Aerodynamic Characterization of New Parachute Configurations for Low-Density Deceleration

Tanner, Christopher; Clark, Ian G.; Gallon, John C.; Rivellini, Tommaso P.; Witkowski, Allen

doi:10.2514/6.2013-1358

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 The purpose of these wind tunnel tests was to investigate the stability and drag performance of various parachute canopy designs in order to inform the design of the full-scale supersonic parachute used in the Parachute Design Verification (PDV) and Supersonic Flight Dynamics Tests (SFDT) in the LDSD test program. Multiple sub-scale (35.2%) parachute canopy configurations were tested in the National Full-scale Aerodynamics Complex (NFAC) 80'×120' test section at the NASA Ames Research Center to quantify their relative drag and stability characteristics.…”

Section: Selection Of the Ringsail Parachute And Configurationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Density Supersonic Decelerator Parachute Decelerator System

Gallon

Witkowski

Clark

et al. 2013

AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems (ADS) Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Low Density Supersonic Decelerator Project has undertaken the task of developing and testing a large supersonic ringsail parachute. The parachute under development is intended to provide mission planners more options for parachutes larger than the Mars Science Laboratory's 21.5m parachute. During its development, this new parachute will be taken through a series of tests in order to bring the parachute to a TRL-6 readiness level and make the technology available for future Mars missions. This effort is primarily focused on two tests, a subsonic structural verification test done at sea level atmospheric conditions and a supersonic flight behind a blunt body in low-density atmospheric conditions. The preferred method of deploying a parachute behind a decelerating blunt body robotic spacecraft in a supersonic flow-field is via mortar deployment. Due to the configuration constraints in the design of the test vehicle used in the supersonic testing it is not possible to perform a mortar deployment. As a result of this limitation an alternative deployment process using a ballute as a pilot is being developed. The intent in this alternate approach is to preserve the requisite features of a mortar deployment during canopy extraction in a supersonic flow. Doing so will allow future Mars missions to either choose to mortar deploy or pilot deploy the parachute that is being developed. NomenclatureC X = opening load factor d = test vehicle diameter D O = parachute nominal diameter DGB = disk-gap-band LDSD = Low Density Supersonic Decelerator MER = Mars Exploration Rover MSL = Mars Science Laboratory NFAC = National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex SPTT = Mars Subsonic Parachute Technology Task SSRS = supersonic ringsail PDD = Parachute Deployment Device PDS = Parachute Decelerator System TPS = Thermal Protection System TRL = Technology Readiness Level V&V = verification and validation x = distance behind the maximum diameter of the test vehicle 1 LDSD Parachute Cognizant Engineer, AIAA Member, john.c.gallon@jpl.nasa.gov 2 LDSD Principal Investigator, AIAA Member, ian.g.clark@jpl.nasa.gov 3 LDSD Chief Engineer, AIAA Member, tommaso.p.rivellini@jpl.nasa.gov 4 LDSD Parachute Engineer, AIAA Member, douglas.s.adams@jpl.nasa.gov 5 Director of Engineering Operations, AIAA Associate Fellow, al.witkowski@zodiacaerospace.com Downloaded by KUNGLIGA TEKNISKA HOGSKOLEN KTH on August 24, 2015 | http://arc.aiaa.org |

show abstract

Section: Selection Of the Ringsail Parachute And Configurationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Density Supersonic Decelerator Parachute Decelerator System

Gallon

Witkowski

Clark

et al. 2013

AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems (ADS) Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Single canopy aerodynamic coefficients determined using photogrammetric and loads data using methods based on NFAC experience. 5,6,7 Static aerodynamic data was gathered using a three-tether and load cell system attached to the parachute vent, coupled with axial measurements, as shown in Fig. 14.…”

Section: A Ames 80×120 Ft Wind Tunnel Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pendulum Motion in Main Parachute Clusters

Ray

Machin

2015

23rd AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Technology Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The geometric porosity generally refers to the ratio of the open area in the canopy material to the total material area [11]. It was reported that in a low-density environment such as Martian atmosphere, the geometric porosity might contribute significantly to the aerodynamic performances of the parachutes, and the effect of the fabric permeability on the aerodynamic behavior was smaller [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Study on Aerodynamic Performance of Mars Parachute Models with Geometric Porosities

Jiang

et al. 2022

Space Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The supersonic flows around rigid parachute-like two-body configurations are numerically simulated at Mach number of 1.978 by solving three-dimensional compressible Navier-Stokes equations, where the two-body model consists of a capsule and a canopy, and a geometric structure (i.e., gap) is located on the canopy surface. The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of gaps with different porosities and positions on the aerodynamic performance of supersonic parachute. The complicated periodic aerodynamic interactions between the capsule wake and canopy shock occur around these two-body models. From the formation of canopy shock and drag coefficient variation, the cycled flow structures can be divided into three types:(1) narrow wake period, (2) open wake period, and (3) middle wake period. In addition, it was found that the geometric gaps have no obvious influences on the flow modes. However, compared with models with different gap positions, the two-body model with an upper gap (gap is close to the canopy vent, UG model) has a smaller drag coefficient fluctuation and better lateral stability. On the other side, the increase of porosity has a more significant impact on UG models.

show abstract

Aerodynamic Characterization of New Parachute Configurations for Low-Density Deceleration

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Low Density Supersonic Decelerator Parachute Decelerator System

Low Density Supersonic Decelerator Parachute Decelerator System

Pendulum Motion in Main Parachute Clusters

Numerical Study on Aerodynamic Performance of Mars Parachute Models with Geometric Porosities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About