Author Topic: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?  (Read 24824 times)

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3789
    • Clavius
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2012, 05:02:17 PM »
I got the gist of it.

That's because I wisely omitted a discussion of fluorescence.

Quote
Also, Jay, have you seen my last post about Hunchbacked over on the 'old friends' thread? He's really gone off the cliff, I think.

Yeah, wow.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2012, 07:28:23 PM »
In addition there is a property called emissivity (Greek epsilon) that determines how readily a hot object gives away heat by radiation.
I like to describe emissivity as the object's "darkness" at far infrared wavelengths around 10 microns. Why far infrared? That's where all objects anywhere near room temperature radiate. Far hotter objects like the sun radiate at shorter wavelengths in the visible and near infrared, with quite a bit of UV.

It's important to understand the difference because it's easy to get the misconception from the terms "absorptivity" and "emissivity" that these materials are somehow "diodes" for heat, that you can make a substance that absorbs all heat radiation inherently better than it radiates, or vice versa. The Second Law of Thermodynamics makes this impossible. Discrimination between incoming and outgoing radiation is possible for an object like a spacecraft in sunlight only because it absorbs and radiates at different wavelengths. Objects can be bright at one wavelength and dark at another, but they can't be simultaneously dark and bright at the same wavelength.

This has a very important practical implication for thermal engineering on the moon. Although the emissivity of an object, its "darkness" at far infrared wavelengths, controls how easily it radiates its own heat to deep space it also determines how easily that object absorbs heat from other objects near its own temperature -- like the lunar surface. The moon is much cooler than the sun so it radiates far less heat per unit area, but the moon also appears much larger to you when you're standing on it. It occupies half of the entire sphere around you, so even its relatively weak radiation is very important. A radiator facing the lunar surface cannot cool below the temperature of that surface, so one designed to operate on the moon at noon when the surface exceeds 100C must be carefully shielded from as much of the surface as possible by reflectors.

It seems counterintuitive, but a radiator performs better with sunlight on it than when facing the warm lunar surface because the radiator surface can be designed to reflect the visible sunlight while still emitting efficiently in the far infrared, but it cannot be designed to emit in the far infrared at the same time it blocks those same far IR emissions from the lunar surface.

The moon is such a challenging place thermally that the Apollo spacecraft (including the PLSS) used a very brute force method to get rid of heat that was only practical because of the short duration of each mission: evaporating water into space. The CSM primarily used radiators that were kept facing space, but it too could evaporate water if needed for extra cooling when passing over the center of the day side of the moon.

« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 08:55:22 PM by ka9q »

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3789
    • Clavius
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #17 on: July 20, 2012, 12:21:04 PM »
It seems counterintuitive...

This is why "common sense" is not a good way to reason about the behavior of the physical world.

In addition to simplifying away fluorescence, I also intentionally omitted a discussion of wavelength precisely because I've learned from experience that the scalar concepts of optical properties sit better first, then you can reintroduce them later as integrable functions of wavelength without watching students' eyes glaze over.

Quote
...it cannot be designed to emit in the far infrared at the same time it blocks those same far IR emissions from the lunar surface.

This actually happened.  On one of the J-missions to the highlands, the ground team noticed poor performance from one of the LM equipment radiators and ultimately determined that it had a partial view factor to a nearby mountain.  This is serious stuff, folks.

Keep in mind also that what you call the "radiator" in your car really doesn't reject much by radiative heat transfer.  It's more properly called a "heat exchanger" and it works mostly by forced convection.  The ones I'm talking about on the lunar module are true radiators.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline Chew

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 545
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #18 on: July 20, 2012, 12:44:30 PM »
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." -Albert Einstein

Offline theteacher

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 33
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #19 on: July 20, 2012, 01:31:41 PM »
Quote
Keep in mind also that what you call the "radiator" in your car really doesn't reject much by radiative heat transfer.  It's more properly called a "heat exchanger" and it works mostly by forced convection.  The ones I'm talking about on the lunar module are true radiators.

Good point. Thanks.

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3014
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #20 on: July 20, 2012, 01:55:44 PM »
This actually happened.  On one of the J-missions to the highlands, the ground team noticed poor performance from one of the LM equipment radiators and ultimately determined that it had a partial view factor to a nearby mountain.  This is serious stuff, folks.
Yes, that was Apollo 15. I think it was one of the ALSEP experiments. The LM didn't have any radiators (only a sublimator) and it was gone before the hottest part of the day. The ALSEP equipment was designed to operate (and did operate) for years, throughout the lunar day.

The Apollo heat flow experiments showed that the lunar surface is an extremely poor conductor of heat, so despite the huge swings in surface temperature only 80 cm down it's uniform throughout the month. That strongly suggests that future equipment simply be buried. You will still have the problem of getting rid of your own waste heat but at least you'll be isolated from the worst extremes.

Offline gillianren

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 2211
    • My Letterboxd journal
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #21 on: July 20, 2012, 02:42:30 PM »
I've actually been the one arguing against "common sense" in certain discussions, and I don't even understand a lot of the technical stuff.  However, I have never believed that having less information is better, and that thinking less is better, the way a friend of a friend suggested.  He then told me that I was being "just like a woman," which I thought was getting his stereotypes backwards.
"This sounds like a job for Bipolar Bear . . . but I just can't seem to get out of bed!"

"Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity."  --Henry Louis Gates

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3789
    • Clavius
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #22 on: July 20, 2012, 02:47:58 PM »
Yes, I found a reference:  ALSEP electronics package radiators on both Apollos 15 and 17.  Apparently increased the radiator temperature by 10 C.

Yeah, most of the designs for lunar bases seem to be converging toward burying them for protection against thermal fluctuations, solar radiation, and micrometeoroids.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3789
    • Clavius
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #23 on: July 20, 2012, 04:32:10 PM »
I've actually been the one arguing against "common sense" in certain discussions, and I don't even understand a lot of the technical stuff.  However, I have never believed that having less information is better, and that thinking less is better, the way a friend of a friend suggested.  He then told me that I was being "just like a woman," which I thought was getting his stereotypes backwards.

Yes, it is backwards.

My local NPR station aired an interview with the author of a new book on common sense, and I failed to note enough about it to find it and read it.  But the gist of the book is how common sense fails us.  I'm going to have to find it now because I think it might serve to illustrate common sense versus common knowledge.

I actually ran across this in a legal context some months ago:  the jury is expected to be able to try matters of common knowledge and to apply reasoning based on common sense.  This is the rule that determines the applicability of expert testimony.  As a sometimes expert witness, I have to be careful whether I'm offering testimony that is truly expert, or whether it treads upon something that a jury would be expected to know and understand on their own.  The specific question was the nature of friction, and the discussion (not at trial) was whether the jury would already know what "coefficient of friction" meant.  The question later moved to the counterintuitive interplay among coefficient of friction, normal force, and surface area.  We determined that coefficient of friction was at least conceptually common knowledge, as a numerical measure of "slipperiness," but that we'd have to inform them how the other quantities behave.

Common knowledge would include propositions such as, "If the sun is shining on something, it will heat up."  You learn that from casual observation and from basic science education.  Common sense would extend that to radiators irrespective of wavelength, because the common knowledge is simplistic.  Common sense is defensible (if usually wrong) inference from common knowledge or belief.  That doesn't make it true.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #24 on: July 23, 2012, 02:33:49 PM »
Intuition is guided by experience.  "Common sense," if the phrase is to be meaningful, is that intuition guided by experience shared by everyone. 

I sometimes say that our common sense is quite good for objects light enough to pick up, large enough to see, moving slower than a human can run, and within a temperature range where you can hold it for a short time without crippling injury.  Extend that for most of us in the developed world for some experience with an entirely different domain of objects with the mass and average velocities of motor vehicles, with artificial light sources cheap enough to be in mass production, and so on.

Unless you can model it -- mathematically or otherwise -- we don't really have a good instinct for the magnitude between what we can lift and the average automobile, or the changes in behavior between a twig held in a stabbing fist and that twig accelerated to 200 MPH in the winds of a hurricane.  Unless you have the experience or training, judging even relative physical quantities for objects outside of our direct experience is extremely hard.

Offline nomuse

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 859
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #25 on: July 23, 2012, 02:35:36 PM »
(Could also add that we are well-bred to understand an environment at the bottom of a gravity well, in a 14 PSI soup of gas, near the triple point of water -- a very unusual place by the standards of most of the universe.)

Offline chrisbobson

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 45
  • BANNED
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #26 on: January 09, 2013, 06:18:25 AM »
Through my subscriptions I found a new "question NASA" awe130archives video

Description:
Quote
All crosshairs are missing in the Apollo 11 Magazine 37R Frames 5433-5555? According NASA the photos come from the raw scans of this magazine? What happened to the crosshairs NASA?

i explained: (blatantly copied from the comments at time of posting)

Quote
because they used different cameras inside the CM/LM than on the surface of the moon.. the ones in the CM/LM were regular cameras and had no resau plate, but the ones used on the EVA (the ones mounted to their chests) did have the plates.
you will not find any "outside" pictures taken without the crosshairs, all the photos shown here from the surface are clearly taken inside the LM (notice the height)

Lunchpacked180 1 hour ago


on Apollo 11 they brought 3 still cameras, 2 normal hasselblad 500el cameras (with viewfinders etc) used exclusively inside the spacecrafts (no modification was necessary for it to work there), and 1 modified hasselblad 500cl (with the resau plate and other mods, no viewfinder etc.) used exclusively on the EVA's. so that should explain the missing crosshairs from some magazines, they were taken with a regular camera.
you can see that crosshairs are consistent with magazines..

Lunchpacked180 in reply to Lunchpacked180 1 hour ago


If that is the case you solved our question.
Peace to you

AwE130Archives in reply to Lunchpacked180 1 hour ago


happy to be of assistance :)

Lunchpacked180 in reply to AwE130Archives 59 minutes ago


Do you know why the "Calibration Chart (OF300) ( 81k )" does show crosshairs?
We will send you a pm with the link!
Peace to you

AwE130Archives in reply to Lunchpacked180 46 minutes ago


yes i noticed that.. however it does not have a catalogue name, only as11-37-chart... it intrigues me as well... let me look into it.. you are welcome to join me in the research :)
Lunchpacked180 in reply to AwE130Archives 13 minutes ago

so that's why I'm writing this post. :)


I also found that the calibration image for magazine 39 had fiducials aswell, while the rest had not.. (and i would suspect that there are similar ones from other missions as well)

Here are the images in question (i have added the next photo from each magazine for comparison)
Magazine 37

Calibration chart


Photo 5433


Magazine 39

Calibration chart


Photo 5737



I have searched both Google and here (and the archives) and even GtP's site for anything about a calibration chart but have not found anything other than the ALSJ mention..

I noticed that all the info on the slate is the same, except the magazine info and shutter time, so my uneducated guess is that  NASA / Kodak had a reference camera they used (with a reseau plate mounted) to take a picture when they received the film / when the film was made, so they had a known factor for colours/grayscale per film..

so my question is, why do the calibration images have fiducials?

I can't find any info on it.. or perhaps I'm searching for the wrong things? or the wrong places?

anyway, I wonder if any of you could help me out?

I'm pretty curious about this myself :)

I read Hasselblad was making Apollo style cameras.  Sort of like Gibson does giving a nod to the old ES 335 (electronic Spanish) guitars.  Works for me.  Wish I could afford one.   The Hasselblad that is.  I own a nice 335.   330 and 339 too as a matter of fact.  Would trade them all for an original Hasselblad though.

Offline Tanalia

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 52
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #27 on: January 09, 2013, 07:50:05 AM »
It's extremely annoying to have to get past a huge quote only to get to a comment that has no useful connection to the contents of that quote, or the thread for that matter.

Offline Daggerstab

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • Badly Honed Bytes (my blog)
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #28 on: January 09, 2013, 08:05:33 AM »
It's extremely annoying to have to get past a huge quote only to get to a comment that has no useful connection to the contents of that quote, or the thread for that matter.

Of course it is, why do you think he's doing it?

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3789
    • Clavius
Re: fiducials on the LM hasselbad?
« Reply #29 on: January 09, 2013, 04:19:58 PM »
Wish I could afford one.  The Hasselblad that is.

You can get an original Hasselblad EL/500 body on eBay for about $200.  Since you bought a $10,000 bike or some such, I think you can afford it.  Too bad you didn't do enough research before you tried on this latest sock puppet.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hasselblad-500-EL-M-camera-w-Carl-Zeiss-120-m-m-lens-medium-format-SLR-complete-/251208794897?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item3a7d360311
« Last Edit: January 09, 2013, 04:22:52 PM by JayUtah »
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams