AlAA 95-2454

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-2454

Castor 120@Motor Development

Progress

David A. Buhaly
Thiokoi Corporation
Brigham City, UT

3Ist A I M A S ME/SAE/ASEE
Joint Propulsion Conference and Exhibit
July
- 10-12,1995/San Diego, CA -

For permissionto copy or republish, contact Thiokol Corporation, Defense and Launch Vehicle Division,
P.O. Box 689, Brlgham Clty, UT 843024689.
 AIM-95-2454

CASTOR 120@' MOTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRESS

David A. Buhaly
Thiokol Corporation
Brigham City, Utah

&@,@ 120 motor to maintain a 3 percent burn rate variability.

The Castor 120 solid rocket motor has been
delivered and emplaced on the launch pad ready for its
maiden flight. This paper discusses the seven year
development, validation, and first motor production
program leading to this event. The Castor 120 motor
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-2454
The motor propellant structural factor of safety is 1.5
while bondline factors of safety are 2.0.
The carbon-epoxy motor case is filament wound
using high strength Toray T-1000 fiber. Use of this
material allows the Castor 120 motor case to be

development program began in 1988 with the
realization that a small satellite launch vehicle market
was emerging. Internal analyses and numerous
interviews with key customers revealed that a new
rocket motor would be needed to meet the requirements
of this market. A subscale demonstration motor was
tested in 1990. After analyzing the results of this test, a
full-scale motor demonstration test was performed in
1992. A third qualification test was successfully
performed in 1993. Finally, the first flight motor, for
the Lockheed Launch Vehicle, was completed and
delivered in January, 1995. Along the way, full-scale
motor case structural and burst tests were performed.
This development program was conservative and costly,
but much less so than a typical defense rocket motor
development program. Key lessons can be gained from
analyzing the decisions made during this program that
d should be incorporated into future programs such as the
Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle.
Castor 120 Motor Description
The Castor 120 motor is the same diameter
(92-inches) as the Peacekeeper first stage motor and
about 20 inches longer (351 inches) (Figure 1). It
contains about 10,000 pounds more propellant. These
key similarities allowed u s to make maximum use of
existing facilities and tooling for propellant casting,
case fabrication, nozzle fabrication, stage assembly, and
transportation.
The motor propellant, a typical Class 1.3 hydroxyl-
terminated polybutadiene (HTPB) formulation, differs
from the Peacekeeper propellant in two key areas. The
burn rate is lower, allowing the Castor 120 to burn
50 percent longer than the Peacekeeper, reducing the
acceleration forces on the payload. The second
difference is that the Castor 120 propellant burn rate is
adjusted by using an iron oxide burn rate catalyst
instead of changing the proportions of the ground
ammonium perchlorate sizes. This allows the Castor
designed to a factor of safety of 1.4 (versus a typical
1.25 factor) while maintaining a high mass fraction of
0.93. The internal insulation uses silica-filled ethylene
propylene diene monomer (EPDM) rubber. The aft
dome also incorporates Kevlar@ in the EPDM. The
internal insulation was initially designed to a 1.5 factor
of safety in the aft end and 1.25 in the forward end of
the motor. After gathering full-scale static test results
showing lower than predicted erosion, it was decided
that the inert weight of future motors could be reduced
by over 200 pounds while maintaining a common
thermal factor of safety of 1.4. Typical factors of safety
for ballistic missiles are in the range of 1.15. This
change will be incorporated in all motors fabricated
after 1 October 1995.
The nozzle is very similar to that used in the
Peacekeeper motor. It uses a 3-D carbon-carbon throat
from a billet fabricated by Textron Industries, a carbon
cloth phenolic liner, and a PAN-based medium density
phenolic structural overwrap. This nozzle is designed
to thermal and structural factors of safety (1.5) that are
much higher than typical programs.
Thrust vector control is provided by an
AlliedSignal cold gas blowdown system. It is a low
cost, highly reliable system similar to that used on the
Castor IVB and on Orbital Science's Taurus launch
vehicle. The system includes an electronic loop closure
unit which conditions both commands and performance
data for telemetry downlink. The design requirements
were developed with AlliedSignal concurrently with the
motor design, which contributed to the low cost of the
system.
The systems tunnel was developed and installed on
the second static test motor. This experience proved
invaluable as we worked with Lockheed to integrate
vehicle cabling and ordnance lines. The envelope and
attach points for all cables were defined well before the
vehicle cabling was fabricated.

u
' Castor 120 is a registered trademark of Thiokol Corporation.
Release B:
"Copyright 0 1995 by Thiokol Corporation. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Inc. with permission."
 I
92.9"
t
59.8"
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-2454

Vectorable
Internal Insulation Nozzle
- 302.3"
350.9"
Firmre 1. Castor 120 Motor

Develooment Proeram

Desien AnDroaCh

Based on interviews with the key US prime launch

vehicle suppliers and several satellite manufacturers,
basic design requirements were developed for the
Castor 120 motor. The driving requirement was lo
provide performance tailored for the commercial
launch vehicle application. This translates to action
time in the 80+ second range while delivering about
30 x IO6 lbysec. An additional requirement was lo be
able to tailor the thrust-time characteristics of the
motor. This allows us to reduce thrust imbalance for
strap-on applications while being able to deliver a fast
tailoff if the motor is used as a first stage, to enhance
staging, all without cost impacts.

Motor design requirements were developed next.

These included providing high factors of safety which Peacekeeper Castor 120
tend to improve reliability by reducing the effects of
manufacturing variability. We also set goals to reduce Figure 2. Reduced Design Complexity
complexity in both the design and manufacturing Measured by Relative Par4 Count
processes by forming product development teams to
incorporate concurrent engineering practices. Finally, Peacekeeoer
.

goo
~
r ~~

we wanted to reduce manufacturing cycle times and

discrepancies. The target against which all these goals 2 80
were set was the Peacekeeper first stage, both because
of its size similarity and the fact that it is in itself a
highly successful motor with a 100 percent flight
success record. As a result of these discussions, we
produced a Capabilities and Requirements Document
-
a
0
E 20
60
40

that served as a motor development specification for our E

2 0
internal engineering work and eventually served quite Motors
well as a technical marketing document. Some of the
results of this planning are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 3. First Unit Defects L'

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Demonstration Static Tests Motor Case CaRabilitv Tests

We began our test program with a subscale
demonstration motor. This motor (46-inch diameter,
25,000 pounds) was tested in March 1990. This
successful test proved many of the key, low cost
materials and processes that were eventually used in the
full-scale Castor 120 motor. Some new processes were
considered too risky and were abandoned before
committing to full-scale fabrication. During early
development of the full-scale motor, we experienced a
case failure during initial bydroproof testing. This
failure was due to the usage of rigid adhesive
attachment of the skirts to the pressure vessel.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-2454
Beyond proving ballistic performance, it is critical
that the motor case’s capability be proven through full-
scale testing. This testing consisted of a full-scale
skirt/case structural test and a full-scale case hydroburst
test. The structural testing was completed in October
1993. Both compressive and tensile tests were
performed. The test article failed in a compressive test
mode at a load of 10,414 pounds per circumferential
inch at the skidcase attach point. This test proved
acceptable capability for all first and second stage
in-line vehicle configurations and provides confidence
for the strap-on applications.

Extensive analysis and design work brought us back to

the current successful design using rubber shear plies, The Castor 120 motor case burst test was
as in the Peacekeeper and Small ICBM designs.
. performed on 19 July 1994. The case failed at a
pressure of 2,418 psig, which is 1.49 times the motor’s
The first full -scale motor was tested in April 1992. maximum expected operating pressure.
This test was very successful, meeting all test
objectives. Now it was time to turn to the second static Flieht Readiness Activities
test and define additional test objectives that would
complete the motor qualification for flight. We A tremendous amount of work is required to take a
analyzed key unproved characteristics and decided that motor that has been successfully static tested and get it
the most important items that could be learned from the to the launch site ready to integrate with a launch
second test were to prove that we could successfully vehicle. These activities were performed in conjunction
design and predict performance of a different machined with the Lockheed Launch Vehicle team between
propellant grain design and to prove that the motor January 1993 and January 1995 when the first stage of
could withstand cold temperatures down to a propellant the Demonstration Launch Vehicle was delivered to
bulk temperature of 30°F. In actuality, the motor was Vandenberg AFB, California. The work performed
conditioned over a period of 30 days down to a included development of an Interface Control
.-” temperature of 28°F and fired successfully in March Drawing (ICD); planning and execution of Pathfinder
1993. The key performance parameters are shown in operations; development, fabrication and certification
Table 1. of transportation and handling equipment; and
qualification of flight critical components.
Table 1. Motor Performance Summary Data
for the Castor 120 Motors One of the key activities that began very early was
definition of interfaces between the solid rocket motor
DM120-2 DM120-1 and the rest of the launch vehicle. These include
(Measured (Measured mechanical, electrical command and feedback,
Parameter instrumentation, and ordnance interfaces. Since
Lockheed fully embraced our “ship, stack, and shoot”
Action time (ta) sec philosophy on the Castor 120 motor, it was critical that
(15 psia to 150 psia) 87.6 79.0 we gain a complete understanding of the hardware they
Average vacuum needed to install on the rocket motor. It was clear to us
thrust overt, Ibf 341,900 379,400 that the only way to gain the level of understanding
needed was to develop the ICD ourselves. This allowed
Maximum vacuum us to easily convert the information contained on the
thrust, Ibf 430,000 423,000
ICD into the required stage assembly drawings.
Average pressure over Though all parties approached the task with the best of
ta, psia 1,055 1,245 plans and intentions, several last minute changes had to
Maximum pressure, be made to the configuration of the systems tunnel and
psia 1,381 1,449 the bonded pads and brackets. Flexibility in design and
manufacturine at this wint late in the fabrication of the
I

Propellant Isp, stage proved to be a paramount asset.

. ...
Ibf-secfib,
. 279.9 280.2
Vacuum total impulse The Pathfinder operation for the Lofkheed Launch
overt,, lbpsec 29,872,400 29,974,400 Vehicle was performed at Space Launch Complex 6 in
4 July 1994 (see Figure 4). Over a year in advance of

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-2454
Figure 4. Pathfinder
this date, planning and design work was being
accomplished. The Castor 120 Pathfinder motor makes
use of the fired case from the second static test. It is
filled with a lightweight concrete which was tailored in
order to make the Pathfinder motor weigh within
2 percent of the actual flight motor. Thrust vector
control hardware was mocked up using wood and metal
facsimiles. Thiokol designed and built all Castor 120
handling hardware to the requirements in ERR/WRR
127-1. All design and proof test packages were
submitted to the Western Range for review and
approval prior to usage on Vandenberg. In addition, the
transporter used for moving the motor to the.launch site
was sent to SLCd for an unloaded fit check to verify
compatibility with the launch site before the Pathfinder
arrived. After this extensive planning and preparation
was complete, the actual Pathfinder operation was
almost anti-climactic because it proceeded so smoothly.
One of the aspects of transporting solid rocket
motors that must be pursued with vigor is that of
obtaining hazardous materials classification and
shipping configuration approval from the US
Department of Transportation (DOT). Since the DOT
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
is required to certify each hazardous shipment, they
need full details on the cargo and shipping
configuration. The process can take up to nine months,
so it is never too early to get started. In our case, we
L,
were able to break some new ground for the
commercial launch vehicle market. Before this motor
shipment, no commercial solid rocket motor had been
shipped with the linear shape charge (classified as 1.1
ordnance) installed. This ordnance had to he installed
at the launch site, greatly increasing processing time,
complexity, and facility requirements. We argued that a
shipment with linear shape charges installed constituted
no greater risk than the shipment of the motor itself
This rationale was accepted by the DOT.
Several flight critical components were qualified to
dynamic levels consistent with Lockheed’s philosophy
and practice and consistent with requirements specified
in the new version of ERR/WRR 127-1, released in
June 1993. All of the flight-critical components on the
launch vehicle must he qualified to a consistent set of
guidelines. It is the launch vehicle integrator’s task to
develop these guidelines. The electronic loop closure
unit on the Castor 120 motor was originally qualified
for static test. As the launch vehicle was developed, it
became clear that the unit had to be requalified to
environments set by LMSC. Several failures and fixes
later, a much more robust system, fully qualified, has
resulted. In addition, the linear shape charge assembly
was qualified to new requirements set in conjunction
with Lockheed and Range Safety. Though no failures
occurred in the process, improvements were made to
the mounting of the linear shape charge that increased
the robustness of this system. In both these cases, an
early definition of the requirements would have been
very beneficial in reducing the schedule impact of a
failure.
Developine a Commercial Solid Rocket Motor
Commercial launch vehicle development is driven
by a balance of risk and cost. For example, increasing
the burst pressure factor of safety in the motor case
from 1.25 to 1.4 cost relatively little in terms of either
performance or recurring cost, but it greatly reduces the
risk of failure and the impact of manufacturing
variability. On the other hand, a second motor case
burst test would cost up to $I,OOO,OOO without greatly
improving confidence in the case capability.
Government programs tend to spend more money for
two reasons. First, a system that is perceived to he
critical to the national defense must never fail. Thus, a
few more static or burst tests are determined to be cheap
compared to the cost of recovering from a failure of this
type of system. A commercial program buys insurance
to cover the risk of flight failure. The marketplace
determines how many static or burst tests are needed to
make the insurance costs reasonable. Second, a
government ballistic missile program typically has \J
 requirements to push to the edge of the performance
envelope. Weight must he reduced to the greatest
extent and total impulse must be increased to get the
2 vehicle out of the silo fast and get to the target with the
greatest amount of firepower. I n a commercial
program, performance is important, hut it must he
balanced at least equally with reliability and low cost.
It is especially true for the small launch vehicle market
that low cost is the name of the game. Therefore, the
Castor 120, built for the commercial market increases
safety factors to reduce the cost and reliability impact of
manufacturing variability. Our target is to build and
deliver a low cost rocket motor to the launch site that
will work each and every time.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES on July 30, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.1995-2454
Summary
As I write this paper, the Castor 120 motor is on
the launch pad, integrated with the rest of the first
5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Lockheed Launch Vehicle. It has heen a long series of
small steps to get to this point, each a critical
accomplishment. The small commercial market is
gaining momentum rapidly and the Castor 120 will he a
major player on a variety of launch vehicles. When this
paper is presented in July, I fully expect to he able to
share successful flight results in addition to the data
pmvided within the current version. The only tasks that
need to be completed to fully take advantage of the
potential of this motor is development and test of
strap-on hardware and a casting core consistent with a
long ballistic tailoff to reduce thrust imbalance.
Future development efforts should take into
account the experiences of the Castor 120 motor
program when defining the tasks, time required, and
goals for their program. Even a successful program has
missteps and it would be wise to study previous
experience as a guide to what lies ahead.