VOL. 14, NO. 3 J.

SPACECRAFT MARCH 1977

Prediction of the Drag Coefficient of a 20'

Conical Ribbon Parachute
Lajpat R. Utreja*
Northrop Services, Inc., Huntsville, Ala.

Theme was obtained using wind tunnel test results 1 and their
estimates are given as
A 20° conical ribbon parachute has been selected as the
drogue parachute for the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket
Booster Recovery System. In this paper, a mathematical
CD= 0.874
expression for the steady-state drag coefficient of a 20° AC
%= "
Downloaded by OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES on February 23, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.57170

conical ribbon parachute in subsonic flow is formulated. The

expression takes into account the effect of suspension line ACDf = (0.055 + 1.145\)es + (0.012-0.775\^) (?s)2
length, geometric porosity, and reefing line length. The
factors representing the effect of design parameters on the The drag coefficient of a reefed canopy is obtained by
drag coefficient have been determined from the various wind subtracting a correction factor corresponding to a particular
tunnel test results. The developed mathematical model can reefing line length from the full open drag coefficient given by
predict the drag coefficient of a 20° conical ribbon parachute Eq.(l)
for a wide range of the parachute size (nominal diameter, 2.89 — /"• _ A r^ cy\
CD>/ R—^D Ll^Df v^/
ft-78.3 ft). '/?.
Contents where ACDfl? = correction factor for the reefed canopy, and
Aerodynamic characteristics of a 20°conical ribbon f/j = nondimensional reefing line length LR/D0. An estimate
parachute depend upon its design parameters, such as of the correction factor for the reefed parachute was obtained
geometric porosity and suspension line length. An explicit using the two wind tunnel test results. 2>3
dependence of the parachute drag coefficient on its design
parameters is difficult to obtain analytically because of the CDf =[L7(\)2-L03\}+0.47](tR*-?R)
complicated way they affect the shape of the inflated canopy R

and influence its performance. The following approach is rR=(2.37-2.5\)

taken to define the steady-state drag coefficient. The drag
coefficient of a solid (zero geometric porosity) 20° conical The drag coefficient of 20° conical ribbon parachute given
ribbon parachute having a suspension line length equal to its by Eqs. (1) and (2) is based on parachute nominal area. The
nominal diameter is regarded as a basic drag coefficient. The applicable range of the variables is limited to the following: 1)
effect of geometric porosity, and suspension line lengths 0<X t ) <24%; 2) 1<L S /Z) 0 <2; and 3) 0.5<L R /D Q <full
greater than one nominal diameter, is introduced by adding open skirt circumference.
correction factors to the basic drag coefficient. Neglecting The empirical relationship derived is for a particular
flexibility and aeroelastic effects the parachute steady-state porosity distribution used in the SRB drogue parachute
drag coefficient at subsonic speeds is described as a function models. This porosity distribution is characteristized by
of the design parameters in the following expression equally spaced horizontal ribbons. Variation in geometric
porosity is achieved by varying the gap size, keeping the apex
vent size constant. The reader is also cautioned to note that
the suspension line length is measured from the drag
where, C D j = steady-state drag coefficient of a 20° conical producing surface to the single confluence point. In case of
ribbon parachute with geometric porosity \$ = Q% and two or more risers, or the designs where the suspension lines
suspension line length to nominal diameter ratio LS/D0 = 1.0, are attached to the forebody at more than one point, it is
ACDx = correction factor for the drag coefficient of desirable to find an effective single confluence point before
parachutes with geometric porosity, ACD(,V = correction
factor for the drag coefficient of parachutes with suspension
line length ratio of more than one, and f s ; = (LS/D0 — 1).
O IREF. 1]
Also,/r; ((R ) is a function of the reefing line length defined as A TWO SET OF POINTS CORRESPOND TO A g
follows = 15.6 and 24.8% [REF. 2]

for full open canopies D A V E R A G E OVER DROP TESTS, A Q = 23% [REF. 4]

for reefed canopies O A V E R A G E OVER DROP TESTS, A

To predict the drag coefficient of a 20° conical ribbon

parachute with known design parameters, the basic drag coef-
ficient CD{, and the correction factors ACDx and ACD(,5
need to be determined. A good fit for the correction factors
Presented as Paper 75-1354 at the AIAA 5th Aerodynamic
Deceleration Systems Conference, Albuquerque, N. Mex., Nov. 17-
19, 1975; submitted Jan. 12, 1976; Synoptic received Feb. 24, 1976;
revision received Oct. 6, 1976. Full paper available from National 0.4
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 ' 2.2
Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22151, as N77-11003
NONDIMENSIONAL SUSPENSION LINE LENGTH, LS/DQ
at the standard price (available upon request).
Index categories: Entry Deceleration Systems and Flight Mechanics. Fig. 1 Effect of suspension line length and geometric porosity on
*Senior Engineer, Aeromechanics. Member AIAA. freestream drag coefficient.

129
 130 L.R. UTREJA J. SPACECRAFT

A AVERAGE OVER TWO WIND TUNNEL TESTS

*r (REF. 2 AND REF. 3) Xg (%) ; (3.0) A\
I
0.5-1 Q A V E R A G E OVER DROP TESTS [REF. 4]
\ A C C NVE NTION/^L tflODEL s
O A V E R A G E OVER DROP TESTS [REF. 5]
co° 1-8 x> O F L EXIE L E M O DEL-sl-1
__' 25 ——————— 0FL L L S CALE 2 8 f t
Downloaded by OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES on February 23, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/3.57170

0.4- LID FLATPyi\Rt \CHUT E

0°1.4 -Jv- -\ SO
9 = 1
6% [RE -. 1
\ ^VX 9 = 16% [RE . 7]
:

^\
v N/
1.0
\.
^ ^ h-i: .—i
"""^ • -^..
u
0.6

£ -- J
>. < b
0.2

18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 81 336
PARACHUTE NOMINAL DIAMETER (in.)

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Fig. 3 Stiffness index comparison of suspended model solid flat and
NONDIMENSIONAL REEFING LINE LENGTH, L R /D Q
conical ribbon parachutes.
Fig.2 Effect of reefing line length on drag coefficient.

reasonably well with the experimental and the drop test

results.
using the same equations. Reefing line length used in the
definition is the circumference of the canopy at the skirt. The Acknowledgment
total length of the reefing line would be LR plus an additional This work was supported by NASA Marshall Space Flight
length needed for splicing. Center under Contract NAS8-21801.
Figures 1 and 2 depict a comparison of the experimental
and calculated full open and reefed drag coefficients of the References
available 20° conical ribbon parachute respectively. The data 'Utreja, L.R., "Wind Tunnel Test of the Space Shuttle Solid
for the various size parachutes has been converted to a case of Rocket Booster Drogue Parachute System," NASA TR-230-1342,
LS/DQ = 1.0 using the mathematical model. It is appropriate Sept. 1974.
2
to mention here that the flexibility has significant effect on the McVey, D.F., et al., "A Parametric Wind Tunnel Study of
performance characterisitcs of a parachute. In an effort to Ribbon Parachutes," AIAA Paper 75-1370, Albuquerque, N. Mex.,
1975.
determine the flexibility effects Heinrich and Hektner 6 3
Holbrook, J.W., "Sandia Corporation Pressure and Disreefing
proposed a stiffness index and showed that models with Test of Model Parachutes in the Vought Systems Divison Low Speed
different stiffness indexes exhibited significantly different Wind Tunnel, "LSWT-445, Sept. 1974.
drag coefficients. Stiffness indexes of two 16% geometric 4
Maydew, R.C. and Johnson, D.W., "Supersonic and Transonic
porosity 20° conical ribbon parachutes have been plotted in Deployment of Ribbon Parachutes at Low Altitudes," Journal of
Fig. 3 reproduced from Ref. 6. It was found out from the Aircraft, Vol. 9, July 1972, pp. 497-502.
wind tunnel tests 1 ' 7 that the canopy with higher stiffness
5
Holt, I.T., "Design and Development of a Heavy Duty 76-Ft.
index 7 exhibited 6% lower drag coefficient compared to the Ribbon Parachute," Proceedings Aerodynamic Deceleration Systems
canopy with lower stiffness index. [ This result agrees with Conference, Technical Report No. 69-11, April 1969.
6
Heinrich's 6 findings. Heinrich, H.G. and Hektner, T.R., "Flexibility as a Model of
Parachute Performance Characteristics," Air Force Flight Dynamics
Reference 8 presents a complete and original version of a Lab., Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio, AFFDL-TR-70-53, Aug. 1970.
parametric investigation of the dependence of the drag 7
Utreja, L.R., "Wind Tunnel Drag Test Report on the Solid
coefficient on geometric porosity, suspension line length, Rocket Booster Parachute System," NASA TR-230-1666, July 1976.
reefing line length, and the wake effects behind a forebody. 8
Utreja, L.R., "Prediction of the Drag Coefficient of a 20-Degree
Curve fitting determination of the drag coefficient has agreed Conical Ribbon Parachute," NASATN-230-1523, Sept. 1975.