Parachutes for

Planetary Entry Systems

Juan R. Cruz
Exploration Systems Engineering Branch
NASA Langley Research Center

V13P
1

Overview
Slide No.
Part I: Introduction 4
Lecture Objectives 5
Scope 6
Further Study 7
Purposes of Aerodynamic Decelerators 9
Historical Review 10

Part II: Parachutes 17

Terminology 18
Types and Functions 24
Stages 35
Drag 36
Dynamics 48
…continued

Overview 2
Overview
Slide No.
Part II: Parachutes - continued
Deployment 59
Ination 71
Opening Loads 80
Materials 89
Mass and Volume 91
Testing 94
Fluid-Structures Interaction (FSI) Analyses 103

Part III: Additional Materials 104

Symbols 105
Acronyms 108
Glossary 109
Acknowledgements 116
Point of Contact 117
Bibliography 118
Overview 3

Introduction

Slide No.
Part I: Introduction 4
Lecture Objectives 5
Scope 6
Further Study 7
Purposes of Aerodynamic Decelerators 9
Historical Review 10

Introduction 4
Lecture Objectives

Provide an introduction to the design and analysis of

parachutes for planetary entry systems
- Extensive bibliography provided for more detailed
study

Target Audience
• Engineers responsible for the development and
qualication of such systems
• Program managers and system engineers
responsible for setting requirements and supervising
development and qualication of such systems

Introduction: Lecture Ob jectives 5

Scope
Lectures emphasize topics most relevant to planetary
entry systems, including those for:
- Robotic missions
- Precursor human exploration missions
- Earth sample return missions
- Earth qualication of systems for planetary missions

Topics not emphasized are those only relevant to Earth

applications

Topics not discussed:

- Parafoils, inatable aerodynamic decelerators (IAD)
- Rigid aerodynamic decelerators (e.g., drag rings)
- Systems intended for entry or aerocapture
(e.g., inatable aeroshells)
- Textile impact attenuation devices (e.g., airbags)
Introduction: Scop e 6
Further Study I

Bixby, H. W., Ewing, E. G., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery Systems

Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.
• Comprehensive (458 pages)
• Extensive bibliography (> 500) referenced through text
• Published in 1978 - some sections (e.g., materials) are outdated
• As with all documents, watch out for typos and incorrect information
• Required reading for engineers involved in the development and qualication of
aerodynamic decelerators for planetary entry systems

Knacke, T. W.: Parachute Recovery Systems Design Manual, Para

Publishing, Santa Barbara, California, 1992.
• Comprehensive (~250 pages)
• Extensive bibliography referenced through text
• Similar to Recovery Systems Design Guide - not as comprehensive but more
up-to-date
• Required reading for engineers involved in the development and
qualication of aerodynamic decelerators for planetary entry systems
• Can be ordered at the following web site: www.parapublishing.com/parachute/

Introduction: Further Study 7

Further Study II
H.G. Heinrich Parachute Systems Short Course
• One-week short course
• Offered on even years (next session in 2006)
• Taught by practitioners in the eld with extensive practical experience
• Timed to allow time for questions during and after lectures
• Sponsored by the AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Technology
Committee
• Comprehensive
• Highly recommended for engineers involved in the development and
qualication of aerodynamic decelerators for planetary entry systems
• Contact: Dr. Jean Potvin
Department of Physics
Saint Louis University
3450 Lindell Blvd.
St. Louis, MO 63103
314-977-8424 (voice)
[email protected]
www.engr.uconn.edu/%7Eadstc/shortcourses.html

Introduction: Further Study 8

Purposes of Aerodynamic Decelerators
Aerodynamic decelerators typically provide one or more
of the following functions:

• Deceleration
• Control acceleration
• Minimize descent rate
• Provide specied descent rate
• Provide stability (drogue function)
• System deployment (pilot function)
• Provide difference in ballistic coefcient for separation events
• Provide height
• Provide timeline
• Provide specic state (e.g., altitude, location, speed for
precision landing)

Introduction: Purp oses of Aerodynamic Decelerators 9

Historical Review
Planetary Exploration Missions Using Parachutes
Venera 5-14, USSR Venus, 1969-1982
Luna 16, 20, and 24, USSR Earth Sample Return from Moon, 1970-1976
Mars 2 & 3, USSR Mars, 1971
Mars 6, USSR Mars, 1974
Viking 1 & 2, US Mars, 1976
Pioneer Venus, US Venus, 1978
Vega 1 & 2, USSR Venus, 1985
Galileo, US Jupiter, 1995
Mars Pathnder (MPF), US Mars, 1997
Mars Polar Lander (MPL), US Mars, 1999
Beagle 2, UK Mars, 2003
Mars Exploration Rovers (MER), US Mars, 2004
Huygens, Europe Titan, 2004
Genesis, US Earth Sample Return from Space, 2004
Stardust, US Earth Sample Return from Comet, 2006
Introduction: Historical Review 10
Mars 2 & 3
Entry
Heatshield
Release
Rocket-Deployed
Pilot Parachute

Terminal
Pilot-Deployed Descent
Main Parachute

Reefed Main
Parachute Retro-Rocket
Firing

Full-Open
Main Parachute

Landing

Graphic Source: Perminov, V. G: The Difcult Road to Mars - A Brief History of Mars Exploration
in the Soviet Union, NASA Monographs in Aerospace History Number 15, 1999.

Introduction: Historical Review 11

Pioneer Venus
Entry

Mortar-Deployed Pilot Parachute at M ~ 0.8, H ~ 67 km

Pilot-Deployed Main Parachute

Heatshield Release

~1s
Probe Release
at H ~ 47 km

3.25 s

19 min

Pilot Parachute: Guide Surface, D0 = 0.76 m

Main Parachute: 20° Conical Ribbon, D0 = 4.9 m
Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Introduction: Historical Review 12

Mars Pathnder
Entry
Mortar-Deployed Parachute at M = 1.7, q = 590 Pa
Heatshield Separation
Disk-Gap-Band (DGB) Parachute
D0 = 12.7 m
Lander Separation

Airbag Ination

Retro-Rocket Firing

Bridle Cut

Bouncing

Rover Deployment
Introduction: Historical Review 13

Mars Exploration Rover EDL

MER EDL Animation

Introduction: Historical Review 14

Genesis
Mortar-Deployed Drogue/Pilot Parachute at M ~ 1.4, H ~ 33 km

Descent Under Drogue/Pilot Parachute

Drogue/Pilot-Deployed Parafoil

Descent Under Parafoil

Drogue/Pilot Parachute: DGB, D0 = 2.03 m

Parafoil: S0 = 39 m2
Mid-Air Retrieval
Graphic Source: Genesis Sample Return Press Kit, NASA, September 2004.

Introduction: Historical Review 15

Huygens
Entry
Mortar-Deployed Pilot Parachute at M ~ 1.5
Pilot-Deployed Main Parachute
Heatshield Separation
Descent Under Main Parachute
Main Parachute-Deployed
Drogue Parachute
Descent Under
Drogue Parachute
Touchdown

2.5 s

30 s

Parachutes
Pilot: DGB, D0 = 2.59 m 15 min
Main: DGB, D0 = 8.30 m
Drogue: DGB, D0 = 3.03 m ~ 2 hr
Graphic Source: Cassini-Huygens Saturn Arrival Press Kit, NASA, June 2004.

Introduction: Historical Review 16

Parachutes

Slide No.
Part II: Parachutes 17
Terminology 18
Types and Functions 24
Stages 35
Drag 36
Dynamics 48
Deployment 59
Ination 71
Opening Loads 80
Materials 89
Mass and Volume 91
Testing 94
Fluid-Structures Interaction (FSI) Analyses 103

Parachutes 17

Terminology I
Apex
Crown Vent

Skirt

Gore

Suspension
Lines

Suspension Lines Riser

Confluence Point
Bridle

Parachutes: Terminology 18
Terminology II
Nominal Area, S0
• Area based on canopy constructed surface area
• Includes vent area and other open areas (e.g., gap
area in a DGB parachute)
• Often (but not always!) used as reference area for
aerodynamic coefcients

Nominal Diameter, D0
• Fictitious diameter based on S0:
4S 0
D0 =
!
• Often (but not always!) used as reference length
for aerodynamic coefcients and other calculations
Parachutes: Terminology 19

Terminology III
Constructed Diameter, Dc
• Maximum diameter of the parachute (measured along
the gore radial seam) of the parachute

Conical Parachute Base Angle, µ Dv

µ
Vent Diameter, Dv
Dc
Vent Area, Sv
• Constructed area of the vent
• Although related, the vent area and vent diameter (Dv) are
not always related by the simple relationship between the
area and diameter of a circle (see following example for a
conical parachute)
• Sv is typically ~1% of S0
Parachutes: Terminology 20
Terminology IV
Geometric Porosity, !g
• Ratio of total open areas (e.g., Vent Area) to the Nominal Area
• Usually expressed as a percentage

Total Porosity, !t
• The sum of the geometric porosity and an equivalent porosity due to
fabric permeability
• Fabric permeability (i.e., ow through the fabric material) is converted
to an “equivalent” open area of the parachute to determine the
porosity due to fabric permeability
• Usually expressed as a percentage

The geometric and total porosity have a signicant effect on the

performance of the parachute (e.g., drag, stability, peak opening
load). Consideration of total porosity is important in the design
and testing of parachutes for planetary missions since there can be
signicant differences between the total porosity in an Earth test
and actual ight.
Parachutes: Terminology 21

Terminology V
Example: Conical Parachute

D2c
S0 = ! 1+ tan2 µ
4
4S 0
D0 =
!
D2v
Sv = ! 1+ tan2 µ
Dv 4
µ SV
!g =
Dc S0

Parachutes: Terminology 22
Terminology VI
Projected Area, Sp
• Projected area of the inated
Dp
parachute
• Sometimes used as reference area
for aerodynamic coefcients in
parachutes for which it is difcult to
dene S0 (e.g., Guide Surface
parachutes)

Projected Diameter, Dp
• Maximum projected diameter of the Ls
parachute based on Sp:

4SP
DP =
!
Suspension Line Length, Ls
• Typically Ls/D0 = 1 to 2
Parachutes: Terminology 23

Parachute Types
Solid Textile Parachutes
• Parachutes with canopies fabricated mainly
from cloth materials
• Typically these types of parachutes have
no openings other than the vent
• Relatively easy to manufacture
Guide Surface Parachute

Slotted Textile Parachutes

• Parachutes with canopies fabricated from
either cloth materials or ribbons
• These types of parachutes have extensive
openings through the canopy in addition
to the vent
• Can be expensive to manufacture Galileo Ribbon
Parachute
• Most common parachute type used in
planetary exploration missions MER DGB
Parachute
Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 24
Solid Textile Parachutes I

Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 25

Solid Textile Parachutes II

Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 26

Slotted Textile Parachutes

Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 27

Drag vs Stability Trade Space I

30
Average Angle of Oscillation (AAO), deg.

Solid Textile Parachutes

25
Slotted Textile Parachutes

20

Disk-Gap-Band

15

10
Ringsail
Conical Ribbon
Guide Surface
5

0
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
CD0
Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 28
Drag vs Stability Trade Space II
• Graph generated by averaging CD0 and Average Angle of
Oscillation from previous tables
• General trend: increasing drag increases average angle of
oscillation (decreased stability)
• Slotted textile parachutes provide better drag-stability trade space
• This chart does not address all important design trades! Other
considerations include:
- Heritage - what data/experience do we already have?
- Drag area vs mass trade
- Robustness - how well will this parachute hold up in the
specic application?
- Deployment and ination reliability
- Cost and ease of fabrication

Parachute type selection is inuenced by numerous considerations!

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 29

Canopies for Planetary Exploration Missions

The most commonly used canopies in planetary
exploration missions are:

Disk-Gap-Band
Guide
Surface
Conical
Ribbon Ringsail
Each of these is discussed in more detail in the following charts
Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 30
Guide Surface (Ribless) Parachutes
• Low drag (CD0 ~ 0.3) with good
stability (0° to ±3° AAO)

• Used in situations where stability is

principal consideration (drogue, pilot)

• Abrupt transition at maximum projected

diameter and subsequent ow separation
is reason for stability characteristics

• Appropriate for subsonic applications

• Difcult to manufacture

• Used by Pioneer Venus (pilot)

Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.:
Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 31

Conical Ribbon Parachutes

• Moderate drag (CD0 ~ 0.5) with good
stability (0° to ±3° AAO)

• Appropriate for subsonic and

supersonic applications

• Can be made very strong (especially

if manufactured from Kevlar) and
deployed at high dynamic pressure

• Relatively high weight per unit drag

area

• Used by:
Pioneer Venus Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.:

Galileo Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 32

Disk-Gap-Band Parachutes
• Low-to-moderate drag (CD0 ~ 0.4 to 0.7) Disk
with good-to-moderate stability (±5° to Gap
±15° AAO)
Band
• Drag can be traded for stability by
changing the gap and band heights

• Appropriate for subsonic and

supersonic applications

• Strong heritage data at supersonic

speeds in low density atmospheres
key to its continued use

• Used by:
Viking MPF MPL Beagle 2
MER Huygens Genesis Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.:
Stardust Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 33

Ringsail Parachutes
• High drag (CD0 ~ 0.8) with good-to-
moderate stability (±5° to ±10° AAO)

• Design tailored for optimum performance

by varying canopy shape and distribution
of geometric porosity throughout canopy

• Currently limited to subsonic applications

• Time consuming fabrication

• Relatively light weight per unit drag area

• Used by Beagle 2 and proposed for

other missions Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.:
Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Typ es and Functions 34

Stages
Design
Qualication
Flight Unit Fabrication
Sterilization
Spacecraft Integration
Launch
Cruise
Entry
Deployment
Ination
Descent
Release

Each stage imposes its own set of requirements and

constraints on the parachute system
Parachutes: Stages 35

Drag - Denition
Drag - Force parallel to the free-stream velocity, V

Assuming quasi steady-state conditions (e.g.,

parachute is fully inated) the parachute drag force
FP can be calculated from:
FP
FP = qCD0S 0

(using S0 as reference area)

or
FP = qCDPSP
(using SP as nominal area)
V
Parachutes: Drag 36
CD0
What does CD0 depend on?
For a specic system (parachute, entry vehicle) in quasi-steady
conditions:
CD0 = f(M, Re, Fr, Kp, c)

where,
Mach Number, M = V / a Reynolds Number, Re = ! V L / µ

Froude Number, Fr = V / (L g)1/2 Kaplun Number, Kp = k / ! V2 L

Effective Porosity, c = V! / V*

See “Symbols” section for a denition of all quantities used in this chart

It is difcult to match all these nondimensional quantities in a test!

The Mach Number and Effective Porosity are the most important parameters in
situations involving the static aerodynamic coefcients (e.g., CD0) of parachutes

Parachutes: Drag 37

CD0 vs M
Viking Parachute Wind Tunnel Test Results in Wake of Aeroshell
0.65

0.60

0.55

CD0 0.50

0.45

0.40

0.35
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
M
Sources: Jaremenko, I., Steinberg, S., and Faye-Petersen, R.: Scale Model Test Results of the Viking Parachute System at Mach Numbers from 0.1 Through 2.6, NASA CR-149377, 1971.
Moog, R. D. and Michel, F. C.: Balloon Launched Viking Decelerator Test Program Summary Report, NASA CR-112288, 1973.

Parachutes: Drag 38
CD0 vs Fabric Permeability
0.60
1.6 Viking Parachute (Permeable Fabric)
1.6 Viking Parachute (Impermeable Fabric)

0.55

CD0 0.50

0.45

Error Bars at
3-Sigma Level

0.40
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
M
The effects of fabric permeability are signicant in many parachute
systems for planetary entry systems - they must be accounted for
Source: Cruz, J. R., Mineck, R. E., Keller, D. F., and Bobskill, M. V: Wind Tunnel Testing of Various Disk-Gap-Band Parachutes, AIAA 2003-2129, 2003.

Parachutes: Drag 39

Design Effects on CD0 I

How does parachute design affect CD0?
CD0 Comparison

Canopy Type
• Example: Ringsail parachutes have higher >
CD0 than Guide Surface parachutes

Geometric Porosity
• Parachutes with smaller geometric porosity >
have a higher CD0
• Example: Increasing gap size on a DGB
parachute decreases CD0
0.60
1.6 Viking Parachute (Permeable Fabric)
1.6 Viking Parachute (Impermeable Fabric)

0.55

CD0 0.50

Fabric Permeability 0.45

• Reducing fabric permeability increases CD0 Error Bars at

3-Sigma Level

0.40
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
M

Parachutes: Drag 40
Design Effects on CD0 II
How does parachute design affect CD0?
CD0 Comparison

Suspension Lines Length

• Increasing suspension line length >
increases CD0

Trailing Distance*
• Increasing trailing distance increases CD0 >

Forebody-to-Parachute Diameter Ratio*

• Reducing forebody-to-parachute ratio >
increases CD0

*Due to wake effects of forebody on parachute

Parachutes: Drag 41

Wake Effects on CD0

0.70
Viking Parachute
Wind Tunnel Test Data
No Aeroshell
0.65

0.60

0.55
CD0 Viking Parachute
Wind Tunnel Test Data
0.50 In Wake of Aeroshell

0.45

0.40

0.35
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
M
Source: Moog, R. D. and Michel, F. C.: Balloon Launched Viking Decelerator Test Program Summary Report, NASA CR-112288, 1973.

Parachutes: Drag 42
How Do We Obtain CD0?
0.70
Viking Parachute
Wind Tunnel Test Data
No Aeroshell
0.65

0.60

0.55
CD0 Viking Parachute
Wind Tunnel Test Data
0.50 In Wake of Aeroshell

0.45

0.40

0.35
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
M

Re-Evaluation of
Available Data Flight Reconstruction

Wind Tunnel Testing Flight Testing

Parachutes: Drag 43

Viking Drag Model

CD0

M
Source: Moog, R. D. and Michel, F. C.: Balloon Launched Viking Decelerator Test Program Summary Report, NASA CR-112288, 1973.

Parachutes: Drag 44
Terminal Descent Problem
Basic Equations FP + FEV
FP + FEV = q(CD0S0 + CDEVSEV)
q = ! V2 / 2
FP + FEV = mg

Parachute Sizing - Determine S0

CD0, SEV, CDEV, q, m, and g are known
!
S0 = (m g / q - CDEVSEV) / CD0

Terminal Descent Velocity - Calculate V

S0, CD0, SEV, CDEV, !, m, and g are known
EV
!
V = {2 m g / [! (CD0S0 + CDEVSEV)]}1/2

Parameter Identication - Determine CD0

S0, SEV, CDEV, q, m, and g are known
! mg
CD0 = (m g / q - CDEVSEV) / S0
Parachutes: Drag 45

2 DOF Trajectory Equations

z
V
!
mVx = ! (FP + FEV ) cos!
mV z = ! (FP + FEV ) sin! ! mg
FP + FEV
FP + FEV = q CD0S 0 + CDEVSEV 
mg

• These trajectory equations can be solved analytically for

some simple cases
• In general, these equations are solved numerically
- Start by transforming them into a set of rst-order coupled ordinary
differential equations
- Solve for specied set of initial conditions

Parachutes: Drag 46
Parachute Clusters
Total drag area of a parachute system can
be increased by clustering parachutes

Advantages
• Easier to fabricate smaller canopies
• Drag area can be adjusted by adding
or deleting canopies
• Redundancy
• Increased stability
• Shorter ination time/distance

Disadvantages
• Slight loss of CD0 (~5% for a
three-canopy cluster)
• Problems with asynchronous ination
• Heavier than a single canopy system
Parachutes: Drag 47

Dynamics - Importance to Planetary Missions

Dynamic behavior of the entry system during the parachute

phase of descent and landing is important for numerous
reasons, for example:

• Scientic observations (imaging)

• Sensor performance (radar)

• Separation events (heatshield)

• Initial conditions for propulsive

terminal descent

• Attitude at rocket ring events

• Control of horizontal velocity

Parachutes: Dynamics 48
Model for Discussion
A simple model will be used for this discussion:
• Parachute and payload behave as a N
single unit
T
• Parachute is modeled as a rigid unit
• Payload generates no aerodynamic forces
• !: angle of attack; single degree of
freedom in this simplied model
• N: parachute normal force acting at
parachute center of pressure (CP) CP
• T: parachute tangential force acting
along axis of symmetry of parachute
m
• m: parachute pitching moment
- Shown about center of gravity, but other reference
points such as suspension lines conuence point !
also used; do not confuse with mass “m”
• Dynamic derivatives (e.g., Cm! , CN! ) are ignored V
Parachutes: Dynamics 49

Static Aerodynamic Coefcients

• CN, CT, Cm are static aerodynamic coefcients - functions of !

N = q S0 CN T = q S0 CT m = q S0 D0 Cm

• CT >> CN
2 2
• CT dominates drag behavior: CD0 = CT + CN

• Center of Pressure function of !

- However, CP assumed constant in present simplied analysis

• Pitching moment coefcient coefcient, Cm, related to CN

x
Cm = ! CP CN
D0
where xCP is distance from CP to reference point (typically the system
center of mass or suspension lines conuence point)

• CN and Cm control stability

Parachutes: Dynamics 50
Typical CT, CN, and Cm vs !
0.78 0.08

0.77 0.06

0.76 0.04

0.75 0.02

CT 0.74 CN 0.00

0.73 -0.02

0.72 -0.04

0.71 -0.06

0.70 -0.08
-20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 -20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

! (deg.) ! (deg.)

0.12

0.08

0.04

Cm 0.00

-0.04

-0.08

-0.12
-20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
! (deg.)

Parachutes: Dynamics 51

Trim and Stability

Trim: Cm = 0
Stable Trim Point: dCm/d! < 0 (restoring moment)
Unstable Trim Point: dCm/d! > 0 (diverging moment)
0.12

Stable trim points

0.08

0.04

Cm 0.00

-0.04

-0.08
Unstable trim point
-0.12
-20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

! (deg.)
Parachutes: Dynamics 52
Stable and Unstable Parachutes

0.12
“Stable Parachute”
Cm = 0 and dCm/d! < 0 at ! = 0
0.08

0.04

Cm 0.00

-0.04

-0.08
“Unstable Parachute”
Cm = 0 and dCm/d! > 0 at ! = 0
-0.12
-20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

! (deg.)
Parachutes: Dynamics 53

Possible Motions

0.12

• Gliding ight - “constant” ! 0.08

• Oscillation about single trim ! 0.04

• Oscillation from one trim ! Cm 0.00

to another -0.04

• Coning -0.08

• Combination of the above -0.12

-20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

! (deg.)

Other factors further complicate system motions:

- Wind shear
- Unsteady wake from payload
- Payload dynamics
- Attachment to payload
- Parachute self induced oscillations
Parachutes: Dynamics 54
Real World Motions - Wind Tunnel Test

Parachutes: Dynamics 55

Real World Motions - MER A Flight

Parachutes: Dynamics 56
Design Effects on Stability

Parachute choice and design can be used to

affect stability:

• Guide surface parachute is more stable than

a Ringsail parachute

• Increasing band height on DGB parachutes

improves stability

• Increasing geometric porosity improves stability

• Increasing fabric permeability improves stability

Stability considerations may drive choice of parachute

and its design
Parachutes: Dynamics 57

Multi-DOF Dynamics Models

Complex multi-DOF dynamics models are often created

to investigate stability issues

• Static aero coefcients

• Dynamic aero coefcients

• Physical mass and

moments of inertia

• Apparent mass

• System components
elasticity

There is still signicant room for improvement

in these dynamics models!
Parachutes: Dynamics 58
Deployment I
Denition
• Process by which the parachute is exposed to the
airstream so that ination can start
• Starts with the parachute in its deployment bag
within the entry vehicle
• Ends with the parachute stretched-out (but not
inated) and completely out of its deployment bag,
streaming behind the entry vehicle

Deployment Methods Discussed

• Extractor Rocket
• Pilot Parachute
• Mortar
Parachutes: Dep loyment 59

Deployment II
A good deployment system will:
- Keep the parachute under tension
- Prevents “dumping” of the canopy (i.e., uncontrolled
emergence from the deployment bag)
- Keep the parachute from tangling
- Minimize inertial deployment loads (i.e., snatch loads)
- Prevent signicant ination before the parachute is
completely out of its deployment bag
- Be reliable (i.e., works every time, in the same way)
- Will operate properly at a variety of deployment conditions
(e.g., combinations of M and q)
- Can be qualied through a reasonable testing program

Planetary parachutes use lines-rst deployment systems

Parachutes: Dep loyment 60
Deployment III
Lines-First Deployment

y
op
an
s on
C
ne si
Li en
sp
Su
er
is
R
&
le
rid
B

Parachutes: Dep loyment 61

Extractor Rocket

• Rocket used to extract pilot or main

Rocket-Deployed
parachute Pilot Parachute

• Used in Soviet Mars 2 and 3

missions
• Low recoil force
Pilot-Deployed
• Reliable Main Parachute

• Insensitive to deployment
conditions (e.g., M and q)

Graphic Source: Perminov, V. G: The Difcult Road to Mars - A Brief History of Mars Exploration
in the Soviet Union, NASA Monographs in Aerospace History Number 15, 1999.

Parachutes: Dep loyment 62

Pilot Parachute I

Genesis System

Mortar-Deployed Drogue/Pilot Parachute at M ~ 1.4, H ~ 33 km

Descent Under Drogue/Pilot Parachute

Drogue/Pilot-Deployed Parafoil

Descent Under Parafoil

Graphic Source: Genesis Sample Return Press Kit, NASA, September 2004.

Parachutes: Dep loyment 63

Pilot Parachute II
• Used in numerous missions:
Mars 2 and 3 Pioneer Venus
Genesis Stardust Huygens

• Low recoil force

• Allows extracted parachute to be packed in almost

any shape

• Added complexity (more than one parachute,

deployment system needed for pilot parachute)

• May have problems with bag strip velocity

• May be sensitive to deployment conditions

Parachutes: Dep loyment 64
Mortar I

Attachment
Lugs (3)
Cover

Rails (3)

Sabot

Tube

Gas Generator

Parachutes: Dep loyment 65

Mortar II

• Mortar mounted on the backshell

of the entry vehicle

• Mortar ejects parachute pack at

high velocity (100 to 130 ft/s)

• Parachute emerges from

deployment bag in a lines-rst
sequence

• Deployment bag separates from

parachute at end of deployment
leaving parachute stretched-out
and ready for ination
Parachutes: Dep loyment 66
Drop Test with Mortar Deployment

Parachutes: Dep loyment 67

Wind Tunnel Test with Mortar Deployment

Parachutes: Dep loyment 68

Mortar Remarks

• Used in all US missions to Mars

• Simple and reliable
• Relatively easy to qualify
• Low bag-strip velocity
• Insensitive to deployment conditions
• High recoil force
• Parachute must be packed to high density (typically 40 to
45 lbm/ft3)
• Mortar tube must be long enough to provide sufcient stroke for
parachute pack acceleration
- Parachute pack length to diameter ratio 1.0 to 2.5
• Inexible with regards to parachute pack geometry and
dimensions
- Can be problematic wrt space allocation inside entry vehicle

Parachutes: Dep loyment 69

Snatch Loads
As the parachute bag re-accelerates to the entry vehicle
velocity, inertial forces are generated
These inertial forces are known as snatch loads
Load vs Time
20000

Peak opening load

15000

Snatch load
Load (lb)

10000

End of deployment
Load (lb)

5000 & start of ination

-5000 Start of deployment (mortar ring)

Mortar recoil force
-10000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Time fromTime (s)Firing (s)

Mortar
Parachutes: Dep loyment 70
 Ination

• Process by which the parachute is

lled (i.e., opens)

• Starts with the parachute stretched-out

and completely out of its deployment
bag, streaming behind the entry vehicle

• Ends with rst full-ination of the

parachute

Parachutes: Ination 71

Ination Process
a) Opening of canopy mouth (start of ination)

b) Air mass moves along canopy

c) Air mass reaches crown of canopy

d) Inux of air expands crown

e) Expansion of crown resisted by structural

tension and inertia

f) Enlarged inlet causes rapid lling

g) Skirt over-expanded, crown depressed by momentum of

surrounding air mass
Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Ination 72
Subsonic Ination

• At subsonic speeds, ination is often modeled as occurring over

a constant number of parachute diameters (i.e., multiples of D0)
for a given parachute type
• Parachute is “scooping” a given volume of air to inate
• For the most part, experimental data supports this assumption
• Thus if ination occurs at a constant velocity, V, the ination
time, tinf, can be estimated from:
tinf = ninf D0 / V
where n depends on the parachute type and geometry (typically
ninf ~ 6 to 15)
• If V varies signicantly during ination, the equations of motion
must be integrated to obtain the ination time for a given ination
distance
Parachutes: Ination 73

Supersonic Ination

• At supersonic speeds, ination is often modeled as occurring

over a xed time, proportional to the parachute diameter but
independent of Mach number (in the range 1.5 ! M ! 2.5)
• For the most part, experimental data supports this assumption
• Thus,
tinf = Kinf D0
where Kinf depends on the parachute type and geometry (for a
Viking-type DGB, Kinf ~ 0.02 s/m)
• Ination (from bag strip to full ination) is very fast at supersonic
speeds! For the Viking DGB with D0 = 16 m, tinf ~ 0.32 s.

Parachutes: Ination 74
Innite-Mass Ination
• If ination is of the innite mass type there will be little deceleration
and reduction in the dynamic pressure during ination
- Peak opening load will occur at full ination
• Innite-mass ination can happen when ination occurs so
rapidly that there is no time for signicant deceleration of the
entry vehicle during ination
• Parachute ination in thin atmospheres at supersonic speeds is
often of the innite mass type -> Mars!
• Innite-mass ination is difcult to obtain at subsonic speeds at
low Earth altitudes - this presents a challenge to the qualication
of supersonic parachutes at low Earth altitudes
• To obtain innite-mass ination at low Earth altitudes:
- Payload mass must be large or,
- Test must be conducted in a wind tunnel
Parachutes: Ination 75

Innite-Mass Ination Example

MER Drop Test - 8,000 lbm Test Vehicle
35 50
Peak opening load
and full ination
25 40

Load
Load / 1,000 (lb)

15 30
q (psf)

5 q 20

-5 10

-15 0
-2 0 2 4 6
Time from Mortar Firing (s)
Parachutes: Ination 76
Innite-Mass Ination Film

Parachutes: Ination 77

Finite-Mass Ination

• If the payload has “nite-mass,” there will be substantial

deceleration and reduction in the dynamic pressure during the
ination
- Peak opening load will not occur at full ination

• This is the typical situation when parachutes are inated at low

Earth altitudes

• It is more difcult to accurately predict the opening loads in a

nite-mass ination

Parachutes: Ination 78
Finite-Mass Ination Example
MER Drop Test - 3,000 lbm Test Vehicle
20 60
Peak opening load
Full ination
15 50
Load / 1,000 (lb)

10 40

Load

q (psf)
5 30

0 20

q
-5 10

-10 0
-2 0 2 4 6
Time from Mortar Firing (s)
Parachutes: Ination 79

Opening Loads

Accurate calculation of opening loads are critical for:

• Stress analysis of parachute
• Stress analysis of entry vehicle
• Calculating acceleration of payload
• Specication of on-board accelerometers

Three opening loads analysis methods are discussed

here:
• Panz’s Method
• Ination Curve Method
• Apparent Mass Method

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 80

Panz’s Method Description

• Simple, rst-order, design book type method

• Requires least knowledge of the system as

compared to other methods

• Version presented here assumes no gravity - limits

application to shallow ight path angles at parachute
deployment (can be extended to account for gravity
and steeper ight path angles)

• Neglects entry vehicle drag

• Yields only peak opening load

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 81

Panz’s Method Equations

Fpeak = q1 CD0 S0 CX X1
where X1 = f(A, n) and A = 2 mEV / CD0 S0 ! V1 tinf

Variables denition
Fpeak - peak opening load
q1 - dynamic pressure at start of ination
CD0 - parachute full-open drag coefcient
S0 - parachute nominal area
CX - opening load factor (from test data or tables in pages 24 through 26)
X1 - force reduction factor accounting for deceleration during ination
(see gure 5-51 of Knacke: Parachute Recovery Systems Design
Manual)
A - ballistic parameter
n - ination curve exponent (dependent on canopy type, see
Knacke: Parachute Recovery Systems Design Manual, p. 5-58)
mEV - mass of entry vehicle
! - atmospheric density
V1 - velocity at start of ination
tinf - ination time (see ination section for guidelines)
Parachutes: Op ening Loads 82
Panz’s Method Example
MER A - Spirit
q1 = 729 Pa
CD0 = 0.400 (at M = 1.75)
D0 = 14.1 m
S0 = 156 m2
CX = 1.45

mEV = 827 kg
! = 0.00863 kg/m3
V1 = 411 m/s
tinf = 0.282 s (from previous discussion on supersonic ination)

A = 26.5
n = 2 (for DGB parachutes)
X1 = 0.98 (i.e., very close to innite mass ination!)
!

Fpeak = 64,641 N (within 10% of best estimate)

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 83

Ination Curve Method Description

• An explicit version of Panz’s method

• Assumes a drag area growth function with opening

load factor

• Only as accurate as the assumed drag area growth

function and the opening load factor

• Requires determination of the trajectory

• Easy to implement in trajectory analysis programs

• Yields parachute force-time history

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 84

Ination Curve Method Equations

! t ! tSI !n tFI
Parachute Force, FP

FP = qCD0S 0CX ! !
! tFI ! tSI !
Peak Opening Load
FP = qCD0S 0

FP = 0

tinf
tSI
Time, t

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 85

Apparent Mass Method Description

• As the parachute inates it carries with it a certain amount of

air mass both within and around it - this air mass is known as
the apparent mass

• Accelerating the apparent mass requires force, which is

generated by the parachute

• Thus, the apparent mass is reected in Fp, the parachute force

• The apparent mass varies with the state of the parachute during
ination

• Although apparent mass opening loads methods are more

physically sound and general, they are difcult to implement
due to the large number of unknowns

• Implementation in trajectory analysis is required

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 86
Apparent Mass Method Equations
d
Basic equation: FP = qCD S +
dt
{(mp + ma )V} + mpgsin!
dV dma
After differentiating: FP = qCD S + (mp + ma ) + V + mpgsin!
dt dt
Fp - parachute force
q - dynamic pressure
CDS - parachute drag area (function of time)
ma - apparent mass
mp - parachute mass
V - velocity
g - acceleration of gravity
! - ight path angle (positive above horizon)

Key difculties in implementing apparent mass opening

load methods lie in modeling CDS and ma

Parachutes: Op ening Loads 87

Reeng
Opening loads can be controlled by temporarily
restricting canopy at the skirt - this is known as reeng
• Reeng line(s) threaded through rings
at parachute skirt

• Reeng line(s) length controls degree

of reeng and drag area

• Reeng line is cut allowing parachute

to continue ination

• Reeng can be performed in multiple

stages

• Reeng is also an effective method

for drag area control

• Added complexity and possible failure

modes need to be considered in design
Parachutes: Op ening Loads 88
Materials I
Most commonly used materials for planetary parachutes:

• Nylon
- Good strength
- Often used in fabric form
- 480°F melting point
- Poor ultraviolet light resistance

• Dacron
- Good strength
- Often used in fabric form
- 485°F melting point

• Nomex
- Moderate strength
- Often used in fabric form
- 800°F melting point
- Used mainly in higher temperature applications
continued…
Parachutes: Materials 89

Materials II
• Kevlar
- High strength
- Most used in lines and webbing form
- 850°F melting point
- Poor ultraviolet light resistance
- Used mainly for suspension lines, bridles, risers, and
reinforcements
- Has signicantly reduced parachute mass as compared to the
mainly-Nylon systems of the 1970’s

• Teon
- Often used as low-friction liner for deployment bags to avoid
friction burns

• New Materials
- Spectra
- Vectran
- Zylon

Parachutes: Materials 90
Mass and Volume

Determining the mass of a planetary parachute system

can be done in various ways:

• Estimating mass based on historical data

• Bottoms-up mass estimate from system drawings

• Measuring weight of prototype and nal systems

Parachutes: Mass and Volume 91

Historical Ringsail Parachute Mass Data

300

mP / S0 = 0.1055 kg/m2
Parachute System Mass, mP (kg)

250

200

150

100

50

Data Source: Ewing, E. G.: Ringsail Parachute Design, AFFDL-TR-72-3, 1972.

0
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000
2
S0 (m )
Parachutes: Mass and Volume 92
Historical Mortar Mass Data

Mortar Mass (lbm)

Parachute Mass (lbm)

Graphic Source: Ewing, E. G., Bixby, H. W., and Knacke, T. W.: Recovery System Design Guide, AFFDL-TR-78-151, 1978.

Parachutes: Mass and Volume 93

Testing I
Types of testing performed during a planetary parachute
system design and development

Materials
• Strength & Stiffness
• Environmental (e.g., heat, UV, radiation, chemical)
• Fabric Permeability
• Joint and Seam

Wind Tunnel Testing

• Drag Coefcients
• Other Aerodynamic Coefcients
• Parachute Dynamics
• Parachute Strength
continued…
Parachutes: Testing 94
Testing II

Flight Testing (Low- and High-Altitude)

• Drag Coefcient
• Other Aerodynamic Coefcients
• Parachute Dynamics
• Parachute Strength
• Deployment and Ination
• System Operation and Performance

Ground Testing
• Mortar Performance
• Bag Strip
• Structural
• Vibration
• Thermal & Vacuum
Parachutes: Testing 95

Balloon / Rocket Flight Testing

Graphic Source: Darnell, W. L., Henning, A. B., and Lundstrom, R. R.: Flight test of a 15!foot!diameter (4.6 meter)
120° conical spacecraft simulating parachute deployment in a Mars atmosphere, NASA-TN-D-4266, 1967.

Parachutes: Testing 96
Balloon / Rocket Flight Testing Film

Parachutes: Testing 97

Rocket Flight Testing

Graphic Source: Eckstrom, C. V. and Branscome, D. R.: High-altitude ight test of a disk-gap-band
parachute deployed behind a bluff body at a Mach number of 2.69, NASA!TM!X!2671, 1972.

Parachutes: Testing 98
MER Low-Altitude Flight Testing
Parachute Drag Structural Qualication
and Dynamics

Parachutes: Testing 99

MER Low-Altitude Structural Qualication Flight Testing

Parachutes: Testing 100

MER Sub-Scale Wind Tunnel Testing

Drag Coefcient
Aero Static
Stability Coefcients

Parachutes: Testing 101

MER Full-Scale Structural Qual Wind Tunnel Testing

Parachutes: Testing 102

Fluid-Structures Interaction (FSI) Analyses

• Analyses used currently to design, develop, and qualify parachutes are

highly empirical - not derived from rst principles

• Coupling of uid (CFD) and structures

(FEM) analyses to solve parachute
problems has become viable

• CFD + FEM = FSI

• Potential benets of FSI

- Yield insights as to why parachutes
work the way they do
- Allow for the numerical exploration
and optimization of the design before testing
- Guide the scaling of sub-scale test results to full-scale ight
- Guide the full-scale qualication testing of new designs
- Expand the range of applicability of previous test results by
numerical extrapolation

Parachutes: Fluid-Structures Interaction (FSI) Analyses 103

Additional Materials

Slide No.
Part III: Additional Materials 104
Symbols 105
Acronyms 108
Glossary 109
Acknowledgements 116
Point of Contact 117
Bibliography 118

Additional Materials 104

Symbols
a speed of sound
A ballistic parameter
c effective porosity
C DEV drag coefcient of the entry vehicle based on S EV as the reference area
C DP drag coefcient based on projected area
C DS parachute drag area
C D0 drag coefcient based on nominal area
Cm pitching moment coefcient
CN normal force coefcient
CN! derivative of C N w ith respect to d!/dt
Cm! derivative of C m w ith respect to d!/dt
CT tangential force coefcient
CX opening load factor
Dc constructed diameter
Dp projected diameter
Dv vent area
D0 nominal diameter
FEV drag force generated by the entry vehicle
FP drag force generated by the parachute
Fpeak peak opening load
Fr Froude number
g acceleration of gravity
k stiffness parameter
Kinf supersonic ination constant
Kp Kaplun number
L reference length
Ls suspension line length
H altitude

Additional Materials: Symb ols 105

Symbols
m mass, pitching moment
ma apparent mass
m EV mass of entry vehicle
mP mass of the parachute
M Mach number
n ination curve exponent
ninf number of nominal parachute diameters required for a subsonic ination
N parachute normal force
q dynamic pressure
q1 dynamic pressure at start of ination
Re Reynolds number
S EV entry vehicle reference area
Sp projected area
Sv vent area
S0 nominal area
t time
t FI time at full ination
t inf ination time
t SI time at start of ination
T parachute tangential force
V velocity
V! average ow -through velocity
V* reference velocity (2 !p / !) 1/2
Vx velocity in the x direction
Vz velocity in the z direction
V1 velocity at start of ination
x, z components of a C artesian coordinate system
xCP distance from the parachute center of pressure to the reference point
X1 force reduction factor

Additional Materials: Symb ols 106

Symbols
! angle of attack
! ight path angle (positive above horizon)
!p differential pressure across fabric
!g geometric porosity
!t total porosity
µ conical parachute base angle, viscosity
! atmospheric density

Additional Materials: Symb ols 107

Acronyms
AAO Average Angle of Oscillation
AFFDL Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory
AIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
CFD Computational Fluid Mechanics
CP Center of Pressure
DGB Disk-Gap-Band
DOF Degree-of-Freedom
EDL Entry, Descent, and Landing
EV Entry Vehicle
FEM Finite Element Method
FSI Fluid Structures Interaction
IAD Inatable Aerodynamic Decelerator
MER Mars Exploration Rovers
MPF Mars Pathnder
MPL Mars Polar Lander
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NA&SD NASA Aeronautics and Space Database
UV Ultraviolet light
Additional Materials: Acronyms 108
 Glossary
Aerocapture – an orbit insertion maneuver in which the drag generated by an entry
vehicle as it flies through the atmosphere of a planet or moon is used to reduce the
entry vehicle’s kinetic energy so that it is captured into orbit.

Aerodynamic Decelerator – a device that uses drag to dissipate a payload’s kinetic

energy and velocity.

Aeroshell – an enclosure that protects a payload from the rigors of entry.

Airbag – an inflatable textile bag used to cushion the impact of a payload.

Angle of Attack – in two dimensions, the angle between the longitudinal axis of an entry
vehicle or parachute and its velocity through a fluid.

Angle of Oscillation – the angular displacement of a parachute’s axis of symmetry from

the vertical or direction of travel.

Apex – the furthest downstream (i.e., top) portion of a parachute.

Apparent Mass – the mass of fluid, both within and around a parachute canopy, affected
by the parachute. The apparent mass has an influence on the forces and moments
generated by the parachute.

Apparent Mass Method – a method of calculating parachute opening loads that

incorporates the effects of apparent mass.

Backshell – the downstream facing portion of an aeroshell.

Bag-Strip Velocity – the relative velocity between the parachute and the deployment bag
during deployment.

Ballistic Coefficient – the ratio of mass to drag area of an entry vehicle or other
component (e.g., heatshield).

Ballute – a type of aerodynamic decelerator consisting of an inflatable structure that is

either attached to the entry vehicle through one or more risers (i.e., a trailing ballute)
or is directly attached around the edges of the entry vehicle (i.e., an attached ballute).
The inflating fluid can be provided by either a gas generator or by capturing a portion
of the airflow (i.e., a ram-air ballute). The term ballute is a combination of balloon
and parachute. Ballutes are also sometimes referred to as inflatable aerodynamic
decelerators (IAD). Ballutes have been proposed for a variety of purposes from entry
to supersonic deceleration. I discourage the use of the term ballute since it is applied
to a wide variety of disparate devices. I recommend using the term inflatable
Additional Materials: Glossary
109
 aeroshell to describe devices that are deployed and inflated prior to entry and must
withstand the heat of entry, and inflatable aerodynamic decelerator for devices
deployed and inflated at Mach numbers of five or less.

Band – the component of a Disk-Gap-Band parachute whose constructed shape consists

of a (fabric) cylinder. The upstream edge of the band is the skirt of a Disk-Gap-Band
parachute.

Bridle – a multiple-leg textile component used to attach the parachute to the payload.

Canopy – the main drag producing portion of a parachute.

Cluster – an arrangement of parachutes in which two or more identical canopies are used
simultaneously.

Conical Ribbon Parachute – a type of slotted textile parachute with a conical

constructed shape consisting of ribbons in the circumferential and radial directions.

Coning – one possible motion of a parachute/payload system in which both the parachute
and the payload rotate in circles and the combination traces two cones.

Constructed Diameter – the diameter of a parachute when it is held in its constructed

shape (e.g., the base diameter of the cone describing the constructed shape of a
conical parachute, the diameter of the hemisphere describing the constructed shape of
a hemispherical parachute).

Crown – the top portion of a parachute canopy from its maximum diameter to the apex.

Deployment – the process by which a parachute is exposed to the airstream so that

inflation can start. Deployment starts with the parachute in its deployment bag and
ends with the parachute completely out of its deployment bag and stretched-out (but
not inflated) while streaming behind the entry vehicle.

Deployment Bag – a bag containing the parachute whose main purpose is that of
effecting an organized deployment.

Disk – the component of a Disk-Gap-Band parachute whose constructed shape consists

of a circular (fabric) disk.

Disk-Gap-Band Parachute – a type of slotted textile parachute whose constructed shape

consists of a flat disk and a cylindrical band with a gap between the disk and the
band.

Drag – the component of aerodynamic force parallel to the airstream generated by a body
such as a parachute or entry vehicle.

Additional Materials: Glossary

110
Drag Coefficient – a nondimensional quantity defined as the drag of a body divided by
its reference area and dynamic pressure.

Drogue Parachute – a parachute whose main purpose is to stabilize the payload.

Dumping – uncontrolled and/or unorganized emergence of a parachute from its

deployment bag.

Dynamic Pressure – one-half the product of fluid density times the airspeed squared.

Effective Porosity – a measure of canopy porosity due to fabric permeability.

Extractor Rocket – a deployment system in which the deployment bag and parachute
are pulled away from the vehicle by means of a rocket.

Finite-Mass Inflation – an inflation of a parachute occurring such that the change in

dynamic pressure is relatively large during inflation. For a parachute, the peak
opening load will often occur before full inflation during a finite-mass inflation. The
term finite-mass inflation arises from the observation that if a payload’s mass is low
(in a constant atmospheric density, gravity-free environment) the dynamic pressure
will drop significantly during inflation since the drag of the parachute will decelerate
the payload. See infinite-mass inflation for the converse situation.

Forebody – a body suspended in front of a parachute.

Froude Number – a nondimensional number expressing the ratio of inertial to gravity

forces.

Gap – the open portion of a Disk-Gap-Band parachute whose constructed shape consists
of a cylinder joining the disk to the band by means of suspension lines.

Gas Generator – a pyrotechnic device that creates gas at high pressure behind the sabot
of a mortar to eject the parachute in its deployment bag. Also, a pyrotechnic device
that creates gas to inflate an airbag, an inflatable aeroshell, or an inflatable
aerodynamic decelerator.

Geometric Porosity – the ratio of open areas in a parachute’s canopy to the nominal
area. Usually expressed in percentage.

Gliding – one possible motion of a parachute/payload system in which there is

significant forward motion in addition to the descent.

Gore – the segment of a circular parachute canopy between the suspension lines.

Guide Surface Parachute – a type of solid textile parachute offering high stability, as
measured by its angle of oscillation, but having a low drag coefficient.
Additional Materials: Glossary
111
Heatshield – the upstream facing portion of an aeroshell. The main role of the heatshield
is to protect the payload from the heat of entry.

Infinite-Mass Inflation – an inflation of a parachute occurring such that the change in

dynamic pressure is relatively modest during inflation. For a parachute, full inflation
and the peak opening load will occur nearly simultaneously during an infinite-mass
inflation. The term infinite-mass inflation arises from the observation that if a
payload were to be of infinite mass (in a constant atmospheric density, gravity-free
environment) the dynamic pressure would not vary during inflation since the drag of
the parachute would be incapable of decelerating the payload. In practical situations
infinite-mass inflations occur only when the payload is massive, and/or the
atmospheric density is low, and/or in a wind tunnel.

Inflatable Aerodynamic Decelerator – a type of aerodynamic decelerator consisting of

an inflatable structure that is either attached to the entry vehicle through one or more
risers (trailing type) or is directly attached around the edges of the entry vehicle
(attached type). The inflating fluid can be provided by either a gas generator or by
capturing a portion of the airflow (i.e., ram-air). Inflatable aerodynamic decelerators
are not intended to withstand the heat of entry. They are deployed and inflated at
Mach numbers of five or less. See ballute and inflatable aeroshell for descriptions of
related devices.

Inflatable Aeroshell – a type of aeroshell consisting of an inflatable structure directly

attached around the edges of the payload to become part of the entry vehicle.
Inflatable aeroshells are deployed and inflated (via one or more gas generators) before
entry, and are intended to withstand the heat of entry. See ballute and inflatable
aerodynamic decelerator for descriptions of related devices.

Inflation – the filling of a parachute with fluid. Inflation starts at the end of deployment
and concludes with a fully filled parachute.

Inflation Curve Method – a method of calculating parachute opening loads that makes
assumptions as to how the drag area of the parachute increases during inflation.

Kaplun Number – a nondimensional parameter expressing the ratio of material stiffness

to fluid pressure forces.

Lines-First Deployment – a deployment procedure in which the bridles, risers, and

suspension lines emerge from the deployment bag before the canopy.

Mach Number – the ratio of airspeed to the speed of sound of the fluid.

Mortar – a device used to eject a parachute at high speed from a vehicle to effect
deployment.

Additional Materials: Glossary

112
Nominal Area – the constructed surface area of a parachute canopy including all
openings such as the vent. Often used as a reference area for the aerodynamic
coefficients of parachutes.

Nominal Diameter – a fictitious parachute diameter obtained by assuming that the

nominal area of the parachute is that of a circle. Often used as a reference length for
the aerodynamic coefficients of parachutes.

Normal Force – for a parachute, the component of aerodynamic force normal to its axis
of symmetry.

Normal Force Coefficient – for a parachute, a nondimensional quantity defined as the

normal force divided by the parachute’s reference area and dynamic pressure.

Opening Loads - the forces generated by a parachute during inflation.

Parafoil – a non-circular gliding parachute whose shape resembles that of a wing.

Peak Opening Load – the largest force generated by a parachute during inflation.

Permeability – a measure of the amount of fluid that flows through a fabric.

Pflanz’s Method - a simplified method of calculating a parachute’s peak opening loads.

Pilot Parachute – a parachute used to deploy another parachute. The pilot parachute is
usually smaller than the parachute it is deploying.

Pitching Moment – for a parachute, the aerodynamic moment normal to its axis of
symmetry. The pitching moment is expressed about a given location, for example the
parachute’s suspension lines confluence point.

Pitching Moment Coefficient – for a parachute, a nondimensional quantity defined as

the pitching moment divided by the parachute’s reference area, reference length, and
dynamic pressure. The pitching moment coefficient is expressed about a given
location, for example the parachute’s suspension lines confluence point.

Projected Area – the frontal area of a fully inflated parachute. Occasionally used as a
reference area for the aerodynamic coefficients of parachutes.

Projected Diameter - a fictitious parachute diameter obtained by assuming that the

projected area of the parachute is that of a circle. Occasionally used as a reference
length for the aerodynamic coefficients of parachutes.

Recoil Force – the reaction force generated by a mortar while deploying a parachute.

Additional Materials: Glossary

113
Reefing – a method of parachute drag area and opening loads control during inflation. In
a reefed parachute the skirt’s inflated diameter is restricted by a reefing line threaded
through a series of rings sewn along the skirt. To allow the parachute to reach full
inflation the reefing line is severed by a reefing line cutter. Multiple stages of reefing
can be used, thus controlling to some extent the inflation of the parachute.

Reefing Line – a braided cord threaded through a series of rings along the skirt of a
parachute to restrict the skirt’s inflated diameter and thus control drag and opening
loads.

Reefing Line Cutter – a pyrotechnic device used to cut a reefing line. Reefing line
cutters (typically 2 to 3 per reefing line) are usually sewn along the skirt of the
parachute.

Rigid Aerodynamic Decelerators – a non-textile aerodynamic decelerator (e.g., drag

ring, rotor).

Ringsail Parachute – a type of slotted textile parachute consisting of concentric fabric

rings and sails (essentially rings with extra fullness) with gaps between them.
Ringsail parachutes offer a good combination of drag and stability.

Riser – a single-leg textile component used to attach the parachute to the payload. Also,
a textile component used to gather several suspension lines into a single leg.

Sabot – the piston that pushes the parachute out of a mortar. On one side of the sabot lies
the parachute in its deployment bag, while on the other side the high-pressure gas
created by the gas generator is pushing on the sabot.

Skirt – the upstream edge of a parachute canopy.

Slotted Textile Parachutes – a family of parachutes with concentric slots that allow air
(or some other fluid) to flow through the canopy.

Snatch Load – the peak inertial load generated by a deploying parachute as it re-
accelerates to the speed of the payload.

Solid Textile Parachutes – a family of parachutes whose canopies lack concentric

openings (besides the vent) that allow air (or some other fluid) to flow through. Solid
textile parachutes are usually manufactured using fabric materials.

Static Aerodynamic Coefficients – the aerodynamic coefficients of a body measured at

a constant angle of attack with zero pitch and yaw rates.

Suspension Lines – braided cord connecting the skirt of the parachute to the payload.

Additional Materials: Glossary

114
Suspension Lines Confluence Point – a point in space where the suspension lines would
theoretically come together if they were to continue upstream. In most parachutes the
suspension lines are gathered by groups in risers – thus, the suspension lines often do
not physically meet at the suspension lines confluence point. The suspension lines
confluence point is useful as a reference point for the pitching moment.

Tangential Force – for a parachute, the component of aerodynamic force along its axis
of symmetry.

Tangential Force Coefficient – for a parachute, a nondimensional quantity defined as

the tangential force divided by the parachute’s reference area and dynamic pressure.

Textile Impact Attenuation Device – an inflatable structure fabricated from textile

materials and used to reduce the acceleration of a payload as it contacts the ground
(e.g., airbags).

Total Porosity - the sum of the geometric porosity and an equivalent porosity due to
fabric permeability. Fabric permeability (i.e., fluid flow through the fabric material)
is converted to an “equivalent” open area of the parachute to determine the porosity
due to fabric permeability.

Trailing Distance – the distance between the largest diameter of an entry vehicle and the
skirt of the parachute.

Trim Point/Angle of Attack – the angle of attack at which the pitching moment of a
parachute is zero.

Tube – the main cylindrical component of a mortar. The tube contains the parachute and
its deployment bag and serves as the barrel through which the parachute (in its
deployment bag) is accelerated by the sabot due to the fluid pressure created by the
gas generator.

Vent – a circular opening at the apex of a parachute through which air (or some other
fluid) flows.

Vent Area – the constructed area of the vent.

Vent Diameter – the diameter of a circular vent. Note that the vent area and vent
diameter are not always related by the simple relationship between the area and
diameter of a circle.

Additional Materials: Glossary

115
Acknowledgements

Pioneer Aerospace provided several of the

photographs used in this presentation

Dr. Steve Lingard of Vorticity Ltd. provided the

illustration of FSI

Additional Materials: Acknowledgements 116

117

Point of Contact

Juan R. Cruz
NASA Langley Research Center
Exploration Systems Engineering Branch
Mail Stop 489
Hampton, VA 23681

757-864-3173 (voice)
757-864-8675 (fax)

[email protected]

Additional Materials: Point of C ontact 117

118
 Planetary Parachute Bibliography

Juan R. Cruz

NASA Langley Research Center

September 2005

Contents
1.0 Pre-Viking
1.1 General
1.2 Wind Tunnel Testing
1.3 Flight Test Programs (PEPP, SPED, SHAPE and Others)1
2.0 Viking
2.1 General
2.2 Wind Tunnel Testing
2.3 Low Altitude Drop Tests (LADT)
2.4 Balloon Launched Decelerator Tests (BLDT)
2.5 Mortar Testing and Qualification
2.6 Multi-Body Dynamic Analyses
3.0 Mars Pathfinder
4.0 Mars Exploration Rover
4.1 General
4.2 Wind Tunnel Testing
4.3 Low Altitude Drop Tests
4.4 Mortar Testing and Qualification
5.0 Pioneer/Venus, Galileo, Beagle 2, Genesis, Cassini/Huygens, Stardust, and
Mars Science Laboratory
6.0 Other

1
PEPP – Planetary Entry Parachute Program; SPED – Supersonic Planetary Entry Decelerator Program;
SHAPE – Supersonic High Altitude Parachute Experiment
Additional Materials: Bibliography
118
1.0 Pre-Viking
1.1 General

1) Worth, R. N.: Maneuverable descent systems for Mars Landing, in: Proceedings of
the Symposium on Manned Planetary Missions 1963/1964 Status,
NASA-TM-X-53049, pp. 245-267, 1964.

2) Eckstrom, C. V.: Development and testing of the disk-gap-band parachute used for
low dynamic pressure applications at ejection altitudes at or above 200,000 feet,
NASA-CR-502, 1966.

3) Eckstrom, C. V.: Shaped parachute with stable flight characteristics, U. S. Patent

3,284,032, 1966.

4) Worth, R. N.: Descent and landing systems for unmanned Mars entry, Journal of
Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 3, No. 12, pp. 1744-1748, 1966.

5) Barton, R. L.: Scale factors for parachute opening, NASA-TN-D-4123, 1967.

6) Heinrich, H. G.: Model laws governing parachute performance in Martian

environment, Wissenschaftliche Gesellschaft Fuer Luft – Und Raumfahrt and
Deutsche Gesellschaft Fuer Raketentechnik Und Raumfahrt, Vol. 11, Jul. – Sept.,
pp. 111-116, 1967.

7) Darnell, W. L., Henning, A. B., and Lundstrom, R. R.: A method for making
large-scale decelerator tests in a simulated Mars environment, AIAA Paper 68-241,
1968

8) Gillis, C. L.: Aerodynamic decelerator systems for space missions, AIAA Paper
68-1081, 1968.

9) Guy, L. D.: Structural design options for planetary entry, AIAA Paper 68-344,
1968.

10) Harrison, E. F. and Slocumb, T. H.: Evaluation of entry and terminal deceleration
systems for unmanned Martian landers, AIAA Paper 68-1147, 1968.

11) Moog, R. D.: Mars lander vehicle/parachute dynamics, in: Proceedings of the Fifth
Space Congress, Vol. 2, pp. 10.2-1 – 10.2-30, 1968.

12) Murrow, H. N. and Preisser, J. S.: A method for controlling parachute deployment
conditions in simulated planetary environments, NASA-TM-X-61215, 1968.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

119
13) Zeiner, H., French, C., and Howard, D.: Evaluation of aerodynamic and propulsive
terminal phase systems for an unmanned Mars soft lander, in: Proceedings of the
Fifth Space Congress, Vol. 1, pp. 6.4-1 – 6.4-48, 1968.

14) Anon.: Titan/Mars hard lander, Volume I, 1400 lb capsule system design study,
NASA-CR-66727-1, 1969.

15) Anon.: Titan/Mars hard lander, Volume II, Autonomous capsule system design
study, NASA-CR-66727-2, 1969.

16) Gillis, C. L.: Deployable aerodynamic decelerators for space missions, Journal of
Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 6, No. 8, pp. 885-890, 1969.

17) Faurote, G. L.: Design of disk-gap-band and modified ringsail parachutes and
development of ballute apex inlet for supersonic application, NASA-CR-66909,
1970.

18) Ewing, E. G.: Deployable aerodynamic deceleration systems, NASA space vehicle
design criteria (structures), NASA-SP-8066, 1971.

1.2 Wind Tunnel Testing

19) Maynard, J. D.: Aerodynamic characteristics of parachutes at Mach numbers from

1.6 to 3.0, NASA-TN-D-752, 1961.

20) Galigher, L. L.: Aerodynamic characteristics of ballutes and disk-gap-band

parachutes at Mach numbers from 1.8 to 3.7, AEDC-TR-69-245, 1969.

21) Whitlock, C. H.: Wind tunnel investigation of inflation of disk-gap-band and

modified ringsail parachutes at dynamic pressures between 0.24 and 7.07 pounds
per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1786, 1969.

22) Bobbitt, P. J. and Mayhue, R. J.: Supersonic and subsonic wind-tunnel tests of
reefed and unreefed disk-gap-band parachutes, AIAA Paper 70-1172, 1970.

23) Mayhue, R. J. and Bobbitt, P. J.: Drag characteristics of a disk-gap-band parachute

with a nominal diameter of 1.65 meters at Mach numbers from 2.0 to 3.0,
NASA-TN-D-6894, 1972.

24) Couch, L. M.: Drag and stability characteristics of a variety of reefed and unreefed
parachute configurations at Mach 1.80 with an empirical correlation for subsonic
Mach numbers, NASA-TR-R-429, 1975.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

120
1.3 Flight Test Programs (PEPP, SPED, SHAPE and Others)

25) Whitlock, C. H. and Murrow, H. N.: Performance characteristics of a preformed

elliptical parachute at altitudes between 200,000 and 100,000 feet obtained by
in-flight photography, NASA-TN-D-2183, 1964.

26) Boettcher, E. W.: Planetary Entry Parachute Program, cross parachute engineering
design report, NASA-CR-66590, 1967.

27) Eckstrom, C. V. and Murrow, H. N.: Flight test of a 40-foot-nominal-diameter

modified ringsail parachute deployed at a Mach number of 1.64 and a dynamic
pressure of 9.1 pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1484, 1967. (Film
supplement L-981 available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

28) Eckstrom, C. V. and Preisser, J. S.: Flight test of a 30-foot-nominal-diameter

disk-gap-band parachute deployed at a Mach number of 1.56 and a dynamic
pressure of 11.4 pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1451, 1967. (Film
supplement L-968 available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

29) Darnell, W. L., Henning, A. B., and Lundstrom, R. R.: Flight test of a
15-foot-diameter (4.6 meter) 120° conical spacecraft simulating parachute
deployment in a Mars atmosphere, NASA-TN-D-4266, 1967.

30) Lemke, R. A.: Final report: 40 ft DGB parachute, NASA-CR-66587, 1967.

31) Lemke, R. A., Moroney, R. D., Neuhaus, T. J., and Niccum, R. J.: Design report,
65 foot diameter D-G-B parachute, Planetary Entry Parachute Program,
NASA-CR-66589, 1967.

32) McFall, J. C. and Murrow Jr., H. N.: Parachute testing at altitudes between 30 and
90 kilometers, Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 4, June, pp. 796-798, 1967.

33) Preisser, J. S. and Eckstrom, C. V.: Flight Test of a 31.2-foot-diameter modified

ringsail parachute deployed at a Mach number of 1.39 and a dynamic pressure of
11.0 pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1414, 1967. (Film supplement L-966
available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

34) Stone, F. J.: Final technical report, 55-ft-D0 ringsail parachute, Planetary Entry
Parachute Program, NASA-CR-66588, 1967.

35) Whitlock, C. H., Bendura, R. J., and Coltrane, L. C.: Performance of a

26-meter-diameter ringsail parachute in a simulated Martian environment,
NASA-TM-X-1356, 1967. (Film supplement L-946 available from the NASA
LaRC Library.)

Additional Materials: Bibliography

121
36) Bendura, R. J., Huckins III, E. K., and Coltrane, L. C.: Performance of a
19.7-meter-diameter disk-gap-band parachute in a simulated Martian environment,
NASA-TM-X-1499, 1968. (Film supplement L-983 available from the NASA
LaRC Library.)

37) Eckstrom, C. V. and Preisser, J. S.: Flight test of a 40-foot-nominal-diameter

disk-gap-band parachute deployed at a Mach number of 2.72 and a dynamic
pressure of 9.7 pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1623, 1968. (Film
supplementL-1006 available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

38) Gillis, C. L and Bendura, R. J.: Full-scale simulation of parachute deployment

environment in the atmosphere of Mars, in: Proceedings of the 14th Annual
Technical Meeting, Institute Environ. Sci., 1968, pp. 469-475.

39) Lundstrom, R. R., Darnell, W. L., and Coltrane, L. C.: Performance of a

16.6-meter-diameter cross parachute in a simulated Martian environment,
NASA-TM-1543, 1968. (Film supplement L-985 available from the NASA LaRC
Library.)

40) McFall, J. C. and Murrow Jr., H. N.: Summary of experimental results obtained
from the NASA Planetary Entry Parachute Program, AIAA Paper 68-934, 1968.

41) Preisser, J. S. and Eckstrom, C. V.: Flight test of a 30-foot-nominal-diameter cross

parachute deployed at a Mach number of 1.57 and a dynamic pressure of 9.7
pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1542, 1968. (Film supplement L-994
available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

42) Preisser, J. S. and Eckstrom, C. V.: Flight test of a 40-foot-nominal-diameter

disk-gap-band parachute deployed at a Mach number of 1.91 and a dynamic
pressure of 11.6 pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1575, 1968. (Film
supplement L-1000 available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

43) Whitlock, C. H., Henning, A. B., and Coltrane, L. C.: Performance of a

16.6-meter-diameter modified ringsail parachute in a simulated Martian
environment, NASA-TM-X-1500, 1968. (Film supplement L-984 available from
the NASA LaRC Library.)

44) Murrow, H. N. and McFall Jr., J. C.: Some test results from the NASA Planetary
Entry Parachute Program, Journal of Spacecraft, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 621-623, 1969.

45) Whitlock, C. H. and Bendura, R. J.: Inflation and performance of three parachute
configurations from supersonic flight tests in a low-density environment,
NASA-TN-D-5296, 1969.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

122
46) Eckstrom, C. V.: High-altitude flight test of a 40-foot-diameter (12.2-meter)
ringsail parachute at a deployment Mach number of 2.95, NASA-TN-D-5796, 1970.
(Film supplement L-1077 available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

47) Eckstrom, C. V.: Flight test of a 40-foot-nominal-diameter disk-gap-band

parachute deployed at a Mach number of 3.31 and a dynamic pressure of 10.6
pounds per square foot, NASA-TM-X-1924, 1970. (Film supplement L-1066
available from the NASA LaRC Library.)

48) Murrow, H. N. and Eckstrom, C. V.: Low- and high-altitude tests of parachutes
designed for use in low-density atmospheres, AIAA Paper 70-1164, 1970.

49) Eckstrom, C. V. and Murrow, H. N.: Flight tests of cross, modified ringsail, and
disk-gap-band parachutes from a deployment altitude of 3.05 km (10 000 ft),
NASA-TM-X-2221, 1971.

50) Preisser, J. S. and Grow, R. B.: High-altitude flight test of a reefed

12.2-meter-diameter disk-gap-band parachute with deployment at a Mach number
of 2.58, NASA-TN-D-6469, 1971. (Film supplement L-1106 available from the
NASA LaRC Library.)

51) Eckstrom, C. V. and Branscome, D. R.: High-altitude flight test of a disk-gap-band

parachute deployed behind a bluff body at a Mach number of 2.69,
NASA-TM-X-2671, 1972.

52) Henning, A. B. and Lundstrom, R. R.: Flight test of an erectable spacecraft used for
decelerator testing at simulated Mars entry conditions, NASA-TN-D-6910, 1972.

2.0 Viking
2.1 General

53) Lau, R. A. and Hussong, J. C.: The Viking Mars lander decelerator system, AIAA
Paper 70-1162, 1970.

54) Gillis, C. L.: The Viking decelerator system – An overview, AIAA Paper 73-442,
1973.

55) Houmard, J. E.: Stress analysis of the Viking parachute, AIAA Paper 73-444, 1973.

56) Hopper, F. W.: Trajectory, atmosphere, and wind reconstruction from Viking entry
measurements, AAS 75-068, 1975.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

123
57) Ingoldby, R. N., Michel, F. C., Flaherty, T. M., Doty, M. G., Preston, B., Villyard,
K. W., and Steele, R. D.: Entry data analysis for Viking landers 1 and 2 – Final
Report, NASA-CR-159388, 1976.

58) Martin Marietta Corp.: Viking lander “as built” performance capabilities, Martin
Marietta Corp. Report, NASA Contract NAS1-9000, 1976.

59) Seiff, A.: Mars atmospheric winds indicated by motion of the Viking landers
during parachute descent, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 98, No. E4, pp.
7461-7474, 1993.

2.2 Wind Tunnel Testing

60) Jaremenko, I., Steinberg, S., and Faye-Petersen, R.: Scale model test results of the
Viking parachute system at Mach numbers from 0.1 through 2.6,
NASA-CR-149377, 1971.

61) Reichenau, D. E. A.: Aerodynamic Characteristics of disk-gap-band parachutes in

the wake of Viking entry forebodies at Mach numbers from 0.2 to 2.6,
AEDC-TR-72-78, 1972.

62) Steinberg, S. Siemers III, P. M., and Slayman, R. G.: Development of the Viking
parachute configuration by wind-tunnel investigation, Journal of Spacecraft,
Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 101-107, 1974. (Also available as AIAA Paper 73-545, 1973.)

63) Foughner, J. T.: Viking Mars mission support investigations in the Langley
transonic dynamics tunnel, NASA-TM-80234, 1980.

2.3 Low Altitude Drop Tests (LADT)

64) Murrow, H. N., Eckstrom, C. V., and Henke, D. W.: Development flight tests of
the Viking decelerator system, AIAA Paper 73-455, 1973.

2.4 Balloon Launched Decelerator Tests (BLDT)

65) Dickinson, D., Schlemmer, J., Hicks, F., Michel, F., and Moog, R. D.: Balloon
Launched Decelerator Test program, Post-flight test report, BLDT vehicle AV-1,
NASA-CR-112176, 1972.

66) Dickinson, D., Schlemmer, J., Hicks, F., Michel, F., and Moog, R. D.: Balloon
Launched Decelerator Test program, Post-flight test report, BLDT vehicle AV-2,
NASA-CR-112177, 1972.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

124
67) Dickinson, D., Schlemmer, J., Hicks, F., Michel, F., and Moog, R. D.: Balloon
Launched Decelerator Test program, Post-flight test report, BLDT vehicle AV-4,
NASA-CR-112179, 1972.

68) Dickinson, D., Schlemmer, J., Hicks, F., Michel, F., and Moog, R. D.: Balloon
Launched Decelerator Test program, Post-flight test report, BLDT vehicle AV-3,
NASA-CR-112178, 1973.

69) Moog, R. D., Bendura, R. J., Timmons, J. D., and Lau, R. A.: Qualification flight
tests of the Viking decelerator system, AIAA Paper 73-457, 1973.

70) Moog, R. D. and Michel, F. C.: Balloon launched Viking decelerator test program
summary report, NASA-CR-112288, 1973.

71) Raper, J. L., Lundstrom, R. R., and Michel, F. C.: The Viking parachute
qualification test technique, AIAA Paper 73-456, 1973.

72) Bendura, R. J., Lundstrom, R. R., Renfroe, P. G., and LeCroy, S. R.: Flight tests of
Viking parachute system in three Mach number regimes, Part II – Parachute test
results, NASA-TN-D-7734, 1974.

73) Buna, T. and Battley, H. H.: Thermal design and performance of the Viking
balloon-launched decelerator test vehicles, AIAA Paper 74-760, 1974.

74) Lundstrom, R. R., Raper, J. L., Bendura, R. J., and Shields, E. W.: Flight tests of
Viking parachute system in three Mach number regimes, Part I – Vehicle
description, test operations, and performance, NASA-TND-7692, 1974.

75) Moog, R. D., Bendura, R. J., Timmons, J. D., and Lau, R. A.: Qualification tests of
the Viking decelerator system, Journal of Spacecraft, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 188-195,
1974.

76) Shields, E. W.: Statistical Trajectory Estimation Program (STEP) implementation

for BLDT post flight trajectory simulation, NASA CR-132427, 1974.

77) Timmons, J. D.: Viking balloon launched decelerator test, IAF Paper IAF-76-155,
1976.

2.5 Mortar Testing and Qualification

78) Brecht, J. P., Pleasants, J. E., and Mehring, R. D.: The Viking mortar: Design,
development, and flight qualification, AIAA Paper 73-458, 1973.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

125
2.6 Multi-Body Dynamic Analyses

79) Whitlock, C. H., Poole, L. R., and Talay, T. A.: Postflight simulation of parachute
deployment dynamics of Viking qualification flight tests, NASA-TN-D-7415, 1973.

80) Talay, T. A.: Parachute-deployment-parameter identification based on an analytical

simulation of Viking BLDT AV-4, NASA-TN-D-7678, 1974.

3.0 Mars Pathfinder

81) Fallon II, E. J.: System design overview of the Mars Pathfinder parachute
decelerator subsystem, AIAA Paper 97-1511, 1997.

82) Peng, C.-Y., Tsang, S. K., Smith, K., Sabahi, D., Short, K., and Mauritz, A.: Model
correlation for Mars Pathfinder entry, descent and landing simulation, in:
Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Vol. 1, pp. 233-246, 1997.

83) Spencer, D. A., Blanchard, R. C., Thurman, S. W., Braun, R. D., Peng, C.-Y., and
Kallemeyn Jr., P. H.: Mars Pathfinder atmospheric entry reconstruction, Advances
in Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 99, Pt. 1, pp. 663-692, 1998. (Also available as
AAS Paper 98-146, 1998.)

84) Braun, R. D., Spencer, D. A., Kallemeyn, P. H., and Vaughan, R. M.: Mars
Pathfinder atmospheric entry navigation operations, Journal of Spacecraft and
Rockets, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 348-356, 1999. (Also available as AIAA Paper
97-3663, 1997.)

85) Spencer, D. A., Blanchard, R. C., Braun, R. D., Kallemeyn, P. H., and Thurman, S.
W.: Mars Pathfinder entry, descent, and landing reconstruction, Journal of
Spacecraft and Rockets, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 357-366, 1999.

86) Witkowski, A.: Mars Pathfinder parachute system performance, AIAA Paper
99-1701, 1999.

87) Desai, P. N., Schofield, J. T., and Lisano, M. E.: Flight reconstruction of the Mars
Pathfinder disk-gap-band parachute drag coefficient, AIAA Paper 2003-2126, 2003.

4.0 Mars Exploration Rover

4.1 General

88) Mitcheltree, R. A.: Dynamic scaling for Earth based testing of Mars terminal
descent dynamics, AIAA Paper 2003-5391, 2003.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

126
89) Steltzner, A., Cruz, J., Bruno, R., and Mitcheltree, R.: Opportunities and limitations
in low Earth subsonic testing for qualification of extraterrestrial supersonic
parachute designs, AIAA Paper 2003-2135, 2003.

90) Steltzner, A., Desai, P., Lee, W., and Bruno, R.: The Mars Exploration Rovers
entry descent and landing and the use of aerodynamic decelerators, AIAA Paper
2003-2125, 2003.

91) Witkowski, A. and Bruno, R.: Mars Exploration Rover parachute decelerator
system program overview, AIAA Paper 2003-2100, 2003.

92) Desai, P. N. and Knocke, P. C.: Mars Exploration Rovers entry, descent, and
landing trajectory analysis, AIAA Paper 2004-5092, 2004.

93) Raiszadeh, B. and Queen, E. M.: Mars Exploration Rover terminal descent mission
modeling and simulation, AAS 04-271, 2004.

94) Witkowski, A., Kandis, M., Bruno, R., and Cruz, J. R.: Mars Exploration Rover
parachute system performance, AIAA Paper 2005-1605, 2005.

4.2 Wind Tunnel Testing

95) Cruz, J. R., Kandis, M., and Witkowski, A.: Opening loads analyses for various
disk-gap-band parachutes, AIAA Paper 2003-2131, 2003.

96) Cruz, J. R., Mineck, R. E., Keller, D. F., and Bobskill, M. V.: Wind tunnel testing
of various disk-gap-band parachutes, AIAA Paper 2003-2129, 2003.

97) Zell, P. T., Cruz, J. R., and Witkowski, A.: Structural testing of parachutes in the
National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex 80-by-120-foot wind tunnel at NASA
Ames Research Center, AIAA Paper 2003-2130, 2003.

98) Schoenenberger, M., Queen, E. M., and Cruz, J. R.: Parachute aerodynamics from
video data, AIAA Paper 2005-1633, 2005.

4.3 Low Altitude Drop Tests

99) Taeger, Y. and Witkowski, A.: A summary of dynamic testing of the Mars
Exploration Rover parachute decelerator system, AIAA Paper 2003-2127, 2003.

100) Way, D. W., Desai, P. N., Engelund, W. C., Cruz, J. R., and Hughes, S. J.: Design
and analysis of the drop test vehicle for the Mars Exploration Rover parachute
structural tests, AIAA Paper 2003-2128, 2003.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

127
4.4 Mortar Testing and Qualification

101) Vasas, R. E. and Styner, J.: Mars Exploration Rover parachute mortar deployer
development, AIAA Paper 2003-2137, 2003.

5.0 Pioneer/Venus, Galileo, Beagle 2, Genesis,

Cassini/Huygens, Stardust, and Mars Science
Laboratory
102) Nolte, L. J. et al.: Final report: System design of the Pioneer Venus spacecraft –
Volume 5: Probe vehicle studies, NASA-CR-137492, 1973.

103) Nolte, L. J. and Sommer, S. C.: Probing a planetary atmosphere: Pioneer Venus
spacecraft description, AIAA Paper 75-1160, 1975.

104) Talley, R. G.: Pioneer Venus deceleration module final report, General Electric
Re-entry & Environmental Systems Division, 1978.

105) Rodier, R. W., Thuss, R. J., and Terhune, J. E.: Parachute design for the Galileo
Jupiter entry probe, AIAA Paper 81-1951, 1981.

106) Corridan, R., Givens, J., and Kepley, B.: Transonic wind tunnel investigation of the
Galileo probe parachute configuration, AIAA Paper 84-0823, 1984.

107) McMenamin, H. J. and Pochettino, L. R.: Galileo parachute system modification

program, AIAA Paper 84-0824CP, 1984.

108) Achtermann, Kapp, R., and Lehra, H.: Parachute characteristics of Titan descent
modules planetary probe, BF-3/86-B/ESA-CR(P)-2438, 1986.

109) Lingard, J. S. and Underwood, J. C.: Wind tunnel testing of disk-gap-band

parachutes related to the Cassini-Huygens mission, AIAA Paper 93-1200, 1993.

110) Lorenz, R. D.: Scientific implications of the Huygens Parachute System, AIAA
Paper 93-1215, 1993.

111) Lingard, J. and Underwood, J.: The effect of low density atmospheres on the
aerodynamic coefficients of parachutes, AIAA Paper 95-1556, 1995.

112) Neal, M. F. and Wellings, P. J.: Design and qualification of the descent control
sub-system for the Huygens probe, AIAA Paper 95-1533, 1995.

113) Underwood, J.: Development testing of disk-gap-band parachutes for the Huygens
probe, AIAA Paper 95-1549, 1995.
Additional Materials: Bibliography
128
114) McMenamin, H. J.: Galileo parachute system performance, AIAA Paper 97-1510,
1997.

115) Underwood, J. C.: A system drop test of the Huygens probe, AIAA Paper 97-1429,
1997.

116) Underwood, J. C. and Sinclair, R. J.: Wind tunnel testing of parachutes for the
Huygens probe, in: Wind Tunnels and Wind Tunnel Test Techniques, pp. 47.1–
47.11, The Royal Aeronautical Society, 1997.

117) Witkowski, A.: The Stardust sample return capsule parachute recovery system,
AIAA Paper 99-1741, 1999.

118) Brown, G., Haggard, R., and Corwin, R. A.: Parafoil mid-air retrieval for space
sample return missions, AIAA Paper-2001-0218, 2001.

119) Fallon II, E. J. and Sinclair, R.: Design and development of the main parachute for
the Beagle 2 Mars lander, AIAA Paper 2003-2153, 2003.

120) Haigh, A.: Five month program for the new main parachute for the Beagle 2 Mars
lander, AIAA Paper 2003-2170, 2003.

121) Northey, D.: The main parachute for the Beagle 2 Mars lander, AIAA Paper
2003-2171, 2003.

122) Witkowski, A., Machalick, W., and Taeger, Y.: Mars subsonic parachute
technology task system overview, AIAA Paper 2005-1657, 2005.

123) Mitcheltree, R., Bruno, R., Slimko, E., Baffes, C., Konefat, E., and Witkowski, A.:
High altitude test program for a Mars subsonic parachute, AIAA Paper 2005-1659,
2005.

6.0 Other
124) Alexander, W. C. and Foughner Jr., J. T.: Drag and stability characteristics of
high-speed parachutes in the transonic range, AIAA Paper 73-473, 1973.

125) Foughner Jr., J. T. and Alexander, W. C.: Wind tunnel tests of modified cross,
hemisflo, and disk-gap-band parachutes with emphasis in the transonic range,
NASA-TN-D-7759, 1974.

126) Anon.: Study of advanced atmospheric entry systems for Mars, Final report,
NASA-CR-157548, 1978.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

129
127) Eiden, M. J.: Aerodynamic decelerators for future European space missions, AIAA
Paper 89-0879, 1989.

128) Ludtke, W. P.: Wind tunnel tests of a 20-gore disk-gap-band parachute,

NSWC TR 89 180, 1989.

129) Ravnitzky, M. J., Patel, S. N., and Lawrence, R. A.: To fall from space: Parachutes
and the space program, AIAA Paper 89-0926, 1989.

130) Raiszadeh, B. and Queen, E. M.: Partial validation of multibody Program to

Optimize Simulated Trajectories II (POST II) parachute simulation with interacting
forces, NASA-TM-2002-211634, 2002.

131) Masciarelli, J. P., Cruz, J. R., and Hengel, J. E.: Development of an improved
performance parachute system for Mars missions, AIAA Paper 2003-2138, 2003.

132) Raiszadeh, B.: Multibody parachute flight simulations for planetary entry
trajectories using “equilibrium points,” AAS 03-163, 2003.

133) Lingard, J. S. and Darley, M. G.: Simulation of parachute fluid structure interaction
in supersonic flow, AIAA Paper 2005-1607, 2005.

134) Manning, R. M. and Adler, M.: Landing on Mars, AIAA Paper 2005-6742, 2005.

Additional Materials: Bibliography

130
Notes
Notes
Notes
Notes