Almost a week after the GSLV-F10 mission failed after anomaly at the top of the cryogenic (cus) produced a non-ignition, the failure analysis committee (FAC) was in the process of revocation of aviation through a simulation to determine the problem.
Sources in Isro said that all the systems were carried out as needed in all land tests and the class of this launch vehicle had a successive disability launch in recent years, the space body felt the problem may not be on the machine.
The initial suspicion is that one process prepares the machine to do work – propellant management, maintain pressure, inlet / input et al – can fail.
And, if it is a process problem, then correction can be done in a shorter time range compared to machine problems, they said.
The Chair of the Isro K Sivan told Toi: “There is a large number of data.
Various hypotheses will be tested through simulations with real hardware before concluding on what caused anomalies.
FAC has been asked to submit a report at the end of this month.” Indicates that the rocket system is complex, Sivan said that some problems arose during land tests, and were always corrected before the launch, but there were some problems that only occurred during the flight, as happened last week.
“While the effect of such damage may be severe (failure of the mission), the cause may turn out to be insignificant.
Sometimes, a system that seems to have a good margin during the pre-launch test and the previous mission is not done as expected when it was launched.
GSLV-MK2 , For example, has had six successive successful flights before last week, which is why we thought it might be a process problem.
But it was for FAC to conclude, “Sivan added.
MK3 correction? Furthermore, if the problem is found with a cus system process, ISRO even needs to make a correction in the GSLV-MK3, which will be used to launch the Chandrauran-3 mission and the establishment.
Sivan said there were two types of systems to deal with: first, machinery and architecture, which differed in MK2 and MK3.
Secondly, several processes such as tanks and propellent management, maintain tank conditions (proper temperature, pressure etc.), which are similar at all cryogenic stages.
He, however, shows that all MK3 missions have so far succeeded and that ISRO believes that the future schedule of the rocket class will not be affected.
“Machines that power the GSLV-MK3 cus, thermodynamics, and the gas cycle are all different, which is why there is no direct impact on the MK3 mission that we have followed.
However, given that it is the cryogenic stage, there are several aspects of similar processes, and If the problem is found with this, then we may need to make a correction in MK3 too, “he added.
Is the process of the Cryo stage stage process causing GSLV to fail?
