On 5/11/2011 3:38 PM, mikea wrote:
Calculate the surface area of that chamber in sq inches and multiply by
15. That's a huge number.
I'm surprised it wasn't a sphere
73
Roger (K8RI)
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:32:50AM -0500, mikea wrote:
>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:14:59AM -0400, Al Kozakiewicz wrote:
>>
>> [a vacuum-filled Hindenburg]
>>
>>> Absolutely. However, the weight of a structure that size that could
>>> withstand the forces of a vacuum would well exceed the forces of
>>> buoyancy!
>> Just so. I got to see a very large vacuum chamber that had collapsed:
>> the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center's space environment chamber, which was
>> something like 5 meters diameter and 8 or 10 meters long. I drove to work
>> one morning, and it had changed shape from a vertical cylinder to something
>> like a crushed Coke can. This chamber was _heavily_ braced on the outside,
>> instead of being designed for flight. Oooopsie!
> I got it w0rng; a press release from the commissioning of that chamber
> says:
>
> HOUSTON_ TEXAS -- Formal acceptance of the 65 ft. diameter vacuum
> chamber at the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center took place here today after
> the completion of acceptance tests by Industrial-Fisher-Diversified,
> prime contractors for the facility. The transfer of the facility to NASA
> was accomplished by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, technical monitor
> for NASA facility construction. The 120 ft. high chamber will be used to
> conduct thermal tests of Apollo spacecraft under vacuum conditions.
>
> That's press release MSC 66-2, January 7, 1966
>
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|