THE UNIVERS I TY OF MI CH I GAN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING Department of Electrical Engineering Space Physics Research Laboratory Final Report DIURNAL SURVEY OF THE THERMOSPHERE D. R. Taeusch G. R. Carignan A. F. Nagy H. B. Niemann ORA Project 07446 under contract with: NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION GEORGE C. MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER CONTRACT NO. NAS8-20232 HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA administered through: OFFICE OF RESEARCH ADMINISTRATION ANN ARBOR October 1967

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Obviously the work reported herein required the skills of many individuals, and the complete success of the experiments would not have been possible without the outstanding assistance of each one concerned. Special recognition should go to A. J. Taiani and A. T. Marchese of the Kennedy Space Center and to the launch, the radar, the telemetry, and the ground support crews at the Kennedy Space Center for their complete cooperation and excellent performance. Special recognition goes to the Thiokol Corporation representatives and their vehicles for the 100% performance demonstrated. We also want to express our appreciation to Dr. J. P. McClure and his co-workers of the Jicamarca Observatory, Dr. H. C. Carlson and Dr. R. Wand and their co-workers at the Arecibo Observatory, and W. Abel and his co-workers at the Millstone Hill Facility for making the backscatter measurements in cooperation with our experiments and for providing us with their results. Just recognition of those of the Space Physics Research Laboratory of the University of Michigan who have contributed to the success of this effort would require the personnel list of some 100 employees; however, some of those with specific responsibilities are listed below: Campbell, B. J. Design Draftsman Carter, M. F. Data Analyst Crosby, D. F. Electron Temperature Probe Engineer Freed, P. L. Head Technician Grim, G. K. Support Electronics Engineer Halpin, R. Technician Kennedy, B. C. Omegatron Engineer Lee, T. B. Electron Temperature Probe Engineer Maurer, J. C. Payload Engineer McCormick, D. Machinist Poole, G. Head Programmer Simmons, R. W. Data Processing Manager Street, M. D. Technician iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vii 1. INTRODUCTION1 2. BACKGROUND FOR THE EXPERIMENT 2 2.1 Neutral Particles 2 2.2 Charged Particles 2 3. GENERAL FLIGHT INFORMATION 5 4. LAUNCH VEHICLE 14 5. NOSE CONE 18 6. MARSHALL-UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN PROBE (MUMP) 23 6.1 Omegatron 23 6.2 Electrostatic Probe 59 6.3 Support Measurement and Instrumentation 60 6.3.1 Aspect Determination System 60 6.3.2 Telemetry 69 6.3.3 Housekeeping Monitors 78 7. ENGINEERING RESULTS 79 8. ANALYSIS OF DATA 80 8.1 Trajectory and Minimum Angle of Attack 80 8.2 Ambient N2 Density and Temperature 80 8.3 Electron Temperature and Density 109 8.4 Geophysical Indices 111 9. CONCLUSIONS 125 9.1 N2 Density and Temperature 125 9.2 Charged Particle Temperature and Density 131 10. REFERENCES 137 APPENDIX. DETE.RMI.AT IOaN O THE TOTAL PAYLOAD MOMENTS OF INERTIA 4I iv

LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Table of Events -- MUMP 1 6 II. Table of Events -- MUMP 2 7 III. Table of Events -- MUMP 3 8 IV. Table of Events -- MUMP 4 9 V. Table of Events -- MUMP 5 10 VI. Table of Events -- MUMP 6 11 VII. Table of Events -- MUMP 7 12 VIII. Table of Events -- MUMP 8 13 IX. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 1 25 X. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 2 27 XI. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 3 29 XII. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 4 31 XIII. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 5 33 XIV. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 6 35 XV. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 7 37 XVI. Omegatron Data -- MUMP 8 39 XVII. Ambient N9 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP I 83 XVIII. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 2 84 XIX. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 3 85 XX. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 4 86 v

LIST OF TABLES (Concluded) Table Page XXI. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 5 87 XXII. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 6 88 XXIII. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 7 89 XXIV. Ambient N2 Density and Neutral Particle Temperature for MUMP 8 90 vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Nike-Tomahawk with MUMP payload. 15 2. Nike-Tomahawk with MUMP payload. 16 3. Nike-Tomahawk dimensions. 17 4. Payload diagram for a day shot. 19 5. Payload diagram for a night shot. 20 6. Thermosphere probe in nose cone. 21 7. Assembly drawing, 8-in. nose cone. 22 8. Thermosphere probe assembly. 41 9. Block diagram (lunar and solar). 42 10. Assembled thermosphere probe. 43 11. Omegatron expanded view. 44 12. Omegatron breakoff unit. 45 13. Omegatron envelope. 46 14. Omegatron magnet assembly. 47 15. Calibration system. 48 16. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 1. 49 17. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 2. 50 18. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 3. 51 19. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 4. 52 20. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 5. 53 21. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 6. 54 22. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 7. 55 23. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 8. 56 24. Electrostatic probe dimensions. 58 vii

LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Page 25. Electrostatic probe timing and computer channel format. 59 26. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 1. 61 27. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 2. 62 28. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 3. 63 29. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 4. 64 30. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 5. 65 31. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 6. 66 32. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 7. 67 33. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 8. 68 34. Trajectory program output format. 91 35. Omegatron current vs. flight time. 92 36. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 1. 93 37. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 2. 94 38. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 3. 95 39. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 4. 96 40. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 5. 97 41. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 6. 98 42. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 7. 99 43. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 8. 100 44. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 1. 101 45. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 2. 102 46. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 3. 103 47. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 4. 104 viii

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Figure Page 48. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 5. 105 49. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 6. 106 50. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 7. 107 51. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 8. 108 52. Typical log current vs. potential plot from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 8. 112 53. Electron temperature template with no ion current correction. 113 54. Electron temperature template with ion current correction. 113 55. Basic electron density template. 113 56. Electron density template superimposed on data curve. 113 57. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 1. 114 58. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 2. 115 59. Charged particle results from the-electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 3. 116 60. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 4. 117 61. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 5. 118 62. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 6. 119 63. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 7. 120 64. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 8. 121 ix

LIST OF FIGURES (Concluded) Figure Page 65. The solar flux at 10.7 cm wavelength. 122 66. Three hour geomagnetic activity index (ap) (January 24, 1967). 123 67. Three hour geomagnetic activity index (ap) (April 25, 1967). 124 68. N2 density vs. altitude. 127 69. N2 temperature vs. altitude. 128 70. N2 density vs. local solar time. 129 71. N2 temperature vs. local solar time. 130 72. Diurnal variation of the measured electron temperatures. 133 73. Diurnal variation of the calculated electron energy loss rates. 134 74. Comparison between the charged particle temperatures measured by the Langmuir probe and the ones obtained by Thomson scatter measurements (January 24, 1967). 135 75. Comparison between the charged particle temperatures measured by the Langmuir probe and the ones obtained by Thomson scatter measurements (April 25, 1967). 136 1. Test setup (appendix). 145 2. Test setup (appendix). 146 3. Instrument package test setup (appendix). 147 x

1. INTRODUCTION The results of the launchings of eight Marshall-University of Michigan Probes (MUMP), Nike-Tomahawk sounding rocket payloads are summarized in this report. The MUMP is similar to the Thermosphere Probe (TP), described by Spencer, Brace, Carignan, Taeusch and Niemann (1965), which was developed by the Space Physics Research Laboratory of The University of Michigan jointly with the Goddard Space Flight Center, Laboratory for Atmospheric and Biological Science. The MUMPS were developed by the Space Physics Research Laboratory for the Marshall Space Flight Center, Aero-Astrodynamics Laboratory. The purpose of the payloads was to study the variability of the earth's atmospheric parameters in the altitude region between 120 and 350 km. The payloads described herein each included an omegatron mass analyzer (Niemann and Kennedy, 1966), an electron temperature probe (Spencer, Brace and Carignan, 1962), and an aspect determination system consisting principally of a lunar or a solar sensor. This complement of instruments permitted the determination of the molecular nitrogen density and temperature, the electron density and temperature, and the ion density in the altitude range of approximately 140 to 320 km over Cape Kennedy, Florida. Six of the MUMP payloads described herein were launched on January 24, 1967, for the purpose of establishing the diurnal variation of the thermosphere under relatively quiet solar activity levels. The additional two payloads were launched on April 25, 1967, as a follow-on day-night pair to reestablish the maximum-minimum density and temperature values for this day. A general description of the payload kinematics, the orientation analysis, and the technique for the reduction of the data is given by Taeusch, Carignan, Niemann and Nagy (1965). The reduction of the data was performed at the Space Physics Research Laboratory and the results are included in the present report. 1

2 BACKGROUND FOR THE EXPERIMENT 2.1 NEUTRAL PARTICLES It has been established that the atmospheric parameters above 100 kilometers altitude vary temporarily because of the variable nature of the solar energy input. The primary variations are periodic following the eleven-year sunspot cycle of our sun, the twenty-four hour diurnal cycle of our rotating earth, and the yearly seasonal cycle due to the latitude change of the sub-solar point on earth. Also, two secondary variations have been observed. A twenty-seven day variation has been observed by Jacchia (1963) and has been correlated with the solar decimeter flux and the twenty-seven day rotational period of the sun. A semi-annual variation, observed by Paetzold and Zschorner (1960) and by Jacchia (1964), is believed to be due to changes in atmospheric circulation when the sub-solar point is near the'equator (soltices) (Johnson, 1964). In terms of the magnitudes of the periodic variations, the elevenyear solar cycle dominates the general atmospheric behavior. Jacchia (1964) reports that the maximum daytime exospheric temperature varies from about 2100~K to about 800~K during the five-and-one-half year interval from maximum to minimum solar activity. The effect of this temperature variation on the atmospheric density is large and variable with altitude, since the scale heights of the constituents change by about a factor of 2.6 during this time. The diurnal variation in temperature depends upon the latitude and the time of year; however, Jacchia (1964) has stated that the maximum variation has been observed to be approximately 30 per cent from subsolar to anti-solar locations on earth and that this diurnal percentage variation is relatively constant for all levels of solar activity. The observed semi-annual temperature variations are on the order of 15 to 20 per cent with the July minimum deeper —than the January minimum and the October maximum higher than the April maximum because of a superimposed "annual" effect (Jacchia, 1964). The twenty-seven day variation is on the order of 10 per cent at low latitudes which makes it difficult to observe during periods of variable solar activity. An attempt to describe the above mentioned variations usually results in "model" atmosphere, which, for the thermosphere, predicts the diurnal variation of atmospheric parameters for various solar activity levels. Most of the models to date are based on satellite drag data, because of the limited number of measurements by other means. Therefore, the models reflect-variations as deduced from these data (Jacchia, 1960; J "acchia, 1961; Harris and Priester, 1964; McElroy, 1964; CIRA, 1965). The major problem to date is that the data, on which the models are based, yield total density and temperature as the derived quantities. Therefore, model composition values are deduced from 2

assumed diffusion levels and assumed total densities well below the lowest altitude where drag data are available. The required assumptions are usually in the form of establishing a constant pressure, temperature, density,and composition at 120 km for all times of day and all levels of solar activity. These assumptions cause relatively small predicted variation in densities, during all variable conditions, up to about 200 km. Undoubtedly these predictions do not give a good physical picture of the real atmospheric behavior at altitudes between 120 and 200 km, as is borne out by recent direct measurements utilizing the Thermosphere Probe (Spencer, et al., 1965a,b). Therefore, it is apparent that the description of atmospheric behavior in the thermosphere must consider variability of the parameters at 120 km and lower. With these facts in mind, more measurements of atmospheric parameters in the 120 to 300 km region are required, if the variability in this region is to be understood. To date, aeronomy satellites have not been used to measure parameters in the lower region because of the resulting shortened lifetime. Also, satellite measurements do not provide good altitude-density profiles. Instrumented sounding rockets provide the desired data essentially only for one time of day at one geographical location. Separating the various effects previously discussed from data obtained at different times of year, day, latitude, etc., is an almost impossible task; and, therefore, a problem exists of how best to utilize a given payload to provide data of maximum usefulness. Measurements to be made in the next year or so will not be capable in themselves of yielding information on the eleven-year solar cycle effect. Therefore, it is reasonable to attempt to make all measurements when solar activity is at the same level for each; thus, only the diurnal, the semi-annual, and the seasonal variations remain to be investigated. Of these, the diurnal variation is the most significant. Measurements of atmospheric parameters over the time period-of one earth rotation would yield much information bearing on the atmospheric time constant and response to the energy input which, in turn, bears on currently assumed rate coefficients for the various physical processes. Measurements of the density profiles of neutral nitrogen yield neutral particle temperature with an estimated error of ~ 5 per cent (Spencer, et al., 1965a,b), if one assumes that hydrostatic equilibrium exists. Since a discrepancy exists between model diurnal variations of temperature as deduced from satellite drag data, (Jacchia, 1965a,b; Harris and Priester, 1964), the sounding rocket techniques should be able to add significantly to the value of the extensive drag results by yielding better diurnal temperature variation information for input to future models. 2.2 CHARGED PARTICLES Studies of the diurnal behavior of the electron densities in the E and bottomside F-region began with the introduction of the ionosonde 3

many years ago. The advent of direct probings by rockets and satellites provided the opportunity of making detailed density measurements in the D, E, and lower F-region and provided the first opportunity for measurements in the topside ionosphere. Rocket and satellite-borne Langmuir probes were also the first to make measurements of the electron and ion temperatures in the ionosphere (Krassovsky, 1959; Boggess, et al., 1959; Bourdeau, et al., 1962; Nagy, et al., 1963). It is difficult to establish a true diurnal pattern by using data from satellite-borne experiments, because of the intricacies involved in separating latitude, longitude, altitude, and seasonal effects in the results obtained. It is also difficult to obtain a complete diurnal pattern by using data from rockets flown to date, because it is necessary to combine the results from numerous flights, carried out on different days sometimes under widely varying conditions. The incoherent backscatter technique (e.g., Evans, 1965a) is very well suited for diurnal measurements of electron density and electron and ion temperature. These measurements are, however, usually restricted to altitudes above about 200 km and have a height resolution of about 50 km. The usual time taken for the measurements of one complete profile by this technique is in the order of one hour, although consecutive measurements have been made during an eclipse (Evans, 1965b) in 15-minute time intervals. The purpose of the rocket program, which is described in this report, was to obtain information on the diurnal variation of the electron temperature and density as well as neutral particle temperature and density in an altitude range where good diurnal measurements are lacking. By the appropriate selection of the launch times, it was also possible to investigate a number of specific problems, which will be discussed briefly in Section 9. 4

3. GENERAL FLIGHT INFORMATION The general flight information for the MUMP payloads are tabulated below. The Table of Events for each flight, which follow on the next pages, gives flight times and altitudes of significant events occurring during the flight. Some of these have been estimated and are so marked. The others have been obtained from the telemetry records and radar trajectories, where applicable. Launch Date: January 24, 1967 Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Longitude: 28~ 27.5'N Latitude: 80~ 31.5'W MUMP Test (EST) G.M. Local Solar NO. Number Local Time Solar Zenith X Time Time Angle 8 ETR-1474 0400 0900 0326 132.4~ 6 ETR-1828 0651 1151 0618 95.6~ 3 ETR-1165 1009 1509 0935 60.0~ 1 ETR-0381 1434 1934 1400 55.50 2 ETR-0611 1750 2250 1712 90.0~ 7 ETR-0851 2200 0300 2126 143.70 Launch Date: April 25, 1967 MUMP Test (EST) G.M. Local Solar NO. Number Local Time Solar Zenith X Time Time Angle 4 ETR-1942 0130 0630 0055 135.3~ 5 ETR-4803 1400 1900 1325 27.8~ 5

TABLE I TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 0381 Mump 1 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.587 1o4 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.137 7.0 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 21.158 20.7 (est.) Despin 43.083 71.3 TP Ejection 44.878 75.2 Omegatron Breakoff 79.904 144.2 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 80.440 146.7 Peak Altitude 287.74 336.12 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 547.0 39.0 Launch Date: January 24, 1967 Launch Time: 19:33:59.940 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 336.12 km Horizontal Velocity: 471,10 m/sec Flight Time: 287.74 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.514 sec Roll Rate -50 deg/sec 6

TABLE II TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 0611 MUMP 2 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 4.0 (est.) 1.6 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 13.0 (est.) 7.2 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 21.5 (est.) 20.5 (est.) Despin 41.0t.) 66. (est.) TP Ejection 42.862 69.7 Omegatron Breakoff 78.320 139.5 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 78.704 140.2 Peak Altitude 279.96 319.58 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omeqatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 541.0 24.0 Launch Date: January 24, 1967 Launch Time: 22:50:00.428 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 319.58 km Horizontal Velocity: 457.24 m/sec Flight Time: 279.96 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 3.32 sec Roll Rate: 0 deg/sec 7

TABLE III TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 1165 MUMP 3 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.45 (est.) 1.7 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.002 7.2 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 20.434 20.6 (est.) Despin 43.352 72.0 (est.) TP Ejection 44.822 76.0 (est.) Omegatron Breakoff 77.532 138.8 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 78.335 140.1 Peak Altitude 382.61 324.22 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 543.0 30.0 Launch Date: January 24, 1967 Launch Time: 15:08:54.448 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 324.22 km Horizontal Velocity: 551.69 m/sec Flight Time: 282.61 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.086 sec Roll Rate: -125 deg/sec 8

TABLE IV TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 1942 MUMP 4 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.524 1.4 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.0 (est.) 7.0 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 21.926 21.0 (est.) Despin 43.734 71.9 TP Ejection 46.557 78.2 Omegatron Breakoff 78.121 142.0 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 78.719 143.1 Peak Altitude 287.971 337.511 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 546.0 43.0 Launch Date: April 25, 1967 Launch Time: 06:30:00.499 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 337.511 km Horizontal Velocity: 384.41 m/sec Flight Time: 287.971 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.160 sec Roll Rate: 0 deg/sec

TABLE V TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 4803 MUMP 5 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.574 1.4 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.480 7.0 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 21.398 21.0 (est.) Despin 44.5 (est.) 74.7 (est.) TP Ejection 47.2 (est.) 80.6 (est.) Omegatron Breakoff 76.704 139.9 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 77.373 141.1 Peak Altitude 286.68 334.73 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 548.0 34.0 Launch Date: April 25, 1967 Launch Time: 19:00:00.110 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 334.733 km Horizontal Velocity: 419.65 m/sec Flight Time: 286.680 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.497 sec Roll Rate: -46 deg/sec 10

TABLE VI TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 1828 MUMP 6 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.830 2.0 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.160 7.2 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 20.878 20.8 (est.) Despin 43.292 71,5 (est.) TP Ejection 45.286 76.0 (est.) Omegatron Breakoff 75.697 135.0 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 76.435 136.6 Peak Altitude 283.190 324.8 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 548.0 24.0 Launch Date: January 24, 1967 Launch Time: 11:51:26.420 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 324.82 km Horizontal Velocity: 574.79 m/sec Flight Time: 283.190 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.137 sec Roll Rate: -50 deg/sec 11

TABLE VII TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 0851 MUMP 7 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.4 (est.) 1.4 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.000 7.0 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 21.0 (est.) 20.7 (est.) Despin 43.0 (est.) 70.2 TP Ejection 45.751 76.2 Omegatron Breakoff 66.994 119.3 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 67.681 121.9 (est.) Peak Altitude 283.97 327.3 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 539.0 39.0 Launch Date: January 25, 1967 Launch Time: 3:00:00.059 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 327.3 km Horizontal Velocity: 525.75 m/sec Flight Time: 283.97 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.511 sec Roll Rate: -200 deg/sec 12

TABLE VIII TABLE OF EVENTS ETR 1474 MUMP 8 Event Flight Time Altitude Remarks (sec) (km) Lift Off 0 0 1st Stage Burn Out 3.122 1.4 (est.) 2nd Stage Ignition 12.265 7.2 (est.) 2nd Stage Burn Out 21.240 20.8 (est.) Despin 42.898 71.2 (est.) TP Ejection 45.301 75.8 (est.) Omegatron Breakoff 78.271 140.3 Omegatron Filaments On. M28 78.968 141.6 Peak Altitude 282.928 325.36 Omegatron to Mass 16 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 32 Not Applicable Omegatron to Mass 28 Not Applicable L.O.S. 539.0 36.0 Launch Date: January 24, 1967 Launch Time: 9:00:00.252 GMT Location: Cape Kennedy, Florida Apogee Parameters: Altitude: 325.36 km Horizontal Velocity: 506.44 m/sec Flight Time: 282c928 sec TP Motion: Tumble Period: 1.546 sec Roll Rate: -25 deg/sec 13

4. LAUNCH VEHICLE The launch vehicles used for each flight were a two-stage NikeTomahawk combination. The first stage, the solid propellant Nike booster, has an average thrust of 49,000 lb and burns for approximately 3.5 sec. The Nike is 135 in. long, 16.5 in. in diameter, and weighs 1338 lb unburned. The center of gravity (CG) was 75.7 in. from the nozzle exit plant (NEP). The second stage was Thiokol's Tomahawk solid propellant motor. The average thrust is approximately 11,000 lb and it burns for about 9 sec. The Tomahawk, 142 in. long and 9 in. in diameter, weighs 530 lb unburned. The CG was 72.125 in. from the NEP. The payloads were 78.4 in. long and weighed 132 lb. The total vehicle was 355 in. long and weighed 2000 lb. Drawings and photographs of the vehicle are given in Figures 1, 2, and 3. The predicted performance for the vehicle was 322 km peak altitude at 281 sec flight time. The actual performances were discussed in the previous section. 14

.......::: 8r::: 0 # 0 d~~~~~~~......: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~j,.j HX.........: A. -.:2*.*5,.,,*s. 2 -........,.*o f,. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...........; X X..' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~....... \..: 1,: s*>::> s>*s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~.. *...........,.a:.;s*.t,............... ~~~~~~~~~~.*:::......................:::*....::.:::::::: ~~~~~~~~~~~"*s,w4 S8s.:..::__.......................: Sit~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~................ 1.~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.................................................... SR~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~............................." X f B | etf;,.,,,,.,,,....,.........,........ g g i —+ggi ii iisi~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.......... j~~~joissi~~~~~~~~ii*6*W9Ev f g., S S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~v g * *~~~................:.. ~ ~ ~ ~.9 9 lg........... I~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~*S ~..........,... ig.-...................1 t...............,vS sg.:>:s:.:*>lt.^BBv;S.p...:..s...................................~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~........................................................

91,1'po~rVO -r, W Ya24~tuUd. _, ayN Z xmT W.OW t~~~~~~l ~~~~i~~~~~~i~~~~~~i ~ ~.......... ~~:3~:~.~jr:~~::~:~~~~:i: ~ ~~::i~::i~igi~:: I:::::::i:::_:-:i~~~~i:_:::::::i~~i~i~i~........................ i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..... Bili;~i~~~~~~~~~~iiiii::~iiii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~:iiiiilii:_i:;lli ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~..........:::::::~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.........,::::::::::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..... ~~~............ iii-; i~~~~~~~~i:::::::i~~~~~~~~~ii;;ilii....i.................... F::::::~~~~~~~~~~....... i::::::~~~~~~~~~.......:'i:::: - -::l~-_i::::-l:-::........................ii iii li:iii ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~::-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.........:::::~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~............. ir::::'::::::::'::::::::::::-:':-::::-:::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~......... -:':::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.....................................................::::::-::':: ii:: I::-::-::-::::::..................... -::~...........::::::::~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..................... _-::-:-r~~~~~~~i:::il-_: -:::::::-:::::::: -:::::::::_:::::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~....... i::::::::-:::::........................... I-:j::...........................:`:~d~i-i-ii~iiliiii-l~i:::: l -:l::irl~i I'i~l iiii iiiii ii'i............iii.............:::::ir:::i::r:i::::::::::::: ii i ii i i ii i i iii i............iilii~iiiiiiii....................i:::::::::::: ~~~ii~~~iii~~~i~~~~~i~~i~~:~~~i~~~~i~~Xi~~i:~~~ii..........................~ ~......................................................................................................................................................................... -.1..........................................................................................

a-=-.......... — 367.7 = 145.2 -141.1 —--- 7. 4 36.6 59.936 -- 65 DIA. 9 I' A. FIRST STAGE SECOND STAGE PAYLOAD.H NIKE BOOSTER TOMAHAWK ORDNANCE ITEMS ~~~~ORD ~NA NCE I ~TEMS XFIRING DESPIN UNIT O NOSE CONE OPENING PRIMERS. O BREAKOFF LINEAR ACTUATORS O DESPIN INITIATION PRIMERS O SECOND STAGE IGNITER ) NIKE BOOS TER IGNITER Figure 3. Nike-Tomahawk dimensions.

5o NOSE CONE A diagram of a day shot of a typical payload including nose cone, despin mechanisms, and adapter sections is shown in Figure 4. Figure 5 shows a typical payload of a night shoto The weights, dimensions, and instrumentation placement are also given on the figures. Figure 6 is a photograph of the TP in the nose cone. An assembly drawing of the 8" nose cone is given in Figure 7. The payload is programmed to despin at about 70 km altitude, and the MUMP is ejected and tumbled at about 75 km. The breakoff device is removed at about 110 km, and the omegatron filaments are turned on a few seconds later. The timing for each particular payload has been described previously. A determination of the total payload moments of inertia, performed at The Bendix Systems Division in Ann Arbor, is included in their report in the appendix. Figures 76 through 78 show the test setup and the instrument package test setup. 18

NASA T.P. NO. MUMP- (DAY SHOT) TYPE OF ROCKET NIKE - TOMAHAWK DATE OF SHOT JANUARY 24,1967 S.0 LOCATION CAPE KENNEDY TIME_________ ALTITUDE_ I 00 RESULTS - DATA OK MISC. NOTES -I. DAY SHOT OMIS E..P. -2. 0 8 0 OSCILLATORS REMOVED FROM OSC DECKS -3. DESPIN FLOWN SECTION I CG.=43.63 25.56 I. OMEI ASS'Y 0. OMES ADAPTER OE. MES RAMP 4 REG DECK-.OSC ECK S. AUX DECK 14.0 1L^~~~ 9j9~36.09 S ECTION 2 --- I. 3 ADCOLE ASPECT SENSOR 12.6 739 2. ELECTRONICS FOR SENSOR 30.44 5 3. SINGLE PROBE SECTION SCM L I. TRANSMITTER S SATT. DECK WEIGHT 50-13 LB S.t ESP DECKt -AT. D ECK S. SCP DECK. SCOMM DECK CONTROL DECK WEIGHT 82.75 LU TOTAL WEIHT OF PROSE AND NOSE CONE 132.88 LI Figure 4. Payload diagram for a day shot. 19

NASA _______ T.P. NO. MUMP- (NIGHT SHOT) TYPE OF ROCKET NIKE - TOMAHAWK DATE OF SHOT JANUARY 24,1967.* i LOCATION CAPE KENNEDY TIME ___________________ ALTITUDE =._ B._ RESULTS - DATA OK MISC. NOTES -I. NIHT SHOT OME$ E.S.P. -2. O & 02 OSCILLATORS REMOVED FROM OSC DECKS -3. DESPIN FLOWN SECTION I C184i, I. ONES ASS'Y O O t. OMNE ADAPTER I. OMES AMP 4. RES DECK,. OM X DECK S OSC DECK I T. 0C DECK I I AUX DIOCK 14.0 j__L ^36.09 SECTION 2 --- 12., 70.39 I. SINGLE PROBE 30.44 3 SECTION 3 1. TRANSMITTER & BATT. DECK WEIGHT 4888 LU WEIGHT 4 8.88O LB D t. E8P DECK. SCO DECK fo a 4. COMM DECK 6 S. CONTROL DICK 6. LUNAR ASPECT SENSOR WEIGHT 82.75 LB TOTAL WEIGHT OF PROBE AND NOSE CONE.13.63 LB Figure 5. Payload diagram for a night shot. 20

s " I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i~~~~~~J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'i:$ii''i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i::i:i-l:::::::::: a ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:ii —:::ii-:::-:::-:::::-: ~::::::::~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.:~~~~~~~~~~~-:._-I-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ":-::::,::::::i::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~~~:i:::::::::::~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ X~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~:~::::~: ~:::::::::: iiliII - ~~~~~~~. I. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ -..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~..:: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~:: ~~~~~~~I. - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~::: ~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.. I-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i:. ~ ~ ~ I~ -., -.. ~.~..,........~~.....,.,.....,...~..~.......~..~.......-. —.-.-.-~ —.-.....~.....~.................................................... ~......................................... - - I.... -.. - - - -................... ~ ~ ~ ~ -................ 1 I....................... -.......... - -. -........~..- -.............-........ ~..........~.......~.............%.~....~..~ ~....~.................~..~.....~~~........,..~~...~.~...,..-... - -...,,..................ij...:i.~............... ~....... ~~~.. I.-. - -..1...I- -. -~....:............ - ~I ~. ~ ~.,.. -..... --.-.... — ~-.... -.: —... —,:.:.:.............:.,..i.:.....'.:...i::-. -.....,,', -.1.:.1..- 1 ^. i'i...... i............~....... - - ~~. ~. -.. ~ ~........................ -.... -., -. -....... - -:-.. -..........:...-... -.........~............ —.......- ~..- -. ~,. —..,..~....~......~.,........-..~- -... —-:,- -.~.~....:........-......:.... -. - - - - -...................-:. —-. —-..:......,..-..- —... - - - - 1 I.... - -. -... -... - - -... -.....:....... -.......~......1-....- -- - - 1- l.....- -.. I.. - -. - I - ~'. - - - -... -.:.... I.. ~ —..... --- -,-....-....... ~ ~..,~,.~.:j~.,.~. - 1. 1..- -..... -....-~...~..-.. -.~....- -... -.~....... --..... I........... -. - -.. -.. - -. I.. - - 1. -.... g..:-................. ~.. -. - -~.. ~ ~...............1 -..1........- -... - -...... - -.......~..~~ ~-..-~.. -~.-~ ~.~.............~......~...,.'... - -~. -...... - ~...~. - I....... - -.. -. 1.. I.. I....-.- -...I.......:......`...I.... - ~.. ~~ ~. - - -. - I.... -.. - ~ ~ I:.:.::::.- -.. - ~ ~ - - - -... - 1. -.... - -.....~............ ~ ~''.,.~....~~..~~.~.~~~....,...~~'. - - -. ~.. -... ~ ~........ - ~ 11- 11- 1- 11- - -..... ~ I- -.........~....... -....... -.... - I..... ~~. ~ ~ -.....~.....................~...... - -.........I.........~~... 1. - - I ~............I....~... - -.. ~ ~ 1.... ".. ~ ~~.... 1.1-..... - 1.... - ~..... ~-.........I...-:... -........:.. ~..- I- -..1-, -. 1., —-....%,,.-.- ~.::i ~ ~ - - - ~......,,,..-....~......~.....-............. -.......- ~......- - - -...... ~..1 1-1.... -.-..... ~., ~ - - ~.......~......... I.. ~~ ~.~.. I. I..~ - -....~.. -.. ~..-... - -.. - - -... - - - - --....,....-.",'....,..-,...,'...,... ~...,......... -..l-..'.-....,,~~.~.~'...~.....~..,.~~.....I.........~... - - - - - -. -........- - -~..... —-~...~..1 ~.. —~..~..~......k14-,.a.a....r.. %...... F ip -.1~ —-...-~~ -, e,-....::::,::., T —. —..-...............,.t.....to.r...~.~'.~,............e.re p..,...... r...I o.Ib e i.,". -,n -- % -..'",..'.".44r.... " ". 1. -...e.c -.o.-.-.%.n 444....

Er"K 7' I $ECTIONDD (D SECTION E E P FICTION C C Ar- -7c SECTION BB E:67 F r-71....... SITE rl "I ;/j SEQTIOI VIEW E E _L. El. 9 1-IfR SECTioN AA Figure 7. Assembly drawing, 8-in. r

6 MARSHALL-UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN PROBE (MUMP) The MUMP, a cylinder 30.44 in. long and 7.25 in. in diameter, weighs 50 lbo The prime instruments for this payload are an omegatron mass analyzer and an electron temperature probe unit. Supporting instrumentation includes a lunar or solar aspect sensor for the determination of the TP aspect. The diagram in Figure 8 shows the instrumentation and supporting electronics location, and Figure 9 shows the block diagram. Figure 10 is a picture of the completely assembled TP. 6 1 OMEGATRON The omegatron used in these payloads was of the type described by Niemann and Kennedy (1966). An expanded view of the system is shown in Figure 11. Tables 9 through 16 list the operating parameters of the gauge and associated electronics. The characteristics of the linear electrometer amplifier current detector, used to monitor the omegatron output current, are also listed. These omegatrons are essentially identical to those flown previously on NASA's 18.02 and 18.03 (Taeusch and Carignan, 1966a,b). The breakoff unit, omegatron envelope, and omegatron magnet assembly are shown in Figures 12, 13, and 14o The calibrations of all omegatrons were performed in December and January preceding the launch. The vacuum system used could accommodate four of the flight gauges at one time plus reference Bayard-Alpert ionization gauges used as secondary standards. A two-stage oil diffusion pump vacuum system was used as a pressure calibration system. To obtain extremely low oil backstreaming, the second stage oil diffusion pump was equipped with a cold cap and two six-inch Granville-Phillips liquid N2 cold traps. A typical background pressure, afte the system has been baked at 360~C for 48 hours, was about 2 x 10 torr. Dry nitrogen was leaked into the system as a calibration gas. Calibration data were taken from background pressures to 3 x 10-5 torr. Above this pressure the omegatron becomes highly nonlinear. Figure 15 is a photograph of an actual calibration set-up. Four omegatrons were calibrated at a time against four Bayard-Alpert ionization gauges (B-A gauges). The B-A gauges were used as secondary references. Two B-A gauges were previously calibrated by the Ball Brothers Corporation against a McLeod gauge. In order to provide continuity, one other gauge was used as reference from previous calibrations of earlier omegatron experiments. Since only four omegatrons could be calibrated at one time, to obtain an accurate 23

relative calibration of the omegatrons, combinations in pairs were used where each group was calibrated twice. Gauge outputs and all critical supply voltages were printed by a datum system employing a 50 channel time multiplexer, an NLS integrating digital voltmeter, and a Hewlett-Packard printer. Also, all gauge outputs were analog-recorded on an eight-channel Sanborn recorder. After calibration, the omegatrons were prepared for pinch-off in pairs, and their output currents were compared at two different pressures. Thus it was determined that no damage had been done to the instrument during reassembly. Calibration curves of the omegatrons are shown in Figures 16-23o The omegatron currents were plotted against particle number densities which were calculated from the reference pressure values 24

TABLE IX OMEGATRON DATA ETR 0381 MUMP 1 Omegatron Gauge Parameters: Beam Current: 2.02 pamps Electron Collector Bias: 77.65 volts Filament Bias: -91.50 volts Cage Bias: -0.194 volts Top Bias: -0.609 volts RF Amplitude: M28 3.70 V RF Freauency: M28 144.93 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 0.114 V ON: 3l183 V (steady) Beam OFF: 0,266 V ON: 3llo 114 V Thermistor Pressure Filament OFF: 4.368V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 4.013V Bias: 4.024 V RF: M28 3o740 V Calibration Sensitivity: 2.00 x 10 5 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 1.3 x 10-5 torr 25

TABLE IX (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Range Range Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 0.0 v 8.645 X 109 50066 2 0.7 v 2.350 x 1010 5.066 3 1.4 v 6.388 x 1010 5.066 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 1011 5.067 5 2.8 v 5.128 x 1011 5,068 6 3.5 v 1.434 x 1012 5.0714 7 4.2 v 4.047 x 1012 5.0807 8 4.9 v 9.700 x 1012 5.106 calibration voltage 0.571 v Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 300ma - Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 3.45 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2700 gauss 26

TABLE X OMEGATRON DATA ETR 0611 MUMP 2 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 2.005 pamps Electron Collector Bias: 77.22 volts Filament Bias: -92.87 volts Cage Bias: -0.209 volts Top Bias: -0.609 volts RF Amplitude: M28 4o00 V RF Frequency: M28 143.59 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 0.106 V ON: 3.091 V Beam OFF: 0.678 V ON: 2.916 V Thermistor Pressure Filament OFF: 2.140V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 2.000V Bias: 4 082 V RF: M28 3.694 V Calibration -5 Sensitivity: 1.82 x 10 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 9 x 10-6 torr 27

TABLE X (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Range Range Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 0.0 v 9.119 x 109 4.884 10 2 0.7 v 2.479 x 1010 4.884 3 1.4 v 6.738 x 101 4.884 11 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 101 4.884 5 2.8 v 4.979 x 101 4.885 6 3.5 v 1.353 x 1012 4.887 7 4.2 v 4.047 x 1012 4.897 8 4.9 v 1.00 x 1013 4.902 calibration voltage 0.524 v Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 370 ma Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 5.9 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2680 gauss 28

TABLE XI OMEGATRON DATA ETR 1165 MUMP 3 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 1.99 pamps Electron Collector Bias: 78.24 volts Filament Bias: -92.10 volts Cage Bias: -0.204 volts Top Bias: -0.602 volts RF Amplitude: M28 4.00 V RF Frequency: M28 140.06 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 0.108 V ON: 3.199 V Beam OFF: 0.350 V ON: 3.700 V Thermistor Pressure: Filament OFF: 2.333V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 2.110V Bias: 4.129 V RF: M28 3.548 V Calibration Sensitivity: 1.96 x 105 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 1.2 x 10 torr 29

TABLE XI (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Range Range Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 000 v 8.483 x 109 4.980 2 0.7 v 2.306 x 1010 4.980 3 1.4 v 6.268 x 1010 4.980 11 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 101 4.981 5 2.8 v 5.049 x 1011 4.981 12 6 3.5 v 1.361 x 1012 4.987 7 4.2 v 3.746 x 1012 5.000 8 4.9 v 9.538 x 1012 5.029 calibration voltage 0.577 volts Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 375 ma -6 Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 5.6 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2620 gauss 30

TABLE XII OMEGATRON DATA ETR 1494 MUMP 4 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 2.00 pamps Electron Collector Bias: 77.58 volts Filament Bias: -89.45 volts Cage Bias: -.2010 volts Top Bias: -.599 volts RF Amplitude: M28 3.90 V RF Frequency: M28 136.68 kHz Monitor Filament OFF:.1104 V ON: 3.165 V Beam OFF: 0.270 V ON: 3.454 V Thermistor Pressure: Filament OFF: 2.086V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 1.917V Bias: 4.093 V RF: M28 3.698 V Calibration Sensitivity: 2.03 x_0 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 7 x 10 torr 31

TABLE XII (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Rang Ranange Indicator Range Resistor M28.ZPV 1 0.0 v 9.119 x 109 5.003 10 2 0.7 v 2.479 x 101 5.003 3 1.4 v 6.738 x 1010 5.003 11 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 10 5.0015 5 2.8 v 4.979 x 101 4.999 6 3.5 v 1.353 x 1012 4,987 7 4.2 v 3.679 x 102 4.973 8 4.9 v 1.000 x 1013 4.918 calibration voltaae 0.663 v Miscellaneous +29 power current all on: 320 ma Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 14 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2540 gauss 32

TABLE XIII OMEGATRON DATA ETR 4803 MUMP 5 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 2.005 pamps Electron Collector Bias: 77.45 volts Filament Bias: -89.27 volts Cage Bias: -0.204 volts Top Bias: -0.604 volts RF Amplitude: M.28 3.98 V RF Frequency: M28 143.43 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 0.115 V ON: 3.036 V Beam OFF: 0.525 V ON: 3.471 V Thermistor Pressure: Filament OFF: 3.027V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 2.860V Bias: 4.115 V RF: M28 3.376 V Calibration -5 Sensitivity: 1.90 x 0 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 6 x 10 torr 33

TABLE XIII (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Rang Ranange Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 0.0 v 9.119 x 10 4.964 2 0.7 v 2.479 x 1010 4.964 10 3 1.4 v 6.738 x 10 4.964 11 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 10 4.963 5 2.8 v 4.979 x 1011 4.962 6 3.5 v 1.258 x 1012 4.96 12 7 4.2 v 3.863 x 102 4.950 8 4.9 v 1.130 x 10 4.926 calibration voltage 0.586 volts Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 390 ma Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 3.33 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2660 gauss 34

TABLE XIV OMEGATRON DATA ETR 1828 MUMP 6 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 2.02 liamps Electron Collector Bias: 76.5 volts Filament Bias: -89.95 volts Cage Bias: -0.206 volts Top Bias: -0.613 volts RF Amplitude: M28 4o00 V RF Frequency: P M28 139.12 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 0.113 V ON: 2 900 V Beam OFF: 0.600 V ON: 3.880 V Thermistor Pressure: Filament OFF: 2.283V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 2.136V Bias: 3.833 V RF: M28 3.797 V Calibration Sensitivity: 2.23 x 105 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 8 x 10-6 torr 35

TABLE XIV (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Range Range Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 0.0 v 9,119 x 10 5.028 10 2 0.7 v 2.479 x 101 5.028 3 1.4 v 6.738 x 1010 5.028 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 1011 5.029 11 5 2.8 v 5.037 x 101 5.030 6 3.5 v 1.435 x 1012 5034 7 4.2 v 4.016 x 1012 5.046 13 8 4.9 v 1.077 x 10 5.073 calibration voltage 0.648 v Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 320 ma Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 3.45 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2600 gauss 36

TABLE XV OMEGATRON DATA ETR 0851 MUMP 7 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 1.99 p amps Electron Collector Bias: 78.24 volts Filament Bias: -92.02 volts Cage Bias: -0.205 volts Top Bias: -0.601 volts RF Amplitude: M28 4.00 V RF Frequency: M28 143.23 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 0.112 V ON: 3.436 V Beam: OFF: 0.642 V ON: 3.886 V Thermistor Pressure: Filament OFF: 1.842V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 1.696V Bias: 4.099 V RF: M28 3e392 V Calibration Sensitivity: 2.03 x 105 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 7 x 10-6 torr 37

TABLE XV (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Range Range Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 0.0 v 9.119 x 109 5.062 10 2 0o7 v 2.479 x 101 5.062 3 1.4 v 6.738 x 1010 5.062 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 1011 5.062 5 2.8 v 4.979 x 101 5.062 6 3.5 v 1.353 x 1012 5.061 7 4.2 v 4.075 x 1012 5.061 8 4.9 v 1.123 x 1013 5.057 calibration voltage 0.622 v Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 400 ma 5 Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 2.5 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2660 gauss 38

TABLE XVI OMEGATRON DATA ETR 1474 MUMP 8 Omegatron Gauge Parameters Beam Current: 2o00 Iamps Electron Collector Bias: 78.70 volts Filament Bias: -89.80 volts Cage Bias: -.197 volts Top Bias: -.596 volts RF Amplitude: M28 4.00 V RF Frequency: P M28 143.42 kHz Monitor Filament OFF: 1025 V ON: 3o324 V Beam OFF:.8460 V ON: 4.129 V Thermistor Pressure: Filament OFF: 2.119V (zero pressure) Filament ON: 1.874V Bias: 4J188 V RF: M28 3.625 V Calibration Sensitivity: 2o12 x 105 amps/torr Maximum Linear Pressure (5%): 9 x 10-6 torr 39

TABLE XVI (CONCLUDED) Electrometer Amplifier Range Range Indicator Range Resistor M28ZPV 1 0.0 v 9.119 x 109 4.978 2 0.7 v 2.479 x 1010 4.978 3 1.4 v 6.738 x 1010 4.978 11 4 2.1 v 1.832 x 101 4.9771 5 2.8 v 4.953 x 1011 4.9715 5 3.5 v 1.330 x 1012 4.9712 7 4.2 v 3.374 x 1012 4.9613 8 4.9 v 9.087 x 1012 4.954 calibration voltage 0.459 v Miscellaneous +28 power current all on: 338 ma Preflight gauge pressure (N2): 3.8 x 10 torr Magnetic field strength: 2680 gauss 40

ViL^" / ^^^SO CENT~el ^r/^YA (H~~- (D// ) ~q B~~~~~~~ /2.75 3.750.37.5 -^A\ ^^B E \ —~-.<?50^ ^ zle*|.<,5-i —,- ~-2694- 2 -\.<869-, -37.S - -3.675- j Sa.438.37 - -j-a'z -s3 j'^/.ODO^- -- 3.500-^ | </3/ j A2 - 2.000 -1- -~ --— ^A -^^B -SC[^^E ______D J _ _gOVAA SECT^ol C C sEccTro D D sEC-Tlol E E -_ ^.-_^ g ^ ^ _____ CO"7eo-,EO XOkE- J 1,IQk fu /ieYP 7-e 0,5CIL LR^Tok POe' LqfVO YqRo O O/ ~^''~'*1T'.'"l,,- A' -^',7 K.""" SPACE PHYSISRSAC! AOAOY DONvC~~ti~A y f'>^ DEPARTMENT O LCRCLEGNEIG C.~o. ____ ~T -7 o THE U Qo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~_ ______________ 7 /=^, fv7r0 ~rr7~l InI~~, II~ Fg 8. Te sphere probe assembly. 419i b I

K&E 19-1133 11-63* PULL OFFS po2 po3 po4 __ po1 OMEGATRON SYSTEM VECTOR SCO'S amplifier OM SCO ledex oscillator A, CALIBRATOR control filament regulator gage mass timer CONTROL LEDEX moitor x */\ * —ito voltage monitors RAYMOND OM amp control / TIMER r BREAKOFF \ REFERENCE.cyt _ZZZ^__ ________ \ VOLTAGES control om — filament control POWER CONTROL I I COMM U TATOR 7.35 KC COMMI ext. power I PI ELECTROSTATIC 2 WAT' --- - -------- ^- / \ _____________ -^-T~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RANSM ITTE PROBE SYSTEM_________ \. ^ —---------------------------------------— ^ - ~40 KC ESP-D INTERNAL \ --------- 22KC ESP-F POWER ADCOLE SPRL 19THR-1 > ___ \Is SOLAR LUNAR ASPECT ASPECT SYSTEM SYSTEM XTMR POWER ESP7COMM/ASPECT POWER ENGINEER JM I DRA^"^^""^N ^^ ^ 7-21-65 SPACE PHYSICS RESEARCH LABORATORY BLOCK DIAGRAM OM/ESP TP 6^^ DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING MUMP 1-12-65 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN - 12 -12 - ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN BIE220A DATE Figure 9. Block diagram (lunar and solar). 42

.......................,,, l.l,

28 &WO FREQUENCY BEAM ADJUST 28 AMPLITUDE BIAS ADJUST "SPACE R R \EGULATOR AUXILIARY: & R a i \ ) DECK DECK OM EGATO OMEGATRON AMPLIFIER OMEGATRON ADAPTER \ "OM ENVELOPE | OMEGATRON SYSTEM - EXPANDED || \BREAK-OFF BREAK-OFF CONFLAT FLANGE Figure 11. Omegatron expanded view.

^/ -^" -"^-. 105 LOC^C. O3F /^V" ~~~~~A-02f 0- 075 -13 BREA -FF=P -UA"RP -^- ~^-.0<o2 APPIRQX. LOC. OF I G ECQ. 5PAC-ED ST:POT WE L-O Z> -OPE'RATION T-RROCE:IDURFE: __ _____ I. MACHINE:- C-CDgO-0T^ — 7BTEAK-OPTF" "BASE: WITHOUT _ _ ____ _ __7_________ CONP-LAT C=TRkOOVE:. 45 A g. MACHINE: C-020-07r-*BREEAK-OF-F- HAT t H-U - ARC. WELLrTD J _^g'^^ 3_TEANNaTMa___T^A^C MOP^IFIE-T-D C:RA\A/'FO'R'M 5WAG~E:LOK. ^^66QO-1(-4VJ -51( TO H AT {-D}4W36Z TAR"D HIGC.S/GLK(0 L^EAK CHIEC< HELI-A"RC WBLTD - r^U5T -BE: VAC:UUr- 7iGjHT7. -— ^I3 -UE- CUTR~- ---- 3.SEi ND'DETrA M C- -, C:- - Q COOT 5 -PORCEL -- -- -- --------------------------------- CO. -TO -BRAZE: COORS" ( P P CERAMIC SE:AL -RING~ -TO --------- IDE rAiLl-S C-020-0T - P - TT - ------- -----------— _____ 4. 5POT WELID A-020-OT5 — BRE:A-OFTF GSUAT RI T- C-02O~07T7 -__ __ ______ __ ________________ BREAW- - 0=P-c HA'T AT U. OF M. A=TER BZAZI MGi QVCEr TAM IC SE AL-. J___A-OaD-OT5-5__BRAK-OF P_ _ 5. LE~:A.k- CHEZCKe COM PLETE: UN!TN^.. J___C-OgO-OT4 - 4>__ R Q=BE_____ Ge.;71NAL MAC HI NINGQ CT= CO='A'_e~ROOyE: ON C-O0O -074__-4_'-OT 3_MGARN'RA.-F -PN E5RE-F-aK-OAls H~ a~r El.Oe~i~d~. ~F1~Ec~l ~BWA~I~ O~e~e~9aB~8~\gl S~AL.J___C-O'O-07Q- O B PEAK -FB AEUAT: SPACE PHYPSICS RESEARCH LABORATORY AWB yjyps R L _ " DEPARTMEN`T OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING ^AXQi'T ^ - THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN'^-OFF Ur^Ph~^tUU^fc ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN IA^S *^. _____________________OMEGATRQM T.PR MQ'~D, JT PROJECT UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED TOLERANCES ARE: ~ _ _ ~ —--------- DIM. ENDING.00 ~.010 ANGULA DIM. DG O.f ^ ^ \ ~'7 Figrure 1_2. Omegatron breakoff unit. 45

9v *-cGdo[GAuG uoaq-,BGsuo GTa-nS~id OO COO -a..; —^^^ ^.y _ ^.S-Sf f^O~~fJ.WSWO NV9IHOIN %iMHw HNV HJ.OVfSC7-'dA-L-f-{sf^ ^ yyA/y~jf~i/TyMCV^O-^t/^ff NVSIHOIW.10 AlliW3AiNn 3H.L /7 J& __ ff< A^ ^ ^F^ ^^^^z jfa^>7^A^k LVUVI -W -^ - U SDM&H 30vdS^/-~y j171&-' /^7C: F-T71W r S-A&L!9'Foo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,'00 vv 9-aso y~^y T [_!]os -5^^~~~~~~~~~~~~-C l^6^-f 00 J17 —^ ^74 *7f ___ ________________^~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Cf P0 ty'X ( ^t aAo&s ^ -ooy NO ^ ^' ^ ^. _. i -^ ^ic ^A/^o7 - -^^ ^^ -- ^^ ^S-A^PC0'.Y *-YC7 /E-0- -77 Sr, \- - ------- ------— V^ ^ —---— ^ " / " --- ^ ^ * )VO C73VI;A&!\ \H-fA ^~3 -/fy AtHAJ, 7bW Tgy*n *v7/< *gS370H77 \A? /___ S 7V &3~~~~~7(7~~~~ 0/0 c\PL k/ — -70 P/ Jol''VIA PO -^ /Vi ^ 2 5^ A ^ ^^3'/ -- _ __ ~^''c/2 o'rSSS/e - — \. - \'7 ^~~~\,^^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E 9/'A*h Vb OWWU /0w' 7'sf? 191 y\ ^^ / ^ ^ss^^^ ~ ~~~~~ 70^^Y -YjPM — tjf 0~Gf-"1 ----- --------- VI &7^ Ea*-^=^^^ ^^d -. jd W Z\./ SAOOS^ ^t<77 C/33C7 / / ~'C &c7 &VO' I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~W: 57 700 7 poMp,*^J /f/ 0^-dS'/C Q5 —'VIC ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~C^~S'~~0 S3!H*' /S^f~CNcc^c' -'- f-^,n -H ^^ c/^3CJ ff^/''V/CJ ^31'-*-f S'^OWefHS' O^JL 3S'3HJ- - W/0~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0.92

k&E 10 S1S4 " S-t8 _________________________'_ ^^.. y-34-5-O.D. AND.2GOTID.7U'BE_ /T BE. S NU G S.>F. IN BOT H ~.004- / S^DES OP7TM<RC~N~ET^~ -^ ------- 4.750 CENT. ---- ^ R5 5 V40WN 2 -PLACEZ' ->| 1. 500 [- FOL-TUBIN5 ONLY [_ )S~ TYP. --- - ^/ ^ ^ ^.062 TYR -- P. _ _ 1.00 0 CENT -7- - - —.- - - - -- < - - - - -( -- -- - | - \ I' \ ^ —.188T~~~~~~~DIA. 5. F. FOR -Da~g \ \ / / \ M~~~~~~~OTE: 7HIE5E HOLEZ^TO \ \ / / \ ~~~~~~MATCH -PtMS ON -ID)a HOTE: - ^.(^^ ^ ""^-""fe^ x -—.ZIOTE10 -DIA, THRU. ---- - || WORKC -TO -BE -DOM\E: ON 24- —'^^ HOL-t ^EZ>L-_ G~.E.MAGNELT75'WH1CH kVJ)LAL ~ 7~-~ t ^\7 - -- ~ 15E: PlJRNVZ:HZ.0 T-"^ LU.CF:M. / / /^ 1. MAGNET15 AT,~F NiM (2)-PAR"TS _ 7 ^/./^ -\/i SPLIT OM VERTICAL C: /.o - ^s U -5 2. E.1D.M. (Z) HOU-::S INJ EA-C H \^ ^ ^/ A y< //| - -MAGNET FOR — 2 (TOTMB& IN J "'' ^^ _.030 RAo. -TOF ^ BOTTOM /~ ilco ^ <^. E.IP.M. (A).010-DIA, HOlES / ^^^ 15. MATE'RkIAL OhJ MA',GNET- - --- ----— j ----- zM CnF EO G.. AG ET -TO -BE'REMOVEU B - - -r, — - - -r ------------- G M'ZNJDIMGi OT "-EI7 SAME: PREA, TFAKEN U'PI/ WHFERF& MAGNET FiTb l- _ ____-2 __:D -5 _ EN -T _ /.2N -ZP-C~Z TOn~FMET-,iEz TQ0 -BEL ~ _t. -, -- m - ---— 4 __ T."^S _ LCC WSE 4"_ _'AR<:R7E C=1201MI FL.AT ^I -.-1 --.... - - -- - -igT, -5 _ O.H.A C -8Fg.~ P'K RZ SQU^^.E: i; ----. —-.-. —— ~,OC 1~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~Z ~r~-SLEE2*150^C-^

Figure 15. Calibration System.

16~. I!> 10l z 0 03 ETR 0381, MUMP I 32S / SENSITIVITY: 1.61 x 102 PART/CC 0 AMP N2 RUN OF 12-7-66 AT SPRL, -13 / BA 7 VS. OMEGATRON -14 10 6 7 8 9 10 ii 12 10 107 10 109 10 10l 102 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC) 3-30-67 Figure 16. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 1.

10 10 F- -11 w LrO ar: CI / z 0 Lii F-~ -12 C gCD ETR 0611,MUMP 2 S~~~~~~~~~ / ~~~~SENSITIVITY: I.77x1021 PART/CC 0 AMP N2 RUN OF 12-7-66 AT SPRL,.-13 / BA 7 VS. OMEGATRON 10 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -14 10 ________/___________________________ _________________ 10 106 107 lo' 910 10 10" 112 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC) 6-12-67 Figure 17. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 2.

I.'-10o _ _I7. — a 10 u0 ETR 1165,MUMP 3 Q: 6 —--------— SENSITIVITY 1.64X121 ART/CC RU OF 1-8-66 AT PRL 10 -(12 —... 1ETR 1165, MUMP 3 NUMR D SENSITIVITY;.64x 021 PART/CC Figuren cn of MP AMP N2 RUN OF 12-8-66 AT SPRL, -13~~~~~~~~ /BA 7 VS. OMEGATRON I0 14_ l604 ________________________________ 10 107 108 1O9 1010 10" 1012 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC) 3-30-67 Figure 18. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 3.

lo-I0' a. l- ETR 1942, MUMP 4 3 I~ 1 l l |I~ /|~ ISENSITIVT: 1.61 xIO2 P RT/CC/AMP IIt~ l~ ll I~ / |~ 2ND N2 R N OF 3-29-6, AT SPRL z OMEGATRO1 VS BAT uo -I Ul 0 10-1: III =E 0 i0-14 106 107 108 109 1010 10 102 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC) Figure 19. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 4. 6-2-67

{0 e ETR 480, MUMP 5 z / SENSITIVITY: 1.69 x0l2 FART/CC/AMP sir |l / |2ND N2 RJN OF 3-29-67, AT SPRL MOg~~~ ly ~ > j /dOMEGATRON VS BA7 z Io-l 0 0 I0 106 107 108 109 1010 10l 1012 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC) Figure 20. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 5. 6- 2-67

10-o a. ~ 101" ---------— l —---- w C) I0-~ 0t: ETR 1828, MUMP 6 Figure: 2. oSENSITIVITY: 1.44 x 1021 PART./,,i AMP 2 2nd N RUN OF 12-1-66 AT SPRL 0.-1g3 / BA NO.7 VS. OMEGATRON I07 IO8 109 1010 10" 1012 NUMBER DENSITY ( PART. /CC) Figure 21. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 6. 3-31

10'as / c/') 0-I -i I I w I I I A | SENSITIVITY: 1.59X 102 PART/CC.2 AMP o 2nd N2 RUN OF 12-1-66 AT SPRL -13 BA 7 VS. OMEGATRON Q1 0..-12 106 10 lo 109 1010 loll'/O2 < [ ETR 0851, MUMP 7 s, / SENSITIVITY:NUMBER DENSITY (59 21PART/CC 6 Figure 22. Omegatron calibration of MP MP 0 / 2nd N2 RUN OF 12-1-66 AT SPRL ~-13 BA 7 VS. OMEGATRON -14 10o 107 10" 10o 1o'~ 1011 10'2 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC) 6-,z-67 Figure 22. Omegatron calibration of HUMP 7.

I0 C) 0 LLw 11 0 4[ -12 Figure2 23. clirtETR 1474, MUMP 8 o0 /SENSITIVITY: 1.52x 021 PART./CC AMP 2NP.N2 RUN OF 12-14-66 AT SPRL IC3 _ BA 7 VS. OMEGATRON i'14 106 IO79 10 10 10 1010'2 NUMBER DENSITY (PART/CC.) 3-30-67 Figure 23. Omegatron calibration of MUMP 8.

6.2 ELECTROSTATIC PROBE (ESP) The electrostatic probe (ESP) system described consists of a cylindrical Langmuir probe, shown in Figure 24, which is immersed in the plasma, and an electronics unit which measures the current collected by the probe. The electronics unit consists of a dc-dc converter, a ramp voltage generator, a three-range current detector, range switching relays, and associated logic circuitry. The electronics unit has two output channels, a data channel, and a computer channel. The data channel output is a voltage proportional to the collected probe current. The computer channel contains information on detector ranges, system calibration, and ramp voltage levels which allows data reduction by computer methods. System timing and the computer channel format are given in Figure 25. The following are the specifications of the ESP system for Mump 1 through 8: (1) Input Power 1.54 watts at 28 volts (2) Sensitivity Mumps 1, 2, 3, 5 Mumps 4, 6, 7, 8 Range 1 20 pa Full Scale* 10 pa Full Scale Range 2 2.0 ia Full Scale 1.0 pa Full Scale Range 3 0.2 pa Full Scale 0.1 pa Full Scale *Full scale output is defined as the +4.0 v from the 0.5 v output bias level. (3) Ramp Voltage (AV) Magnitude Slope High AV -3 v TO +5 v 80 v/sec Low AV -1 v TO +1.8 v 28 v/sec (4) Output Voltage -0.6 v TO +5.6 v Resistance less than 2 K Bias Level +0.5 v (5) Calibration ON-FOR 600 msec Interval 28.8 sec Synchronized with AV (6) Timing (see Figure 25) AV-High-Low alternated every 1.8 sec Range - Sequential, 100 msec each range 57

U1.- --—. —-— ~ — 5.875 I 9.000 O.D. -.065 O.D. -.022 ELECTROSTATIC PROBE Figure 24. Electrostatic probe dimensions.

5V AV OR/////////////// - I -3 I I.m-100 MS';-_- - -- HI AV 1.8 SEC I — LOAV1.8SEC RANGE 2 Iu a OR 2 _u i I lOfl a 20-a - I CALIBRATE CALIBRATION iCOMMON SEQUENCE MODE CHECK MEASUREMENT THIS SEQUENCE OCCURS ONCE EVERY 28.8 SEC AT BEGINNING OF HI AV 1_ 600 MSLn 5V AV ZERO CROSS'PULSE BIT CODING COMPUTER BIT BIT DETECTOR CHANNEL 1 2 RANGE TYPICAL SYNC A SAMPLE 0 5 I OUTPUT PULSE OV BIT I BIT 2 BIT3 5 5 2 -IV 0 0 CAL OMs MS IIOMS 5MS ~'" —I 5^,^ |' - -5MS BIT3= 0 HI AV BIT3 = 5 LO AV _ —" -------------- 100 MS v I MUMP SYSTEM TIMING 8 COMPUTER CHANNEL FORMAT Figure 25. Electrostatic probe timing and computer channel format.

6.3 SUPPORT MEASUREMENT AND INSTRUMENTATION 6.3.1 Aspect Determination System The aspect determination systems, utilized for the eight payloads described herein, were identical to those used on previous Thermosphere Probe payloads. The launches performed during the sunlit hours utilized the Adcole Corporation solar sensors with their shift register electronics package. The launches performed at night utilized the University of Michigan lunar sensor. Adequate information for the determination of payload aspect was received in all cases. However, one of the solar aspect sensors malfunctioned after operating properly for a short period during the initial part of the flight. Details of the malfunction are discussed in Section 7. In all cases the data were analyzed by a technique which used the velocity vector as a reference (Taeusch, Carignan, Niemann, and Nagy, 1965)o It was hoped that the use of Adcole Corporation earth sensors used for the sunlit flights would yield enough information to allow aspect solutions independent of the velocity vector technique. Such information would allow a study of atmospheric winds0 However, the earth sensors did not provide adequately accurate data and will subsequently not be used in the future. Other techniques are being attempted to recover the atmospheric wind data. If the techniques are successful, the results will be reported in the future. The minimum angles of attack versus flight time for each flight are given in Figures 26 through 33. These angles are believed accurate to better than ~+5. 60

340 320 - 300280 260 D 240- | ETR 0381,MUMP I JANUARY 24,1967 I- /l 19:34 Z - 7l CAPE KENNEDY 220 DOWNLEG 200 180 UPLE UPLEG 160 140 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 3-30-67 Figure 26. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 1. 61

320 300 280 UPLEG 260 -26O- DOWNLEG 240 F 220 - _ 2 | I ETR 0611, MUMP 2 f i 324 JANUARY 1967 22 50Z 200 CAPE KENNEDY 180 160 140 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 6-12-67 Figure 27. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 2. 62

I I, -I 1. 1 320 300 / UPL EG 280260 2 240 w / ETR 1165,MUMP 3 % /\~ |\~ ~JANUARY 24,1967 220 15;09 Z =. ~ | |~ |~ CAPE KENNEDY 2800 - DOWNLEG 180 160 140 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 3-30-67 Figure 28. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 3. 63

340 |l 320 300 UPLEG 280 DOWNLEG 260240 220 ETR 1942, MUMP 4 25 APRIL 1967 06:30 Z 200 CAPE KENNEDY 180 - 160 140 |0 0 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 6-2-67 Figure 29. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 4. 64

320300- ETR 4803, MUMP 5 25 APRIL 1967 19'00 Z CAPE KENNEDY 280 260 240 220 200 < 200- / 180 / 160 140- 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 TEMPERATURE (OK) 6-2 -67 Figure 30. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 5. 65

I l I t 320 300- UPLEG 280260/ 2 240 W^ / I.~ ~ETR 1828,MUMP 6 W, / JANUARY 24,1967 I- / I 11:51 Z - 220- | |CAPE KENNEDY 200 180 180 DOWNLEG 160 140 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 3-30-67 Figure 31. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 6. 66

320 300 280 ETR 0851, MUMP 7 25 JANUARY 1967 260- 0300 Z CAPE KENNEDY 240 220 200 180 UPLEG DOWNLEG 160 140 I I I i 1 1'0 -10 -20 -30 -40 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 6-12-67 Figure 32. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 7. 67

320 300 // 280 260- / ~24040 —O~ // ETR 1474, MUMP 8 240wJ I I,JANUARY 24,1967 UPLEG/ / 09:00 Z' ~I I /~ ~ CAPE KENNEDY 220 -l I 200 1 1 |DOWNLEG 180 160 140 I I I I I I I I I I I. 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 46 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 33o0-67 Figure 33. Minimum angle of attack vs. altitude for MUMP 8. 68

6c3o2 Telemetry The payload data were transmitted in real time by PAM/FM/FM telemetry systems at 231.4 M Hz. with a nominal output of 2.5 watts. The system used subcarrier channels assigned as outlined on the following pages. 69

ETR 0381 MUMP 1 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 3113-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 2499-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 2497-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 2482-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 2480-25 7.35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2839 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 521 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1063 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt output. 70

ETR 0611 MUMP 2 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 2503-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 2498-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 2495-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 3102-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 2478-25 7o35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2846 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 522 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1066 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt outpute 71

ETR 1165 MUMP 3 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 3111-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 2542-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 2493-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 2487-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 2476-25 7.35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: Type TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2845 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 523 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1065 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt output' 72

ETR 1942 MUMP 4 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 2506-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 3108-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 3107-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 1985-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 3100-25 7.35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: Type TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2844 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 524 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1123 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt outputo 73

ETR 4803 MUMP 5 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 2504-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 2502-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 2494-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 2483-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 2477-25 7.35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: Type TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2848 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 525 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1122 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt output. 74

ETR 1828 MUMP 6 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 3112-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 3109-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 3106-25 22 kHz 300 Hz ESP-Flag 12 3104-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 3101-25 7.35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: Type TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2490 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 428 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1124 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt output. 75

ETR 0851 MUMP 7 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 2505-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 3110-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 3105-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 3103-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 3099-25 7.35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: Type TRPT-250 Serial Number: 2974 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number: 535 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number: 1060 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt output. 76

ETR 1474 MUMP 8 Subcarrier Channels (SCO-type TS58) Nominal IRIG Serial Center Frequency Band Number Frequency Response Function 18 2560-25 70 kHz 1050 Hz Omegatron 16 2010-25 40 kHz 600 Hz ESP-Data 14 1891-25 22 kHz 330 Hz ESP-Flag 12 1689-25 10.5 kHz 160 Hz Aspect 11 1977-25 7e35 kHz 110 Hz Commutator Transmitter: Driver: Type TRPT-250 Serial Number 2973 Power Amplifier: Type TRFP-2V-1 Serial Number 536 Mixer Amplifier: Type TA58A Serial Number 1057 Instrumentation power requirements totaled approximately 30 watts, which was supplied by a Yardney HR-1 Silvercell battery pack of a nominal 27 volt output. 77

6.3.3 Housekeeping Monitors Outputs from various monitors throughout the instrumentation provide information bearing on the operations of the electronic components during flight. These outputs are fed to a thirty*-segment commutator which runs at one rps. The commutator assignments are as follows: COMMUTATOR FORMAT FOR MUMP 9-7-66 SEGMENT SEG. NO. ASSIGNMENT EXPECTED READING ACTUAL READING 1 RANGE 4.9/8 0/1 2 OUT 4.95/OFF.83/CAL 3 FIL 3.1/ON.11/OFF 4 BEAM 3.2/ON.46/OFF 5 BIAS 3.95 6 RF 3.1/N2 2.3/02 2.1/0 7 PRESS 1.8/OFF 8 TH-GAGE 3.8/20~ 3.5/25~ 3.1/30~ 9 TH-AMP " " " 10 TH-REG " " 11 TH-NO " 12 TH-XTMR " " 13 OPEN 14 OPEN 15 28/5 E0/E = 1/6.11 OR 4.5/27.5 16 POS 5.0/7 4.2/8 2.7/10 2.0/11 17 CAL V 5.0 18 TH-CM 3.8/20~ 3.5/25~ 3.1/30~ i_- 3 II " 19 20 "1 21 22 23 24 0 CAL 0.00 25 1 CAL 1.00 26 2 CAL 2.00 27 3 CAL 3.00 28 4 CAL 4.00 29 & 30 5 CAL 5.00 (FRAME SYNC) 78

7o ENGINEERING RESULTS Because of the nature of program objectives, no engineering innovations of consequence were introduced into the instrumentation. Rather, every effort was made to use previously flight-tested designs. The three night shots were identical to the Thermosphere Probe launched by NASA 18:22, and the day shots differed only in their use of a solar aspect sensor and in the sensitivity of the Langmuir probe current detector. A great deal of laboratory effort was devoted to an attempt to find a surface treatment for the omegatron gauge and envelope which would permit a measurement of atomic oxygen abundance. The results of the laboratory studies, insofar as permitting the atomic oxygen measurement to be made, were negative, and the measurement was reluctantly abandoned. The circuitry required for the measurement had already been incorporated into the instrument and was merely disabledo As a consequence, measurement of complete N2 density profiles on both up and downleg was permittedo The recovery of 100% data was realized from all eight shotso With two known exceptions all eight instruments performed completely as designed. On flight # 1165, solar sensor outputs were erratic (spurious readouts plus many normal readouts) until 135 seconds of flight timeo After 135 seconds of flight time, no useful solar data were obtained. The early normal behavior permitted an orientation determination, which then permitted a sorting out of the normal from the spurious outputs. No loss of information resulted from this failureo On flight 611, the usual method of aspect determination which assumes a constant angular momentum vector for the probe and then tests the assumption, failed to confirm its validityo Further analysis of the data showed that consistent interpretation of the aspect data could be obtained only by permitting the angular momentum vector to move at a rate of approximately 2~ per second0 It has been concluded that the most likely explanation for this situation was that a small leak developed such that a thrust perpendicular to the cylindrical axis existedo A second possible explanation offered is that the cable attached between the negator motor and the probe for imparting tumble failed to release from the probe, thus resulting in a complex non-rigid system. Other explanations are possible, but the leak theory seems best to fit the observations0 At any rate, no known loss or deterioration of data were experienced as a result of this problem. Since no new engineering concepts were tested on these flights, little can be identified as engineering results. The success, however, of eight of eight shots seems to indicate that the Thermosphere Probe in the configuration used is a reliable space flight instruments 79

8. ANALYSIS OF DATA The telemetered data were recorded on magnetic-tape at the Station 1 (Tel 4) facility. One set of real time paper records, run at one inch per second, were obtained for "quick look" evaluation of the performance of each payload. Other paper records were obtained as required for data reduction as stipulated in the Operations Directives. Tracking data for trajectory information were obtained from the 0.18 and 19.18 radar facilities. 8.1 TRAJECTORY AND MINIMUM ANGLE OF ATTACK The trajectory and the velocity information used for the reduction of the data and for the interpretation was obtained by fitting a smooth theoretical trajectory to the radar data. The theoretical trajectory is programmed for computer solution similar to that described by Parker (1962). The output format is shown in Figure 34. The analysis of minimum angle of attack (a) as described by Taeusch, et al. (1965), is also incorporated in the program and the output of the computer furnishes a and cos a versus time, altitude, etc. Plots of a versus altitude for each of the payloads are given in Figures 26 through 33. 8.2 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY AND TEMPERATURE The neutral molecular nitrogen densities for each of the flights were determined from the measured gauge partial densities as described by Spencer, et al. (1965, 1966), by using the basic relationship: An ui \ na2 2/T Vcos N2K(a) where naN2 = Ambient N2 number density An. = Maximum minus minimum gauge number density during one tumble 1 u. = i most probable thermal speed of particle inside gauge. 1 n m T. = Gauge wall temperature. V = Vehicle velocity with respect to earth. 80

a = Minimum angle of attack for one tumble. K(S,a) = Correction factor required because of imperfect gauge geometry. (See Spencer, Taeusch, Carignan, 1966). AI., the difference between the maximum (peak) omegatron gauge current and the minimum (background) gauge current versus flight time is shown for a typical flight in Figure 35. The background current is also shown in the figure. The background current is the result of the outgassing of the gauge walls, and the inside density due to atmospheric particles which have enough translational energy to overtake the payload and enter the gauge. In contrast to reports by Moe and Moe (1967), there is laboratory evidence that the background of N2, due to outgassing of the gauge walls, is constant for at least one tumble period, and effects both the peak reading and the background reading and therefore does not effect the difference. From calibration data, obtained as discussed in a previous section, the inside number density difference, Ani, is computed for the measured current. As described by Spencer, Taeusch and Carignan (1965), the uncertainty in these data is believed to be +5% relative to other gauges calibrated at the same time on the same system. Much could be written concerning the absolute accuracy which cannot be proved or disproved to anything better than +25% to date. By using the thermistor measured gauge wall temperature, ui, the most probable thermal speed of the particles inside the gauge, is computed. The uncertainty in this measuring is believed to be about ~2% absoluteo V, the vehicle velocity with respect to the earth, is believed known to better than ~1% absolute. It is obtained from the trajectory curve fitting described previously and is the most accurately known quantity obtained from the analysis. Cos a is obtained from the aspect analysis described by Taeusch, et alo (1965)o Since the uncertainty in cos a depends upon a, for any given uncertainty in a, each particular case and altitude range must be considered separately. However, the upleg angle of attack is typically less than 10~0 With an assumed maximum uncertainty in a of ~50, this results in less than a ~2% uncertainty in cos ao The low angle of attack data were used as control data in all cases. K(S,a) for each flight was determined from theoretical and empirical results gathered over a four-year period utilizing data obtained from about ten payloads similar to the ones described herein, Several researchers have contributed to this work (Pearl, John, and Vogel, U., Space Physics Research Laboratory, The University of Michigan, to be published; and Ballance, 1967)o In general, the maximum correction to the data is approximately 15%, or K(S,a) = o85. These corrections are believed known to better than 2%. 81

The ambient N2 number densities versus altitude obtained from the measured quantities described above are given in Figures 36 through 43, and are tabulated with the derived kinetic temperature in Tables 17 through 24. The ambient neutral particle temperature profiles shown in Figures 44 through 51 were obtained by integrating the density profiles, which gives the ambient N2 pressure. The densities and the resulting pressures are then related to the temperatures through the ideal gas law. The assumption that the gas is in hydrostatic equilibrium and behaves as an ideal gas is implicit. Since the temperatures derived depend only on the shape of the density profile and not its magnitude, it is believed that the uncertainty in its magnitude is less than ~5% absolutee 82

TABLE XVII ETR 0381, MUMP 1 January 24, 1967 19:34 Z 14:34 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENS ITY (km) (~K) (part/cc) 140 640 3.70 x 1010 145 693 2.61 150 744 1.94 155 792 1.49 160 838 1.16 x 109 165 877 9.24 x 10 170 913 7.47 175 942 6,08 180 969 5.03 185 991 4.19 190 1010 3.51 195 1026 2.97 200 1041 2.51 205 1054 2.14 210 1065 1.82 215 1074 1.57 220 1081 1.35 225 1086 1.16 230 1090 1.01 x 10 235 1093 8.76 x 10 240 1096 7,60 245 1099 6.60 250 1102 5.72 255 1104 4.99 260 1106 4.32 265 1108 3.76 270 1110 3.27 275 1112 2.85 280 1114 2.50 285 1115 2.17 290 1116 1.89 295 1117 1.65 300 1118 1.44 305 1120 1.25 310 1122 1.10 x 108 315 1123 9.58 x 107 320 1124 8.33 x 10 83

TABLE XVIII ETR 0611, MUMP 2 January 24, 1967 22:50 Z 17:50 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENSITY (km) (~K) (part/cc) 140 657 3.53 x 1010 145 677 2.72 150 696 2.10 155 715 1.64 160 735 1.27 1 165 754 1.00 x 109 170 772 7.99 x 10 175 791 6.40 180 809 5.13 185 828 4.13 190 846 3.37 195 864 2.74 200 881 2.25 205 898 1.85 210 914 1.54 215 928 1.28 220 940 1.07 x 10 225 951 9.02 x 10 230 959 7.60 235 967 6.41 240 974 5.43 245 981 4.61 250 988 3.92 255 994 3,34 260 999 2.85 265 1004 2.43 270 1009 2.08 275 1014 1.78 280 1018 1.52 285 1022 1.31 8 290 1026 1.12 x 107 295 1030 9.61 x 10 84

TABLE XIX ETR 1165, MUMP 3 January 24, 1967 15:09 Z 10:09 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENS ITY (km) (OK) (part/cc) 140 632 3.52 x 1010 145 662 2.65 150 684 2.02 155 704 1.57 10 160 722 1.22 x 109 165 739 9.56 x 10 170 755 7.57 175 769 6.03 180 784 4.85 185 797 3.90 190 810 3.18 195 823 2.59 200 835 2.12 205 846 1.74 210 857 1,43 215 869 1.18 x 108 220 880 9.80 x 10 225 890 8.16 230 900 6.77 235 910 5.63 240 919 4.70 245 929 3.95 250 938 3.32 255 946 2.80 260 952 2.36 265 959 2.00 270 965 1.70 275 972 1.44 280 977 1.23 285 982 1.04 x 107 290 988 8.97 x 10 295 992 7.64 300 997 6.56 305 1002 5.61 310 1006 4.81 315 1011 4,12 320 1015 3,55 x 10 85

TABLE XX ETR 1942, MUMP 4 April 25, 1967 06:30 Z 01:30 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENSITY (km) (~K) (part/cc) 145 591 3.70 x 1010 150 628 2.74 155 658 2.04 160 690 O155 165 720 1.18 x 100 170 747 9.19 x 100 175 774 7.22 180 796 5.77 185 816 4.61 190 831 3.74 195 846 3.07 200 860 2.51 205 875 2.06 210 887 1.70 215 898 1.41 220 906 1.18 x 109 225 915 9.82 x 10" 230 922 8.27 235 927 7.00 240 931 5.92 245 935 5.00 250 937 4.23 255 939 3.60 260 940 3.06 265 941 2.60 270 941 2.21 275 942 1.88 280 942 lo60 285 942 1.36 290 942 1.17 x 107 295 942 9.90 x 10 300 942 8.45 305 942 7.20 310 942 6.08 315 942 5.19 320 942 4.41 x 10A 86

TABLE XXI ETR 4803, MUMP 5 April 25, 1967 19:00 Z 14:00 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENSITY (km) (OK) (part/cc) 140 616 4.81 x 1010 145 654 3.56 150 693 2.65 155 736 2.00 160 777 1.54 165 814 1.20 x 101 170 848 9.54 x 10 175 880 7.69 180 907 6.24 185 931 5.13 190 951 4.26 195 969 3.55 200 983 2.99 205 997 2.52 210 1010 2.14 215 1021 1.81 220 1030 1.54 225 1037 1.32 230 1044 1.13 x 108 235 1049 9.66 x 10 240 1053 8.34 245 1057 7.20 250 1060 6.21 255 1062 5.38 260 1065 4.63 265 1067 4.01 270 1069 3.47 275 1071 3.01 280 1072 2.61 285 1073 2.27 290 1075 1.97 295 1076 1.70 300 1077 1.48 305 1078 1.29 310 1080 1.12 x 107 315 1081 9.60 x 107 320 1082 8.29 x 10 87

TABLE XXII ETR 1828, MUMP 6 January 24, 1967 11:51 Z 06:51 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENSITY (km) (OK) (part/cc) 140 576 3.25 x 1010 145 630 2.29 150 672 1.68 10 155 703 1.28 x 109 160 727 9.90 x 10 165 745 7.80 170 762 6.20 175 774 5.00 180 786 4.02 185 795 3.27 190 804 2.64 195 812 2.16 200 819 1.76 205 826 1.45 210 832 1.19 x 10O 215 838 9.85 x 10 220 844 8.13 225 849 6.75 230 853 5.61 235 857 4.67 240 861 3.87 245 866 3.25 250 869 2.71 255 872 2.26 260 875 1.88 265 878 1.58 270 881 1.33 275 884 1.12 x 107 280 886 9.35 x 10 285 889 7.90 290 890 6.65 295 892 5.65 300 894 4.72 305 896 3.98 310 898 3.35 315 899 2.82 320 901 2.38 x 107 88

TABLE XXIII ETR 0851, MUMP 7 January 24, 1967 03:00 Z 22:00 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENSITY (km) (~K) (part/cc) 140 597 3.59 x 1010 145 635 2.60 150 666 1.95 155 688 1.50 160 706 1.16 x 109 165 722 9.18 x 10 170 737 7.27 175 750 5.78 180 762 4.63 185 773 3.73 190 784 3.00 195 794 2.42 200 803 1.97 205 812 1.61 210 821 1.31 215 829 1.07 x 10o 220 837 8.79 x 10 225 844 7.20 230 852 5.97 235 859 4.96 240 865 4.11 245 870 3.43 250 875 2.85 255 879 2~39 260 883 2.00 265 886 1.68 270 889 1.41 275 892 1.18 280 894 1.00 x 108 285 896 8.41 x 10 290 898 7.10 295 900 6.00 300 902 5.07 x 10 89

TABLE XXIV ETR 1474, MUMP 8 January 24, 1967 09:00 Z 04:00 Local (EST) Cape Kennedy, Florida ALTITUDE TEMPERATURE DENSITY (km) (OK) (part/cc) 140 502 3.80 x 1010 145 550 2.57 150 596 1.81 155 635 1.32 x 109 160 669 9.90 x 10 165 700 7.51 170 726 5.78 175 750 4,51 180 771 3.55 185 790 2.82 190 807 2.28 195 821 1.84 200 834 1.50 205 846 1.22 210 855 1,00 x 10 215 864 8.29 x 10 220 871 6.87 225 878 5.73 230 883 4.77 235 889 3.98 240 893 3.32 245 897 2.80 250 901 2.37 255 905 1.99 260 908 1.68 265 911 1o41 270 913 1.19 275 916 1.00 x 107 280 918 8.43 x 10 285 920 7.19 290 922 6.08 295 924 5.18 300 925 4O40 305 926 3.74 310 928 3.20 315 929 2.73 320 930 2.35 x 10 90

ETR 4803 MUMP 5 LAUNCH TIME (GMT) YEAR 1967 DAY 115 HOUR 19 MINUTE 0 SECOND.000 INITIAL CONDITIONS TIME 70.000 SECONDS FROM LAUNCH ALTITUDE 416538.7 FT RANGE 88146.3 FT VELOCITY 6536.1 FT/SEC FLIGHT PATH ANGLE 76.6289 DEGREES UP FROM LOCAL HORIZONTAL PLANE AZIMUTH 76.1700 DEGREES EAST OF LOCAL NORTH LONGITUDE -80.2596 DEGREES (+EAST) H__ LATITUDE 28.5122 DEGREES (+NORTH) NO WIND SPECIFIED CONE CORRECTION -.70 MOMENTUM VECTOR INPUT BY SPECIFYING PHI LS = 62.0 AND THETA LS = 129.6 COMPUTED MOMENTUM VECTOR IN EARTH FIXED COORDINATES IS.299509.883184 -.360943 MOMENTUM VECTOR INPUT BY SPECIFYING PHI LS = 172.0 AND THETA LS = 129.6 COMPUTED MOMENTUM VECTOR IN EARTH FIXED COORDINATES IS -.401072 -.008207 -.916010 PEAK PARAMETERS TIME ALTITUDE F ALPHA V*COS ALPHA PHI V RANGE F VELOCITY F VXFX VZFX AZIMUTH LATITUDE ALTITUDE M RANGE M VELOCITY M VYFX ELEVATION LONGITUDE 286.79 1098205 30.90 360.09 103.66 384318 1376.80 1339.35 -31.17 77.387 28.699 334733 -21.10 391.50 -177.20 117140 419.65 317.15 -.000 -79.360 Figure 34. Trajectory program output format-.

* *: 0 -. I - ETR 1474,MUMP 8 iO —: JANUARY 24,1967 -: - 09:00 Z -: CAPE KENNEDY * 0 a.' 0r i0. z -: 0 -;.(PK-BKG) I- -W~~~~ ~~ I ~~~0* I ~ - id' t ~'. 0 08~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ 10-12'' *. L 0 Q - - l..;. - dl - (BKG) O, XV=' - x.:-.: 0 100 200 300 400 S00 600 FLIGHT TIME (SEC) 3-30-67 Figure 35. Omegatron current vs. flight time. 92

340 320 ETR 0381, MUMP I JANUARY 24,1967 300- \19:34 Z CAPE KENNEDY,.. 280-260 bJ \ D24022 20 18 160 14 120 107 108 109 101o AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART/CC) 3-30-67 Figure 36. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 1.

340 320- ETR 0611, MUMP 2 24 JANUARY 1967 ~~~~~30~~0 —~ ~22:50 Z 30 CAPE KENNEDY 280 260 -24 C 20 3 220 v 200- \ 180 160 140 120 1O I I I I ILI0 o07 108 109 Io~ I1 1'''id 8'' 108 1 10 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART/CC) 6-12-67 Figure 37. Ambient N2 density for MUMP a.

34032-0 | ETR 1165, MUMP 3 |320N^~~~~ \JANUARY 24,1967 300- 1 \15:09 Z CAPE KENNEDY 280 — -- ~260 — kO 240A N D < 220 8 A ul - @ 200 \. 180- - - 160 \.. 140 — ~ - 120l07 l,10109 11010 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART/CC) 3-30-67 Figure 38. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 3.

340 ETR 1942, MUMP 4 320 \ 25 APRIL 1967 ~300-~X \06:30 Z CAPE KENNEDY 28026 240220ON> l~t w c20 F- i\ 3 180 < \ 160 140 120 — 107 108 109 100' AMBIENT N, DENSITY (PART/CC) 6-2-67 Figure 39. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 4.

, l,,,,, l,,,,,,,11 X,,,,,,,,,, 340320 ETR 4803, MUMP 5 300+ 25 APRIL 1967 \.~ ~ 19:00 Z 280- CAPE KENNEDY 260 240Y220 I. ij 200 5 180 160 140 120 10? 108 109 1010 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART/CC) 6-2-67 Figure 40. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 5.

340 320- ETR 1828, MUMP 6 JANUARY 24, 1967 300 — 11:51 Z CAPE KENNEDY 280v 260a 240-, 22000 200 180160140 1 20 107 108 109 1o10 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART./CC) 3-31 -67 Figure 41. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 6.

340,320 ETR 0851, MUMP 7 25 JANUARY 1967 300- 03:00 Z CAPE KENNEDY 28 i 260 -'" 240- - - 5220 20 180 16 14120 107 l 19 1010 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART/CC) 6-12-67 Figure 42. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 7.

340 320- ETR 1474,MUMP 8 JANUARY 24,1967 300 - 300- 09:00 Z CAPE KENNEDY 280 260 240 <220 o 200 180 160 140 120 10 7 o 10' 1010 AMBIENT N2 DENSITY (PART/CC) 3-30-67 Figure 43. Ambient N2 density for MUMP 8.

I I I' I' 320300 280 260 260 -ETR 0381,MUMP I JANUARY 24,1967 19:34 Z CAPE KENNEDY 240 - 220 200 - - 180 160 140 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 TEMPERATURE (~K) 3-3o-67 Figure 44. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 1. 101

300 ~280 _ ~ETR 0611, MUMP 2 24 JANUARY 1967 22:50 Z CAPE KENNEDY 260 240 220 / - _200 " I 180 160 140 500 600 700 800 900 1000 TEMPERATURE (oK) 6*. -67 Figure 45. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 2. 102

I l. 320 300 ETR 1165,MUMP 3 JANUARY 24, 1967 280 15:09 Z CAPE KENNEDY 260 240 - 3 / 220 / 200 180 160 140 I I I I I. I 500 600 700 800 900 1000 TEMPERATURE (OK) 3-30-67 Figure 46. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 3. 103

320 ETR 1942, MUMP 4 300_ 25 APRIL 1967 ~~300 ~ 06:30 Z CAPE KENNEDY 280260 - 240 3 220- 200- I80 140500 600 700 800 900 1000 TEMPERATURE ( K) 6-2-67 Figure 47. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 4. 104

340 320 300 280 ETR 4803, MUMP 5 25 APRIL, 1967 19:00 Z 260- | CAPE KENNEDY 24 20 DOWNLEG 180 16 140 -20 -10 0' + -10' +20 +30' +40 ANGLE OF ATTACK (DEGREES) 6-2-67 Figure 48. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 5. 105

320 300 280 ETR 1828, MUMP 6 JANUARY 24, 1967 11:51 Z CAPE KENNEDY 260 240 220 -J 200 - 180 160 140 I I I I I. 500 600 700 800 900 1000 TEMPERATURE (K) 3-367 3-31 - 67 Figure 49. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 6. 106

300 280 ~ETR 0851, MUMP 7 25 JANUARY 1967 03:00 Z 260 CAPE KENNEDY 240 220 200 180 160 140 500 600 700 800 900 1000 TEMPERATURE (~K) 6-12-67 Figure 50. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 7. 107

320 300ETR 1474, MUMP 8 280- JANUARY 24,1967 09:00 Z CAPE KENNEDY 260 - 240I. _ 220 200 180160 140500 600 700 800 900 1000 TEMPERATURE (~K) - 30-67 Figure 51. Neutral particle temperature vs. altitude for MUMP 8. 108

8.3 ELECTRON TEMPERATURE AND DENSITY The cylindrical Langmuir probe technique which was used in this series of experiments has been described a number of times before (e.g. Brace, et al., 1963; Nagy, et al., 1963; Spencer, et al., 1965); therefore only a brief review of the data reduction technique will be given here. The equations for the current collected by a stationary cylindrical probe immersed in a plasma were derived by Mott-Smith and Langmuir (1926). Recently Kanal (1964) extended this work to moving cylindrical probes. The thermal velocity of the electrons is very large in comparison with typical rocket velocities; therefore, if the effect of sheath distortion is neglected the probe can be considered stationary for electron current calculations. The dimension of the sheath which surrounded the collector is of the order of the Debye length, which is inversely proportional to the electron density and therefore the sheath will be the smallest in the daytime F region. The Debye length corresponding to typical daytime F region conditions is of the order of 0.3 cm; since the radius of the collector used in this experiment is only 0.027 cm a large a/r ratio (sheath radius to probe radius) results. The retarded and accelerated electron current equations under these conditions are, respectively -(/kTe \1/2 (1) - kTe N qA exp (V) (1) 2erm I kTe l/2N qA I = 12 me 2. 2 + exp (Vo) erfc (Vo1/2)] (2) where k = Boltzmann's constant. Te = electron temperature. me = mass or an electron. Ne = number density of electrons. q = electronic charge. A = collector area. Vo = qVpp/kT. Vpp = potential difference between the probe and the ambient plasma =V Va + Vr Vap is applied voltage. VD is potential of the reference with respect to the plasma. erfc (x) = complementary error function = 1 - (2/7r1/2)fx exp [-_2] dB. 109

The method of electron temperature reduction from the retarding potential current characteristics, used on previous occasions, was outlined in the report by Taeusch, et al., (1965). In this method the retarded electron current is plotted on a semilog paper, and the temperature is obtained-from the slope of the resulting straight line; such a typical plot from flight ETR 1474 is shown in Figure 52. Since this technique is very cumbersome and time consuming and the computerized system for reduction of the data was not yet operational, the following "template method" was used to reduce the bulk of the data. The natural logarithm of the ratio of two points on the retarded electron current characteristics is: in C = AVap k Te e2 C= - ratio of electron currents el AV = V - V ap ap2 apl Vap2 = applied voltage corresponding to Ie2 Vapi = applied voltage corresponding to Iel Since the retarded electron current is exponential (Equation 1), AVap will be the same for all points having the same ratio C. Given a C we can therefore determine AVap for different temperatures and draw a grid as shown in Figure 53. The current collected by the probe is not the electron but the total current, so we have to apply the same corrections as used on previous occasions. The ion saturation current is extrapolated by a straight line and it is assumed that the difference between the net current and the straight line is the electron current. This leads to the con struction of a template as shown in Figure 54. Here instead of calibrating the grids in terms of AVap we did it in terms of temperature allowing direct determination of the electron temperatures. The templates were made of transparent paper by allowing them to be used directly on the paper record of the telemetered data. The majority of the temperature information was obtained in this manner. Numerous data curves were also reduced by using the conventional semilog method for the sake of comparison, but no detectable difference in the results was observed. 110

The accelerated electron current is two orders of magnitude higher than the retarded ion current; therefore, the effect of the latter on the total current is negligible. The two unknown quantities in the accelerated electron current, Equation (2), are the electron density, Ne, and the reference potential, Vr. Any two points from this portion of the curve are, therefore, sufficient to solve for the unknowns (Nagy and Faruqui, 1965). Templates based on this method were used to obtain the electron density results from the series of flights discussed here. When Vo>>l Equation (2) simplifies to kT 1/2 2 me qA 2 V /2(3) Ie 2T NeqATr 2<m For typical ionospheric conditions (e.g., Te = 2000~ K) Vo is 5.79 V when Vap is 1 V; therefore, Equation (3) is applicable when Vap>l V. Let us consider two points on the accelerated electron current characteristics corresponding to (V^p - V ) equal to 2 V and 1 V respectively. The ratio of the currents corresponding to these two voltages isv-7 according to Equation (3). Two vertical lines, separated by a distance, corresponding to a difference of 1 V in the applied voltage, as shown in Figure 55, provides a template which can be used to determine the electronic density directly from the characteristic curves. The density is obtained by placing the template on the data curve and shifting it horizontally until the curve crosses the vertical lines at the points which correspond to the same electron density (see Figure 56). This value then corresponds to the solution of Equation (3) for fel The charged particle results obtained from the electrostatic probe experiments of MUMPS 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are shown in Figures 57 through 64, respectively. 8.4 GEOPHYSICAL INDICES The 10.7 cm solar flux (F10.7) and the geomagnetic activity indices (ap) for the appropriate periods during launch day are shown in Figures 65, 66, and 67. 111

LOG CURRENT vs.. POTENTIAL FOR ESP ETR 1474 MUMP 8 TIME FROM LAUNCH: 114.9 SEC. 1000 / - ~~~~~~~~/ I.z - z uj 10 Te - It 2 62 K I- 20 40 60 s0 100 120 SCALED POTENTIAL Figure 52. Typical log current vs. potential plot from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 8. 112 112

0 0 00 00 s8g A VQ? CO R RESPONDS TO 2000 K.'2 Ie2 el le --— l __ —— ZERO ELECTRON CURRENT LINE ZERO ELECTRON CURRENT LINE H Figure 55. Electron temperature template Figure 54. Electron temperature template G^ ~with no ion current correction, with ion current correction. Ne Ne N* 3 --- 5 3 - --- 5 4 — 2+- Hr HI I 2t 2 ^ AV;IV_ Figure 55. Basic electron density template. Figure 56. Electron density template superimposed on data curve.

1000 2000 10o os 107',II s/I I I I ETR 0381, MUMP I JANUARY 24, 1967 14:34 EST CAPE KENNEDY I N 300- i T I H I u,,,.L /,, I T Tn 200' I 1000 2000 110 10 TEMPERATURE (~K) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm.3) Figure 57. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 1.

600 IQ00 1400 1800 2200 2600 I x 104 Ix!05 ETR 0611 MUMP 2 JANUARY 24, 1967 17:50 EST 300 - I Io ~ e/ CAPE KENNEDY, FLA, Tn I _ I W 200 No U-" h /:-: 100 00 I0 I1 Ii4WI I 2!4 I'. l5 600 1000 1400 1800 2200 2600' Ixlo4 xilo TEMPERATURE (~K) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm.3) Figure 58. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 2.

600 1000 1400 1800 2200 10 1012 I I 1 I I I I I I I ETR 1165 MUMP 3 /I / \ JANUARY 24, 1967 300 / 10:09 EST Tn / \ CAPE KENNEDY.FLA. iE /i L1~ T I w Ne J I 4( / 20 100 L I I I I 1 I 1 600 1000 1400 1800 220Oe o5 lo TEMPERATURE ( K) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm3) Figure 59. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 3.

600 800 1000, 13 104 105 ETR 1942, MUMP 4 Te APRIL 25,1967 300 Tn IITi 01:30 EST ||I~~ ] CAPE KENNEDY, FLA. II H /Ne (UPLEG)I uj 200 Ne (DOWNLEG) 100. — I- -II I iI' // _Iee,,, perimIno__.. 600 800 100 10 10104 105 TEMPERATURE (OK) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm3) Figure 60. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 4.

600 1000 1400 1800 105 I06 ETR 4803,MUMP5 APRIL 25,1967 Tn ITi Ti 19:00z N, 30 n|gI \ CAPE KENNEDY, FLA. 300 I \ 19 I I I oo W 00 0 100 600 1000 1400 1800 105 106 TEMPERATURE (~K) ELECTRON DENSITY (electronskm3) Figure 61. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 5.

500 1000 1500 2000 104 10 106 l I I,,"1_ _ __ ETR 1828, MUMP 6 JANUARY 24, 1967 06:51 EST CAPE KENNEDY X=93.1 I /Te.300- - E I,, / X:94.2X a sio~~~ (lolo /lolo~ 20lo',104 lX=920 200 X= 94.9 X=91.30 500 1000 1500 2000 10 I o0 TEMPERATURE (~K) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm?) Figure 62. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 6.

800 1000 1200 1400 103 104 105 "yy 1 111 —--- I I I — I04 I I ETR 0851, MUMP 7 3I00 T /!Ti / JANUARY 24,1967 300 Ti 22:00 EST Tn I CAPE KENNEDY, FLA. I / (CONJUGATE X =950) WL Cw) / T (UPLEG) I2<t;~~ 00|/ /~~ N, (UPLEG) W 200 p / Te (DOWNLEG) I / ^^-G qNe (DOWNLEG) 100 800 1000 10 200 1400 103 104 105 TEMPERATURE (OK) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm3) Figure 65. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 7.

800 1000 1200 1400 103 104 105 ETR 1474, MUMP 8 JANUARY 24, 1967 300 T 04;00 EST CAPE KENNEDY (CONJUGATE X =99.40) Te (UPLEG) 200 -t' H wj B/ Te (DOWNLEG) 100.//.,- I,,,, //,'-,, iI 800 1000 1200 1400 103 104 105 TEMPERATURE (~K) ELECTRON DENSITY (electrons/cm.3) Figure 64. Charged particle results from the electrostatic probe experiment of MUMP 8.

F0.7= 10.7cm. SOLAR FLUX 190 180 170.MUMPS 160 150- MUMPS 140 130 120 100 90NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. MARCH APRIL 1966 1967 Figure 65. The solar flux at 10.7 cm wavelength.

THREE HOUR GEOMAGNETIC ACTIVITY INDEX (ap) Cp VS. TIME JAN.24,1967 Ap=2 046 0 123.7 I 1 0 1.4 2.0 25 o — - - a TI I I I I ap 2 04 06 08 0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 02 GMT02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 02 04 EST21 23 01 03 05 07 09 I1 13 15 17 19 21 23 Figure 66. Three-hour geomagnetic activity index (ap) (January 24, 1967). 123

I II I II IIII Ia THREE HOUR GEOMAGNETIC ACTIVITY INDEX (ap) ap VS. TIME APRIL 25, 1967 Ap= 8 0 20 — I,. -I. 18 W ap 10 38- -- 16 2 — GMT 24 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 15 20 22 24 EST 19 21 23 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 19 Figure 67. Three-hour geomagnetic activity index (ap) (April 25, 1967). 124

9. CONCLUSIONS The payload design and successful launching of eight MarshallUniversity of Michigan probes have been described in the present report. These probes provided data which permitted the determination of the neutral molecular nitrogen density and temperature and the electron density and temperature in the altitude region between approximately 140 and 320 km. Six of the payloads provided data during one diurnal cycle on January 24, 1967. Two additional payloads provided data on the maximum and on the minimum of the diurnal variation on April 25, 1967. The purpose of the two sets of launches was to obtain data which would bear on the diurnal variation of the atmospheric parameters, and consequently be of value in the development of future model atmospheres. The data have been reported at the July meeting of COSPAR in London, England, and the paper has been accepted for publication in Space Research VIII. A summary discussion of the preliminary findings and significant points of interest are included in the following subsections. 9.1 NEUTRAL MOLECULAR NITROGEN DENSITY AND TEMPERATURE The theory of the measurement, of the reduction of raw data, and of the probable errors for each of the nitrogen, density, and temperature altitude profiles was discussed in the previous section. Figures 68 and 69 give the congeries of these data. Of more interest here, however, are the variations with time of day as given in Figures 70 and 71. The figures also show several data points taken from the CIRA 1965 model 4 and also show the variation as is predicted by Jacchia (1964, 1965a,b) for the appropriate 10.7 cm solar flux and geomagnetic activity levels. As can be seen, the density values predicted by the two models are approximately a factor of two greater than the measured values. This discrepancy between gauge measurements and drag measurements has persisted for many years. However, the temperature predictions made by Jacchia (1964, 1965a,b) are in excellent agreement with the temperature values determined from the measured density profiles. Even though these data are relatively new and much work remains to be done, some preliminary conclusions are as follows: 1. Densities determined by satellite drag techniques are typically on the order of a factor of two higher than those determined by density gauge and mass spectrometer techniques. 2. CIRA 1965 model nighttime temperatures are in good agreement with those derived by direct measurements, but the daytime model temperatures are consistently too high at the level of solar activity used for the comparison. 125

3. The atmospheric temperatures and densities below 200 km are more variable than current models predict. 4. The Jacchia empirical formulae, which predict exospheric temperatures as a function of geomagnetic activity, solar flux, and time of day and year, are consistent with the mass spectrometer results. 126

10II DIURNAL SURVEY OF THE THERMOSPHERE N2 NUMBER DENSITY VS. ALTITUDE JANUARY 24, 1967 | ^^^^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^^^^ok~~~~~ ~CAPE KENNEDY }010' ss^,~~~~~~ -^^**s^~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ AT. 28~ 27' N 1010 CIRA 1965 MOD 4 (F=125) 0400 MIN -- --— 21261400 MAX c,) ~I ~ —- -— 0618 SUNRISE cr IgL- 9ALT E 10Figure 68. C) LOCAL SOLAR TINE i08 --— F- 0935 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 ALTITUDE (KM) Figure 68. N2 density vs. altitude.

I EI I I I' 320 DIURNAL SURVEY: OF THE THERMOSPHERE: 310: N2 TEMPERATURE VS. ALTITUDE I 300 290 III 280 270 260' LOCAL SOLAR TIME Ii * -*-*-...1400 / I0.0618 SUNRISE/ - 220- // /:c~hl....06 —-~ —-1812 SUNRISE/.1 0 ///. 250t - /// 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 Figure 69. N temperature vs. altitude. 128 41~~~~/.6 1 41 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 Figure 69~~. tmeau v. atd./ 128~ /.

o ll I I I Ii I I I I I I! I I i I I I I I I I! I I I I! MUMP DIURNAL SURVEY OF THE THERMOSPHERE CAPE KENNEDY,FLA. N2 NUMBER DENSITY VS. TIME 2827' N. LATITUDE JANUARY 24,1967 - ~ - -- - - - ---- _ _ _ _ - -- —.X MUMP DATA 150 KMX -X — -- -X 150 KM CIRA 0 CIRA 1965 MOD. 4 10l1 -— JACCHIA 1964 a<g | ~ - -7%-X 200 KM - 1 200 KM:: 109 Z - _ _ - - - - _ x z IX — 250 KM Z. 0 KX —'250 KM —108 300 KMXX — X300KM MUMP TEST NUMBER ETR -1474 ETR-1828 ETR- 1165 ETR-0381 ETR-0611 ETR-0851 10 IJ - - | — 1- — 3.7 1 1 1.8 1 1.4 2.0 1 2.51 0 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 02 04 LOCAL SOLAR TIME Figure 70. N2 density vs. local solar time.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I i 1200 F" 1'27.6 MUMP DIURNAL SURVEY CP OF THE THERMOSPHERE 28 27 N. LATITUD JANUARY 24, 1967'* th MOLECULAR NITROGEN KINETIC TEMP. vs. TIME F107 (24th) 152.0 X 1100k in 1I000 ~5% x /01 z -X - Z 900- 1 8900 — ^^^^-x^^^" / / \ \ X -,. x_____ IA< ---- - -— "" /. /. x -X. 03 0 050 070 0912I1 1 1 150km 122 7000 ~5% MUMP TEST NUMBER ETR-1474 ETR-1828 ETR-1165 ETR-0381 ETR -0611 ETR-0851 3.7 1.8 0 ap(LIFT OFF-7hrs) 1.4 2.0 2.5 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 LOCAL SOLAR TIME Figure 71. N2 temperature vs. local solar time.

9.2 CHARGED PARTICLE TEMPERATURE -AND DENSITY The electron temperature and density results obtained from the Langmuir probe experiments were shown in Figures 57 through 64. The ion temperatures shown in these figures were calculated by using the following expression given byDalgarno, et al., (1967), which is based on the assumption that only.+) ions are present: -7 5x10 (T -T) 2 Ti = Tn +....T / n (4) e 5xl ~7n2 + x -14 -14 -15 -1 5x___ ne + ne[9xl0 n(0)+6x10 4n(N2) + 6x105n(He)] I Te 2 All the quantities which appear in this equation were measured simultaneously except n(O) and n(He). The values used in the calculations for the oxygen density were obtained from Jacchia's (1965a,b) model and the effect of neglecting helium was found to be negligible at these altitudes. Figure 72 shows the diurnal variation of the electron temperature Te at the various altitudes, as measured by the Langmuir probes on January 24, 1967. The pre-sunrise effect in Te is clearly shown by these results. The average rate of pre-sunrise temperature rise at 300 km is about 4~K/min which is of the same order as the value given by Carlson (1966). A significant rise in the electron temperature was also present at sunset on this day, as may be seen from Figure 72. The rate at which energy is transferred from the electron gas to oxygen ions and which is approximately equal to the rate of energy input to the electrons, was calculated using equation (5) and plotted in Figure 73. 5xlO07(Te-Ti) -3 -1 L -/ n2 eV cm sec (5) e eae eeee The calculations clearly indicate that the energy input varies smoothly; the sunset peak in Te is apparently caused by a rate of decrease in the electron density which was somewhat larger than usually observed. The cooling rates calculated by Dalgarno, et al., (1967) for a similar flight in November, 1963, are also shown in Figure 73 for comparison. A similar sunset peak was recently observed at Arecibo and reported by Wand at the University of Illinois Thomson Scatter Conference. The results of the sunrise flight (ETR 1828) were shown in Figure 62; the changing solar zenith angles during the flight were also indicated. It is interesting to note that, although the electron density changed considerably during the flight, no detectable change in Te was observed. This behavior can be explained by a rate of increase in the electron density which is of the right order to offset the increase in the heat.input, resulting in no significant change in the electron temperature. 131

Thomson scatter measurements of the electron and ion temperatures were also made on January 24 by the Millstone Hill Radar Facility and the Jicamarca Radar Observatory. Figure 74 shows both the rocket and Thomson scatter results. The ion temperature results obtained from Jicamarca are in good agreement with the results obtained from the rocket data; the ion temperature results from Millstone are, however, lower than would be expected. There is only a gross agreement between the Millstone and Cape Kennedy Te results shown in Figure 74, but this is reasonable, since electron temperatures exhibit significant spatial variations. The comparison between the results of the April daytime flight and the preliminary backscatter results from Jicamarca, Arecibo, and Millstone are shown in Figure 75. There is good agreement between the ion temperatures obtained from the rocket data and those measured by Jicamarca and Arecibo; however, the results from Millstone are again low. The preliminary analysis of the data obtained from these eight rocket flights has already improved our understanding of the diurnal behavior of the upper atmosphere; these series of flights have also provided an excellent opportunity to compare the results of rocketborne measurements with those obtained by Thomson scatter technique. 132

JANUARY 24,1967 CAPE KENNEDY 320 km 2,000 -60 km - -—. —-- 1,000 ETR 1474 ETR 18 TR ETR 65 ETR 0381 ETR 0611 ETR 0851 04 o0 0822 1220 1602 20~0 LOCAL TIME Figure 72. Diurnal variation of the measured electron temperatures.

I I I I I l JANUARY 24, 1967 CAPE KENNEDY 10 260km'E^ /*- -^300km 320km | ] ^^ t,, t,NOV. 1963 CO 0 -- f (DALGARNO ET AL).._ETR 1474 ETR 1828 ETR 1165 ETR 0381 ETR 0611 ETR 0851 St 0400 0800~ 12 —0 16~~ 20~~0 LOCAL TIME Figure 73. Diurnal variation of the calculated electron energy loss rates.

I I I I I BACKSCATTER RESULTS PROBE RESULTS BACKSCATTER RESULTS FROM MILLSTONE HILL CAPE KENNEDY FROM JICAMARCA OTe (225 km) * Te + T (400 km) _ Te (300 km) x Ti 300 km \ A Ti (225 km) YCLcuLAEo/ * T (300 km) * LCULTE JANUARY 24,1967 hi0O 0 12 ~,000 - \ I i - Y 00 \:3 0 12000 F — 0 000 ETR 1474 ETR 1828 ETR 1165 ETR 0381 ETR 0611 ETR 0851 0400 0800 12~~ 16~~ 2000 LOCAL TIME Figure 74. Comparison between the charged particle temperatures measured by the Langmuir probe and the ones obtained by, Thomson scatter measurements (January 24, 1967).

(400 KM) i ( t400KM) COMPARISON BETWEEN 4f R MUMP 5 (ETR 4803) & / \ \ BACKSCATTER RESULTS / \ \ APRIL 25, 1967 N is \ 09'00 EST 300-. / \ A I \,N ~\ I' ~ * AREIB T i I / - ~ o JICAMARCA Te *,, JICAMARCA Ti 200 _ 4 / //b./ ^t MILLSTONE Te Of / MILLSTONE Ti 0 0 ARECIBO Te @ 0 ARECIBO Tj //' 0 JICAMARCA Te urn * JICAMARCA Ti 100 1000 2000 TEMPERATURE (~K) Figure 75. Comparison between the charged particle temperatures measured by the Langmuir probe and the ones obtained by Thomson scatter measurements (April 25, 1967). 136

10. REFERENCES Ballance, James O., An Analysis of the Molecular Kinetics of the Thermosphere Probe, George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, NASA Technical Memorandum, NASA TM X-53641, July 31, 1967. Boggess, R. L., Brace, L. H., and Spencer, N. W., "Langmuir Probe Measurements in the Ionosphere," J. Geophys. Res., 64, 1627-1630. 1959. Bourdeau, R. E., Whipple, E. C., Jr., Donley, J. L., and Bauer, S. J., "Experimental Evidence for the Presence of Helium Ions Based on Explorer VIII Satellite Data," J. Geophys. Res., 67, 467-475, 1962. Brace, L. H., Spencer, N. W., and Carignan, G. R., "Ionosphere Electron Temperature Measurements and Their Implications," J. Geophys. Res., 68, 5397-5412, 1963. Carlson, H. C., Jr., "Ionospheric Heating by Magnetic Conjugate-Point Photoelectrons," J. Geophys. Res., 71, 195-199, 1966. CIRA, 1965 (COSPAR Intern. Reference Atmosphere), compiled by H. K. Kallmann-Bijl, et al. (North-Holland Publishing Comp., Amsterdam, 1965). Dalgarno, A., McElroy, M. B., and Walker, J. C. G., "The Diurnal Variation of Ionospheric Temperatures," Planet. Space Sci., 15, 331, 1967. Evans, J. V., "An F-Region Eclipse," J. Geophys. Res., 70, 131-142, 1965a. Evans, J. V., "Ionospheric Backscatter Observations at Millstone Hill," Planet. Sci., 13, 1031, 1074, 1965b. Harris, I. and Priester, W., The Upper Atmosphere in the Range from 120 to 800 Km, Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA, Institute for Space Studies Report, 1964. Jacchia, L. G., "A Variable Atmospheric Density Model from Satellite Accelerations," J. Geophys. Res., 65, 2775, 1960. Jacchia, L. G., "A Working Model for the Upper Atmosphere," Nature, 192, 1147, 1961. Jacchia, L. G., "Variations in the Earth's Upper Atmosphere as Revealed by Satellite Drag," Rev. Mod. Phys., 35, 973-991, 1963. Jacchia, L. G., "The Temperature Above the Thermopause," Smithsonian Astrophys. Obs. Spec. Rep., No. 150, 32 pages, 1964. 137

Jacchia, L. G., "Density Variations in the Heterosphere," Smithsonian Astrophys. Spec. Rep., No. 184, 1965a. Jacchia, L. G., "Static Diffusion Models of the Upper Atmosphere with Empirical Temperature Profiles," Smithsonian. Astrophys. Obs. Spec. Rept. No. 170, 1964; also published in Smithsonian Contrib. Astrophys., 8, 215-257, 1965b. Jacchia, L. G. and Slowey, J., "The Shape and Location of the Diurnal Bulge in the Upper Atmosphere," Smithsonian Astrophys. Obs. Spec. Rep., No. 207, April 1, 1966. Johnson, F. S., "Circulation at Ionospheric Levels," Southwest Center for Advanced Studies," Report on Contract Cub10531, January 30, 1964 Kanal, M., "Theory of Current Collection of Moving Cylindrical Probes," J. Appl. Phys., 35, 1697-1703, 1964. Krassovsky, V. I., "Exploration of the Upper Atmosphere with the Help of the Third Soviet Sputnik," Proc. IRE, 47, 289-296, 1959. McElroy, M. B., Models for the Terrestrial Atmosphere Above the 120 Km Level, Kitt Peak National Observatory, Contribution No. 55, 1964. Moe, Kenneth and M. M., The Effect of Adsorption on Densities Measured by Orbiting Pressure Gauges, Publication No, 576, Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics, University of California, Los Angeles, California. Mott-Smith, H. M., and Langmuir, I., "The Theory of Collectors in Gaseous Discharges," Phys. Rev., 28, 727, 1926. Nagy, A. F., Brace, L. H., Carignan, G. R., and Kanal, M., "Direct Measurements Bearing on the Extent of Thermal Nonequilibrium in the Ionosphere," J. Geophys. Res., 68, 6401-6412, 1963. Nagy, A. F. and Faruqui, A. Z., "Ionospheric Electron Density and Body Potential Measurements by a Cylindrical Langmuir Probe," J. Geophys Res., 70, 4847-4858, 1965. Niemann, H. B. and Kennedy, B. C., "Omegatron Mass Spectrometer for Partial Pressure Measurements in Upper Atmosphere," Rev. Scie Instr., 37, 722-728, 1966. Paetzold, H. K. and Zschorner, H., "Bearings of Sputnik III and the Variable Acceleration of Satellites," Space Research I Proc. First. Internat. Space Sci. Sump., Ed., H. Kallman-Bijl, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1960. 138

Parker, L. T., Jr., "A Mass Point Trajectory Program for the DCD 1604 Computer," Tech, Doc. Report AFSW-TDR-62-49, Air Force Spec. Weapons Center, Kirtland AF Base, New Mexico, August, 1962. Spencer, N. W., Brace, L. H., and Carignan, G. R., "Electron Temperature Evidence for Nonthermal Equilibrium in the Ionosphere," J. Geophys. Res., 67, 151-175, 1962. Spencer, N. W., Brace, L. H., Carignan, G. R., Taeusch, D. R., and Niemann, H. B., "Electron and Molecular Nitrogen Temperature and Density in the Thermosphere," J. Geophys. Res., 70, 2665-2698, 1965a. Spencer, N. W., Taeusch, D. R., and Carignan, G. R., "N2 Temperature and Density Data for the 150 to 300 Km Region and Their Implications," NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, Report x-620-66-5, December, 1965b. Taeusch, D. R., Carignan, G. R., Niemann, H. B., and Nagy, A. F. The Thermosphere Probe Experiment, Space Physics Research Laboratory, The University of Michigan, Scientific Report 07065-1-S, March, 1965. Taeusch, D. R. and Carignan, G. R., Sounding Rocket Flight Report, NASA 18.02 Thermosphere Probe Experiment, Space Physics Research Laboratory, The University of Michigan, Rocket Report 07065-3-R, September, 1966a. Taeusch, D. R. and Carignan, G. R., Sounding Rocket Flight Report NASA 18.03 Thermosphere Probe Experiment, Space Physics Research Laboratory, The University of Michigan, Rocket Report 07065-4-R, November, 1966b. 139

APPENDIX DETERMINATION OF THE TOTAL PAYLOAD MOMENTS OF INERTIA 141

TH RII CORRORATION SINODX $StIMS D $ViO$o" *~ ""NN & OI 01ICN6A#" REPORT NO. TR- 1219 SYSTEMS TEST DEPARTMENT LR NO. 2403 REPORT NO. TR- 1219 DATE 2 Feb 66 PERFORMED FOR: University of Michigan 2455 Hayward Northwood Campus Ann Arbor, Michigan TEST: Moment of Inertia Determination ITEM: Thermosphere Probe MUMP-1 TEST DATE: 17 Jan 66 PERFORMED AT: Space Laboratories WORK ORDER NO: 85191-441-01-2403 AUTHORIZATION: PO R-64522 REQUESTED BY: Otto Kruse REPORT SENT TO: John Maurer PREPARED BY: / / R.W. Hyde Test Engineer Systems Test Department APPROVED BY: R. H. Culpeppe Project Engineer Systems Test Department ed 142

Bendix Systems Division TR 1219 INTRODUCTION The mass moments of inertia of a Thermosphere Probe MUMP-1, manufactured by the University of Michigan, were determined experimentally on the trifilar test stand. The purpose of the tests was to determine the mass constants about the spin axis as the split halves were placed at various angles. The mass constants were also determined for the test item in the lateral axis and the instrument package alone. SUMMARY OF RESULTS The moments of inertia of the test items are shown below. lb ft sec2 = slug ft2 Payload about the spin axis 0. 2135 Payload halves open 7. 73 in. (spin axis) 0. 4732 Payload halves open 18. 67 in (spin axis) 1. 3413 Payload halves open 42. 25 in. (spin axis) 5. 8871 Payload halves open 72. 675 in. (spin axis) 13. 7881 Payload halves horizontal 16. 3455 Payload about the lateral axis 7. 9402 Instrument package about spin axis 0. 07035 Instrument package about lateral axis 1. 0018 Payload total weight 120 lbs Instrument package weight 48.. 75 lbs METHODS AND DATA The test items were mounted on the trifilar pendulum apparatus as shown in Figuresl through 3 and the platform was allowed to oscillate through approximately 1 to 2 inches. The period of oscillation of the combined test item and platform was determined. At the conclusion of testing the period of oscillation of the platform alone was determined. Itest item = I combined test item - Iplatform alone or and platform w a2p2 w a2p2 I - t t p p 4117 L 4Th L 143

Bendix Systems Division TR 1219 Where: Wt = Platform plus test item weight a 20 inches L = Filament length, 108. 22 inches Wp - Platform weight, 22 lbs Pt = Period in seconds, combined test item and platform Pp p Platform period in seconds, 1. 49925 I = Test item moment of inertia in lb in sec The tests were witnessed by J. Maurer, L. Degener, and R. Simmons of the University of Michigan. The test items were returned to the University of Michigan by the University of Michigan personnel. 144

THE " P//-CORPORATION 6tNOIX SYI(M$ OIV$IION * ANN Allo0, MI(HIOAN SYSTEMS TEST DEPARTMENT TRl 1219. Figure 1 TEST o E T UP Shell Open 12. 850 inches S1ell Open 18. 67 inches 1 45

THE en4 CORPORATION tO(4OX SYSIIMS OVtiVION I ANN AftO0. MICHIGAN SYSTEMS TEST DE[PARTMENT TR 1219 Figure 2 TEST SETUP 1.46 Shell open 72. 675 inches Shell fully open Lateral axis C~::'~:: 14

(I) - = rn 2j r >r 0 00 Zn~~~-E H:~~~~~~" -4~~~~~p -4~~I ~ ~6s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~J fl#c "~4 5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C) 9? 9$"~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~1~~3i i~~~~~5.... -. I I..~..I~.... 1.....1-...... —- -—...- ~~ —-- ~~~~ ~~;1' ~I 4' )" A 99/~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ rk ""4'-""""'.. _ _ _ -~~~~~~~u~~' >4 4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ri I a i:~~~~~~~~$ ~~~~SB"' s I~ll'ii:I ~4 C"3~ Xi:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ili ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iI ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S -4 ~~~~~~~~~~5r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~P ~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THEac ORPORATION TR 1219 IENDIX SYSTIMS DIVISION * ANN ARl O1. MICNIGAN SYSTEMS TEST DEPARTMENT TEST EQUIPMENT Test: Moment of Inertia Date Used: 17 Jan 66 Test Item: Thermosphere Probe Item Model No. BxS No. Scale Range (.;alibratior....-D. -_... _-.. _. _. _. _ _.. Late Manufacturer Serial No. Accuracy puantity Measurec Last Next Electronic Counter _ _ 19 -521 CR _ IEC 50577_ 9-28 6-28 Hewlett -Packard _____cps8 65 66 Counter 50682 12-8 12-8 BSD cycles 65 66 1- ---- ------— 1 —— I -- - - - -11 i* __ —----- -- 1 — - - -- — 1 — — I ------- 1 j I I I I. ] I. qi T II I Ii I I I I -! - I I _ _ _ _ _ _~- _~- - _ _ _ _- _'- _ _ _ __j4 I 1 - - - - -- ----- - I- I I -| ~ I I I I I I 148