43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit 2005
DOI: 10.2514/6.2005-439
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Affect upon Aeroballistic Parameter Identification from Flight Data Errors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While this technique is the most accurate method for obtaining aerodynamic data on a specific projectile configuration, it is usually the most expensive alternative, requires a spark range facility, and strictly speaking is only valid for the specific projectile configuration tested. More recently, aerodynamic parameters have been estimated using a combination of radar data and on-board instrumentation [31,32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While this technique is the most accurate method for obtaining aerodynamic data on a specific projectile configuration, it is usually the most expensive alternative, requires a spark range facility, and strictly speaking is only valid for the specific projectile configuration tested. More recently, aerodynamic parameters have been estimated using a combination of radar data and on-board instrumentation [31,32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At a discrete number of points during the flight of the projectile (< 30) the state of the projectile is measured using spark shadowgraphs [23][24][25][26][27]. The projectile state data is subsequently fit to a rigid 6 degree-of-freedom projectile model using the aerodynamic coefficients as the fitting parameters [28][29][30]. Spark range aerodynamic testing is considered the gold standard for projectile aerodynamic coefficient estimation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%