Application of Fabric Ribbons for Drag and Stabilization

Auman, Lamar; Wilks, Brett L.; Arsenal, Redstone

doi:10.2514/6.2005-1618

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, despite this, the data at the highest aspect ratios and areas actually has closer agreement to the power-law approximation. It must also be pointed out that the data gathered by Auman et al [1,3,4] used loops and streamers that are significantly longer than those considered here. These other loops exhibited streamerlike characteristics because testing was conducted at the higher velocity range of 27 m=s < U < 46 m=s.…”

Section: Variation Of the Drag Coefficient With Aspect Ratiomentioning

confidence: 91%

“…This fact was first demonstrated by Auman and Dahlke [3]. Empirical formulas for streamers and loops have been determined to describe the variation of the drag coefficient with the aspect ratio [4]: The drag characteristics have been measured for nylon loops (material properties not specified) and remain valid over two velocity ranges, 27 m=s < U < 46 m=s and a higher range of 280 m=s < U < 600 m=s. The shape of the loop canopy at these relatively high velocities is streamerlike, i.e., they tend to fold and appear as a flag; however, at a low velocity this is not the case, and no data currently exist that attempts to describe the various motions experienced by the loops in this low-speed regime.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The effects of cloth properties on the drag and flutter characteristics of loops are certainly an area for further research. Therefore, the study conducted here attempts to incorporate the effects of material properties by testing pure cotton of relatively similar material thickness, rather than the nylon cloth previously considered [1,3,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Drag and Flutter Characteristics of Loop Membranes

Carruthers

Filippone²

2007

Journal of Aircraft

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the results of experimental investigations on the aerodynamic characteristics of high-drag devices with flexible membranes joined at their short ends (loops). The loops were placed in a low-speed wind tunnel and tested at speeds up to 19 m=s. The range of Reynolds numbers was Re 2 10 5 -2 10 6 . The loops were tested for a variety of aspect ratios, from 3.3 to 30, three planform areas, and two mounting methods. Results are presented for the drag coefficient and for the flutter characteristics. We prove that with a low aspect ratio the loops form a teardrop shape and their flutter mode is a sinusoidal-like oscillation. Furthermore, the drag coefficient decreases with the increasing wind speed, but it depends strongly on the aspect ratio and the planform area. Empirical correlations for the drag coefficient are polynomial equations. Nomenclature A = planform area, m 2 C D = drag coefficient based on the planform area (single side area) c 1 , c 2 = coefficients in Eq. (1) Re = Reynolds number based on loop length U = freestream velocity, m=s = loop thickness, mm

show abstract

Section: Variation Of the Drag Coefficient With Aspect Ratiomentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Drag and Flutter Characteristics of Loop Membranes

Carruthers

Filippone²

2007

Journal of Aircraft

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figure 15 presents drag coefficient data for the cases measured in the tunnel along with data extracted from the literature. Equation 2 provides an analytical function that fits the wind tunnel data and follows trends reported in the literature [8][9][10][11].…”

Section: Ribbon Additionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[8] [9] The atmospheric wind velocity components express the horizontal atmospheric wind in the body frame. And are found from the horizontal wind magnitude and heading.…”

Section: Iiib Aerodynamic Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design, Simulation, and Experimental Testing of Humanitarian Aid Airdrop Micro Packages

Herrmann

Costello

Montalvo

et al. 2012

AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional airdrop methods for humanitarian aid and emergency relief require dropping heavy payloads far away from the intended recipients. Currently, there are a number of issues with this method of delivery. Because supplies are distributed by just a few large crates dropped on or near the location of those requiring relief, there is not only risk of injury upon being struck by one of these large crates, but it is also common for the distribution of supplies to be inhibited by adversaries. Thus, in an effort to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of such difficulties, a safer, more effective means of dropping and distributing humanitarian aid is necessary. The development of small sized packages of supplies that can be dispersed directly above a populated area with minimal risk of human injury is essential to ensure safe, timely, and effective distribution of aid. The research reported here explores several proposed packaging designs of individual food and water rations to identify possible methods to deploy emergency relief in a manner consistent with the previously stated requirements. With a combination of flight dynamic simulation, wind tunnel testing, and flight testing, promising package designs that meet impact requirements are identified. NomenclatureC = aerodynamic force or moment coefficient, denoted by subscript , , = unit vectors denoting the axes of a reference frame [I] = total body mass moment of inertia matrix (kg-m 2 ) A = reference area (m 2 ) F s = cushion spring force (N) g = gravitational acceleration (m/s 2 ) k s = cushion spring stiffness (Pa/m) L, M, N = moment components in the body reference frame (N-m) m= total body mass (kg) p, q, r = angular velocity components of the body frame with respect to the body frame (rsd/s) q 0 , q 1 , q 2 , q 3 = quaternion parameters denoting the orientation of the body frame relative to the inertial frame R = sphere radius (m) r x , r y , r z = body frame components of a position vector from center of gravity to a point of interest (m) s = cushion thickness (m) SL, BL, WL = distances along the station, butt, and water lines from the body frame origin (m) [T BW ] = rotation matrix from the body to the wind reference frame [T IB ] = rotation matrix from the inertial to the body reference frame 2 u, v, w = velocity components of the mass center in a body reference frame (m/s) V air = air velocity magnitude relative to the body center of gravity (m/s) V imp = cushion impact velocity magnitude (m/s) V w = horizontal wind velocity magnitude with respect to the inertial frame (m/s) x, y, z = inertial positions of the body mass center (m) X, Y, Z = force components in the body reference frame (N) x imp = cushion impact deflection (m) φ, θ, ψ = Euler roll, pitch, and yaw angles of the body frame relative to the inertial frame (rad) ψ w = wind heading from North (rad) Subscripts * 0 = pertaining to the initial state * A = aerodynamic forces and moments acting on the attachments * air = air velocities relative to the center of gravity in the body frame * B

show abstract

Body-Fluid-Structure Interaction Simulation for a Trailing-Edge Flexible Stabilizer

Kiani

Mohammadi-Amin

2019

Multibody Dynamics 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Application of Fabric Ribbons for Drag and Stabilization

Cited by 8 publications

References 3 publications

Drag and Flutter Characteristics of Loop Membranes

Drag and Flutter Characteristics of Loop Membranes

Design, Simulation, and Experimental Testing of Humanitarian Aid Airdrop Micro Packages

Body-Fluid-Structure Interaction Simulation for a Trailing-Edge Flexible Stabilizer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About