RocketRage Quantum chutes?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I don't know if this is standard across the literature, but "Parachute Recovery Systems Design Manual" by T W Knacke does use the canopy area, not the projected area, as the reference area -- see page 4-11. "... parachutes use the canopy surface area. The selection of the wing planform and the parachute surface area as references was made for practical reasons... the surface area of the parachute canopy is fixed; however, the frontal projected area of the inflated parachute canopy changes with airspeed, porosity. line length, and type of parachute."

That said, I totally agree that using the frontal area would be much better for making apples-to-apples comparisons between chute types, since that's what most rocketry simulation software could most easily make use of. But the effective Cd seems to vary with descent rate/load to a pretty significant degree for many designs.

That's really interesting - as I said, it is just a reference area, so you can chose whatever you want, but I didn't know that some chutes had been designed that way.

One of the main reasons I think that projected frontal area is the best for our chutes though is simply the way most chutes are sold or advertised. Most chutes are sold by inflated diameter. If you have inflated diameter and a value of Cd based on the frontal area, you have all the information you need to determine the chute's drag at a wide variety of speeds. However, if you have a value of Cd based on amount of fabric, you then have to make a guess as to how much fabric is in the chute before you can estimate the chute's drag vs speed characteristics.
 
Back
Top