Ttdfjt

Would this winged human/angel be able to fly?

What is the reason behind water not falling from a bucket at the top of loop?

ZFS on Linux: Which mountpoint option when mounting manually per script?

Did Logical Positivism fail because it simply denied human emotion?

On the consistency of different well-polished astronomy software

What printing process is this?

How to open Lightning component in new window

Repeated! Factorials!

Does a humanoid possessed by a ghost register as undead to a paladin's Divine Sense?

What does Argus Filch specifically do?

A verb for when some rights are not violated?

What are the limitations of the Hendersson-Hasselbalch equation?

Can the Cauchy product of divergent series with itself be convergent?

Pronouns when writing from the point of view of a robot

Probably terminated or laid off soon; confront or not?

Plotting Autoregressive Functions / Linear Difference Equations

When using the Proficiency Dice optional rule, how should they be used in determining a character's Spell Save DC?

What is it exactly about flying a Flyboard across the English channel that made Zapata's thighs burn?

conditional probability of dependent random variables

Is a text with orthographic or grammatic mistakes in a language X still a text in that language X?

In MTG, was there ever a five-color deck that worked well?

Need reasons why a satellite network would not work

Make lens aperture in Tikz

Why is Heisenberg shown dead in Negro y Azul?

Does static fire reduce reliability?

What is the advantage of doing a static test fire before launch?What boosters/launchers conduct hot fire tests before launch?ISRO's Mars Orbiter Mission - LAM vs Attitude thrusters reliabilityHow does static test firing before launch affect design of rocket mass and structure?What is the advantage of doing a static test fire before launch?Do Falcon 9 preflight static fire ignitions use up the engines' ignitors?RS-25 Hot Fire TestWhich of the orientation is preferred for static fire testing of a liquid rocket engine - vertical or horizontal?How long does Augmented Spark Igniter fire?What parameters of an rocket engine determines whether it is fit for any more static hot fire test?Why is a purging process necessary for static firing test of liquid rocket engines?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

5

$begingroup$

I do understand that static fire helps discovering malfunctions, as explained in this answer.
A launch exerts an important stress on rockets' engines (high temperature and pressure, vibrations,...) and, except for SpaceX's launchers and the space shuttle, there is no need to make the engine reliable enough to survive more than one launch (one ignition, a few minutes of full thrust).

One static fire represents a significant part of the number of ignitions it will handle in its entire life.
The same reasoning goes for the number of seconds it will be running.

My reasoning is that a static fire puts a strain on the engine, and thus may decrease its life expectancy significantly. Am I right? Does the static fire reduce the engine's life expectancy and thus its reliability?

engines testing

share|improve this question

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  An engine being reliable enough to survive one launch over a few minutes should be able to survive some additional seconds. Some reserve of life expectancy is needed for reliability. You can't predict life expectancy very precisely for every single engine. One will fail early, another one will fail much later.
  $endgroup$
  – Uwe
  Jul 25 at 10:50
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

5

$begingroup$

I do understand that static fire helps discovering malfunctions, as explained in this answer.
A launch exerts an important stress on rockets' engines (high temperature and pressure, vibrations,...) and, except for SpaceX's launchers and the space shuttle, there is no need to make the engine reliable enough to survive more than one launch (one ignition, a few minutes of full thrust).

One static fire represents a significant part of the number of ignitions it will handle in its entire life.
The same reasoning goes for the number of seconds it will be running.

My reasoning is that a static fire puts a strain on the engine, and thus may decrease its life expectancy significantly. Am I right? Does the static fire reduce the engine's life expectancy and thus its reliability?

engines testing

share|improve this question

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  An engine being reliable enough to survive one launch over a few minutes should be able to survive some additional seconds. Some reserve of life expectancy is needed for reliability. You can't predict life expectancy very precisely for every single engine. One will fail early, another one will fail much later.
  $endgroup$
  – Uwe
  Jul 25 at 10:50
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I do understand that static fire helps discovering malfunctions, as explained in this answer.
A launch exerts an important stress on rockets' engines (high temperature and pressure, vibrations,...) and, except for SpaceX's launchers and the space shuttle, there is no need to make the engine reliable enough to survive more than one launch (one ignition, a few minutes of full thrust).

One static fire represents a significant part of the number of ignitions it will handle in its entire life.
The same reasoning goes for the number of seconds it will be running.

My reasoning is that a static fire puts a strain on the engine, and thus may decrease its life expectancy significantly. Am I right? Does the static fire reduce the engine's life expectancy and thus its reliability?

engines testing

share|improve this question

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

edited Jul 25 at 18:36

user23432

20611 silver badge44 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

asked Jul 25 at 10:26

Manu HManu H

1,5541414 silver badges3131 bronze badges

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

15

$begingroup$

Probably highly relevant here is the concept of the failure curve where parts will generally fail either at the start or end of life. Some engine designs may be such that they do not have much of an early failure tail but shallow (unpredictable) end of life tail, these would not be test fired. The Apollo ascent engine might qualify.

For a more conventional engine with a lot of moving parts and potential for latent fabrication problems the aim would be to design it such that can be test fired into the flat part of the curve, and does not reach the up curving tail over the remaining flight time, hopefully backed up by a large pool of test data from engines fired for longer than expected and then autopsied with engineering changes as required.

So yes, a test fire does use up some engine life but if engineered correctly it makes the engines that actually go into the rocket more likely to perform as required.

And if you found out that your production process was so reliable that no/few engines failed the test fire it would be valid to make them lighter/run them harder and not test them before flight.

share|improve this answer

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37668%2fdoes-static-fire-reduce-reliability%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

15

$begingroup$

Probably highly relevant here is the concept of the failure curve where parts will generally fail either at the start or end of life. Some engine designs may be such that they do not have much of an early failure tail but shallow (unpredictable) end of life tail, these would not be test fired. The Apollo ascent engine might qualify.

For a more conventional engine with a lot of moving parts and potential for latent fabrication problems the aim would be to design it such that can be test fired into the flat part of the curve, and does not reach the up curving tail over the remaining flight time, hopefully backed up by a large pool of test data from engines fired for longer than expected and then autopsied with engineering changes as required.

So yes, a test fire does use up some engine life but if engineered correctly it makes the engines that actually go into the rocket more likely to perform as required.

And if you found out that your production process was so reliable that no/few engines failed the test fire it would be valid to make them lighter/run them harder and not test them before flight.

share|improve this answer

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

15

$begingroup$

Probably highly relevant here is the concept of the failure curve where parts will generally fail either at the start or end of life. Some engine designs may be such that they do not have much of an early failure tail but shallow (unpredictable) end of life tail, these would not be test fired. The Apollo ascent engine might qualify.

For a more conventional engine with a lot of moving parts and potential for latent fabrication problems the aim would be to design it such that can be test fired into the flat part of the curve, and does not reach the up curving tail over the remaining flight time, hopefully backed up by a large pool of test data from engines fired for longer than expected and then autopsied with engineering changes as required.

So yes, a test fire does use up some engine life but if engineered correctly it makes the engines that actually go into the rocket more likely to perform as required.

And if you found out that your production process was so reliable that no/few engines failed the test fire it would be valid to make them lighter/run them harder and not test them before flight.

share|improve this answer

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Probably highly relevant here is the concept of the failure curve where parts will generally fail either at the start or end of life. Some engine designs may be such that they do not have much of an early failure tail but shallow (unpredictable) end of life tail, these would not be test fired. The Apollo ascent engine might qualify.

For a more conventional engine with a lot of moving parts and potential for latent fabrication problems the aim would be to design it such that can be test fired into the flat part of the curve, and does not reach the up curving tail over the remaining flight time, hopefully backed up by a large pool of test data from engines fired for longer than expected and then autopsied with engineering changes as required.

So yes, a test fire does use up some engine life but if engineered correctly it makes the engines that actually go into the rocket more likely to perform as required.

And if you found out that your production process was so reliable that no/few engines failed the test fire it would be valid to make them lighter/run them harder and not test them before flight.

share|improve this answer

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges

answered Jul 25 at 11:21

GremlinWrangerGremlinWranger

3,77644 silver badges2121 bronze badges