Parachute Design Examples

Dean F. Wolf

Parachute Seminar
3rd International Planetary Probe Workshop

Outline

Drag Coefficient vs Velocity

Porosity and Permeability
Wind Tunnel Blockage Correction
Infinite Mass Opening Shock
Vent Design
Skirt Inversion
Parachute Design Examples

Drag Coefficient vs Velocity

It is a widely accepted truth in the parachute
industry that drag coefficient increases at low
descent velocities
Drag coefficient is often plotted versus descent
velocity to prove this truth
Of course, measured descent velocity was used
to calculate drag coefficient so this correlation is
somewhat self fulfilling
Parachute Design Examples

CD vs V for Solid Cloth Canopies

Knacke NWC TP 6575
Figure 5-24
Solid Canopies,
Ringsails and
Annulars
For any one canopy,
the data tend to group
in one location
Variations in other
design parameters are
ignored
Parachute Design Examples

CD vs V for Extended Skirt

Canopies
Knacke NWC TP 6575
Figure 5-25
Straight and full
extended skirt
canopies
Only one canopy has
data over a velocity
range
No explanation of how
that variation was
obtained
Parachute Design Examples

CD vs V for Cross Parachutes

Knacke NWC TP 6575
Figure 5-27
Only one canopy has
data over a velocity
range
No explanation of how
that variation was
obtained

Parachute Design Examples

CD vs V for Annular Parachutes

Knacke NWC TP
6575 Figure 5-28

Parachute Design Examples

Possible Explanations for

Correlation
Aerodynamic
Pressure distribution

Structural
Elastic
Material permeability

Stability
Gliding
Coning

Vertical winds
Data errors
Parachute Design Examples

Drag Coefficient vs Velocity

Beware of correlations like this that imply
a cause and effect but dont really explain
the cause
Note any possible contributors to change
in drag coefficient for a series of tests
Measurement errors and data scatter are a
real part of any test

Parachute Design Examples

Porosity and Permeability

For canopies that contain both geometric
porosity and fabric permeability, it is necessary
to combine both effects
The handbook method of combining the two
effects is given by the equation :
T = g + m
where T is total porosity, g is geometric porosity
and m is the contribution due to cloth
permeability

Parachute Design Examples

10

Porosity and Permeability

The cloth permeability part is given as:
m = (Cm/28)(Am/A0)
where Cm is permeability (ft3/min)/ft2 at a p of
inch of H2O or 2.6 lb/ft2, Am is the permeable
fabric area and A0 is the total canopy area
The constant 28 is derived assuming flow
through the geometric porosity openings has an
orifice coefficient of 1.0
This is not a valid assumption for flow through a
sharp edged orifice
Parachute Design Examples

11

Theoretical Orifice Coefficient

Lamb
Hydrodynamics 6th
edition
2 dimensional
complex analysis
Free streamline
theory
Co = 0.611
Parachute Design Examples

12

Orifice Coefficient Model

Heinrich and Greig
AFFDRL-TR-65-110
Grid intersection
angle is
Values of = 0o, 45o
and 90o were tested
Pressure ratio is
critical pressure
ratio
Relative to sonic
pressure ratio
Parachute Design Examples

13

Experimental Orifice Coefficients

Most parachute
applications near the
Y-axis
Top curve just greater
than 0.6
Lamb was right

Other configurations
show orifice
coefficient values of
about 0.7
Parachute Design Examples

14

Porosity and Permeability

For an orifice coefficient of 0.7, the
constant in the m equation is 20 instead
of 28
The permeability effect is greater

The total porosity calculations in the

literature assume an orifice coefficient of
1.0
Studies of Reynolds number effects on
permeability should be expanded
Parachute Design Examples

15

Wind Tunnel Blockage Correction

Macha AIAA 91-0858
Based on wind tunnel
data only
Not validated by
comparison with freeflight data

Parachute Design Examples

16

Drag Coefficient vs Porosity

Knacke NWC TP 6575
Figure 5-62
Collection of free
flight data
Corrected to a
suspension line L/D =
1.0
Corrected to velocity
of 25 ft/sec
How?
Parachute Design Examples

17

Drag Coefficient vs Porosity

Knacke NWC TP 6575
Figure 5-62 is Ewing
data
Data from Sandia
bomb and wind
tunnel, SRB flight test
and X-38 drogue flight
test data added
Orbiter wind tunnel
data without blockage
correction agrees
better with data set
Parachute Design Examples

18

Parachute Infinite Mass Opening

Shock
Proposed contributors to parachute
opening shock

Apparent mass
Rate of change of apparent mass
Overinflation
Reefing
Elasticity
Nylon/Kevlar lines
Canopy porosity
Mass ratio
Froude number
Parachute Design Examples

19

Infinite Mass Ck vs Porosity

Knacke NWC TP
6575 Figure 5-64
Low porosity
parachutes inflate
faster and
generate higher
opening shock

Parachute Design Examples

20

Infinite Mass Ck From Wind Tunnel

Data
Low speed wind
tunnel
3 ft diameter models
All Nylon parachute
construction
Data questioned
because of small
models and wind
tunnel origin

Parachute Design Examples

21

Infinite Mass Ck From Wind Tunnel

Data
Low speed wind
tunnel
3 ft diameter models
All Nylon parachute
construction
Ck is maximum force
divided by steady
force

Parachute Design Examples

22

Infinite Mass Ck From Wind Tunnel

Data
Orbiter drag chute
data added
40 ft diameter
parachute
Nylon/Kevlar
parachute
construction
120 x 80 ft wind
tunnel
Parachute Design Examples

23

Quasi - Infinite Mass Ck from Free

Flight Data
An approximation of infinite mass opening
shock can be obtained from free flight
data by dividing instantaneous parachute
force by instantaneous dynamic pressure
Some errors are inherent in this process
because of the difficulties in the
measurement of loads, the calculation of
dynamic pressure and the synchronization
of the two
Parachute Design Examples

24

Quasi - Infinite Mass Ck from Free

Flight Data
Free flight data added
Some wild points due
to synchronization
problems
The data indicate that
infinite mass Ck
values are not wind
tunnel specific
Geometric porosity
appears to be the
primary influence
Parachute Design Examples

25

Quasi - Infinite Mass Ck from Free

Flight Data
Ck is maximum
drag area divided
by steady drag
area for any stage

Parachute Design Examples

26

Vent Entanglement
During the Space Shuttle SRB
parachute flights, several main
parachute failures occurred
No SRBs were lost due to parachute
failures

All of the major main parachute

damage was eventually attributed to
entanglement in the canopy vent
region
Parachute Design Examples

27

SRB Main Chute Cluster

SRB main chute
cluster with 1
parachute deflated
SRB lands on 2
main parachutes
Damaged
parachute is
repaired
Parachute Design Examples

28

Damaged SRB Main Chute

SRB main chute with
split gore
View looking from
skirt to vent
Gore split from vent to
skirt
Localized burning
near the vent
Entire split tension
failures
Parachute Design Examples

29

Vent Hoop Design Origin

Vent line management band and
improved stacking sequence
minimized entanglement once the
mechanism was understood
A search for a new design that
eliminated the entanglement problem
entirely was initiated
Parachute Design Examples

30

Vent Hoop Design Concept

Radials are terminated at a structural hoop
at the vent opening
The hoop is made of high strength braided
material (Kevlar, Spectra, Zylon) to
minimize weight
Free vent lines are completely eliminated,
so there is no vent entanglement
mechanism remaining
Vent line abrasion also eliminated
Parachute Design Examples

31

SDW Drogue Vent Hoop

AIAA-2001-2041
Semi-Deployable
Wing (SDW) drogue
and mains were first
vent hoop chutes
Drogue 41-ft ringslot
Tested 15 times
Hoop 6500 lb Kevlar
Parachute Design Examples

32

Prototype Drogue Vent Hoop

Drogue 26-ft ringslot
Prototype drogue
used to test
lightweight fabric at Q
= 400 lb/ft2
Tested several times
Hoop 6500 lb Kevlar

Parachute Design Examples

33

X-38 Drogue Vent Hoop

AIAA-2001-2041
Double vent hoops
used to reduce vent
diameter
Drogue 80-ft ribbon
Tested 20 times
Hoop 6500 lb Kevlar
Each hoop 4 plies for
redundancy
Parachute Design Examples

34

X-38 Supersonic Drogue Vent

Hoop
AIAA-2001-2041
Double vent hoops
used to reduce vent
diameter
Supersonic drogue 16-ft
Zylon/Kevlar ribbon
Tested at high Q
subsonic
Hoop 12000 lb Zylon
Each hoop 2 plies
Parachute Design Examples

35

X-38 Supersonic Pilot Vent Hoop

AIAA-2001-2041
Double vent hoops
used to reduce vent
diameter
Supersonic drogue 2.2ft Kevlar ribbon
Tested at high Q
subsonic
Hoop 1500 lb Kevlar
Each hoop 2 plies
Parachute Design Examples

36

Experience with Vent Hoops

No problems encountered with vent
hoops during many tests of several
different designs

Parachute Design Examples

37

Parachute Porosity vs Diameter

Knacke NWC TP 6575
Figure 6-23
Large parachutes
require lower porosity
Universal truth or just
reflection of most
common applications
for different sized
parachutes?
Why?
Parachute Design Examples

38

NASA/JSC and Natick Joint

Program
JSC was designing large round parachute
for use as X-38 backup parachute in
cluster of 3
105-ft ringslot with ribbon vent area

Natick provided some test support if the

parachutes were tested in the 500-ft LVAD
mode
Low altitude extraction from airdrop aircraft
Parachute Design Examples

39

NASA/JSC and Natick Joint

Program
3 parachutes were fabricated by USA at
the KSC PRF
Three single parachute tests were planned
to evaluate the deployment, inflation and
load characteristics of the first parachute
No reefing was planned because the LVAD
delivery required rapid inflation

Parachute Design Examples

40

Test Results for First 3 Tests

Test 1: Parachute skirt damage
Parachute did not inflate

Test 2: Skirt inversion (Mae West)

Structural failures allowed parachute to
inflate with major damage

Test 3: Skirt inversion

Parachute did not inflate
Parachute Design Examples

41

Angle of Attack at Bag Strip

Test 2 no change
for all tests
Large angle of
attack at line
stretch

Parachute Design Examples

42

Skirt Inversion Formation

Windward canopy
fabric blown under
skirt band and
inflates outside
main canopy

Parachute Design Examples

43

Inverted Skirt

Parachute in
steady descent
with large inverted
skirt (Mae West)

Parachute Design Examples

44

Analysis of Test Results for First 3

Tests
Large angle of attack at bag strip
causes skirt inversion before
parachute can inflate
Skirt inversion observed on all 3
tests
Skirt inversion prevents inflation and
causes canopy damage as parachute
inflates
Parachute Design Examples

45

Cause of Skirt Inversion

Large amount of canopy skirt
material is uncontrolled at line
stretch
Uncontrolled fabric must be
controlled to prevent skirt inversion
Angle of attack cross flow blows
uncontrolled fabric under skirt band
Parachute Design Examples

46

How to Prevent Skirt Inversion

One way to control the canopy skirt
material would be to install a short reefing
line with a short time delay cutter
Reefing would control canopy skirt but
would not delay inflation
G-11 has a similar system
Reason for G-11 reefing was not clear

Install short reefing line and short time

delay cutter and test again
Parachute Design Examples

47

Results for Test 4

Reefing line prevented skirt inversion
Angle of attack at line stretch caused
severe canopy infolding and skirt
collapse that prevented inflation
Parachute did not inflate

Parachute Design Examples

48

Redesign of Canopies
Skirt collapse could not be prevented
because of test conditions
Reduce porosity of canopy vent to
cause more positive inflation
Canopy vent areas were lined to
reduce porosity
Extent of lining limited by construction of
canopies and time available
Parachute Design Examples

49

Results for Tests 5 an 6

Test 5 was a single chute test that
repeated tests 1 through 4 with a short
reefing line
No skirt inversion
Full inflation somewhat sluggish

Test 6 was a 3 chute cluster with a scaled

up weight tub
Good inflation on all 3 chutes
Parachute Design Examples

50

Conclusions from LVAD Tests

LVAD parachute deployment conditions
(large angle of attack) cause severe
inflation and skirt inversion problems for
large parachutes
Short reefing line is effective in preventing
the skirt inversion problem
Reducing canopy porosity near the vent is
effective in improving inflation
Parachute Design Examples

51

Conclusions from LVAD Tests

The test peculiar conditions of an LVAD
deployment for large parachutes cause a
requirement for a much lower canopy
porosity than normal
Most large parachutes would have to be
tested using similar methods regardless
of their actual application
The LVAD test environment could explain
why large parachutes must be less
porous than small parachutes
Parachute Design Examples

52

Parachute Design Examples

53

Parachute Design Examples

54