MEMORANDUM

To: John Doe

Marshal Space Center
1234 Moon Lane
Huntsville, AL 35649

From: Jacelyn Bain

Morton Thiokol
Engineering Department
42 Engineering Way
Ogden, UT 84401

Re: Delay Challenger Launch to Avoid Potential O-ring Failure

Date: 28, December 1986

Background
The o-rings will not seal properly and are significantly more likely to have blow-by and
erosion at low ambient temperatures, which is a sign that they are not functioning
correctly. If the o-rings were effectively operating during launch, there would be no signs
of heating, erosion, or blow-by. If the seals fail, the fuel could leak and cause an explosion.
Bench tests indicated “at 75℉ the [secondary] o-ring lost contact for 2.4 seconds. At 50℉
the o-ring did not re-establish contact in ten minutes,” so the test was terminated when it
became clear that the o-ring would not seal (Windsor 105). Since the testing showed that
at 75℉ the secondary o-ring lost contact for 2.4 seconds and the secondary seal wouldn’t
be able to hold if the primary seal failed within 170 to 660 milliseconds after launch, the
probability of the seals failing, even momentarily, is extremely high at temperatures lower
than 66℉ (Windsor 105).

Problem
Since the Challenger is scheduled to launch on a day with a predicted 26-29 ℉
temperature, the o-rings are guaranteed to not seal properly. As demonstrated in Figure 1,
lower launch temperatures lead to more damage in the rocket booster resulting from
damage and improper sealing. Improper seals of the o-rings can lead to the loss of lives
and the rocket.

Recommendation
The launch should be delayed until the predicted temperature is at least 66℉. The 66℉
launch was the lowest temperature at which the rocket boosters did not sustain damage.
Moving forward with the launch as scheduled will lead to loss of human life and the launch
facilities.
Figure 1

Legend
= Predicted Launch Temperature on January 28, 1986

= Damage Index Value at Launch Temperature

*O-ring Damage Index is based on the severity of number of incidents of O-ring heating, blow-by and
erosion. No damage is a 0, evidence of heating without damage is a 2, slight erosion or blow-by found
in rocket casing is a 4, and heavy erosion coupled with blow-by and heating of the back-up o-rings is an
11 (Tufte 22).
 Works Cited

Tufte, Edward R. “Visual and Statistical Thinking: Displays of Evidence for Making

Decisions.” 3 printing. Graphics Press LLC, November 2005, pg 16-31.

Winsor, Dorothy. 1988. “Communication Failures Contributing to the Challenger

Accident: An Example of Technical Communicators.” IEEE Transactions on

Professional Communication, vol. 31, no. 3. Pg 101-107.