(llSl-Cl-151El~J SCLIB fCi!B !Al!lll!! I! D!PII STUCI. ti~! 2• VClD!! 8:

SPS llOICB 9EBIC1! ISC!lt llt EM!l1 SOIIC C9!B~&!SSUB! llC ICIS! lfP!C!S (!aeing

Ca. Seattle, ias•.J

0180-22876-8

NAS9·15196 ORl T-1346 ORO MA"664T UNE ITEM3

Volume VIII SPS Launch Vehicle Ascent and Entry

and Noise fects

~01f3

unclas 11 1

..

I S TEMDEFINI NSTUDY

PA II

01~22876-8

CONTRACT NAS9-15196

ORL T·l~ DRDMA..e&4T LINE ITEM3

Solar Power Satellite SYSTEM DEFINITION STUDY

PART/I

VOLUME VIII

SPS LAUNCH VEHICLE ASCENT AND ENTRY

SONIC OVERPRESSURE A..'ID NOISE EFFECTS

018~22876-8

DECE.\IBER 1977

Submitted To The 1'ational Aeronautics and Space Administration

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center in Fulfillment of the Requirements

of Con tract SAS9- IS 196

Supervised By: '1/ A. /}.; ~ H. A. DiRamio

/ /~ Approved:~ ,1 PJ; I .;J /

...,;· lrzi/? t/' J1. ~tf tri

BOEING AEROSPACE COMPANY MISSILES ANO SPACE GROUP-SPACE DIVISION

P.O. BOX 3999 SEATTLE. WASHINGTON

. G. R. Woodcock '-Study Manager

D 180-22876-8

The SPS system definition study was initiated in December •:i16. Part I w:-s completed on May I. 1977. Part II technical work was completed October 31. 1977.

The study was mana~ by tile Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) of the National Aeronautics and SJ)<Ke AdministAtion (NASA). The Contracting Officer's Represcntati\"C (COR) was Clarke Covington of JSC. JSC study manai;<ment team members induded:

Dickey Arndt

Harold Benson Bob Bend Jim Cioni Hu Davis R.H. Dietz

Bil Dusenbury Bob Gundersen Alva Hardy Buddy Heineman Lyle Jenkins Jim Jones Dick Kennedy

P.ticrowave System Analysis

Cost Analysis Man-Machine Interface

Photovoltaic Systems Transportation Systems Micro"Nave Transmitter

and Rectenna Energy Conversion Man-Machine Interface Radiation Shielding Mass Properties Space Construction Design Power Distribution

Andrei Konradi

Jim Kelley Don Kessler Lou Leopold Lou Livingston Jim Meany Stu Nachtwey Sam Nassiff Bob Ried

Jack Scyl Bill Simon Fred Stebbins

Space Radiation Environment

Microwave Antenna Collision Probability Microwave Generators System Engineering and MPTS Computer Program Microwave Biological E fkcts Construction Base Structure and Thermal Analysis Phase Control Thcnnal Cycle Systems Structural Analysis

The study was P'!rforrned by the Boeing Aerospace Company. The Boeing study manager was Gordon Woodcock. Boeing Commercial Airplane Company assisted in the analysis of launch vehicle noise and overpressures. Boeing technical leaders were:

Ottis Bullock Vince Caluori Bob Conrad Eldon Davis

Rod Darrow Owen Denman

Hal DiRamio

Bill Emsley Dr. Joe Gauger Jack Gcwin Jan Gregory

Structural Design Photovoltaic SPS's Mass Properties Construction and Orbit-

to-Orbit Transportation Operations Microwave Design

I r.tegration Earth-to-Orbit

Transportation Flight Control Cost Power Distribution Thermal Engine SPS's

Don Grim Henry ff illbrath Or. Ted Kramer Frank K ilburg Walt Lund K cith M iller

Dr. Ervin Nalos Jack Olson Dr. Henry Oman John Perry Sc.>tt Rathjen

Ela·trical Propulsion Propulsion Thermal Analysis and Optics Alternate Antenna Concepts Microwave Antenna Human Factors and

Construction Operations Microwave Subsystem Configuration Design Photovoltaics Structures MPTS Computer Program

Development

The General Electric Company Space Division was the major subcontractor for the study. Their contributions included-Rankine cycle power generation. power processing and switchgear, micro­wave transmitter pha$e control anJ alternative transmitter configurations, remote manipulators, and thin-film silicon photovoltaics. ·

Other subcontractors were Hughes Research Center gallium arsenide photovoltaics; Varian­klystr'Jns and klystron production; SPIRE-silicon sohr cell directed energy annealing.

ii

Dl-.m76-I

This report was prepared in 8 volumes as follows:

I - Exet.-utive Summary II - Technical Summary Ill - SPS Satellite Systems IV - M a:rowave Power Transmission

Systems

V - Space Operations VI - faaluation Data Boot VII - Study Part II Final Briefing Book VIII - SPS Launch Vdaide Ascent and Ent~}'

Sonic On'fi ressure and Noise Effects

This \'Olume. ""SPS launch Vehicle Ascent and Entry Sonic Overpress1.a::e and Noise Effects ..

addresses the anticipated sonic overpressures and launch noise for the candidate SPS launch

vehicles. The sonic o\·erpressurc and launch noise investigations were <..-onducted b)· the

Aerodynamics and Acoustics Preliminary Uesip staff of the Boeing Commercial Airplane

Company. The principal contributors were

Larry J. Runyan - Sonic Overpressure Analysis

Frank Klujber - launch Noise Analysis

The NASA monitor for this portion of the study was Herb Patterson.

iii

01•22876-8

T .\BLE OF C'>NTENTS

Stttion Title

1.0 lntroJu\.'tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LI

L.! .:!.O .:!.1 ....

:!.o 3.0

.3. I

. L~ 4.0

4.1

4.:!

4.3

5.0

~lint!' Vt!'hk~ ~rirtion ......................................... .

launch and Entry Ov.:rrn...,sure Anal) l>is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Main fnplW' Plunk' «har.t\.'t~risli4--.. . . . .......................... .

Sonic Boom fht•rprl!''\'i.ure Pattl.'rns ..................................... .

Pressur.: Si~natun:s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... .

H1~4-·t of A'.\\.Ynt \'.:hkk Sit.: . . . . . . ......................... .

Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

launi:h x~lis..· Att•ll~ SIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Rocket Laund1 SoiSl: . . . ........................................ .

literanm: Sun·1.·y and Past lx~riencl!' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .

Prdiminary laun.:h Sit.: Sc.-1.:critltl Crih.•ria .............................. .

t:xplt~\e llaLarJ Due to th1.· Prori.·Hant Combination'.\.. . . ................. .

l:ffl.'.".:b of Soni.: Owrpre .... un: ......................................... .

launch ~oisc f n<cts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IS

JS

IS

18

.?4

:!4 37 39

39 42

SS SS S1 61

63

Figure

1.2-1

1.2<! 1.2-3

1.2-4

1.2-5 1.2-6 1.2-7

1.2-8

1.2-9

1.2-IO

2.1-l

2.2-1

Dtl0-22876-8

UST OF FIGURES

Title

SPS Launch Vehicle-Cargo Version ..................................... .

__ .:!-Stage Ballistic Vehicle Ascent Perfonnance Char:tt:teristics .................. .

Ballistic Vehicle Ascent Trajectory ......•................................

Ballistic Booster Reentry Trai--c:ory ........................•.............

Ballistic Second Stage Reentry Tr-.tjectory .•................................

2-Stage Win~ SPS Launch Vehicle ..................................... .

2-Stage Winged Vehicle As<.-ent Performance Characteristics ................... .

SPS Winged Vehicle Ascent Trajectory ................................... .

Winged Booster Reentry Tr.ajectory ..................................... .

Winged Second Stage Reentry Trajectory ................................. .

SPS Ascent Vehicles Estimated Plume Characteristics ........................ .

Validation of Linearized Sonic Boom Theory at High Mach Numbers ............ . 2 • .2-2 Sonic Boom Overpressures under Flight Track of Winged and Ballistic

Page

2 4

5 6 7

9

10

II

12

13

16

17

Ascent Vehicles...................................................... 19

2.2-3 Ground Sonk Boom Overpressur~ under Flight Track-Winred

\'

0

chide Reentry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

2.2-4 Ground Sonic Boom Ovcrpressures under Flight Track-Ballistic

Vehicle Reentry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

2.3-1 Winged HLLV A"cent and Booster Reentry Sonic Boom Overpressures . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2.3-2 Ballistic HLL V Ascent and Booster Reentry Sonic Boom

Overpressures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3-3 Winged HLL V Ascent Sonic Boom Overpressures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2.3-4 Winged HLL V Booster Reentry Sonic Boom Overpressures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

2.3-5 Winged HLLV Second Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Overpressures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

2.3-6 Ballistic HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom Overpressures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2.3-7 Ballistic HLLV First Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Overpressures.................. 29

2.3-8 Ballistic HLLV Second Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Overpressures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

2.4-1 HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 2.4-2 Wing'"J HLLV Booster Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.4-3 Winged HLLV Second Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure

Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 2.4-4 Ballistic HLLV First Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 2.4-5 Ballistic HLL V Second Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure

Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

2.5·1 Sensitivity of HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom Overpressures to

Vehicle Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

3.1-1 SPS Predicted Overall Sound Pressure Levels-OASPL-dB..................... 40

y

Figure

3.1-2

3.1-3

3.1-4

0180-22876-8

Title Page

SPS Predi1..·tcd Per'-~iwJ Noise Levels-PNl-dB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Launch Site Ground Surface Noise Levels (8 = 90°)........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

SPS Launch Vehick Overall Sound Pn.·ssurc Level-dB ( 1.000 ft.

Sideline Distance) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3.1-5 SPS Launch Vehicle Overall Sound Prl.'ssun: Level-dB l 10.000 It.

Sideline Distance I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 3.1-6 SPS Launch Vehicle Overall Sound Pressure Lxvcl -dB (100,COO

3.1-7

3.1-8

3.1-9

3.1-10

3.1-11

3.1-1 ~

4.1-1

4.>1

ft. Sideline Distancd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

SPS Launch Perceived Noise lewl--JB t 1.000 ft. Polar Distance). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

SPS Launch Perceiwd Noise le\d dB 1 IO.OOO ft. Polar Distancd............... 48

SPS Launch Percein."d Noise Lewi-dB ( 100.000 ft. Polar Distanci!l.......... . . . . 49

SPS Sideline Noise S~clrum- 1.000 fl. Sideline Distance..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SO

SPS Sideline Noise Sf'l\'ctrum ·~ I0.000 ft. s:detine Distance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SI

SPS Siddinl' Noise Speclrum · 100.000 ft. Silldint' Dislan.:e... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S2

Predicted O\·erpressurcs pa an On-Pad Explosion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Maximum Sali: Prl'dkled or :\kisured .herage Ground Overpressure for

Plate and Window Glass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

vi

0180-22876-8

UST OF TABLES

Table Title

4.2-1 Maximum Safe PreC:icted or Recorded Peak Overpressures-for

Representative Building Materials and Bric-a-brae-Other Than Glass . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 4.3-1 OSHA Noise Standards for Occupational Noise Exposure ...................... 62

vii

0180-22876-8

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Recoverabk launch vehicle com.-epts for the Solar Power Satellite progr.im have been identified

which have a payload capability in the 400 metric ton range. These large launch vehicles are

powered by proposed new engines in the F-1 thrust level class. In comparison to the Saturn V,

these vehicles are much larger in size (by a 1.5-3.0 factor) and use 16 of the F-1 class engines rather

than the 5 on the Saturn V.

Both ballistic and aerodynamic winged recovery versions of the launch vehicle have been identified

in a previous portion of the SPS study (Ref. 1-1 ). Due to the large size of the vehicles and the

magnitude of the installed thrust. investigations into the prediction of the launch noise and sonk

overpressures during ascent and reentry were undertaken.

This volume includes:

o Des"·ription of the candidate launch vehicles and thdr operating mode.

o Predictions of the sonic overpressures during ascent and entry for both types of vehicles.

o Prediction of launch noise levels in the vicinity of the launch site.

o Overall assessment and ;;riteria for sonic overpressure and noise levels.

1.1 REFERENCE OPERATING MODE

The an..ilysis of predicting the so11ic owrpressures and noise levels in the vicinity of the launch site

and also in the landing zone was conducted for both the 2-stage ballistic recoverable and 2-stage

winged recoverabk vehicles.

The operational mode for both vehicles is a launch to a 4 77 .5 km circular orbit at 31° inclination

assuming a launch site at ~8.5°N. The first stages of either vehicle are recovered downrange with

sea recovery for the ballistic boosta and land recovery for the winged booster. The upper stages.

in both cases. circularize the payload and deorbit approximately 24 hours after launch to return to

the launch site area. A nominal zero degree (0°) angle 0f attack has been assumed for the ballistic

reentering stages. Winged stages art.' at a 60° angle of attack until they perform the subsonic transi­

tion. The transition occurs usually between 20 km and 24 km altitude.

J .2 BASELINE VEHICLES DESCRIPTION

2-Stage Ballistic Vehicle

The reference concept for the ballistic recoverable vehicle is shown in Figure 1.2-1. Main propul­

sion is provided by sixteen ( 16) RP- I /L02 gas generator cycle engines which use liquid hydrogen

( LH 2) for engine cooling.

SPS-164,

REENTRY CONFIGURATION

PAYLOAD ENVELOPE 75kt/m3

SSME ENGINES (8} f • 77.S

GLOW

BLOW w,, ULOW

Wp2 PAYL04D

10.472 x 1o8 kg 8.243 x ;.,e kg

7.'51x 1o'kg 1.838 x ,.,e kg

1.479 x ,.,e kg

0.391 x 1ol kg

T/W AT LIFTOFF 1.30 ·

MAIN PROPULSION

(23.087 JI 1ol Jbm)

(18.173 "1o' • ....-,

. (11.437 x 1pl lbm)

(4.051 ' 1ol 11»m>. (3.281 x ,.,. Uni

(0.883 .·,-·..-.

vu~w A-A ITAQI lllUlllHM'YH . "iYAC'UU..i~ llOIAUIT YILOCITV .... f -

11T 42.I •Lo,fA"':' t.OIO IND 7U tlSl'OllMI .1.•'

STAGE I

Figure 1.2.1 SPS Launch Vehicle-Cargo Version

, ..... ..,.. m

2M7 Nin 11• ... ,. ..... ....

L02'ftP·10G ENGINES (18) f. 42.5

SSME

... , ....

LANDING ENGINES (I) 1•20

Dlao-221764

The baseline engine is a scaled up version of the Alternate Mode I engine defined by Aerojet

Liquid Rocket Company under contract NAS3·19727 to NASA Lewis Research Center. The

following main engine charact·!ristics were used in the analysis.

Propellar.ts RP-1 /LO...,/LH.,

Thrust-Vacuum 9 .059 x 1 o6N -

Chamber Pressure 29300 kpa

Mixture Ratio

Specific Impulse (Sl/Vac.)

Total Flow Rate/Engine

2.9:1

323.5/350.7 sec.

2635 kg/sec

(2.037 x 106 lbf)

(4250 psia)

(5808 lbm/sec)

Engine overall length ii. 5.4,~:n and the power head and exit diameters are 3.51 m and 2.97m.

respectively.

The ascent trajectory chacacteristics for the vehicle are shown in Figure 1.2-2. The major char­

acteristics are summarized as follows:

First Stage

T /W @ Ignition = 1.30

Maximum Dynamic Pressure= 32.125 kpa

Maximum Acceleration = 4.90 g's

Stage Burn Time= 176.89 sec.

Dynamic Pressure at Staging = 405 pa

Second Stage

T/W (ii Ignition= 0.76

Maximum Acceleration= 2.28 g's

Stage Bum Time= 394.84 sec.

At main engine cutoff (MECO) the trajectory charactenstics are as follows:

Altitude = I I 0948m

Relative Velocity= 7540 m/sec

Burnout Mass= 749583 kg

The significant trajectory parameters for the SOilic overpri.>ssure analysis ari.> the mach number.

altitude. and flight path angle ('Y) as a function of distance along the ground track. TheSt'

parameters are plotted for the ballisticall) recoverable vehicle or stages in Figure 1.2-3 through

Fiimre 1.2-5. The vehicle ascent characteristics are shown in Figure 1.2-3 and the n.·entry char­

acteristics for both the booster and second stage are shown in Figures 1.2-4 and 1.2-S.

respectively.

3

§ !: ;

a .f ~J .,. ... ......

' • - 21

t40 ,

,. .. • •

~· 300 § ti

1111 > ..

• 100 , . 2

100 I

20 '

'

4

g j:

~3 ~

I 2

0180-22876-8

100 JOO

TIMl.sECONDS

vtH.ocnv

Figure 1.2-l 2-Stage Ballistic Vehicle Ascent Perfonna~ Characteristics

4

. . . . ......... .

so ... . ~ . . .

. . ·I- . I.. I. . ... I ...... I ... I··. I· .... I . I • I . .,. I . I I I • • •

:; .... J. . .. 20

i••:-;jj.JJ~E • ,•~·:.•[~i?1~tJ•::•i••••i·--~3t-1-i~:::t-[····1·-··~ls1••· •!·•··,--:~•F!=f ~~f sj·;-•····:········ :· ! : : ·j .. (. ···-~·· ·,! ... :. tp: : l .. i: i . :· ·D, .. O .. :W· N: R. 1kN:'·c:·;;:· ·~ .N. Jl···: .. I '. .. : .. : : . ····:···T ·i 'T ... ~ .

. .. . ··"··--·····1····'" .. - ....... --····- i. .• ···-····-•·· .,........ . .. n . . ,_ -·····-. i~I· ..... T ........ I .................. , .......... _._,,. ; .... L ..... I .... ~ .... ; .... ~ .... -~.-~ .... !. .. : ... L.~. ~~:.L~--~~ .~ .. ~ .. : .. ~~: .. :i~.:J .... L'.:~L~::'..:.:L .. :L:.:!: ... ~~-.:!.:.d.~::i .i .. : .. ~ ... i .... '. . . : ... ·L ... L.

Figure 1.2-3 Ballistic Vehicle Ascent Trajectory

Flsun J .2-4 811ll1tle Boo1ter Reentry Trljectory

I

Flpre 1.2 ·5 BalUIClc Steond ltl• Runtry Trajtctory

2-Stage Wing Vehicle

The referell\:c- concq>t for the wi~.;.:J m:O\·erable \'ehide is shown in Figure 1.2-6. Main propulsion

is provid~ by sixteen c 16J RP-I 1L021LH2 gas generator cyde engines similar to those on the

2-stage ballistic vehicle. The following engine characteristics were used in the analysis:

Propellants RP-I /L02/LH 2 Thrust-Vacuum 8.275 X IG6N

Chamber Pressure 293GO kpa

Mixture Ratio 2.9: i

Spe .... ·mc Impulse (S.LfVad 323.5!350.7 sec.

The ascent trajectol}· characteristi.:s for the \·ehide are shown in Figure 1.2-7. Th.: majordur.K:er­

istk-s are summariud as follows:

First Stage

T\V (<I Ignition = i .30

~Jaximun: Dynar.-ii.: Pressure = .34.446 kpa

Maimum Ac.:t"ler.stion = 3.49 g's

Sta~ Bum Tim::= 14 .. _96 sec.

Dyn.:imic P!essure al Sla~;ng = 1819 pa

~ _.:md Srage

lW ~ Ignition= O.Q5

Maximum .-\..-..:deration = 3.6 7 g's

Stage Burn Time= 35 L78 sec.

lite madt number. altitude. and flight p;ath as a function of dista."lCe along the ground track for the

winged vehicle and stages are shown in Fi~"Uf'!S 1.2-8 through 1.2-10. The winged vehicle 354.~nt

characteristks are shown in Figure 1.2-8 and the reentry characteristics for the booster and SC\..-ond

stage are shown in Figurc:s L.!-9 and 1.2-tu. respectively.

Refermces

1-1 :;;>S Tran~.,rt:..lion: Representative System lkscriptions. 018~::?0689-S. Part I of Con­

tract NAS9-l 5 l 96.

8

ITACH

,. •• -,

30.41m

--1.........._~W-"-6-+-----l-#!~~-1

.,_ __________ 140.73m ---------·"""''

VIHtCLI CHAftACTlllUITtCI

• GLOW • I .... >C 101 kt e ILOW • t.441 >C 1ol kt w,, ...... )( tol 11t • ULOW • 2.7H >C 101 kt

w P2 • 2.301 )( 1ol kt e PAYLOAD• 0.311>C101 lie . ·• T/W AT \tpTOl'I' • 1.30 ·. MAIN PllOPULllON

NUMIUI f THft~/INO, . "'" lto'NVAC.I

tl-LOJRlt.t .•u ..,,, , ...... 77.1 I.Oii

Ftpre 1.2-6 2..Stqe Wln1ed SPS Launch Vehicle

··-Vie.I .... .. , ....

a t ... ~ - --

HID

• 5

1

JI •

>5

§ , • • >

J 10 2

2

5 1

1

0

D 180-22876-8

100 200

Figure 1.2-7 2-Stage Winged Vehidr Ascent PerfonnanceCharactcristics

10

Fiaure 1.2·8 SPS Wlnaed Vehicle Ascent Trljectory

. ;:c. 1c~;: :1:::i:.:1::r:-r: :~:!:.'r l~, .. : .. r: :.: .. i::>Lr:.:L; t.~r:. 1 ~·:T::::·: · :·r: .. : ··" ·: . ' I . I I ·j .. . ' I • ' : . ' ' I ' . I • '

. ·: ... : .; .. :. ':.; ... :. ,::····1·:~:. + .. :.:-1- ... :. ', ... : ... : :· ..... i ... : .•. 1 .... j .... 1 ••. +-· ... : ......... 1 •••• i : ' ' .. I ,, I I ' '·I· .. , ' • I • ' : ' ' . ' I·. . I I

. i

. : 4-·· ,,, ' -·1'0:·· : ' . : : ' ' • I ' i ' I '; I : ; I : ·1 · ' : i '. ; ... l. ....

·-~ · -~i7 Lt·· ...... · · <t :ir-., ... ;. :Tr: · : · ! , 1··.i 1.·1~s+.:1:0.::r·:-~ ···: :-··· ....... 3 ·· ····W·-· ··-·· ··· ·--! .. ·-:···· ... ·· ······ ·1-··:···· ....... 1····:····1·-····· ·Pi~.,.,, . .,. .. ...._,,e,-·-·.... 1 ......... , ...... ··!·-······:···· ·· -b6·· · ... · . ... . : ~~ '' l . : : ,' ' i. I. ·i : l : I . : : : : ; . I . j . i . : . :· (j ...... ·: ·: .. :3i ·:·:: -:; .l .. ; ....... : ... '. ...... li _T":l ;·:·1·:·:·1·· .. ;:"T "! .. 11 .... : .... 1; ..... : ...... J . ;· i .... i ·· 1 ... 1.. ·:·· ·:··· 1 .... : 1 ·: )/' Lb~·~) "4. . ...... - ...... \00· ..... ........ .. ......... .. ....... , .. _, __ .......................... ,. ' ........... · 'l'"'I' .................. ••• 1··-•··' .................. Q.. ·°' .... : .... : . : ! . . . : : : I . ; 1' . : . I : i : I . : . ! : I : I i i i : ! . :

.... . . . . . t-1. .... . ..... . .•. .. .. . I"... 1· .... ·1 .. ··I .. ·· ......... f ....... 1 .... " .. I ... + ..... !. ............... 1 .... 1. .. ...... .• .. • . .... I ••••

. . i .J; . : : : .. : : ... I ·! i .·1 I" !· '!. ! ! : : : ! I. i . ! l : i j : I ·! : . .

....... ~ .. .... 4', ......... . _.. ........ -· .... ......... i ········1·-:..1 ........ '.1····1-·-· .. i· ....... ! ..... i ......... i ...... -.. r··· ........... ! ........ ·-··· ......... -.4iO i .••

. ·: .. : ... i. i> ::-.. . . :r< . :. ; 0 i: !.: _:. ·.: .. :! . 1.:::1 .. :: .. ) ... I : .. i. ; ... :. i ; ; . ! .. ( .. ·i, ... '.;:::-i-::ll< !."·i. [ :··'.· .. , . i. : . : . : : ... .. : .. : .... ;···+··+·· ... ;.!.... ! .. : ....... : .... j... . .. ): ... : ... : .. _; .; .:.+ .. :,~ .. :(t?l..~J .... :. +·-+··- ... b·:.l-.1.: .. L. ... _ .. 1 __ ; __ J_:.!.. .. ;_ .. ; ................ .

~·· .• ••~ •··· •:•·: :~ 1•;f ~ H;;!~ !• • • • · • •.• : • ::•,· .:. :•_· f •..• 1H1 ~•ij· :-· 1 · · •• r1: •:1 _ •·:. • • :: •:r:-: •~: 1JJ :1:t.1,:~r11 d:J;~J•-=I~ . .l•~•t:·l•··•i• ·•·:.·. • ~~d- • · ' .. ' '.I .. I I I . I .. I ·'I ... I .. j ..... I I . 1· .. 1.l .. '.' I .. ! ! I " ' .•.

:··1··~···!···i0•••1=f t··i····:···· • ,; •• ::•••:•····~~:·:~·~ ::~··~;~·:····1·•••i•~0••:.• •• ! .• :.··~~::···;·····::~··:• ..• t'i •. ~ :•~:i··-1· ••·J· ··•\••••:• •. ~· .. -·········-········-··---··-···-·-····-· .... 4_,J:) ~S~.A!li>~.t ...... ~JLO H.-.\...~.hl~. tiN Cr. .. JiU.:t:S ...... .N.t'lJ. ........ .... ····' ............... .

Fiaure 1.2-9 Winaed Booster Reentry Trajectory

-w

... : ... ., ..

. ~· 6 :~ ..

.. :~ :~

: t.t: i .~: ..

... ,.., .. :.: ..... 'o· .... . ll(:.

•.

.. ' . . . . .. ...... '. . . . . . ' ..... ' .. "

l

. . . . . . . . .. ' ... ' . . .

..

' . '

""'" ... ,

..·1.."

·:: •. ::1 •• :." ; ..

. ..... .

.. . :. :.L.

• : I .............. • 1 .. . ·-······· .....

-'-<>' ......

·:~(K~ ,L

-... o: ' . . . . . . . ' . . ". . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ' . . . . .. ~ . . . . . . ' . ' . . .

.. . : .. : : : : : '. : .. ; : ·~: l .. ;.:: '..: ... ; .. ~ . . : l .. ; ' : : ~ •

... ::·;:+··::::;; .:: :· .. ; ... : .. . . . : : " ~ : .. . : .. ; . . . . . . : '

'.". +·· . l ..... : .. : .. .. i·. . . . . ""-........ : .. :·~····: .. : .... ~ ........ :.· ........... :·

.. i::. : .. ;. . .. . .. .

.. J.:: .. . ... ' ... '~ ... ' '

:. !.: .. ; ... .

C).1..-..:..:------'-----------~--...... __..-..._.... ...... i....-.................. ..._ ....... .._ ____ ~----- 0 " . : .~0 . . ' I ~ . .'Z..O .. ·: .o.. . Gt.O.:. .. . . . ; \00 .. : .. : ~,O: .. .\4\0

~hS'"t:"'~C. t!.. : .~-ID~ .... ~Jl\WC:H ~ (r: . 5\ +£:j·~·Hti'tl

Figure 1.2·1 O Wln,ed Second Staae Reentry Trajectory

0180-22876-8

2.0 LAUNCH AND ENTRY OVERPRESSURE AN.AL YSIS

The sonic boom characteristics have been developed for the candidate SPS launr. · vehich~s during

both ascent and reentry. During ascent the main engine plumes are a significant factor in the overall

sonic overpressures. The vehicle reentry characteristics. particularly the subsonic transition altitude,

influence the magnitude and the area impacted by the sonic overpressure.

2.1 MAIN ENGINE PLUME CHARACTERISTICS

During ascent, it is the vehicle exhaust plume which determines the magnitude of the sonic boom

that is generated. This is because the plume is so much larger than th~ \·ehicle itself. Therefore.

good estimates of the plume size are essential.

To estimate the plume characteristics of the SPS launch vehicle, the following approach was used.

The Saturn V plume characteristics were first estimated by assun.ing a plume length of 1.5 times

the vehicle lengt!1 (as suggested in Reference 2-1) and a plume diameter which resulted in an esti­

mated linearized theory sonic boom overpressure which matched the measured overpressure for the

Saturn Vat flight altitude of 107.000 feet. The estimated Saturn V plume length and diameter at

l 07 ,000 feet were then multiplied by 16/ 5. which is the ratio of the number of F-1 thrust class

rocket engines on the SPS launch vehicle to the number of F-1 rocket engines on the Saturn V. The

justification for this approach is that the ratio of the Saturn V plume length and diameter to the

plume length and ciameter of a single F-1 engine is fairly close to the ratio of the number of engines

(5: l ). This results in a plume length of 1744 feet and a plume diameter of 1024 feet for the SPS

launch vehicle at an altitude of I 07 ,000 feet. The plume length and diameter were assumed to vary

with altitude in the same ratio as that of the F-1 engine (Reference 2-2). The resulting SPS ascent

vehicle estimated plume characteristics are shown in Figure 2.1-1.

2.2 SONIC OVERPRESSURE CALCULATION METHODS

Sonic boom calculations for typical supersonic airplane configurations are based upon linearized

supersonic aerodynamics. However. the accuracy of these methods begins to decrease for mach

numbers greater than 3.5 and for non-slender vehicles. Therefore. it was questionable whether this

approach could be used to calculate the sonic booms generated by the SPS vehicles. However, com­

parisons b :ween linearized theory estimates and measured Apollo 17 ascent data and measured

Apollo 15 command module reentry data for mach numbers as high as 4.8 have shown fairly good

agreement. Figure 2.2-1 summarizes these comparisons and gives the equation used to make the cal­

culations. This equation is a modification of Whitham 's equation for the bow shock overpressure

(pressure rise through the shock) of a slender, pointed body of revolution (Reference 2-3) and is

given in Reference 2-4. These results show that linearized theory can be expected to give good esti­

mates of the sonic boom characteristics of the SPS launch and reentry vehicles for the mach number

and altitude ranges which produce significant overpressures at ground level. This conclusion is in

agreement with the results of a study by Carlson and Mack (Reference 2-5) which demonstrated

IS

Figure 2.1-1 SPS Ascent Vehicles Estimated Plume Characteristics

DIS0-22876-1

The following equation was used to make the linearized thc:ory estimates:

where: 4P

PA

PG h

KR M

d

t Kv

"l 1/8 d KR · (M- - }) · -- K

= Bow shock overpressure in psf

= Atmospheric pressure at vehicle altitude in psf

= Atmospheric p.-essure at ground level in psf

11/4 v

= Perpendicular distance f~-om vehicle mght path in feet

= Reflection factor (usually about 2.0)

= Vehcile Mach number

= Vehicle diameter

= Vehicle length

= Vehicle volume shape factor (.54 ~ Kv ~ .81 ); assumed to be 0.8 for this study

This equation i'i called the modified .. Whitham Equation" and is given in Reference 6.

FLIGHT DATA

vs LINEARIZED THEORY ESTIMATES

Measured Estimated

CASE# Vehicle Altitude (ft) Mach 4P (pst) 4P Cpst)

CASE I Saturn V 107.400 3.78 4.5 4.5

(Apollo 17)

CASE 2 Saturn V I I 5.500 4.00 4.1 4.4

(Apollo 17)

CASE3 Saturn V 149,400 4.84 1.3 2.1

(Apollo 17)

("ASE 4 Command 110,000 4.57 0.4 0.(1

Module

(Apollo 15)

Figure 2.2-1 Validation of Unearized Sonic Boom Theory at High Mach Numben

17 ORIGINAL PAGE IS 01 POOR QUALITY

0180-22176-8

that linear theory sonic boom methods gave good agreement between test and theory for bodies

with ratios of diameter to length as great as two and for mach numbers as high as 4.14.

The modified Whitham equations was used to estimate the sonic boom overpressures of the SPS

vehicles. However. in order to determine S:.ock wave locations on the ground, caustic locations,

and the location of the "cut-off' which occurs at the edge of the region affected by the sonic boom,

it was necessary to use TEA-25 I (R;!ference 2-6). This is the Boeing version of a computer program

developed by Hayes (Reference 2-7) which calculates sonic boom propagation in a stratified

atmosphere.

Whitham Overpressures Under flight Track

The overpressures predicted by the modified Whitham equation along th .. vehicle flight track are

shown in Figures 2.::!-2 through 2.2-4, as a function of vehicle altit•Jde. 1ltese overpressures were

used together with data from prog•.am TEA-25 I to determine sonic boom overpressure pattern~

lateral to the ground track.

2.3 SONIC BOOM OVERPRESSURE PATTERNS

Figures 2.3-1 through 2.3-8 show the sonic boom overpressures as a function of ground location for

each of the SPS vehicle configurations. as determined using the TEA-25 I ground shock patterns

together with the Whitham overpressures.

Figure :!.3-1 shows the overpressures f<'r the winged vehicle ascent and booster reentry. The combi­

nation of vehicle trajectory and acceleration results in the generation of a caustic or .. focal zone" in

which the sonic boom overpressures are much larger than they would be for steady night. Over­

pressur:=s in this very localized region will be about 25 psf. The beginning of the caustic is located

3 t nmi downrange from the launch site. The overpressure under the flight track decreases rapidly

to I 0 psf at a point 35 nmi downrange from the launch site. It has dropped to 2 psf 66 nmi down­

range from the launch site. These overpressures are about three times as large as those generated by

the Saturn V. The v 1·erpressures generated by the reentry of the booster reach a maximum of 4 psf

in the vicinity of the hnding site.

Figure 2.3-2 shows the overpressures generated by the ballistic vehicle ascent and booster reentry.

The ascent overpressures are very similar to those of the winged vehicle. However. the booster

reentry overpressures are much larger than those of the winged vehide. rea"·hing a maximum of 11

psf in the vicinity of the landing site. This is caused by the difference in trajectory between the

winged booster and the ballistic booster. The ballistic booster maintains supersonic velocity to a

mu1:h lower altitude than the winged booster resulting in the higher overpressurcs. The difference

in trajectories. primarily the higher staging velocity. also results in the ballistic booster landing site

being much further downrange than that of the winged booster.

18

-'°

Figure 2.2-2 Sonic Boom ~verpressures under Flight Track of Winged and Ballistic Ascent Vehicles

IV 0

:·::·;::::;:'.;·c:,.·:~·-·: .. i .··::;···r:·:·, .. : .. : . . .··.·;.I -~·: .. :··~~;.-··:··::~~-~1!~: .. -.tt" :·11; .. -~:i: .,;!:.:~:.:.: :~!::····:·.··· ;: ... : :.· ·r .::.··_ 1'::~-~·:,l···-11 .. ::~,._:~ii~~:· .;_ ·.;.:· .. -:: -~-L .... :..LL, .. :: .. ,_ . ·!·: ·::-::;::::: .. ,i. --:· :.L :~ • u.;,~ -:r "-~ ::n·\1!. ~

L.,. ·.·.1.:_:.• . .,...:.~·'.·.r. :.:_: .. ::_.·_._;1.·.;_''..:.·.-.·_1 .. · .. --.·.: .• ~.·. -_ ---;-· :1---~··:·1::~1-· ~. ·:·-~-i--:-··1··--~. -~ ---:-·:··· ~,; ~ . 'j. ;,;·~· . ·1· o:Q.: ·-: -~ .. ..... ... ....... ...... .. • . . . .. · ...... ..: ...... : .... j •• ; ... 1 ••• :: ••• -j- ....... , .......... -.-.T\ .,..Pi. -• .. . .... 1 .: ..

1 · · i i ; : l : '. . ~ I ~ . 1 • ; f ! f : 1 1 r • 1 . t : 1 l i f f '. ; .. .. 1+' ·T.:·l1.:~_,t! ___ J,,~_-_'.::-: .. ·,,!; .. :_: .. : .. ·.·.· Lf!·f~l E}i~TT: .•.•• : '·~~·· f"TY:~FfJ.; : .. -: . "·:· .. t·· '.:'."'. ... .. )S:f. STAGE .. \\~t. ,"" .~Y :: 1::::···:·1:~·-l.:c t:··:I "'. "''. ...

· · ·· ··· 4

,_' : • ::_ : , . • .. ' • 1 · ' , ·, I : 1-1-_1tt::;r: . : : 1. . . ' : : : . ''j 1.· :· ! . I ! ! . I • ' ' • f .' •. I. I t i I

·U.. : (J'J

: ·a.:·

"Q.; ...

<l. : 2

............ ., ...................................... ·~-- ........... I ... :, ... 1. ... -. .. : .... .... . ..... : .. : ....... : .... ! .. : •... : •... :. "J' ,.: ... I

... \ .. \-\-:. i<L· \---~- :.:. _'.···+=T~.L .. ~'.-~:i:-~~t :·:·· i.: .. :" _: · :_ 2ND .. SIAGt.~.H:\!.~~ '"tP.t,.,\: ~~~--~ .. -,;~:!..~.\

....... i .. :::.:1.; .. :. . ................. : .... :: ..... ._.... . .. . . t:. . • . ... i : . . . . L .. :<

. ""-:·:;··. ~ ~:·1:~·-· ···~·-·-·. t•- -· ~-·- ... l-· • ·- i~:-i::-······

.:.i···

··i-" .. ·O , . 1

.. : ... ; ........ 'iO : ... j. :.bO. : .... ; .. :.BO.: ........ : .J · D. ... 1 . .. 12.0 .. ·r .... J.Lt.OJ. .. ; .... :.160: .... 1: ... ,.!80i. .. J.: ... ·-· ... : .: · -~ · ·>·1 ·-["-- H~·-··i· ·:· ·i--:: --·>-A-·i· · : .... !--··:·--:---·:·-Er~·~·--·:·-._::.:. --1---: .. ._l ... '..: ! ·: .. "+:::!. -l<l··-1·-- ·· +.-- .... :

.......... ........................ .. . .......... ~IlTl.;JOE: .. r< l0 1 ..... ,FT. L. ............. 1 ............... 1 ......... 1 .................... ..

_ L---~--··;·---~---~L--~-~-:r ·-·~-· L·-·----~ _ ... L.-~-- L ... ;.: . .i.~--L .. J .... ~- .J. ___ : ____ l _____ .. L _____ L .. :. __ l_~--~---.l __ L ___ L ... L .. L ____ L_ -~~

Figure 2.2-3 Ground Sonic Boom Overpressures under Flight Track-Winged Vehicle Reentry

N -

... :.: ... ·:· ~ ~.:.·:·:.: \ ·::: .. :.L~!~:~.Li~L2~J .. :. J .. · ... c:: .. ·; .. : ·: ~:. ·:::;~ .. ·:··c· ::::1.·~·::.:·r.~~:~r·~L L~r1:;~1·~:c.T .. : · .. :1 .. ~ -~·~ . : : : : ~·: .;.:-..;: ... (·:·i··;+~~:J :·+ . · i · .... j ... : · i : l · ····i·" , ... ·(·:,~ .... , .... ; _..1~'j~:· :;.:· 1 :·:L~; i·~1~: ·~: t·~eiy .. ··!

-·-· ........ ;· ···:·:·· :·::~-... t! .. ::. (-t:J, .... :. j' .. ":· :··:; .. T° .. :. ! ·: .. 1,. :··: ::t···1 .. '.·r·~·1~:·-:W· ;,;1'-· :;e1 ··;i ~:"~ . ·-I, .. •• • .......... j • :· ... + ... :._;. .. .... : .. ......... 1 ..... •• :.; • • .,. .... i"· ... : ...... I ...... :........ ..... ! .. :'t :t .... :. .-. . I .. :. : .. ..

. : (0 . ! ) ;. " ; .: .: : l • ! : : .. I : : • ' : I .. :!-. "I · 1 · : :. I j . 1' ; j • '."......... • .. ....... _ .............. ···--·· ·~·- 1 ............ _ ....... , ............. ·1 · ..... 1 ......... ··-1·-· ................. ··-·· ...... 1 ........ - I ... I

. : . ; ! : . l : l : . : I : , . ! ! . i . : I ; I ; ; I . I : . : .. : ..... : I ·, i : j i . I t ··· · .! ·:[ ·.: :~ .. ·t: , .. '. .... ::·;·(·('.· :" '.. ·.r·" 1 · · · · !"";· 1 .. , . ; .. : .. T .. ; ·::i .. i·: .. : ,~;:j ... ·:r-:-i : ..

1 .. -r-· .. ,·--: .. T"·r ..... !. · ., ... ·····- ........................ r-···· ·-·: ......... , .. , ..... - ................. 1 ......... , ................. 1 .................. .... i . .. , ...... ···+ .......... .

i. ::: ... "< ... ·!· ! . l ·:·1: ·I .·:.:;.;:~+·· :.::.;. ! .. . ~.sr .~TAq~:iR:~sN.:-r:~.~·. ; ... 1 .... 1 .. ·i. :; .... 1. :-! .. ; >l: .. L .. : ••• ; ... :.i ··:it .... : . "'. ... \ , .. I • 1 I • ::! . . ~ .. l ... :. " .. : I .. : . I I . : . ' : . i· I I . , I

· ........ · :0 """""!" "" l•• 0 """f-• ..... -······ · '··· .. ""' "' ·"'!"'""""!" ""' 1' """' "• ..... /.,. .. .,/ .. , ..... ,. '""'"!""••"'·' '"·'-··1 .... _ ....... .. : ·:: .' .... :::~: ... ;.: i ·++:· k·h/:·~··"! · ... : .. '. · ;. "'. ;: · : ... ;:. '. ... ! .. : · i ·:. · i:. ... ~: .. ! . .. : ... L .. i . :· .. 1 . .:: ::. •.: .. ! ; · .

. ... ""' ..................... , ........ -·-··· .... J... . .................. , ........ , ... ,. ; "'""'j" • ... I .... -I· ..... !. ............ j ........ I : VJ . . ,; : . . ~' i. ; .. 1 .. ; j ; ' ; I : i . ' : i . ' I : . . . ; ;, ·1. . I . i

.. : ;.~·::~:,, :~~~:·~::·.i .. :~!;;:.;~:J~T"+:~:(:. !::~~ .. :-! .. ·'.: .. +:; .1.: .. ;:.·:i .. ;:::r::: .i : ............. ·!· .. : ).::; ::.i.: .. :;: ... t~J~~ ~~+:1~~-r~-i

.. ,.~ .. .. ...... , ... , .... 1 ..... :··': ... : .... , ....... 1 ...... : ... f .. i .. 1... .~tto ..

1

TAGE ~~•N\"'t"~Y. . : . ··-r ...... , .. _ .. -i-·r .. i · .1

,~: : , .... : !. :;:~:1:~.:·~ :y·i~4 :. l :::· :: ,. rt:: : :~ .. : i .. · 1::: i:: :~t:i.: :.r: ~t :·r:r: · : ........ ~ .... :"+ ···-t·-·1· ... ~ .. ~· :-··· ... ., .. ~:· .. -···r·~-.. l ... ,. T .. ,. • ....... , ..... -·1·~· .. ·:·1 ......... , ................. !··· :····~··~-l .... :····1 ......... : .. , .. ..1 ... ! :; ~ .. ! : ..... : .. : .. :: i.:.:LJ::. ~ . .:..~ ... , . ·: .... r ... :·~: .... !... : ..... '; .. 1.:.; .: . ... :·1· .... 1 ...... !. .. : .... 1 •••• : ·1 .... J.:.' : .. l:: :~J ... :!·· .L ... i ... : .. 1 . . ~ : <· ! ; f: : i I'.:.. . . i· ~ .; :. 1: ·t i .' f I .t .·: . I "J: .t I i .,; : .. ·: :: ' ! . ; I . 'I ................ ·-·- .J. ........ r·-·····'· ............. 1. ..... , .• ·' ,1 .............................. , ........ , ....... , .......... t·- ... r-· ............... - ...... 1

.· .. ; <i:· .. 1 ·· L"!':"1 ::·I· :: :1: .. L ·l:: . ! ! 1~~1· ''.~' ·:i:· :; .. i .. >.I. .. :.·!' :·'.":;i;;: :"'.' ·:: i.:::1·')·< ~: j- .. :j. ... ~.::1.:.; .... ! ... ":·: .... 2 ... ~··=·1 ··- .. ·-··r-.. r- ... 1.. . .. ~ ... 1 ......... l. ... , ... ,, .... 1-.......... ·-:··1·.. . .... -~ .... 1 .. ··1-4·--1-......... - ····-·- ~··-·+···!- ·!·---:· -i " · · 1 .. : ...... i ... : '""t· :.'. ....... ! ::'.i.:: ".:. · t • .': ..! ; .. :~:. i ::. :.:.j ... : ·:·'1f" · : .. ,· . I :::. " .. ,.i .... , ... .l.. .. ';:.:JJ ;,:./ ... , .. : : .... t' ... ;, .. :

• ' ·: ' I • ~"I: : ::.j . ! . ! . "I : ... : :;: ,· .: . 'l". .... -· I ''.'1' :· . :1."· ... " . ·i .. : "· I ........................ p.--.. ··T······- ........ ., ........................................... ~ ........... -......... -.. ... i.... .. .. ..... ·-·1· ....... i .... , ....... , .... ,_ .,

:;:· .. :.L ~ 0 . :· :>!:::·l;.::i.:·+:::i::=·i .... ! · ·h· l· ·:; .. ::.. .. ; ·::1 .::H: · :.'. ..... : 1::·F·"f ·1 .. :.1 .... :. ·f·T: :·; ;4·;:·1:::·:;·: .. , .... :·:: L>t:.i::'.'.l ·· · 1 · LIO; " '60 · · eo · · ;.1ot( 1 o i \~0 1 ·i t601· "I'· 1 t or' · '· • · 1

.. . ; .... : : · ·· :---1

·>+- ·; ! -:- ..

11• .. :· : ·-~~, t ·:· :·J .; ... .' ·: · , i · 'i' · : .. ·

1 ..... ,.::·:·. 1-::·1: .. :i: .• :i" 1 :.r::J:: .. : . .- , ... ; ... ·,·

..... , ............ : ........ :····rl "T"'."l .. ··: .. , .... -...... ~i ir· "11-1·;!~0··~·1· ··:·,·a· ::3 ·J ;;·r .. , ...... T ....... ; ...... + .. ;··"!'· l .... ··:-r :1 ...... !-· '.- ·, ..... .. i. .. .... : ... : ....... L .. : ..... :., .... ; ....... :. .. 1r .... n~ ... ~ .._. ilC, ......

1 .. r:. ! .... : ... : .. ! .... !. ...... 1: .. :: .... ! : .. ! ....... ;,. ·j"· .: . .. : . . : . i

. . . : .. . : i : I : I • . j ' . I ; I ' I I l' :.·1 '. I • • · :.... .. .. : . ..... i .... :_,,:4 ... i .. : .. :., .. :_ .t . . : ........ ........ ~: ... .l- ... ~.--- ··• : ............ t.:. , .... : ..... ..... ~ ......... 1 .... : ............... ..: ........ : .... L ......... .. :

Flaure 2.2-4 Ground Sonic Boom O~erprMUrt1 under Flltht Trac:k-81ltl1tlc Vthlclt Reentry

Flpre 2.3·2 81W1tlc HLLV Asetnt and 8001ter Reentry Sonic Boom Overprt11Un1

Dll0-22876-8

figures :!.3-3 and 2..3-4 show the winged vehk..ie ascent and booster reentry overpressures in greater

detail. Figure 2.3-S shows the sonic boom O\"erpressures resulting from the reentry of the second

stage of the winged vehicle. The overpressures re<k..il a maximum of J psf in the vicinity of the land­

ing site.

Figures 2.3-6 and 2.3-7 sltow the ballistic vehicle ascent and boooter reentry overpressures in gr~kr

detail than was shown in FiguR 2.3-2. Figure 2.3-8 shows the M>nic boom fWerpressurcs resulting

from the reentry of the second sfa1C of the ballistic vehicle. llle overpressures reach a maximum

of 4 psf in the vicinity of the landing site. The lateral extent of the region affected by the scx.~ad

stage of the ballistic vehicle is less than !hat of rhe second stagie of the winged vehicle because it has

a lower tra~ory.

2.4 PRESSURE SIGNATURES

figures 2.4-1 throu_. 2.4·5 show the positive portions of the sonic boom pressure signatures for

each of the SPS vehicle configurations. A pressure signature is the variation of sonic boom over­

pressure with time that an observer at a ftx~ point would experience. Only the positive pressure

portions of the pressure signature were ..:akufated in the present study.

figure 2.4-1 shows sonic boom pri."SSUre sign:itures at two points along the fl~t track of tile SPS

ascent veh:de. These signatures are applicable to both the wingied ucent vehicle and the ballistic

ascent vehicle. The first prc!Ssure signature is that which <k:CUrs 32 nmi downrange from the launch

site. This signature was generated when the vehicle was ;a an altitude of 92.000 feet and a mach

number of 3.2. T!.e maximum ~erpressure is '.!I psf and the duration of the positive portion of the

pressure signature is 2.3 seconds. The S«ond pressure signature occurs 39 nmi downrange. It has a

maximum overpressure of 8.4 rsf ailJ a positive lobe duration of 1.65 seconds.

The pw.-cure signatures shown in figures 1.4-2 through 2.4-S have much shorter durations than

those of the asc.:ent ,-~hides because the reentcy vehid::s are mu~h shorter than the exhaust plumes

of the ascent vehicles. The duration of the positive lobe for the reentry vehicles is about 0. 7 sec.

2.S EFFECT OF ASCENT VEHICLE SIZE

The effect of ascent vehicle size on the magnitude of the sonic boom overpressures is shown in Fig­

ure 1.5-1. ~ent vehicle size was varied by vacying the number of F-1 class engines and, thereby.

the plume size. The overpressure at the caustic decreases from 15 psf to IS psf when the number of

engines is reduced from 16 to I 0 and from 15 psf to 8 psf when the number of engines is reduced

from 16 to 5. These p~ak overpressures are tht" limit in the focal zone.

24

. . '. 10

i :«> 2 t

s z <10 : .........

! .m ~ .J ..

IO.

Dl .... 22176-8

............ ··-~· .... _ .... _. - ..... . .. - . .

.: .10·: .... : . . '" . . . .. ~ .. '.

. -. . - .

. . . . . ... ·~ - .. . ... .. . . . .....

20 .: : . 5,:) .. : : 40 ·: ·~. : !50 .... ~. &O

P<>~RANc:.£ "''.NHI L :; .. : .. :;::.~:,:.: ·:::::: · . . . .. . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . : . -. . . . . . ; . ; ' ... : . . . ; ; . '' ~" ' . : . : : . : ;.~". : : .. ; : : ... ~

.. .. -·-··- .. . .

Figure 2.3-3 Winpd HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom 0Yerp1mures

25 ORIGINAL PAGI JI OF POOR QUAUTY

= -I t

Figure 2.3-4 Winaed HLLV Booster Reentry Sonic Boom Overpreaures

Figure 2.3·5 Winged HLLV Second Stase Reentry Sonic Boom Overpreaures

0180-22876-8

................ ,. ·-···· ...

. .. '' 10 ..... .

-r z 50 1

• tfl %

~ ~ II(

• ~ .J

. 20

10

0

:C!!> PsF .. .:6 ·····

10 20 . 30 : .. . """° :. . . !SO ..

oowNRAN<ilE .-NMI . . ..

. . . .~. ~- - .. . - . . ... .. .... . .

Figure 2.3-6 Ballistic HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom Overpressures

28

Figure 2.3·8 Ballistic HLLV Second Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Overpressures

_--is

__ t::i.~: : .. :. .'"\'$\: :

.. ; ·l 5

..

\()

. s.

I I

..

................ _ "' -l\.\a'i.E .,~~ 9'"f ""'"-.,~ ... :*-\o\:~~-.t. ~,.,.e :

'T~S. S.""'E. .. :~O"- 4'.;\°'.'0\ ..... :.~ .. ~.\""1~C'> . . . . - . - .

... . . · -~:~_,_..,>t'\I. oo~l\>C:..llllNG.-1: : ...... .

-: ./ . : : . l ~~ 92000 f ~ ,. '"':.:.:a,'2.'> .. : . ·:. .. ' .......... ········

'

'

----..;- ~<?>--w~a •. :.c?u;l'JR.111..._, Gr-ti. _ (\.t .• _\~~-~~o l:T , M•<l\-,4) ...

.: ....... : ..

I.

' • . I ; : : L. . :

.•• : . • t • • •• ~ •••.••.••• '

. .. . ..................... ······· ............ . : . . . .:

••. : .• ,.: •• ::·,·:: .• 1; ...... : ;.:, -· :· . . . .

. . ; : : ...... : ~ .... : .... : . . . : . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 1 - : : . . . ············ ..... •·········· ...

. . . . . . . . ....... ~: ~ .. . : .. . ............ . . .i :··: : !. ' . . . . : " ..... ~ .... ! : . : . . .. ~ .... ! . . . . . . ...

... : ..... L.:_i:~.l.·:··-:.:1 .... , .. : . : ..••.•. : ........ t ... ;.,

. ...... : ...... :.!· ....... .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. ·-' . . ,,_ ... ······· ....

. . . . •· ... :·········: ....... :·····

i .

' . . . . . ........... . . . .

. . " ~ . . . .. : .. : : . . . . . . .. : : .

Figure 2.4-1 HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures

Figure 2.,~2 Winged HLLV Booster Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure Signatures

Figure 2.4-3 Winged HLLV Second Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure Sipatures

DlS0.12876.a

:;~:·;:.~~~~~: ~~~:+t:~~::~~:+~~:r:::FY~1''.:~~~'.t~~8:;~4~~~~1~··:·:: ;::_; .:J .. ::~ .-r~:r~-r~~·1:1~:+~~-:·:1 ~·· ·:. ·:· ·: ... ·: .. : .... c·, .·:;· .. F·-·1·:}d;;:;:~1·~~fT!~jT::; .... : .. :· .. :. ·::·:; .. ; : ·:.~·h·;· .. ·j-::·~:1 .. +:·;::-:r::T "i ...... -····- ... --- .. ·-1--··-·--·--···l---1- ----:--··--~- ...... l. ---· .. ·-· .•. ·---·j·---·-··· -~-+-··-j . . ~ : . : · .. i :· · ~ .. ;: ;;t:·:·L ... :'. :: .. ~;~:i:~:.i:: ·· ·i : ! .. i ·i ~ ( . : .:! i · : · ,. : : ·:r · i .... . . . .. .. .. .......... -'-·-··-+·· .. ·-~-··t"" ----1·· ............... ·-· ........ , ................. ! ................. 1-·+···1 : · : . : ··r -:· .·~.; :: :. :: .;:=:·1<:=~.:: .. ·~f;r·::i:.: :: .. =!· i·.· t . ! : ; · : · , : : ···t · :: ~- f ·: , , : .......... to .... T_ ·-- -·--- ···-··-r--r-·f····-.. J- ... ··-~--···-t·- ·-·-···-·-·-1-··--·-.. ····-T-···-----~ . . ; ":i.·;~.:.;:_·~ .. ::_:1.:·.··:~_-::;::_::::;_:::._·r-.·:_:~~.: .. ~.:1.~:::_·'. .. :.-::_:i.·< .. :+ .. ~::-;1 ::_·~.;::;;_:: .. ~.:·:l~·:i· .. :i-.. :,;.: :~ .... ;: : j ... : .... ::: .. : .... !. t. '. ·~-··:"~~·- .. ·-~·-~· . • . ~~-%,.~1~ .. ~~~·:~:~~t~'-':~~": ~-··· ~-'~:·-- .. ~····!

.i . . l

l . . . . . ····-· ............... . : : i ...... :. 4'·. b\) ..

. ....... -···· ...... . . . ·: .....

: ....... : .. ..q. ...

! ....

I.

1 -~J·i~ .. ..= .. :=i::· .. J:C.:.t~·:.j:::~~·::··~:~~:·f!·:·:~~=~·:~·:~:·~:·lr~·j::~·:~·:11~·}::·j. :b~:~ .. l1 :J~~1·~~:-~--~::·~:·1:~~:·J·:~ .. ~·:Lf ~·~··_· ·~-~~:-~ .. ~~·~:~ji~:·4~.:L~:~·--11 :~·:j:~ .. ~··; :· ...... '. .. ¢. ~-

; i_ :. i. :: . ~ :: . !: : . ··~ ... ; " ' :: : f . : 1io . I : \ !2.:; . i. : . . . l

........ ••;.·.i··:t•·r-+~t·•-·=•1·•~1:_~:•::~;r~;+~5r·1=.r-~-••·1=H~··~J:•=·· · ···: ··· j ... ~:·:·~_::•: .. ~:::~c::;~:r::c~;::::c:T~~f::J=c=~;~j;:J:~·:r::T:r:r~:-:r:·:.:·T: ; :~ :: -~_::::

F4ure 2.4-4 BaDiltic: HLLV Fint Stage Reentry Sonic Boom Pressure Signat..ues

34

'-5-· - -. -. . ---... --- ~ -~

.. . . . . '

::··: ··:: ""4· i. ···--;

Fwgure 2.4-S Ballistic HLLV Second Stage R~ary Sonic Boom ~reuure Signatures

35

. ;25 r . ·.· •....... ; ..... · ..... • • j,

20

15 . 6P

UNDER FLIGHT

. TRACK """ PSF

: 10

··-·······. :.::· ..:: 5

.•. I... ..: ••• : .• "'i ........ .

. . .. ~ ·~ ... ' . . : . . . .. . " ... : '" . :

. " . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ..

: ' ... : ... ·~:.: ... ..... "···'. ... !··:' .... ; ... :·' . . " . . . .... . . .

: ; . : " : " . f ~.::: '. . . : : . . ... : :

I/

. . " ......... '"

---:·16 ENGINES

;--- 10 ENGINES·

. : .. : ::i 5 _ENGINES

' .. ' .

,..., ·""~~. c;.11ti-•&.. ,. "' ...... .. C.~4.\e!.t . .:.s. ' ~--c. .•~: '' ... . o• --nC· .•-\. C..ti._,~-.w 'Ko).: -r:v.•.t . : .. .. . . '

' . '

' . . . .. ... . ........

' ' . . . : . .' .. ; . .. . .. i. .. " .

. : .. : I .

.. : . : . . ~ .. '.. '. . . I . . .... ' ....... .

. . ' ' . ' ............... ·-····' ' . '

... ";" :. ..:i, ... :.

' . ~ ..... ' ' .. : : . . . : . .. ;., ..... : ... '..:.: .... ~ .... r... . . :· ..... 1· ... ' : .....

I ·: ' '. . ....... '.... . ................. .

,, ' . " . . . " '

.: . \ ... j: "::·":-::L::: ..... ; ; .... . I .. '·I· . .. .

.. ; .• : ..... : .• :1. •• ::.: ....... : . •• .. : '

.. ' . l: ~ .. :::-: . i.. : .. :.. . . .. . .. . ' . ' . . . . ~ " . ' ' ' : .

. ... · .. :Ir··· :.·.ro: .. :.c: ! ..... .......... ... L~:-.... :ll. ;.£L.: .... ;.:;:_;::; ~~~~~~·:::··t:! :<.:~L..: . .. : ... :. 0.

. ' . . ... ...... ... . ' 'I • .............. ~ . . ..... : . . • . ' f ; •. : .. .' i · .. ; : . ~ . . . : . : ; . :

. .' ' ... : . : .. ~. -~.: .... :--' . i: ; . ~; . . . ! . . : . : .. ~ ...

. : . . " ~ ~: .... " . . ... ~-:. . ' ; .. ·.... . : : .. : ... _, .

' .. ':": ··o ··: : ... : .. 1~::; :. i:.:: ::2.0.:: ... _ :" io .. :_ . :· 80 :: .. ·: ... 90 .: ... ·-.: 100 :. ' ..... : .

. : . "' l "' : . : .. : ~ . ; .. : .. ; : . : : . ; . : . : : ... 30 .. ' , . • . I. , .

40 ....... ·so·" .. : .. ' 60 . . L .: : ... : : . :.:

. ' DOWNRANGE IW NM!

Fipre 2.5·1 .Semltivi•y of HLLV Ascent Sonic Boom Overpreuures to Vehkle Size

2.6 CONCLUSIONS

It is ~timated. based upon the correlation obtained between the linear theory estimates and the

Apollo 17 data. that the estimated overpressures for the SPS vehicles are within J(Yf of the actual

values. The caustic and lateral cutoff locations are probably within 1 O't- of the 3\:tual locations.

The following are some general conclusions that can be dtawn from the results of this stu!!v:

(I) For the ascent vehicles maximum overpressures of 25 psf will occur in the vicinity of the

caustic.

(2) Overpressures at the caustic are reduced fror.· 25 p$f to 15 psf when the number of F-t engines

is reduced from 16 to 10 and to 8 psfwhen the numberofF-1 engines is reduced to 5.

(3) For the rl!t':ttry wnides maximum overpressures of 3-4 psf will occur in the \·icinity of the

landing site except for the first stage of the ballistic vehide. in which c<ISe the maximum o\·er­

pr .. ssures in the vicinity of the laading site will be I I psf.

(4) For the ascent vehicles the duration of the positive lobe of the pressure signature will be about

2 .5 seconds.

(5) For the reentry vehicles th£ duration of the positi\·e lo"e of the pressure signature will be

about 0. i seconds.

(6) The only significant difference between the sonic boom characteristics of the winged and bal­

listic vehicles is that the ballistic booster reentry o\·erpressures are much !light"r th.m the

winged booster reentry overpressures. and the ballistic booster l.mding site is much farther

downrange than the winged booster landing site.

References

2-1 ··shuttle Sonic Boom-Technology and Predictions." Paul F. Holloway. Gilb1:rt A. Wilhold.

Jess H. Jones. Frank Garcia Jr .. and Raymond M Hicks.AIAAPaper73-I039.0ctober l<n3

2-2 ••Saturn Base Heating Data." C. R. Mullen. et al.. NASA CR 61390. May ! . 1972

2-3 "The Flow Pattern of a Supersonic Projectile:· G. B. Whitham. Communications on Pure

and Applied Mathematics. Vol. V. 1952. pp. 301-348

24 "The Shock Wave Problem of Supersonic Aircraft in Steady Flight." Domenic J. Maglier and

Harry W. Carlson, NASA Memo 3-4-59L. April 1959

37

DIS0-22876-8

2-5 .. A Study of the Sonic Boom Cbr.lelcmtks of a Blunt Body at a Mad1 Number of 4.14."

Harn· W. Carlson and Rot,ert J. M:Kk. NASA Technical Paper 1015. ~ptember 1977

2-6 .. Study Cowring Calculations and Analysis of Sonic Boom During Operational Maneuvers:

Vol. lll~Description of Computer Progr.un .. Sonic Boom Propagation in a StrJtitied Atmos­

phere .. and Estimation of Limitation Near Caustics;· G. T. Haglund and Dennis L Olson.

Boeing Document No. 06Al2l08-3. July 1971

2-7 .. Sonic Boom Propagation in a Stratified Atmosphere with Computer Program.· Wallace D.

Hayes. Rudolph C. Haefdi. and H. E. Kulsrud. NASA CR-1299. April 1969

38

0180-22876-8

3.0 LAUNCH NOISE ANALYSIS

A preliminary investigation was conducted on the Solar Power Satellite (SPS) launch vehicle noise

to provide basic noise infonnation to as.teSS the environmental impact on a launch facility and to

facilitate preliminary launch site selection. The investigation included rocket launch noise predic­

tion. a limited literature survey on past experience, and a review of present prediction capabilitv to

assess technology de,·elopment requirements and ra.""Ommendations. Each of the above items \\ u1

be discussed in some detail in the following sections.

3.1 ROCKET LAUNCH NOISE

The basic launch noise for rockets is created by the rocket engine exhaust. The high velocity

exhaust contacts the station;uy ambient air and a mixing of the two gas masses takes place. Two

basic noise generating mechanisms have been identified as being the main contributors to noise gen­

eration in this process. Jd mixing noise is generated by turbulent pressare fluctuations in the mix­

ing region. In addition to this mixing noise, shock cell generated noise is also present in je!s with

supersonic nozzle exit velocities. Both of th~ above noise sources have been a subject of consider­

<>ble past investigation. Jet mixing noise has been investigated in connection with subsonic aircraft

and supersonic aircraft propulsion systems. Procedures for aircraft type power plant jet noise pre­

diction have been developed and computerized computation procedures were available. These avail­

able prediction procedures were modified to extend the prediction range to jet velocities that are

characteristic of the SPS ·~.inch vehicle prl'rulsion engines. The basic prediction method is docu­

mented in References 3-1 and 3-2. The prediction procedure utilizes the basic jet noise generation

influencing parameters (jet velocity. density. masstlow, temperature and nozzle area) and predicts

the sound spectrum generated by the jet. Spectral information is obtained at 1 o0 intervals around

the jet axis. Distance extrapolations are also handled by the computer program accountings for the

effect of spherical divergence and atmospheric attenuation as a function of distance. Overall Sound

Pressure Levels (OASPL) and Perceived Noise Level (PNI,.) are also computed from th1: predicted

spe~tral information. The computer program is equipped to handle jets with the effect of vehicle

forward motion taken into account.

This option has not been used in these predictions because the forward flight velodties are small

compared to the jet velocities in the initial stages of the flight. Due to the limited score of this

investigation. noise prediction was limited to the static case.

The predicted launch Overall Sounct Pressure Level (OASPL) contour map is shown on Figure 3. J-1 _

The predicted iaunch Perceived Noise Level contour is shown on Figure 3.1-2. The contour maps

represent the maximum noise emitted by the launch vehicle at the site. As a measure oi relative

comparison, it is suggested that for building damage estimates the OASPL levels should not exceed

14 7 dB and for habitation the PNL levels should not e:ii.ceed I 08 dB. The building damage limit

level is suggested on the basis of literature survey results and the PNl level limit is based on criteria

39

I DIST (~T)~ ____ -

I

DIS0-22876-8

' I I i

10.000 FT.

Figure 3.1-1 SPS Predicted OveraU Sound Pressure Levels-OASPL-dB

40

I

Dtsr c4

I

Dll0-22876-8

10,000\ fl.J

J

/ I

I

~co~ -----r

fipft 3.1-2 SPS Predicted Prrceind Noise l..evels-PNL~B

41

established as maximum for commercial aircraft in any category on takeoff or landing a1,proach (at

rhe measureing point per Reference 3) in the United States. (The 108 dB PNL levels assume a lO

second time duration for the noise level to decay 10 dB from the peak.)

Figure 3.1-3 sh.Jws the OASPL and PNL levels for the SPS launch vehicle as a function of radial dis·

tance along the ground surface (6=90°). From this curve. it can be seen that the maximum OASPL

level for building damage occurs at 1000 ft from the launch vehicle and the PNL limit 108 dB takes

place ar 32.000 ft from the launch axis. figures 3.1-4 through 3.1-6 present the polar plot of the

predicted OASPL for IOOO. 10.000 and 100.000 ft distances and the PNL prediction for the same

distances is shown on Figures 3.1-7 through 3.1-9. Figures 3.1-10 through 3.1-12 show the sound

spectrum along the ground plane for the above distances.

3.2 LITERAllJRE SURVEY AND PAST EXPERIENCE

A review of applicable data on rocket noise has identified a number of information sources. The

majority of available material on rocket noise that is available is from 1964. 1968 and 1972. A

summary of this material is provided in the following paragr.iphs:

( 1) Determination of Rocket Engine Noise Damage to Community Dwellings Near Launch Sites-

1964.

Volume I is a discussion of the srudy.

Volume II is a pre~ntation of the data.

Both volumes deal with the tests on windows and walls. Tests were conducted to "·heck stru"·­

tural damage. There was no glass damage below 120 dB. Wall damage Cdry wall tyrd

cxc:urred ahove 147 dB.

The post-Saturn booster created no glass damage and some plaster damage when wt>ather

'onditions were su'h that the noise focused on the building wi!h the plaster walls.

Weather conditions cause .. acoustical focusing .. that could cause damage. Tht> weather condi­

tions are hard to predkt. The velocity of the wind plays an important part in acoustical t~us­

ing and it is hard to measure.

This report is coocerneJ with the dynamic response to windows and wall damJge c:auscd by

rocket noise. It also specifie·, that the authors fed that the psychological damagl' possibility is

rcmolc.

( 2 l Analysis of Potential Community Response to Test Operations of Rockctdyne/Santa Susana

fadlity 1968.

Strudural damage was not predidcd. Compiaints oc:currcd whl·n noise got to he ~1hout 120 dB

or windows rattled. \\•ry fow daims were paid although a lot Wl"fl' likd.

42

0180-22876-8

; T I lllllllll'f!f;il!l I llll 1111 fllllillll""'"" l I I.! ! ! ·, "1 ll I I l·I; I I i ' ! " 11 •I:

1 I 'I I I ! ! 'lj "

i I I • i " .!'

I 900 !Ii

I : :1

I : Ii Ii l.l I I ''I'

' I I' i r I ri

I ''I

160-+-~1--'~-++++ I l \ f

! ,, " .I.

80

60

I I I I

: ' 'l'' .I . I, ill!.;, - . • • ¥ ~---------+-t---+--....-if.•~•. •:-• -~·•.-++ ...... ,tt< ;"l,.,.,ttl ~." :·'++','+,•,•_f',", ii, '--t""'.;..1'0: . ! '/ I "I i I I r1 1- 1t 1 .! ,

'f----~-+-<~-+--t---'~~~>-4-f-·-.-~1.~+-...... ~h-"'+<i+·~··~·+--~'~'o.+f-tol"+!-~-·.._·__.>-+--~-t-..... -~-·~,......,...~+-~·~· ..... 1-"-~-t--.;.....-t"-.-j~-t--'-i' ,I 1:' ·1. : I

f·-----_,, ...................... -4-..... 1.:.._._..,...;......;_,.' ' '; i '! :::: : . : . ' '' i ~~;--l 1-....__..._..;...._,_..._I_,_· .i-.-+'M..._ ~.~ -'•.++·-+..,.+-.-..~f-----...... ~-1-- .... ~. ,- i. t . ' . + .L.' ' ' ' i '' ;_,.....__.... __ ..,_ .... ,...._,.._. ,----1•-·1-:. • -~ ••, ...- -1_....:._. ' ',f I .._.. __ ._.i_.._._.~,"'"1~---.--~· I I· ,,. ! -f •I •I ;. ·i

. " ' '' . ,,.. •'• p .• ,j., I -r--; '.'H t""; • ....,

' ~ , i• ... ;....

I '.!...!+.~ !I I' t ' ...

I I lOoO 10000 100000

DISTANCE .... FT

Fipre 3.1-3 Launch Site Ground Surface Noise Levels (8 = 90°)

43

ORIGINAL PAGE 18 OF POOR QUALl'l'I

--- JET MIXING NOISE

--·- SHOCK CELL NOISE TOTAL

OVERALL SOUND PRESSURE LEYR OASPL - dB

0180-22876-8

f ipre 3.1-4 SPS Launch Vehicle Overall Sound Premure Le¥eklB ( J .000 ft. Sideline Distance)

44

JET MIXING NOISE. SHOCK CELL NOISE

- TOTAL

OVERALL SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL OASPL - dB

DI 80-22876-8

Figure 3.1-S SPS Launch Vehicle Overall Sound Pr~ure Level-dB (10,000 ft. Sideline Distance)

45

UJ ...J c:i :z ~

>­... ..... > ..... r­u L&.J ex: ..... 0

---JET MIXING NOISE

--·- SHOCK CELL NOISE - TOTAL

OVERALL SOUND PRESSURE lEVEl OASPL - dB

DIS0-22876-8

Figure 3.1-6 SPS Launch Vehicle Overall Sound Pressure Level-dB (100.000 ft. Sideline Distance)

46

JET M!XING NOISE SHOCK CELL NOISE TOTAL

PERCEIVED NOISE LEVEL PNL dB

D 180-22876-8

Figure 3.1·7 SPS !.aunch Perceived Noise Level-dB (l ,000 ft. Polar Distance)

47

otttGlNAL PA~ OF POOR QU

DJS0.2287~

~ io0 40° ---- JET MIXING NOISE

SHOCK CELL NOISE TOTAL

tERCEIVED NOISE LEVEL PNL - dB

I I

Figure 3.1-8 SPS Launch Perceived Noise Level-dB (10,000 ft. Polar Distance)

48

,

La.I LI.I l'X

ffi ·~ooc :.>

>­t­.... :> ....

oo0 t; La.I a::: -Q

JET MIXING NOISE SHOCK CELL NOISE TOTAL

nERtEIYED NOISE LEVEL PNL - dB

DUI0-22176-1

·;pre 3.1-9 SPS Launch Perceived Noise LneklB (100.000 ft. Polar Distance)

49

ORIGINAL PAGE IS OF POOR QUALITY

Dll0-22876-8

--- JET MIXING NOISE

--·- SHOCK CELL NOISE

-- TOTAL NOISE

Fipre J.1·10 SPS S~ne Noile Speclnlm-1.000 ft. Sideline Distantt

so

co "O

I _, IA.I

G:i _, IA.I a:: => Cl> Cl> ..... a:: D..

c z: => 0 Cl>

125

120

115

110

105

1

95

90

85

80

75

70

65

31. 63

Dt~22876-8

-- JET MIXING NOISE

--· SHOCK CELL NOISE TOTAL NOISE

125 250 500 lK 2K

FREQUENCY, Hz

I ~e

t 10.000 FT.

4K SK

• 900

6K

Figure 3.l-11 SPS Sideline Noise Spectrum-10.000 ft. Sideline Distance

SI ORIGINAL PAGI-~ IS OF. POOR QUALITY

0180-22876-8

----JET MIXING r«>ISE .

---· Stl)CK CELL NOISE TOTAL NOISE

105

100

95

CD 90 'O I

_, 85 ....

> .... _, 80 ....

1100.000 FT •

0: ::::> Cf)

75 v. &A.I 0: CL

Q 70 _ ..... , z ::::>

" 0

65 Cf)

60 \ \

55 \ \

50 \ ~

45

31 63 125 500 lK 2K 4K K 6K

FREQUENCY, Hz

figure 3.1-12 SPS Sideline Noile Spectrum-I 00.000 ft. Sideline Distanee

52

DI 80-22876-8

(3) Structural Damage Oaims Resulting from Acoustical Environments Developed During Static

Test Firing of Rocket Engines-1972.

(a) Data measured from about l Hz and higher. Highest OASPL values at about 101-'z.

(b) Weather plays an important part ... Less favorable" days gave higher sound pressure level

values and therefore more complaints.

(c) .. Acoustic damage .. is referred to as the basis for claim remu~ration but what the dam­

age consists of was never mentioned.

(d) Number of complaints increased with increase in OASPL.

Conclusion"

No infonnat!on is available in these documents on the effect of the low freque~y noise on humans.

One document states that they feel that there is no effect on humans. Other information da<s not

mention an)' words about the subject. All were concerned with glass and wall damag,. rather than

human annoyance. The loudness (over I ~O dB) of the noise was the reason for the compt;i;nts.

References

3-1 C. l. Jaeck, .. Empirical Jet Noise Predictions for Single and Dual Flow Jets With and With­

out Suppressor Nozzles." Boeing Document No. D6-4.:!9.:!9-J. April 1Q76.

3-:! M. Harper-Bourne and M. J. Fisher. "The Noise from Shock Waves in Sup.:rsonic Jets in

AGARDCP-131. 1973."

3-3 Part 36-Noise Standards: Aircr.ift Type Certification: Fed~ral Aviation Regulations.

53

DI 80-22876-8

.. 0 PRELIMINARY LAUNCH SITE SELECTION CRITERIA

Establishment of preliminay launch site selection criteria from a standpoint of sonic overpressures

and l.tunch noise required a review of present standards. reports on the impact of noise on struc­

tures (buildin~. etc.) and humans. In addition to the sonic overpressure and launch noise problem.

the explosive hazard of t~e large launch vehicles must be considered.

4.1 EXPLOSIVE HAZARD DUE TO 111E PROPELLANT COMBINATIONS

The explosive hazard o! :he prop-.:1fant combi1:ations used in the SPS launch vehicle was estimated

using the procedures of the Air force Fxplosives Safety Manual (Reference 4-I )_ The first stage

propellants include liquid oxygen (L02). liquid hydrogen fLH 2) and a hydrocarbon rocket propel­

lant (RP- I ). The equivalent mass of TNT for these combinations is as follows:

l02 + RP- I = 20% of the loaded mass in equivalent mass of TNT

L02 + lH2 = 60% of the loaded mass in equivalent mass of TNT

Using these proportions the totai vehicle explosive hazard is the equivalent of 2806 metric tons

(6.2 X 106 tbm) ofT!IIT. with 511;; on the first sta~ and 49~, on the sa:\>nd. The prt>dicted over­

pressures from an on-pad explosion are shown in Figure 4.1-1 and were developed using the meth­

odology in Reference 4-1 . The requirer\ minimum separation distances as e!'tablishcd in Reference

4-1 for this explosi\>n hazard is:

2840m (9330 ft) for inhabited buildings

I 700m (5600 fO for public highways

The safety manual (Reference 4-1 ) also provides some examples of overpressurcs (of short time

duration) on structural elements. These effocts are summarized below:

BLAST OVERPRESSURE EFFECTS

Structural Element

Aircr.ift

Glass windows, large and small Corrugated asbestos siding Conugated aluminum or steei paneling

Brick wall panel 8 to 12 in. thick (not reinfor .. J)

Wood si ng panels standard housing constru.:tion

Concrete or cinderblock wall panel 8 to 12 in. thick (not reinforced)

Steel frame buildings Steel towers

Failure

Damag~ to control surfaces and other minor repair

Major repair Shattering occasional frame failure Shattering Connection failure followed by

buckling Shearing and flexure failure

Usual failure at main connections allowing panel to be blown in

Shattering of the wall

Sides blown in distortion Blown down

SS

PSI Side On

Overpressure

L0-2.0

2.0-3.0 0.5-J .n 1.0-2.0 1.0-2.0

7.0-8.0

1.0-2.0

2.0-3.0

8.6 30.0

DIB0-22876-8

. ..: s .. ~

't .., A• ... ~ I :1 \ii

~ ~ .. .. I ~ ~

<:) I

()

0 S,ooe> I01t.oo

FJIUle 4.1-1· Pftdicted CMrpnmua per• On-P8d Ex,.__

56

DI 80-22876-8

Ch·erpressures in the range of l !o 2 psi are sufficient to dish in panels and buckle stiffeners/stringers

on adjacent vehicles. Therefore. using a mi11imum pad separation distance of 2 miles will limit tilt>

orerpressures 10 less than 0. 75 psi 011 adjat:ellt pads a11d will minimi=e a11y potemial damage.

4.2 EFFECTS OF SONIC OVERPRESSURES

The effects of sonic overpressures on humans. due to the operation of supersonk aircraft structures.

etc .• has been investigated by many researchers in the past. An o\·er.111 summary to the effects can

be found in Reference 4-2 ... Sonic Boom literature Survey.•· The following paragraphs will summa·

rize some of these findings.

Hum.. .. Effects

Transient overprcssures of considerable magnitude can be experienced under certain drcm'lstanccs

without significant discomfort. For example. the overprcssures inside a car when the door is dosed

arc up to 245N m2 (4 psi) for standard sedans and station wagons up to 425 N/m3 c 8.5 psi) 1or ., compact cars. Owrpressures of 600 N/m- ( 12 psi) have been measured in public \·icwing an:as

during firework displays.

limits for physical damage to humans due to sonk booms have been reported hy H. E. rnn Gierke

(Reference 4-J). A summary of these results are shown below:

(I) Rupture of the tympanic membrane ., o None expected below 720 #/ft-., o None observed up to 144 #/ft.;.

(2) Aural pain ., o None observed up to 144 #/ft.;.

(3) Short tempera!)' fullness. tinnitus ., o Reported above 95 #/ft-

( 4) Hearing loss-temporary

o None measured ., - 3-4 hours after exposare up to 120 #/ft-

- immediately after booms up to 30 #/ft2

(5) Stapedectomy

o No ill effects reported after booms up to 3.5 #/ft2

(6) Hearingaids .

o No ill effects reported after bc.·Jms up to 3.5 #/ft2

The most probable objection by humans to sonic boom is the behavioral effects rather than physkal

damage. since the anticip<1t..:d overpressure levels are much lower than those which \an cause dam·

age or discomfort.

51

0180-22876-8

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) sonic boom panel published a report (Refe~

ence 44) on the beha\ioral effects on humans due to sonic boom. The obseJVations noted by the

ICAO panel are shown below:

Sonic Boom Overpressure N/m2 CPSF) 16 (0.33)

30 to 111 (0.63 to 2.32)

130 to 310 (2.72 to 6.47)

340 to 640 (7.1to13.37)

Behavioral Effects

- Orienting, but no st3rtle response

- Eyeblink response in I 0% of subjects

- No arm/hand movement

- Mixed pattern of orienting and startle responses

- Eyeb!ink in about half of the subjects

- Arm/hand movements in about a quarter of sub-jects; no gross bodily movements

- Predominant pattern of startle response

- Eyeblink response ill 90% of subjects

- Arm/hand movements in more than half of the subjects; gross body flexion in about a fourth of subjects

- Ann/hand movements in more than 90% of subjects

The Oklahoma City test <Reference 4-.:!) for the 6 month period of February to July 1964 where

the populace was exposed to 1253 sonic booms between 1.13 to 1.60 psf in magnitude resulted in

about 73% to 90% feeling they could accept eight booms per day of this magnitude. A number of

the people who actually complained to the FAA. during this test series, were the most intensely

.mnoyed and most hostile toward the SST (Supersonic Transport).

Structural Damage Effects

Sonic booms of varying magnitude can cause various degrees of damage to dwellings and other

structures. A number of test series have been conducted to measure the effect of sonic boom at

varying levels of overpressure on seleded structures and materials. One of these test series was con­

ducted at the White Sands Missile Range from November 18. 1964 through February 15. 1965 and

is reported in Reference 4-5. The observed results of this test program has provided the data to

establish I) the maximum safe predicted or recorded overpressure for representative building mate­

rials and bric-a-bra~ other than glass (see Table 4.2-1) and 2) the maximum safe predicted or meas­

ured average ground overoressure for plate and window glass (see Figure 4.2-1 ).

Recommended Sonic Overp~re Criteria

A maximum allowable overpressure of 2. 0 psf outside of the government reservation perimeter shall

not be exceeded in populated areas for SPS launch vehicle operations. The Space Shuttle is

expected to produce a 2.1 psf sonic overpressure during a typical return to Kenlledy Space Center.

58

0180-22876-8

Table 4.2-1 Maximum Safe PredicteJ or Reconled Pak ~-for Rep1esentatiYe Buildina Materials and Bric+Brac-Other Thu Gllll

Material

Interior Walls and Ceilings

t. plaster on wood lath 2. plaster on gyp lath 3. plaster on expanded metal lath 4. plaster on concrete block S. gypsum board (new) 6. gypsum board (old) 7. nail pepping (new) 8. bathroom tile (old) 9. damaged suspended ceiling (new)

10. stucco (new)

Bric-a-brac

1. extremely precariously placed or unstable items

2. normally stable or placed items

Miscellaneous

1. brick stacked 2._ glass door loosened 3. twisted mullions 4. popped molding

White Sands

3.3 7.S 16. 16 . 16 4.S S.4 4.S 4.0 s.o

NA NA

19 19 9

19

Major3

S.6 16. 16. 16. 16. 16. 16. 8.S 16 16

3.1 S.6

I. las than one chance in I 0,000 when within rave miles of flight tock. This value corresponds to a 99.99 percent confidence that damage will not Occ:ur.

2. Small Oess than three inches) hairline cracks extensions or pre-damaged paint chipping or spalling.

3. Falling plaster or tile, etc.

59

0180-22876-8

1 _ CUT OFF LIMIT *LESS THAN 11100.000

8-58 BOOM-SAMPLE I I I I 200

100 90 80 70 60 50

~ " ~· ~

~

' CHANCE OF A SLIGHT . I I I CRACK OCCURRING ' , , 1

~ CUT OFF LIMIT

''"""' I

F-104

40

~ 30 u.

d 20 !!! < UJ a: < ~ 10 < 9 a a

7 6 5

4

3

2

1 1

' ' ' " ' ... ... ' ...

'" .... '" ' ""' ... ' "- "-' '"J '" '" '" "

...

'" '" \.A \.. .... \.. ' ~ ...... .......

" "'""' "' ... ~ r'll " ' " "I \.."' ~ I"' "" ,, ~ \.. 1-1/~

"" '\ ~ "' ~

....

\. ""'\ -1 ~

' "' '" ~ ' '314 "'" I\ ' ~

...

' ' 1/2 '"' ' ~" ' ' r\ ~

'' 311! ' \.. " ' ~t \ .... ,\5/16, "" ' !'\ I' ~ '1/~ 0 ~ ~ ' ~ 7~~ ' \. \ ~11s' \. ~ " " ..... ' " ' ... "

...

' ' '" ' ~

' ' ' \,. ' ' I'-. ~OVERPRESSURE VALUES \ \. "' "' ' '

"I

REFER TO INBOUND ' OS ' "\ \. ... " ~

-VECTORS. MULTIPLY \ \ \ " ~' \ - BY 2 FOR TAAi LING VECTORS & INTERPOLATE ~ \ \ \ \ \

-FOR ALL OTHER I

VECTORS. l~2 \ \ ' '\ \ \

' ~ ' \ \

\ 2 3 4 5 6 7 89 10 20 30 40 50 100

OVER PRESSURE **(PSF)

Figure 4 • .2-1 Maximum Safe Predicted or Measured Average Ground Overpressure for Plate and Window G ...

60

D 180-22876-8

4.3 LAUNCH NOISE EFFECTS

The On:upational Safety and Health Administration (OSHr ) noi5e standards for t•xposure kvels

and allowable duration are shown in ,.able 4. ~-I. A maximum of 140 dB peak sound noise len·J is

acn•ptable for a very short duration (impad noise). The safe limit appears to be 14 7 JB for build­

ing damage as a result of a literature survey. A perceived noise level (PNU of 108 dB for habitation

is the maximum allowable for commercial aircraft in any category on takeoff or land mg approach in

the United States (Part 36-Noise Standards: Aircraft Type Certification: Federal Aviation Regula­

tions). The l 08 dB PNL levels assure a 10 second duration for the noise level to decay JO llB from

the peak.

References

4-l Air Force Manual 127-100. Explosives Safety Manual. dated October 3. i S 75

4-2 Sonic Boom Literature Survey. Volumes I and 2. Report No. FAA-RD-73-129- J anll -2. pre­

pared by Larry J. Runyan anJ Edward J. Kane (Boeing Conunercial Airplane Company l.

September 1973

4-3 Effects of Sonic Boom on People: Review and Outlook. Henning E. von Gierke. ProL·eed­

ings of the Sonic Boom Sympc-~;um. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. \! ol.

39. No. 5. Part 2. 1960. pp S43-S50

14 Report on the Sonic Boom Phenomenom. The Ranges of Sonic Boom Values likl'ly to be

Produced by Planned SST"s. and t!le Effects of Sonic Booms on Humans. Property. Animals.

and Terrain-Attachment A oflCAO Document 8894. SBP/IJ. Report of th<:' Second Meet­

ing of the Sonk Boom Panel. Montreal. October 12 to 11. 1970

4-5 The Effects of Sonic Boom or. Structural Behavior-A Supplementary Analysis Rqiort.

John H. Wiggins. Jr .. Federal Aviation Agency SST Report No. 65-18. Octoher 197 '>

61

DI 80-22876-8

Table 4.3-1 OSHA Noise C)tandards for Occupational Noise Exposure

Sound Lewi-dB [!:> Allowable Exposure Time (hours)

115 dB 1 /4 hour or kss

110 dB l /~hour

105 dB 1 hour

102 dB 1-1/2 hours

100 dB 2 hours

97 dB 3 hours

95 dB 4 hours

92 dB 6 hours

90 dB 8 hours

[!> If these levels must be exceeded minimization procedures must be undertaken (ear plugs.

acoustic hdmi:ts. etc.)

62

DI 80-22876-8

5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The SPS launch vel;icles are expected to produce peak '\C•nic overpressures of 25 psf during ascent

primarily due to the plume effect and total thrust of the "~hicle. These peak pressures occur do.vn­

ran)Ze about 30 milt:s from the launl:h site due to the focu:.ing :->henomena. Wingrd vehide con­

cep ... re expected to produce a peak overpressure in the 3 to 4 psf range during reentry. Ballistic

recoverable vehicles are expected to produce reentry overpressures of between 4 and 11 psf. It is

expected that the launch noise will be 140 PNL dB in the vicinity of the launch pad and I 08 PN L

dB at a distance of 32.000 ft from the pad. The explosive hazard due to the on-board propelhmt

combinations is expected to produce an overpressure less than 0. ""5 psi two miles away from the

launch pad.

Based on the above. the following criteria are proposed for inhabited areas along the ground track.

l l) Maximum allowable overpressure of 2.0 psf

(2) Maximum noise level of 108 PNL dB

In addition. it is recoinmen<led that a l;•:mch pad sepration distance of at least 2 miles be used.

Recommendations

In order to enhance the confidence level in the accuracy of the predictions and the t'f . · .ic

overpressure and noise the following items are recommended for future effort:

( l) The accuracy of the sonic boom overpressure estim:.>tes mJde in this study couk .n provcc

upon by cor.ducting a wind tunnel test using models of the SPS vehicles. The re'lults of this

kst would be near-field sonic boom pressure signatures which could then be ex tr3polated to

tlig!it coordinations. This is a well-known technique use<l by NASA (Rden:nce 2-1) to predkt

the Space Shuttle sonk boom characteristics.

(2) It is recommended that a ddaikd study be undertaken to review thr validity o!'thc analytical

tools currently available in knns of existing rocket noise data. This study should include

review of data quality and measurement technology by which such data had been acquired.

Extrapolati:m techniques should l'-e verified where prediction t~chniques based on supersonic

transport aircraft engine noise are extended to the relatively high velocity range of rocket

engines.

(3) A study should :.1lso be ~111dertaken to establish subjective noise limits to be set for valid assl.'ss­

ment of rocket noise on human subjeds. Building damage assessment should also be improved

by a wmprehensive assessment of past experience.

63