness of
0.318
cm,to carbon stee l panels 15.2 cm by 15.2 cm by 0.318 cm. The stee l panels
had been first coated w it h an inorganic-base, zinc-ric h paint, which i s used wid ely as
an anti-corrosion coating on exposed structures at KSC. Some of the panels were sent
t o vendors for app lication of the heat-resistant coatings. Other panels were retained by
the M T B for app lication of coating materials supplied by the vendors. Te st samples for
the later launch-exposure tests were ba sical ly identical wi th those used in the in i t i al
test. Any departures from the origina l test configuration are noted in the data tables for
the particular tests described in subsequent sections of the report. Samples for other
type s of tes ts were prepared by the MT B, from materials sup plied by the vendors, in the
forms needed for the various tests.
TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS
The overall test requirements for the evaluation program were established by the
Mec hanical Design Division, and these requireme nts are, in general
,
ow incorporated
in a KSC specification for heat- and blast-protection materials (Reference
1).
In addi-
ti o n to the launch-exposure tests, data were needed on refurbishm ent charac teristics,
mixing and application, adhesion to painted steel base, fle xib il i ty , f lammabil i ty, resis-
tance to attack by hypergolic propellants (i n event of spil lage), possible re acti vity with
LOX
(also i n event of spillage), and the resistance to torch-flame exposure. As stated
previously, the most urgent requirement in screening the various can didate materials
was satisfa ctory performance i n the launch-exposure test. Therefore, the chronology of
the program was prim arily established by the Apo llo launch schedule. The mixing and
app lication cha racteristics of the materials were evaluated during preparation of samples
for the launch-exposure tests. The other tes ts were conducted as time and materials
were av aila ble between, and subsequent to, launch-exposure t es ts.
Boos er-Engine-Ex haus
t
Exposure
Th is section o f the report describes the launch-exposure tests conducted during the
A/S 502, 503, and 505 launches. The procedures used in preparation and eva luatio n
of the samples for these tests included mixing and application of the heat-resistant coat-
ing materials, and refurbishment of the test panels follow ing launch exposure, both of
2
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
8/63
whic h have become part of the o verall tes t requirements. The results o f the mixing and
appl ication and refurbishment evaluations of the materials origin al ly tested in the A/S
502 aunch are given in Tab les 3 and 5 (Append ix). Performance of the "newer" mate-
ria ls was general ly satisfactory in both respects.
r iz ed i n a subsequent section o f the report.
The overall results are also summa-
AJS
502
Launch Exposure
Coating samples were app lied to the s teel t es t panels by the M T B and by some
of the partic ipatin g vendors. Fo r the coating application done by the MTB, the vendor's
recommendations were followed. Fo r one of the coatings, a particula r primer supp lied by
the coating manufacturer was applied over the inorganic-base, zinc- rich paint. W it h
other coatings, no primer was required, and the material. was ap plied dire ctly to the zin c-
ri ch pain t surface. In instances where a primer was recommended but not required, the
primer was applied. A sing le primer material was used for al l such application s by the
,MTB-- GE-SS4155 "Blue Primer? Table 3 Appendix) shows the coatings and primers
used, the panel designation for each sample, and other details of the coating app licatio n.
In the instances of coatings a pplied by the vendor, details of coating app lication are
shown when this information was sup plied by the vendor. In the coating application
sequence, the weigh t of each panel was determined immediately before the coating was
app lied. Afte r the coating was applied and had cured, each panel weigh t was again
determined.
As a part of the performance evaluation for the coatings, it was desired t o know
the temperature that each panel atta ined during the exposure t o the booster engine exhaust.
The time factor did not permit instrumentation of the panels w it h heat-sensing devices
from wh ich temperature record ings could be made. However, a series of temperature-
indic ating pa ints (Tempilaq) was applied to the back of each panel. These paints,
which were app lied as stripes, undergo a vis ib le permanent change when a given tempera-
ture lev el is reached. The series applied to the panels covered a temperature range
from
204C
to
1,371 C.
The p aints were also a pplied to severa l uncoated panels,
which were attached face-up on the large plates in several differen t locations among the
coated panels. It was expe cted that some ind ication of the dire ct exposure temperatures
could be obtained from these samples, as w e ll as the back -face temperatures from the
coated samples.
The te st panels w ith the heat-res istant coatings (or temperature-indicating
paints) appl ied were attached to the large steel plates w ith
.O
.635-cm stainless steel
machine screws. The spaces between the edges of each tes t panel and the base plate
were sealed with a caulking material (Dow-Corning 92-041) to protect the temperature-
sen sitive paints on the back surface of the panels from the intrus ion of moisture. The
plates wi th the attached test panels were transported to the launch si t e (L C- 39 A) and
were attached to the mo bile launcher No. 2 deck at a point 55.9 cm from the deck
opening. One pl at e
(No.
1)was on the south s ide o f the deck opening, and the other
plate
(No. 2)
was on the ea st side of the opening.
F igure 1 shows the initial appear-
ance of the coated panels on Plate No. 1; Figure 2 shows the location of the plate in
relat ion to the flame h ole and one of the booster engines.
3
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
9/63
Figure
1.
Test Fixture (Plate
N o .
1)with Panels, on Mobile Launcher
Deck,
For A/S
502 Launch
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
10/63
: J E
Figure
2.
Posit ion of Test Fi xture Relative to Flame Hole and Booster E ngine
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
11/63
In the period between the pla cin g of the t e st samples on the mob ile launcher deck
and their heat and blast exposure during the A/S
502
launch, the samples were inspected
for any effects of atmospheric exposure on the coatings. No sign ifica nt changes from atmos-
-ph eric exposure were noted.
Immediately fol lowing the
A/S 502
mission, the two plates
w it h the attached panels were removed from the mobile launcher deck and transported to
the Materials Testing Laboratory for examination.
Photographs were taken of the tes t pan els for documentation of changes i n their
appearance as a res ul t of exposure to the booster engine exhaust. The in dividu al panels
were then removed from Plates
1
nd 2 and were inspected and evalua ted by a panel com-
posed of personnel from the M echanical Design Div ision and the Ma terials T esting Lab-
oratory. The temperature indica tions from the Temp ilaq pain t (app lied to the panel backs),
and the weight and thickness changes of the coatings were determined and recorded.
Figure 3 hows
an
overall view of Plate
1
nd the attached te st panels. The general
appearance o f the panels after launch exposure can be seen in th is photograph. The
Tem pilaq paints ap plied to the exposed face of seve ral panels were removed, probably
during water deluge.
The results o f the evaluation of each coating, w ith respect t o back-face tem-
perature, material
loss,
and general appearance, are giv en i n Table
4
(Appendix). The
arbitrary rating for each coating m aterial i s also shown.
These ratings were arrived at
by the parameters previously l isted. If one test panel for a given material showed a back-
face temperature of les s than 204"C, nominal material loss, and fai rly even ablation,
the m aterial was given. a "Good" rating, even though other tes t panels in the group did
not perform as we ll. In some instances, panels prepared by the vendors appeared to
have performed substantially better than the panels of the same material prepared by the
M T B (e.g. Korotherm
792 700
nd
792 70
1; Dynatherm D-65 ). W ith other mate-
rial s, the converse was true (e.g.
190-J-4).
The "Fair" rat ing was usu al ly given to
materials with nominal
loss
but wi th very uneven ablation, partic ularly when completely
bare spots were present. The "Poor" rating genera lly ref lec ts high back-face tempera-
ture, or very heavy mate rial
loss,
or both.
Those materials receiving the "Good" rating were next evaluated for refurbish-
ment characteristics. The thickness and weight of each of these materials with it s char
layer (i f present) was determined. One-half o f the coating surface was then wire-
brushed t o remove any char layer and other loose mater ial. The panels were then
reweighed to determine the w eight of char removed, and the coatin g thickne ss was again
measured. Fres h material was applied to the brushed half of each panel to restore coat-
ing thickness to. 0.318 cm. The refurbishment cha racte ristics for each material are
shown i n Table
5
(Appendix).
A/S 503 Launch Exposure
Test samples for the exposure to booster engine exhaust during the A/S
503
launch consisted of panels refurbished after the A/S 502 exposure test, new ly prepared
panels of several of the previously tested materials, several panels i ni t i al ly coated wi th
6
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
12/63
. . . . . .
..................................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 3 . Plate No. 1
with
Test Panels Following Exposure
t o
A/S 502
Launch
7
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
13/63
Dynatherm D -6 5 and then overcoated wit h other ablative materials
,
nd a previously
untested material, - 3 2 0 , upp lied by Dynatherm for e valuation.
General methods of
preparation of ' 'new" tes t panels were sim ilar t o those used in preparation of samples for
the
A/S 502
test. The tota l number of tes t panels
(30)
could be accommodated on one
of the large steel te st f ixtures. In the assembly of the te st f ixture for the A/S 503 test,
temperature-sensing strip s (Tem pilabels) were placed in contact wit h the back face of
each stee l te st panel. These elements, which give indic atio n by color change wit hin
1 4 C increments of temperatures reached in the range of 1 21 C to 26OoC, were
expected to cover the back-face temperature range more effectively than that obtained
w it h the Tempi laq
in
the A/S 502 test. Photographs were taken of the completed te st
fixture, and it was moved to the launch site and attached to the' deck o f the mobile
launcher.
Fol lowing the
A/S
503 launch, the test f ixture was returned to the Mat erials
Tes ting Labora tory for evaluation of the coatings. Photographs of the exposed samples
were taken for documentation. Each of the samples was then removed from the base
plate, and the weig ht and thic kne ss of the remaining coa tings were determined. The
temperature sensors (TempiIabeIs) attached
t o
the backs of the tes t panels were read to
determine the maximum b a c k - fa d temperatures experienced during exposure. The sam-
ple s were then wire-brushed t o remove any char th at was found, and the weigh t and th ick -
ness o f each c oatin g were again determined.
The resu lts of the sample analyses are given i n Table 6 (Appendix). Compari-
son of the results of this test w ith those obtained in the original A/S 502 exposure sug-
gests th at the se verity of the exposure was genera lly of greater degree in the A/S 503
launch, as indica ted by weight and thickness losses. F iv e
o f
the materials were con-
sidered outstanding on the b asis of rate of ablation and unifor mity of ablation. These
were: DC 93-072, GE TBS 758, Dynatherm E -3 1 0 F , Dynatherm D- 32 0, and
Raycom RPR
2138.
A/S 505
Launch
~ ~~
Exposure
Ma ter ials selec ted for booster-engine-exhaust exposure during the A/S
505
launch include d retesting of several materials th at had performed we ll in prior tests (for
the purpose of completing a l i s t of acceptable materials) and several ' 'new'' materials,
inc lud ing three elastomeric materials furn ished in sheet form, and several materials sup-
pl ie d by Universal Propulsion Company. The sheet materials were cemented to the steel
te st panels, and the other materials were trow elle d on the panels (as usual). Temperature-
sensing elements (Tempilabels), covering the temperature range from
66C
to 260C
in 1 4 C increments, were plac ed on the backs of the te st panels, and the panels were
attached to the large steel tes t plate. In add ition to the ablative-material tes t panels,
the plate had
inorganic-zinc-paint-coated
steel panels attached to
it,
also wi th the
Temp ilabels app lied to the back of each panel. These zinc-painted steel panels, in
thicknesses
of
0.318 cm,0.635 cm, 1.27 cm, 1.91 cm, and 2.54 cm, were evalu-
ated to determine the back-face temperatures attained, as a func tion
of
thickness, without
the protection of ablative coatings. The plate wi th the attached panels was photographed
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
14/63
and was then transported to the mobile launcher for attachment to the launcher deck near
the flame hole.
The results of the A/S 505 launckexposure test are given i n Table 7 (Appen-
dix). Several of the prev ious ly teste d materials performed very satis fac tori ly in th is
test, notably Dynatherm E - 3 1 0 F and E -3 2 0, and Dow-Corning 20-103 and 93-072.
The Korotherm
792-703/792-704
was marginally acceptable on the basis
of
weight
loss, and the Dow-Coming
93-058
(a ' 'new" material) and the Dynatherm D -6 5 panels
showed excessively high weight loss. Several new materials were exceptionally resis-
tant to the heat and bla st effects, in part icular the Goodrich E P - 8 7 and the Upcote
16030, 10035, 14038, 16031, 14041, and
07006.
Test data on the "unpro-
tected" zinc-painted steel panels of various thicknesses indicate d that, in plate thick-
nesses
of
1.27 cm or greater, the back-face temperatures at tain ed during lau nch are
surprisingly low -- approximately 107C
--
in areas
o f
the launcher deck fai r ly close
to the flame hole.
.Adhesion
Tes t of adhesion cha racterist ics of
15
abla tive materials that were rated "Good" in
the A/S
502
launch te st were performed initi all y, and subsequently simil ar tests were
performed with new materials whose performance in the lat er launch-exposure tests war-
ranted further co nsideration .
The te st samples were 0.3 18 -cm -thic k str ips o f the abla-
tive material 2.54 cm wide and
20.32
cm iong, app lied to steel strip s (of simi lar s ize)
that had been primed wi th inorganic-base, zinc- rich paint.
.In
addition, some lim ite d
tests were performed to evalua te the adhesion of severa l materials t o bare stee l and to
other ablative materials. Th is latter type
of
tes t was p rima rily to evalua te the adhesion
cha racte ristics of d issi mila r materials, such as might be app lied during refurbishment of
launch structures.
In the preparation of the adhesion tes t specimens, a 2.5 4- cm length at one end of
the specimen strip was deliberately separated from the base metal with masking tape t o
allow access for gripping.
The separated ends of the specimen were gripped in the jaws
o f
an lnstron testing machine, and the specimen was alig ned normal to the loading axis
of the testin g machine.
The specimen was then pu lle d in the machine at a crosshead-
travel rate of 0.402 cm per second.
A load-d eflection cu we was recorded, and the
average adhesion load for each test was determined for a band length o f
12.7
cm, the
f i rst and last 2.54 cm of separation being neglected.
The results
of
the adhesion tests for the 15 original m aterials ap plied to zinc -
painted steel are given i n Table 8 (Appendix). Table 9 (Appendix) gives the results of
adhesion tests of several materials app lied to bare carbon steel, and Table
10
(Appen-
dix) gives the results of adhesion tests of four ablative materials applied to steel pre-
vio us ly coated wi th Dynatherm D -6 5 (simulating refurbishment bonds). Add itiona lly,
adhesion tests similar to those reported in Table 8 (Appendix) were performed with
Dynatherm E -3 2 0, Upcote
10-035,
and Dow-Corning
93-058
(ap plied to zinc-coated
steel).
The E -3 2 0 and the
10-035
had exc ellen t adhesion cha racte ristics. The bond
9 '
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
15/63
strength of the E-320 exceeded the ten sile strength of the material, and the adhesion of
the Upcote
10-035
was 11.9 kg/cm. The adhesion of the
93-058
was very poor, well
below
1.13
kg/cm. Generally, materials having an adhesion of
5.65
kg/cm are con-
sidered acceptable. If def init iv e load value cannot be obtained, because of tensile fa i l-
ure of the te st strip, indica tion of good adhesion is implied by removal of the zinc paint
appl ied to the steel base. Of the materials tested, fi ve were considered to have unac-
cepta bly low adhesion. These were:
GE
RTV
511, GE
T B S
542,
Ful le r
190-J4,
Raycom RPR 435, and Dow-Corning 93-058.
FI
ex
i i
t y
The heat- and blast-re sistant coatings are applied to structural parts of various
shapes and to r elat ively large fl at areas, such as the side panels of the ta i l service
masts. I f the cured coating i s exce ssively hard and stiff,
it
can be separated from the
base metal because of the stagnation pressures susta ined during launch. Sepa ration
wou ld begin along an edge where adhesion is inadequate. Infle xible coatings could
separate as complete sheets, leavin g large unprotected areas exposed to l ate r stages of
the booster engine exhaust. Examination of test panels exposed in the launch tests pre-
viou sly described indicates that th is may have occurred in several instances. To prevent
th is occurrence, the cured coatings must be reasonably flex ible and
so f t .
The tes t requirement for f le xib i l i t y i s that a 0.318 -cm -thic k sheet of the cured coat-
ing be bent around a 7.6-cm-diameter mandrel withou t cracking o f the coating ma terials.
Tw o materials fai le d this test: Martyte Presst i te
1192
and Raycom RPR 2138.
Flammabi l i ty
Flam ma bil i ty tests were performed on the
15
materials evaluated i n the A/S
502
launch exposure and on additional materials whose prope rties warranted further considera-
tion. The tests were performed generally in accordance w it h A S T M D 1 6 9 2 - 6 2 T . T h i s
method ut i l iz es sheet samples of the te st m aterials,
5.08
cm by
15.2
cm by 0.635
cm,
supported on a metal screen. In the f ir st tests performed wi th these ablative materials,
some modifications were made in the A S TM test procedure to provide more re al is tic con-
di t ions wi th regard to appl ication of the tes t materials. Tw o test series were conducted
on the original f lammab il i ty
t e s t s .
In the first, the samples were supported horizontally,
from one end only, as cant ilevers . The specimen was ig nite d by app lying a Bunsen-
burner flame to a 2. 54 -c m length of the outer end for 60 seconds. After 60 seconds,
the Bunsen burner was removed, and the propag ation time of flame down the length of the
sample, or the time to flame extinc tion, was obtained. In the second series, the speci-
men was supported horizon tally on an aluminum plate wit h a 2 .5 4- cm length of the speci-
men overhanging the aluminum support plate. The Bunsen-burner flame was a pplied t o
the 2.5 4-c m free end, he ld for 60 seconds, and removed. The tim e for flame ext inct ion
was deiermined. The results of these tests are given i n Table
11
(Appendix).
Additional tests were performed on four materials with specimens of two different
sheet thickness es --
0.635
cm and
0.318
cm
--
but with the samples supported on
10
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
16/63
0.635-cm-gr id hardware c lo th as spec if ied in AST M D 1 6 9 2 -6 2 T .
The Bunsen burner,
wit h a wing tip, was ap plied to the sample end for 60 seconds, the flame removed, and
the time to flame ext inctio n was determined. The results of these tests are given in
Table 1 2 (Appendix). These data indica te tha t sheet thickn ess has no important eff ec t
on flame-extinction time of the ablative m aterials wit hin the thickness range usua lly
applied to the launch structures.
Three of the materials evaluated in the fir st tes t group, Korotherm 792-700/790-
704,
Raycom RPR
435 and Korotherm
792-701/792-702,
were con sidered unsat-
isfactory on the basis of f lam mabil i ty characteristics because of their tendency to
sus=
tai n burning and to burn beyond the edge of the heat sink.
The flammabil i ty properties
of the Raycom RPR
2138
were questionable
because of
its
long-burning characteristics.
It was decided to submit this material to further flamm abil i ty tests, along wit h several
other materials for comparative purposes.
It
was believed that tests in accordance wit h
A ST M D -6 35 , which uti l iz es smaller test specimens, might be more sens itive in delin-
eating excessive flamm abil i ty tendencies. In these tests, specimens 12.7 cm long,
1.27 cm wide, and
0.318
cm thick were used.
The specimen was held horizonta lly at
one end in a gripping fixture, w it h the specimen
axis
at
45
degrees; a Bunsen-burner
flame was applied to the free end for
30
seconds and then removed; and time of burning
along the lower edge was recorded. The resu lts of these tests on RPR
2138,
DC 20-
103,
Dynatherm E - 3 1 0 F and D-65, and Korotherm
7.92-703/792-704
are given in
Table 13 (Appendix). These data indica te tha t the Raycom RPR
2138
has much greater
flammabil i ty tendencies than the other materials evaluated with the ASTM D-635 test
procedure.
Exposure to Hypergo lic Propellants
Because of the possibil i ty of accidental spil lage of hypergolic propellants during
loading at the launch sites, heat- and blast-protection materials used on the launch
structures should be rela tively resista nt to attack by the propellants or, at least, should
not be violently reactive i f brought in contact wi th them. Accord ingly, hypergo lic pro-
pellant exposure tests were conducted with the more promising candidate ablative mate-
rials, which were: Dynatherm D-65, E -3 10 F, and E- 32 0; Dow-Corning 20-103 and
93-072;
Raycom RPR
2138;
Korotherm 792-703/792-704; GE TBS 758; and
Universal Propulsion Upcote
10-035.
The exposure tests u ti l iz ed 2. 54 -cm squares of each material,
0.635
cm in thick-
ness. Each sample was placed in a dish, and several drops
of
propellant were a pplied
to simulate spil lage . Two propellants were used
--
Aerozine 50 (50:50 mixture of
hydrazine and unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine) and nitrog en tetrox ide (N2 O4) . None of
the materials were noticeably affected in
600
seconds of exposure to Aerozine
50.
I n
the tests with nitrogen tetroxide, there were no viole nt reactions although the reactio n
wi th the Upcote 10-035 was vigorous. In 600 seconds, no disco loratio n
or
other
activity was observed with Korotherm
792-703/792-704,
DC
20-103,
DC
93-072,
or E -310F .
Sl ig ht surface discoloration was noted with TB S 758, E- 32 0, and RPR
2138.
Considerable leaching of some of the constituents of D -6 5 was noted along the
11
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
17/63
edges of the sample, where the 904 topcoat was not present. There appeared t o be l i tt le
act iv i ty o f the N 2O 4 where the 904 topcoat was intac t. The Upcote 10-035 was the
most reac tive of the materials to N2 0 4 . However, there was no evidence of ignit ion or
otherwise violen t effect s. The reaction was ess en tial ly one of re lat ive ly rapid deterio-
rat ion of the ab lativ e material. Consequently, it was decided that none of the mate rials
tested should be d isqu alif ie d on the b asis of pos sible hazard generated by exposure to
hypergolic propellants.
Exposure to Li qu id Oxygen
The pos sib il i ty of a l iq uid oxygen spil lage on the lau nch structures dictates the
requirement that m aterials applie d to these structures for heat and bla st protection be
unreact ive on contact with LOX . Earl ier in the evolut ion of both the materials and the
te st requirements for their qualif ica tion, consideration was given to the poss ible effects
of LOX-impact sen sit iv i t y o f materials appl ied to the launch structures.
Th is considera-
tio n was based on the fol lowing rationale: a LOX spil la ge coinc iden t wit h mechanical
shock supp lied by impact from a fal l in g o bject could produce cond itions resu lting i n deto-
nation
of
LOX -impact-sen sitive materials. Consequently, LOX-impact tests were per-
formed by the Mar shall Space Fl ig h t Center (MSF C) (References
2
and
3
on materials
then ava ilab le as thermal insu lators . One material, Dynatherm D- 65 , was pr ov isio na lly
qu alif ie d as being LOX-compatible. Tes ts performed at MS F C in accordance wit h
MSFC-SPEC-106B (Reference
4)
showed that, in thicknesses of
0.16
cm or greater,
the D -6 5 could be considered acceptable, wit h the stipula tion that batch-testing of the
material be performed.
As experience was gained through launch-exposure performance of the heat- and
blast-protection materials (and the continuing tes t program wi th them), the need for LO X-
impact com patibi l i ty was g iven further cons ideration.
As s ta ted in KSC DTI -M-15A
(Reference
51,
the requirements with regard to LOX (or
G O X
exposure were modified,
wi th the resu lt that qual i f ica t ion of materials by the LOX-impact test is no longer required
for applications involving exposure directly
t o
the atmosphere. Th is modifica tion is also
ref lected in the provisions of KSC-S PEC -F-O006 A, for Heat and Bla st Protect ion Coat-
ing Ma terials (Reference 1). In part, thi s mo dificatio n was based on the r esults of a
series of spe cial LOX-impact tests, performed a t the request of the Mec hanical Design
Div isio n by the Ma terials Tes ting Branch, ut i l iz ing the KS C Oxygen-Compatibil ity Te st
Fa ci l i t y. The te st specimens consisted of several of the abla tive coating materials,
some prepared in the Ma terials Te sting Laboratory, one material (D -6 5) in tape form,
and other materials obtained from the launch structures where they had been applie d and
exposed to the environment for some time. Some of the ma terials prepared in the labora-
tor y were tes ted in "lab-c lean " condition; others of the samples were deliber ately con-
taminated with hydraulic f luid.
It
was b elie ved th at the tes ting of such a group of Sam-
ple s would give greater insig ht into the basic LOX -impact se ns itiv ity of the various types
of ab lative materials and into the effects o f surface contaminants on LOX-impact sensi-
t i v i t y of the materials.
1 2
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
18/63
The results o f these LOX -impact tests are'given in Table
14
(Appendix). The inten-
si tie s of the reactions observed were rated according to an arbitrary scale as fol lows:
Rating
Descri t ion of Reaction
Fa in t Bare ly v is ib le l i gh t f l ash
. S lig ht Readi ly vis ible (but not intense)
l igh t f l ash
Ap preci b1e
Considerable
Very intense l igh t f lash
Very intense l igh t f lash wi th
burning af material for more
than 2 seconds.
In some instances, the vis ib le reactions were accompanied by audible reports. These
instances are noted in the data table. Several of the materials in the thickness range of
normal applica tion (approximately 0.318 cm) and in the "lab-clean " cond itions (or exposed
t o the atmosphere in the KS C Indu strial Area for 16 days) were basically unreactive in
this particular test series. Both the Dynatherm D -6 5 and the Dow-Corning
20-103
materials tha t had been obtained from the launch structures were LOX-impact-sens it iv e
to some degree. Ap plicatio n of hyd raulic f lu id to the materials appeared to have increased
the s en sitiv ity i n some instances (e.g. the Dynatherm tape) but had no apparent effe ct on
se ns iti vi ty in other instances (e.g. Dynatherm E - 3 2 0 and Korotherm 792-703/792
704).
In one instance with Dow-Corning 20-103 (which was found to be generally
LOX-impact-sensit ive t o a minor degree), the applic ation
of
hydraul ic f lu id resul ted i n
no reactions in a tes t series o f
20
drops.
The results of the LOX-impact tests should be taken as indication that the ablative
materials, whether they are inherently sensitive to LO X-impact conditions or not, may
become sensitive by the adsorption of atmospheric contaminants or the spillage of con-
taminants such as hydraulic fluid.
None of the materials were bas ical ly reac tive w it h LOX as the result of dire ct con-
tac t (simulated spil lage) in the absence of impact.
Torc h-F lame Exposure
As an adjun ct to the major part of the program, tests were performed t o determine the
effec ts of torch-flame exposure on a number of the abla tive materials. The purpose of
these tests was to provide a.possible means for evaluating the heat and blast performance
of the coatings as an alternative to the launch-exposure test. I f it could be established
tha t the torch-flame exposure was es sentia l ly e quivalent to launch exposure in rating the
abla tive materials, then
it
might be possible to qualify new candidate ablative materials
witho ut the rather restric tive time requirements inherent i n the launch schedule.
The test procedures were based on an ASTM specification -- E - 2 8 5 - 6 5 T ,
Oxyacetylene Ablation Testing of Thermal Insulation Materials.
Certain modifications
13
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
19/63
were made to the procedures to provide conditions more suitab le for the intended applica-
t ion. The AST M spe ci f icat ion prov ides for the use of a commercial welding torch no zzle
(e.g. Vic tor Type
4, No.
71,with a s ingle or i f ice
0.326
cm in diameter. W ith thi s noz-
zle, the area of flame impingement on the sample is r el at iv el y small, and the presence of
smal l voids i n the ablat ive coating has a signi f icant effe ct on the test results. The torch
tes ts for th e reported pfiogram were performed w ith a m ultiple -orif ice nozzle that provided
a
torch flame area of
5.08
cm by
5.08
cm. Therefore, the area of te st specimen 'Isam-
pled"
in
the te st was large enough
s o
small void areas would not have as profound an
ef fect
on
the test results.
The torch tests were performed by Continen tal Tes t Laboratories, Fern Park, Florida,
under contract to KSC, ut i l i zi ng abla tive material samples prepared by the M ater ials Test-
ing Branch. Th e samples, wh ich were 10.2 cm by 10.2 cm sheets, 0.635 cm thick,
consis ted of
16
ma terials representing a wide range of performance i n the launch-exposure
tests. The test procedure consisted bas ical ly of the fol lowing:
The sample was mounted
( in
a vert ical posi t ion)
in
a te st support fixture, and a
thermocouple, connected
t o
a temperature recorder, was plac ed in contact wit h the
back face of the sample.
The torch, whic h was mounted in a retractable fixture, was fired using acety-
lene fuel on ly at f ir s t and was then supplied wit h oxygen autom atically at the proper
time interval to attain the desired flame chara cteris tics. The torch was then posi-
tione d rapidly, by a hydraulic actuating system, so that the flame impinged on the
center of the tes t specimen, and the te st timer was in it iat ed . The distance from
the torch face to the specimen, a t the in it ia tio n of the test, was nominally 2.54 cm.
Calib ration of the torch flame so pos itioned w ith respect to the specimen showed a
heat flux of approximately
135
watts/sq cm. The torch-flame exposure was con-
tinued until specimen burn-through occurred or for 180 seconds. The torch-test
fac i l i t y is shown in Figures 4, 5, and 6.
From the test data obtained in the torch-flame tests, tw o parameters were ca l-
culated: insu lation index, A 80C , A18O oC, A38O"C; and erosion rate. The
ins ula tion indexes are defined as fol lo ws:
where: I T
=
insulation index at tetqperature T (sec/cm>
t T
=
time for back-face temperature changes of
80"C, 180"C, 380C from ambient (sed.
d = thickness of specimen (cm).
14
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
20/63
Figure 4. Test Stand and Torch, wi th Sample
in
Place for Testing
15
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
21/63
.
ii
t
Figure 5. Torch
Flame
Impinging on Specimen During Test Thermocouple
is positioned on back face
of
specimen)
16
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
22/63
i
Figure
6.
Specimen After Torch Flame Exposure
17
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
23/63
Erosion rate i s def ined as fol lows:
where:
E =
erosion rate (cm/sec)
d = thickness of specimen (cm)
b = burn-through t ime (s e d
I n ests where burn-through did no t occur before 180 seconds had elapsed (or occasion-
a ll y because of torch flashback), the erosion rate was determined by measuring the depth
o f
material that burned during flame exposure and dividing this distance by the time of
exposure.
The results of the torch-'flame tests on
16
ab lativ e materials, presented as insula -
tion indexes for AT'S of
80",
180",
and 38 0" C, and as eros ion rates, appear
in
Table
15
(Appendix). F or comparative purposes
,
he results of booster-eng ine-exhaust
exposure tes ts are als o presented. These la tter resu lts are average values of weig ht
l o s s ,
includ ing char removal. Some materials were tes ted in three launches, A/S 502,
503,
and
505,
whereas other materials were teste d in on ly one launch. Therefore,
it
is not known whether a "fair" comparison between test methods can be drawn for all of the
ma terials . Generally, the comparative data suggest tha t
a
procedure can be devised for
screening materials b y the torch tes t as a sub stitute for the rocket engine test. In a few
instances, incon sisten cies between res ults of the tw o types of tes ts were noted. Some
of these, par ticu larly i n erosion rate, may be associated with b asic differences in char-
act eris tics of the exposures. It is bel ieved that the heat f lux attained i n the torch test
is representative o f heat fluxes experienced on the launch structures from booster-engine-
exhau st impingement. However, the stagnation pressures from the torch te st may be
lower than those created by the booster engine. The inc on sist en cie s may be also due in
part to the method of preparing the samples for the torch test, wh ich required "castin g"
the ab lative m aterial to a uniform thickness of 0.635 cm (w ith l i t t l e dimensional tolerance
allow ed). As a result, more entrapment of air bubbles may have occurred than is usu ally
experienced by trow ell in g of the 0.3 18- cm -thic k coatings on the test panels for launch-
exposure te sting.
A
mo dified te st sample for the torch test, sim ilar to tha t used for the
launch-exposure tests
,
ould probably be satisfactory, Ba sica lly,
it
appears that le vel s
can be established for the AT 80" C insula tion index and for the erosion rate that wi l l
ensure the sound selec tion, by the torch test, of materials for performance on the L C - 3 9
laun ch structures. Fo r example, values of 55 (minimum) sec/cm for AT 80" C insula tion
index and 0.007 (maximum) cm/sec for erosion r ate wou ld appear to b e reasonable ten-
tative l imits for this purpose.
18
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
24/63
CON
CLUSI
NS
An ove rall summary of the tes t resu lts for each o f the heat- and blast-protec tion mate-
r ia ls i s g iven i n Tab le
16
(Appendix). Seve ral ma teria ls from one vendor were not com-
ple te ly tested because, in the course of the program, th e vendor selec ted a sin gle mate-
ri a l (e. g. Upcote 10-035) as being most generally suitable for complete evaluation.
Several of the other materials were not completely tested because they were found to be
unsa tisfacto ry i n one of the major te st categories and were, therefore, ba sic all y unac-
ceptable for use on the launch structures a t KSC.
The follow ing materials were found to be satisfactory in a ll major tes t categories
and are so i nd ica ted in K SC-SP EC-F-0006-A MPL-4 :
Dynatherm D-65 with 904 Topcoat
Dynatherm E -3 20
Dow-Coming 20-103
DeSoto Korotherm 792-703/792-704
Pf i ze r F i rex
10-035
(originally Upcote
10-035)
Another material, Dynatherm
E-310F,
found to be basic ally acceptable, is essentia l ly
simi lar to E -3 20 , but the E -3 1 0 F components are somewhat less readi ly mixed for
application. Therefore, the E- 3 2 0 product is carried as the preferable material
of
the
two.
Data obtained in torch-flame tests on a number of the ablat ive m aterials indic ate
that th is type of tes t can probably be ut i l i ze d as an acceptable substitute for the booster-
engine-exhaust exposure test for basic screening of candidate materials.
19
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
25/63
REFERENCES
1.
"Heat and B la st Protection Coating Materials, Sp ecif ica tion for," KSC -SPE C-F-
0006A,
2
June 1969, John F. Kennedy Space Center, NAS A.
2.
Key,
C. F.
and Riehl,
W.
A., "Com patib i l i ty of Materials wi th Li qu id Oxygen,"
N AS A T M
X-985,
August
1964.
3.
Key, C. F., "Comp atibi l ity of Materials w ith Liq uid Oxygen,
111,
T M X-53533,
November 3, 1966.
4.
"Test ing Com patibi l i ty of Materials for Liq ui d Oxygen Systems
,I
MSFC-SPEC-
106B, October 6, 1967, Marshall Space F li gh t Center, NAS A.
5.
"Design Technical Instruction for Determining
LOX
Impact Se ns it iv i ty and Flam-
mabil i ty Requirements for Materials Used where Contact with Liquid or Gaseous
Oxygen is Expected or Possible," D T I- M -l 5A , March 28, 1969, John
F.
Kennedy Space Center, NA SA .
20
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
26/63
APPENDIX
Table
1.
Vendor
Armstrong Cork
Des oto
DeSoto
DeSoto
Dow-Corn i g
Dow-Corn ing
Dow -Corn
i
g
Dynatherm
Dynatherm
Dynatherm
Dynatherm
F u er Ai rcraft F in ishes
Fu l er Ai rcraf t F in ishes
General Electric
General Electric
General Electr ic
General Electric
General Electr ic
Press i e
Products Research and
Raytheon
Raytheon
S perex
Thermal Systems
Thermal Systems
Thermal S ystems
Thermai Systems
Chemical
Heat-Resistant Coatings Evaluated in the
In i t ia l A/S 502 Launch-Exposure Test
. -
aterials Designation
lnsulcork K5NA
Korotherm 792-70
0
792-70 4
Korotherm 792-701/792-70 2
Korotherm 79
2-70
37792-704
Si l ico ne Rubber
20-103
S
i
icone Rubber 93-0
72
Sil icone Rubber
92-041
D-6
5
E - 3 1 0 F
7275
700
190-J-7
190-J-4
548-300
548-301
T B S - 5 4 2
T B S - 7 5 8
R T V - 5 1 1
1192 Martyte
P R - 1 9 5 5 - B T - # 1 2 K i t
Raycom 435 RPR
Raycom
2138
RPR
S P - 2 1
Thermo-Lag T-395-1
Thermo-Lag T-395-3
Thermo-Lag T-395-4
T hermo-Lag T- 80 0 -6 A
ype
Ab1ative
Ab1 a ti e
I su
I
t ive
Ablat ive
Ab Iati e
Ab
I
ative
Ab\ at ive
Ab1 at i ve
Ab1 at ve
Heat-Res ista nt P aint
Ab1 ati ve
AbI t ve
A blat ive
Ab
I
at e
Ablat ive
Ab at e
Ab1 at e
Ab at ive
Ab1 at e
Ablat ive
Ab1at
i
e
Ablat ive
Intumescent Pain t
Ab1 at ive
Ab1 at ve
Ab1 at ive
Ablat ive
A - l
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
27/63
Vendor
Table 2. Heat-Resistant Coatings F ir s t Evaluated in the
A/S 503 and A/S 505 Launch-Exposure Tests1
Dynatherm
Dow-Corning
Universal Propulsion2
Universal Propulsion2
un vers a1 Pro pu1s i n 2
universal Propuls i n2
universa l Propuls on 2
Universal Propulsion2
universal Propu
s
ion2
Goodrich
G
oodric
h
Goodrich
Material Designation
E - 3 2 0
93-058
Upcote2 16030
Upcote2
14038
Upcote2 07-006
Upcote2
10035
Upcote2 14050
Upcote2
14041
Upcote2 16031
N 3 2 2 3
N 3 5 5 3
E P - 8 7 3
ype
Ab at ve
Ab1 at ive
Ab1 ative
Ab I ti e
Ablat ive
Ab at
i
e
Ab1 at ve
Ab1 ati e
Ab at ve
Ablat ive
Ab Iati e
Ab1 at e
1. These are coatings th at were not availab le for evaluation in the A/S 502 launch-
exposure test and were evaluated i n the A/S 503 or 505 launche s, or both. Some
of the A/S 502 tes t materials were also evaluated in the two later launches.
2. Material now marketed by Pfizer Chemical under different trade name - "F i rex. "
3.
Ma terial supplied i n sheet form, requiring cementing to ste el substrate.
A-2
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
28/63
Table 3. Preparation of Coated Panels for A/S 502 Launc h Exposure
Panel No. 1
1-168
2-164
2-111
1-171
2-1 70
? 2-110
1-173
2-172
2-109
1-195
2-193
2-10 2
1-156
Coating Material
Korotherm 79 2-70 0 /79 2-704
Korotherm 792-700/792-704
Korotherm 79 2-7 0 0
7
9 2 -7 04
Korotherm 792-70 1/792-702
Korotherm 792-701/792-702
Korotherm 792-701/792-702
Korotherm 792-703/792-704
Korotherm 792-703/792-704
Korotherm 792-703/792-704
Dynatherm E-310F
Dynatherm E-310F
Dynatherm
E-310F
Sperex SP-21
Primer2
G E-S S-4155
G
E-S
S-4155
GE-SS-4155
G
E-SS-4155
G E-S S
-4 1 5
G E-S S-4155
G E-S
S-4155
G E-SS-4155
G
E-S
S-4155
None
None
None
G
E-S S-4 155
Method
of
Coating
App
I
ati on
Trowel
Trowel
Spray
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Brush
Coating
Applied
BY
M T B
M T B
Vendor
M T B
M T B
Vendor
M T B
M T B
Vendor
M T B
M T B
Vendor
M T B
General Observations
Not suitable for vertical
surface application.
Not suitable for vertical
surface application.
No t suitable for vertical
surface applica tion .
Not suitable for vertical
surface app lication.
Application satisfactory.
Appl ica t on sa tisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
13 coats applied.
Application by brush
satisfactory.
1.
Fi rs t dig it in thi s number sequence refers to the designation of the large steel plate (1 r 2) to which the ind ividual
panels were attached. Las t three digits refer
t o
the particular panel designation.
2. When no primer was used, the surface of the zinc -ric h undercoat was wire-brushed before the hea t-res istan t coating
was applied.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
29/63
Table
3.
Preparation of Coated Panels for A/S
5 0 2
Launch Exposure (Continued)
Method
of
Coating
Coating Applied
Panel No.
1
Coating Mate rial Primer2 Applica tion By General Observations
1-153 Sperex SP-21
G E-S S-4 155 Brush MTB 1 3 coats appl ied.
Application b y brush
s
at i sf acto ry
1-147
G E - 5 4 8 - 3 0 0
2-14
5
GE-548-300
1-14
2
GE-548-301
2-144
GE-548-301
G
E-S
S-4155
G
E-SS
-4 1 55
G
E-S S-4 155
Trowe
I
Trowel
Cast
M T B
M T B
M T B
Application satisfactory.
Appl i ation satisfactory
.
Not suitable for vertical
surface application.
Not suitable for vertical
surface application.
Not suitable for vertical
surface appl ication.
Not suitable for v ertical
surface appl ication
.
Appeared to need elevated
temperature (32 .2 '0 cure.
Not considered entirely
satisfactory.
Appeared t o need elevated
temperature
(32.2'0
cure.
Not considered entirely
satisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
App
I
cat on sat s actory.
G
E -S S -4155 C as t MTB
1-148 GE-TBS-542
1-150
GE-TBS-542
1-130 GE-TBS-758
?
G E-S S-4 155 Trowel MTB
G
E-S S- 41 55 Trowel MT B
GE-SS-4155 Trowe I M T B
2-132
GE-TBS-758
G
E-S S-4 155 Trowel MTB
1-185
1192
Martyte
2-184
1 1 9 2
Martyte
None
None
Rol ev
Roller
M T B
M TB
1.
F ir st digit in this number sequence refers t o
the
designation of the large steel plate (1 r 2) to which the individual
panels were attached. La st three digits refer t o the p articula r panel designation.
2. When no primer was used, the surface of the zinc -ric h undercoat was wire-brushed before the heat-resista nt coating
was
applied.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
30/63
Table
3.
Preparation o f Coated Panels for A/S 502 Launch Exposure (Continued)
Method of Coating
Coating Applied
Panel N O ? Coating Material Primer2 Appl ication By General Observations
2-107
2-250
2-213
1-202
1 1 9 2
Martyte
Dynatherm
700
Dynatherm 7275
Dynatherm D-65
None
G
E-S
S
-4 1 5 5
GE-SS-4155
D-65A
Vendor
M T B
M T B
M T B
Application marginal
.
Application satisfactory.
Total of
15
coats applied,
then topcoated wit h No.
9 0 4 sealer.
Total of 15 coats applied,
then topcoated with No.
904 sealer.
Total
of
1 5 coats applied,
then topcoated with
N o .
904
sealer.
Application satisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
11coats applied.
Satisfactory for brush
application.
Satisfactory for brush
application.
11
coats appl ied.
Trowe I
Brush
Brush
2-203
Dynatherm D-65
D-65A Brush MT B
2-104
?
UI
1-139
2-141
1-158
Dynatherm D-65
D-65A
Vendor
Dow-Coming 20-103
Dow-Corning 20-103
Raycom 435 RPR
DC 1 2 0 0
DC
1 2 0 0
None
Trowe I
Trowel
Brush
M T B
M T B
M T B
2-157
Raycom
435
RPR None Brush M TB
Raycom
435
RPR
-126
None
Vendor
1.
First digit in this number sequence refers to the designation of the large steel plate (1 r 2) to which the individual
panels were attached. La st three digits refer to the particul ar panel designation.
2. When no primer was used, the surface of the zinc-rich undercoat was wire-brushed before the heat-resistant coating
was applied.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
31/63
Table 3. Preparation of Coated Panels for A/S
502
Launch Exposure (Continued)
Method of Coating
Coating Applied
Panel
NO.^
Coating Material primer2 Application
By
General Observations
1-162 Raycom 2138 RPR
None
Trowel M TB Adheres to vertical sur-
face but di f f icul t to
'trow el because of sti f f-
ness of mixture.
Adheres to vertical sur-
face but diff icult to
trowel because of stiff-
ness of mixture.
2-160
Raycom
2138
RPR
None
Trowel MTB
2-1
27
Raycom 2138
RPR
2-119
Thermo-Lag
T-395-1
?
1-136 Dow-Corning 93-07 2
1-176 Dow-Corning 93-072
None
Vendor
Vendor
M T B
E-SS-4155
Trowel
Trowel
Not suitable for vertical
surface application
.
Not suitable for vertical
surface appl ication.
No t suitable for vertical
surface application.
No t suitable for vertical
surface application.
Application satisfactory.
Appl icat on satisfactory,
GE-SS-4155
MT B
2-137 Dow-Corning 93-072
GE-SS-4155 Trowel MTB
2-177
Dow-Corning
93-072
G E.-S
S-4 155
Trowel MTB
1-198
Dow-Corning
92-041
2-196 Dow-Corni ng 92-04
1
1-114 Thermo-Lag T-395-4
1-133 G E - R T V - 5 1 1
G
E-S
S
-4155
GE-SS-4155
Trowel
Trowel
M T B
M T B
Vendor
M T B
E-SS-4155
Trowel Not suitable for vertical
surface application.
1. F ir st dig it in this number sequence refers to the designation of the large steel p late 1or 2 to which the individual
panels were attached. La st three digits refer
t o
the par ticular panel designation.
2. When no primer was used, the surface of the zinc-rich undercoat was wire-brushed before the heat-resistant coating
was applied.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
32/63
Table 3. Preparation of Coated Panels for A/S
502
Launch Exposure (Continued)
Method of
Coating
Coating Applied
Panel ~ 0 . 1 Coating Mate rial Primer2 Appl i atio n BY General
0
bservati
ons
2-135
1-181
2-182
1-187
2-188
2-1 20
2-124
1-191
? 2-190
2-123
2-1
25
1-204
2-200
2-116
2-115
GE-RTV-511
PR-1955-BT
PR-1955-BT
190-J-7
190-J-7
190-J-7
190-J-7
190 J-4
190-J-4
190 J-4
190-J-4
K5NA
K5NA
T hermo- Lag T- 39
5-3
Thermo-Lag 1-800 6A
GE-SS-4155
G
E
S
S -4
1
5
GE-SS-4155
GE-SS-4155
G E-SS-4155
None
None
None
None
G E-S
S
-4 1 55
GE-SS-4155
Trowel
Trowe
I
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowel
Trowe I
Trowe I
M T B
M T B
M T B
MTB
M T B
Vendor
Vendor
M T B
MTB
Vendor
Vendor
M T B
M T B
Vendor
Vendor
N ot suitable for vertical
surface application.
Application satisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
Appl icat on satis factory.
Applied to bare steel
surface.
Ap p at on sat factory.
Application satisfactory.
Applied to bare steel
Application satisfactory.
Application satisfactory.
surface.
1.
First digit in this number sequence refers to the designation of the large steel plate (1 r 2) to which the in dividual
panels were attached. La st three dig its refer to the particular panel designation.
2.
When
no
primer was used, the surface of the zinc -rich undercoat was wire-brushed before the hea t-resistant coating
was applied.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
33/63
Panel
No.
1-168
2-164
2-111
1-171
2-170
O3
2-110
1-173
2-172
2-109
1-195
2-193
?
Table
4.
Results of Booster Engine Exhaust Exposure,
A/S 502
Launch
Coating Material
Korotherm
792-700/792-704
Korotherm 792-700/792-704
Korotherm
79 2-700/792-704
Korotherm 792-701/792-702
Korotherm 792-70 1/792-702
Korotherm
79 2-70 1/792-70 2
Korotherm 79 2-70 3/79 2-704
Korotherm 79 2-703/792-704
Korotherm 79 2-70 3/792-704
Dynatherm E-310F
Dynatherm
E-310F
In i t i a l
Coating
Weight
(grams)
86.5
82.6
112.7
113.8
102.9
122.1
86.7
62.7
103.5
79.7
62.8
Fina l
Coating Weigh t Back-Face
We
i ht1
Temp e atu e
3
(grams) ( /.I ( C)
Lo
s s2
37.3
38.4
62.1
50.4
44.4
60.3
39.0
21.2
64.9
47.4
44.5
56.9 Ci204
53.5 C204
44.9
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
34/63
Table 4. Results of Booster Engine E xhaust Exposure, A/S 502 Launch (Continued)
Panel
No.
2-10
2
1-156
1-153
1-147
2-145
1-142
2-144
1-148
1-150
1-130
2-132
1-185
2-184
- Coating Material
Dynatherm E-310F
Sperex SP-21
Sperex SP-21
G E - 5 4 8 - 3 0 0
G E - 5 4 8 - 3 0 0
GE-548 -30 1
G E - 5 4 8 - 3 0 1
GE-TBS-542
GE-TBS-542
GE-TBS-758
G
E- TBS -7 58
1 1 9 2
Martyte
1 1 9 2 Martyte
In it ia l
Coating
Weight
(grams)
97.6
45.6
53.4
70 . 5
71.7
120 . 2
107 . 5
64.2
7 2 . 6
91.9
9 2 . 1
170.4
152.0
Final
Weightinl
(grams)
81.1
0
1.4
25.3
28.5
39.1
35.5
56.9
64.5
80.9
86.6
28.9
0
Weight
L o ss2
(/I
16.9
100.0
97.4
64.1
60.3
67.5
70.0
11.4
11.2
12.0
6.0
83.0
100.0
Back -F ace
Temperature3
(c
1
2 0 4
Not readable
Not readable
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
35/63
Panel
NO.
2-10 7
2-250
2-213
1 - 202
2-203
2-104
1-139
? 2-141
1-158
2-157
2 - 1
26
1-162
2-160
Table 4. Results of Booster Engine Exhaust Exposure, A/S
502
Launch (Continued)
Coatina Material
1192 Martyte
Dynatherm
700
Dynatherm
7 2 7 5
Dynatherm
0-65
Dynatherm D- 65
Dynatherm D-65
Dow-Corning 20-103
Dow-Corning
20-103
Raycom 435 RPR
Raycom
435
RPR
Raycom
435
RPR
Raycom 2138 RPR
Raycom 2138 RPR
Init ia l
Coating
Weight
(grams)
112.5
--
--
56.0
59.2
76.5
85.7
100.6
90.7
94.5
100.0
1 2 6 .3
99.3
Final
Coating Weight
Weight1 Loss2
(grams)
(70)
--
51.8
6.7
0
0
1.5
4 1 O
35.3
54.2
41. .8
54.5
77.4
75.8
66.9
54 .O
100.0
100.0
97.5
46.4
58.8
46.1
53.9
42.3
22.6
40 .O
32.6
--
Back-Face
Temperature3
("C 1
Not readable
Not readable
No t readable
760
760
< 2 0 4
4 2 0 4
< 2 0 4
< 2 0 4
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
36/63
Table
4.
Results of Booster Engine Exhaust Exposure, A/S
502
Launch (Continued)
PaneI
No.
2-127
2-1'19
1-136
1-176
2-137
I-' 2-177
1-198
2-196
1-114
1-133
?
I-
Coating Material
Raycom 2138 RPR
Thermo-Lag
T-395-1
Dow-Corning .93-0 7 2
Dow-Corning 9 3-07 2
Dow-Corning 93-072
Dow-Corning 93-07 2
Dow-Corning 92-041
Dow-Corning 92-041
Thermo-Lag
T-395-4
GE-RTV-511
lni t a l
Coating
Weight
(grams)
96.0
53.4
81.3
47.5
76.3
53.1
55.0
45.9
--
76.8
Final
Weight Back-Face
Weightatn Loss2 Temperature3
(grams)
(yo)
("C)
69.7
17.2
60.7
27.5
57.4
34.5
5.4
3.4
45.6
45.8
27.4
67.8
25.4
42.1
24.8
35.0
90.2
92.6
--
40.4
204
c
204
Not readable
Tens i ie strength of material
'>T en si le strength of material
(Ma terial peeled away from steel
base and fractured before load
value cou ld be obtained.)
Table 10. Adhesion Characteristics of Four Ablative
Materials Appl ied over a D- 65 Surface
Material
DC 20-103 714.4
Dynatherm E -3 1 0 F 2,679.0
Raycom RPR 2138 3,572.0
Korotherm
792-70
3/79
2-704
(exceeded ten sile strength of
materiaI)
A- 24
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
50/63
Table
11.
Flamm abil i ty Characterist ics of Fif t ee n Abla tive Materials
Evalua ted in the A/S 50 Launch-Exposure Tests
Burn T i m e1 Burn T ime 2 Mater ial Burned Beyond
Mater ial ( S e d ( S e d Edge of Heat Sink
Dynatherm D- 65
DC 93-072
FuI er
190
-J-4
G E R T V - 5 1 1
GE T B S - 5 4 2
Korotherm
792-70 3/792-704
GE
T B S - 7 5 8
GE
548-300
Dynatherm E-310F
DC 20-103
Korotherm
792-700/790-704
Raycom RPR 435
Martyte Pressti te 1192
Korotherm 792-701/792-702
Raycom RPR
2138
Dynatherm E -3 2 0
Upcote 10-0354
4
4
8
15
25
25
30
37
60
10 j3
160
195
240
300
345
110
--
4
4
5
8
30
11
41
30
40
78
80
105
267
136
252
210
102
-- 4
N o
N o
N o
N o
No
N o
N o
N o
N o
N o
Yes
Yes
N o
Yes
N o
N o
N o
1. . Sample supported horiz on tall y as ca ntilever.
2.
3. Flame engulfed sample.
4.
Sample supported horizon tal ly on aluminum plate with 2. 54 -c m overhang.
Specimen co uld not be ignited.
A - 2 5
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
51/63
Table 12. Flammability Characteristics of Four Ablative
Materials of Two Different Thicknesses
Burn T ime (s e d
Materials 0 . 3 1 8 ~ ~ 1hickness
0,635
cm Thickness
Burn Time (s e d
Raycom RPR
.2138 160
Korotherm
792-70 3/792-704
36
Dynatherm E-310F
152
Dow-Corning 20-103
64
Table 13.
-
Material
Dow-Corning 20-10 3
Dynatherm E-310F
Dynatherm D -6 5
Ravcom RPR 2138
102
26
70
57
FIammabiI ty Characterist ics of Five Ablative
Materials Tested in Accordance wi th
AS TM-D6
35
Burn Time Burning
FI
ame Propagation
( s e d
Characterist ics Before Extin ction
201
Very small flame 0.635 to
1.27
cm
100 Vigorous burning
1.27
cm
1-2
Very small flame ~ 0 . 3 1 8m
Vigorous burning, al
I
of specimen consumed.
Ko;otherm 792-703/792-704 8 Flame medium ~ 1 . 2 7m
1.
Sample glowed for 22 seconds after flame extinguished.
A - 2 6
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
52/63
MAB
Test
No. Material
1 DC-20-103
2 D-65
3
DC-20-103
?
10
4
DC-93-072
5 E - 3 1 0 F
7 D-65 Tape
+ 904
8 0-6.5 Tape + 904
1 0 DC-20-103
Table
14.
Results of LOX-Impact Tests on Ablative Materials
Condition
MAB Preparation.
Lab-Clean1
.
MAB Preparation.
Exposed t o
atmosphere for
1 6 days l .
MAB Preparation.
Exposed t o
atmosphere for
16 days l .
MAB Preparation.
Lab-Clean1
.
MAB Preparation.
Lab-Clean1 .
MAB Preparation.
Lab-Clean1 .
MAB Preparation.
Hydraulic oil
brushed on
surface.
Hydraulic oi l
brushed on
surface.
MAB Preparation,
Average
Thickness
(cm)
0 . 3 0 0
0.328
0.353
0 . 2 9 5
0.292
0 . 0 7 9
0.079
0.300
(Drops) Faint S I ght Appreciable Considerable Reports Reactions
20
2 0
20
2 0
20
1 0
5
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
(vi olent)
0
11
0
1 2
14
0
0
2
1
1.
Strike r pins precooled in LN 2 . Samples and cups conditioned for
1,800
seconds
i n LOX
"freeze box."
NOTE:
Because of the several departures from testing procedures spec ified in MS FC -SP EC -10 6B (Reference 41, the data presented
here should not be considered as ce rtifying these materials as either sensit ive or not sens itive
t o
LOX impact.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
53/63
Table 314. Results of LOX-Impact Tests
on
Ablative Materials (Continued)
Average No,
of
- - - - - - ..- -
.
- - -
Reactions - -
- - I - - - - - -
AB
Test Thickness Trials Audible Total
No.
Material Condition
(cm)
Drops) aint _I ght Appreciable Considerable Reports Reactions
1 9.
'$2
1 3
14
16
1 7
18
1 9
2 0
2 1
DC-20-10 3
792-703/792-704
E - 3 2 0
RPR 2138
T5S 758
D- 65
D - 6 5
D-65
D C - 2 0 - 1 0 3
0-65
MA B Preparation.
Lab- c l ean l .
M A6 Preparation.
Washed in
F - 3 3 l .
N AB Preparation.
Lab-Clean1.
MA5 Preparation.
Lab-Clean1.
MAB Preparation,
Lab-c leanl .
Mobile Launcher
#2/ tower ieg2,
Mobile Launcher
#2/ tower Ieg2,
Mobile Launcher
#2, tower ieg2.
Mobile Launcher
# 2 / camera
stand2.
Mobile Launcher
82, tower ieg2.
0.295
0.307
0,307
0.318
0.300
0 .2 0 6
0.196
0.340
0.465
0.483
4
20
2 0
2 0
20
20
20
20
8
1 0
1
0
0
0
3
4
2
1
0
0
2 0 0 0 3
1 0 0 0 1
0
0
0 0 0
2 1 1 1 4
2
1 3 2 9
5 6 0 1 2 1 5
3
11
0 4 1 6
0
1 0 1
2
0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0
0
0
1.
Striker pins precooled in LN2 . Samples and cups conditioned for
1,800
seconds in LOX "freeze box."
2.
Striker pins precooled in L N2 . Samples and cups not condit ioned; LOX added
1 0
seconds prior to drop.
NOTE: Because of the several departures From testing procedures specif ied in MS FC- SP EC -10 6B (Reference 41, the data presented
here should not be considered as certifying these materials as either sensitive or not sensitive to LOX impact.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
54/63
Table 14. Results
of
LOX-Impact Tests on Ablative Materials (Continued)
Average No. of
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reactions
- - - -
-
- - - - - -
-
- - -
A 6
Test Thickness Trials Audible Total
N o .
Material Condition
(cm) (Drops) Fa in t SI ght Appreciable Considerable Reports Reactions
-
22
DC-20-103
23
DC-20-103
24 D-65
25
DC-20-103
P
10
26
DC-20-103
27 E - 3 1 0 F
28
TBS-758
29 792-703/792-704
30
D-65
Mobile Launcher
#2, camera stand,
zero level2.
Mobile Launcher
2 ,
camera stand,
zero IeveI2.
Mobile Launcher
#2, amera box2.
Mobile Launcher
#2, camer stand,
zero level .
MA6 Preparation.
Lab-Clean2.
MA B Preparation.
Lab-Clean2 .
MA B Preparation,
Lab-Clean2.
MA6 Preparation.
Lab-Clean2 .
9
Mobile Launcher
#2,
tower leg
3
.
0.490
20
0.513
20
0.173 5
0.478 30
0.340
20
0.439 20
0.368 20
0.343 20
0 . 1 1 4 to 5
0 . 191
2.
3.
Stri ker pins precooled in LN2 . Samples and cups not conditioned; LOX added 1 0 seconds prior to drop.
Speci al test: Sample base flat plat e not recessed for cup; cups and striker p ins not used; sample place d on stainle ss ste el plate,
LOX poured on sample for 3 seconds, stainle ss ste el dis c placed on top of sample; impacted wi th plummet.
NOTE: Because of the several departures from test ing procedures specifi ed in M SF C- SP EC -1 06 6 (Reference 41, the data presented
here should not be considered as certifying these materials as either sensitive or not sensitive to LOX impact.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
55/63
Table 14. Results of LOX-Impact Tests on Ablative Materials (Continued)
MAB
Test
No.
30
3 1
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
?
w
Material
D -65
20-103
E - 3 2 0
DC-9 3-0
72
RPR
2138
DC-93-0 58
Goodrich EP 87
Goodrich N-322
Goodrich N-355
Condition
Mobile Launcher
#2,
tower 1eg3.
MAB Preparation.
Lab-Clean3.
MAB Prepar tion.
MA B Preparation.
Lab-Clean2 .
MA B Preparation.
Lab-Clean2 .
MA B Preparation.
Lab-Clean.
Sheet samples
,
Lab-CI ean2.
Sheet samples ,
Lab-C Iean.
Sheet samples ,
Lab-Clean.
Lab-Clean3 .
0.312 to
15
0 . 4 9 3
0 .1 0 9
to
20
0 .2 7 2
0.351
20
0.330
20
0.366 20
0.348
2 0
0.353 2 0
0.353
20
0.320 20
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
18
0
0
0
2.
3.
Stri ker pins precooled in LN 2. Samples and cups not conditioned; LOX added 10 seconds prio r t o drop.
Special test : Sample base f la t plate not recessed for cup; cups and striker pins not used; sample placed on stainless steel plate,
LOX poured on sample for 3 seconds, stainless steel dis c placed on top of sample; impacted wi th plummet.
NOTE: Because
of
the several departures from testin g procedures specif ied in MSFC-SPEC-106B (Reference 41, the data presented
here should not be considered as certifyin g these materials as either sensi tive or not sensi tive to LO X impact.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
56/63
Table
14.
Results of LOX-Impact Tests on Ablative Materials (Continued)
Average No. of
- - - -
-
- - - - - - - - -
Reactions - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AB
es
Thickness Trials Audible Total
No. Mater ial Condition (cm) (Drops) Fa in t Sl igh t Appreciable Considerable Reports Reactions
43 DC-20-103
44 E-310-F
?
w
64
Dynatherm E-320
6 5
Korotherm
79 2-70 3/792 -
704
.M AB Preparation.
0.312
20
0
0
0
0
0 0
MA B Preparation.
0 .3 8 4
20 0
0
0
0 0
0
MAB Preparation. 0.345
20 0
0 0 0
0 0
MAB Preparation.
0 .3 4 8
20 0
0
0 0 0 0
Hydraulic fluid
on surface4.
Hydraulic fluid
on surface4.
Hydraulic fluid
on surface4.
Hydraulic fluid
on surface4,
4.
MI L-H -56 06B hydraulic fluid brushed on surface
of
specimens, allow ed to stand
1
ay, and then surface-wiped prior to impact
tes t, Str iker pins precooled in LN2; cups and samples not conditioned; LOX added 10 seconds prior to drop.
NOTE: Because of the several departures from testin g procedures spe cifie d in MSF C- SP EC -1 06 B (Reference 41, the data presented
here should not be considered as certifyin g these materials as either sens itive or not sensitive
t o
LOX impact.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
57/63
Table
15.
Summary of Torch Test Results
Erosion
Materials
,A\T8O0C 1& 180~C
~ r 3 8 0 O C ( cm /sec)
Insula tion Index (sec/cm) Rate
GE
548-300
GE TBS-542
47 104 247 0.0024
74 142
,-1 0.0037
GE
TBS-758 98 167 233 0.0032
GE
RTV-511 66 121 20
7
0.0045
0.0017
ynatherm E-310F 82 190 ,-1
Dow-Co rni ng 93-0 72
W Dow-Corning
20-103
Martyte
1192-1
Fu er 190 J-4
Raycom
435
RPR
Raycom
2138
RPR .
?
I\)
61 103 148 0.0066
60 135 270 0.0016
4 1 67- 98 0.0089
97 142 --1 0.0068
40 73 123
59 106 159 0,0061
2
--
Comparative
Launch Exposure Te st R esults (Average)
Weight Loss
(/O
69
663
31
51
34
34
564
86
76
48
54
1.
Mis sing data indicates sample burned through prior to reaching indicated . K t or that test t ime
(180
sec) elapsed
before was reached.
2.
Th is sample delaminated during burn.
3.
Weight loss was
~ Y / o
o
32%
during AS-502, and
100%
during
AS-503
4.
Weight loss range from 32 o
82"/0.
8/12/2019 1969 NASA Ablation
58/63
Table 15. Summary of Torch Test Results (Continued)
Materials
Dynatherm D-65
.Korotherm
79
2-700/790
-704
Goodrich EP-87
Korotherm 792-70 3/792-704
Dynatherm E-3 20
Compqative
Launch Exposure Test Results (Average)
Insu lation Index (sec/cm) Rate Weight Los