Large Supersonic Ballutes: Testing and

Applications
FISO Telecon 06-29-2016

Dr. Ian Clark, LDSD Principal Investigator

Erich Brandeau, Entry Descent and Landing Engineer

Overview

Ballute history
Parachute deployment device
Ballutes as SIADs
Use with high-beta entry vehicles
Future work

06/29/2016

jpl.nasa.gov

10

Trailing Decelerator Development

Ref: NASA TN D-1601
a

C
0

Y-

$-'

--

c6
t
c6

In

rl

0
I

Q)

v,

0
0

00

0
0
d
d

c6

C
0
0

IC

(u

Initial concepts focused on simple

geometries like cones and spheres
and quantifying their aerodynamic
performance

Beginning in 1960s, NASA and the Air

Force began researching and
developing trailing decelerators for
launch vehicle and entry vehicle
recovery

Ref: NASA L-1075

l / d = 1.14

Later geometries evolved to consider

a more structurally optimal shape
Ref:
l / d NASA
= 4 . 4 2TN D-1601
06/29/2016

jpl.nasa.gov

Isotensoid Theory
An engineer at Goodyear (Houtz)
developed a more structurally optimal
geometry => Isotensoid
Allows for use of thinner gage, and lighter,
materials

Ideally, isotensoid theory creates a

stress state that is equal in both radial
and circumferential directions
Actual implementation has concentrations
due to drag and presence of a burble fence
that creates a load concentration
Resulting geometry is still relatively lowstress though
Ref: Goodyear Aerospace Corp

This trailing isotensoid concept was

termed a ballute by Goodyear
aerospace corporation
06/29/2016

jpl.nasa.gov

ADDPEP
Goodyear Ballute Development

Goodyear continued to mature the ballute

concept through the decade, Jlargely
through Air Force sponsorship
Aerodynamic Deployable Decelerator
J (ADDPEP)
Performance Evaluation Program

J
Program covered significant analysis,
J

maturation of materials, supersonic

wind
jl
tunnel testing, and multiple sounding rocket
flights of 5-ft diameter test articles

J
Overall very successful program
J that
matured the concept significantly

ADDPEP
[ree -[l ight Evaluation
deployment sequence
Bloetscher, F., Aerodynamic Deployable Decelerator
Performance
Program, Phase
II, Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory Technical Report, AFFDL-TR-67-25, Apr. 1967.

06/29/2016

RS-SS

jpl.nasa.gov

PRIMEPROGRAM
The purpose of tests conducted for The Martin Company under Contract
SA0261 was to establish de sign parameter s for a minimum -weight drogue de-

Aerodynamics

vice capable of satisfying the performance requirements of the Air Force's

SV -SD PRIME (!'re cis ion
vehicle.

ecover y !.ncluding Maneuve rable 1.4

re -entry

Included were a series of te sts in the Arnold Engineering Develop-

ment Center's propulsion wind tunnel, Tullahoma, Tenn., in 1.2

which Hyperflo
a
a
and PARASONIC parachutes and BALLUTEs were tested for comparative

Compilation of performance data

1.0
performance at various calibers at the after part of the forebody, atvarious
shows rather consistent
Mach number s, and at dynamic pres sure s behind symmetrical and uns ym0.8
performance,
though much of it
metrical
forebodie s.
behindobjective
slender
0.6
One program
was bodies
to evaluate the effects on decelerator
perfor-

Burble Fence
No Burble Fence

CD

Leading Body
Slender
Blunt

Towline Length
2 lt/Df < 5
5 lt/Df < 8
8 lt/Df < 11
lt/Df = 11 +

mance of airflow as a variant withforebody shape, angle of attack, and control surface activity.

These tests produced significant data 0.4

on decelerator

Qualitative assessment of stability The uns ymme trical

0.2
forebody
employed
was favorable
a full-scale model of the PRIME vehicle.
always
very
pe rformance in s ymmetri cal and uns ymmetrical wake s.

0.0 the developAs a result of its initial work, GAC assumed responsibility for
ment

Very little motion of the ballute in the

of the entire recovery system for the PRHvlE vehicle.
wake of a vehicle

5
6
Mach

10

Ref: Smith, B. P., Tanner, C. L., Mahzari, M., Clark, I. G., Braun,
R. D., Cheatwood, F. M., A Historical Review of Inflatable
Aerodynamic Decelerator Technology Development, IEEE
Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, March 2010, IEEEAC
Paper #1276.

06/29/2016

Goodyear
Corp
PRIME te s t vehi cle andRef:
BALLUTE
in Aerospace
fl ight attitude

jpl.nasa.gov

Inflation & Deployment

Closed, isotensoid design is amenable
to pressurization via ram-air
Most designs incorporated a number of
inlets on the periphery of the ballute for
this purpose

SE

BURBLE FENCE
25 (DEC-

B
C

15

GORf P4 TERl?.

4.50
60.0 DIAM3.R

BURBLE FENCE AREA

IN E

KEEPER RING

14.5

Early versions were raised to get out of the

boundary layer and get higher total pressure
air, more recent concepts utilized surface
mounted inlets for simplicity

3.4.

20.8271.63

Most flight tests also incorporated

some sort of inflation aid to provide
initial pressurization

Ref: Nebiker, F. R., Aerodynamic Deployable Decelerator

Performance-Evaluation Program, Air Force Flight Dynamics
Laboratory Technical Report AFFDL-TR-65-27, Aug 1965.

Exception was a 5.5 m ballute tested by

NASA which failed to inflate successfully

06/29/2016

jpl.nasa.gov

79,000 ft).
psf.

Mach numbers ranged to 1. 92,

During an abort event,

and dynamic pressures to 180

the BALLUTE would have prevented physio-

logical harm to the astronauts from violent spinning after man and seat had
separated and prior to the inflation of the terminal descent parachute.

Additional Usage Examples

METEOROLOGICAL BALLUTES

Under Contracts AF19(628)-4194 and AF19(628)-5851 with the USAF Cambridge Research Laboratories, Goodyear Aerospace designed, fabricated,
a
and tested a BALLUTE sy s tem to decelerate and stabilize a 7-lb meteoro -

After initial development, the

gal sounding device in vertica l descent. Stability of 3 deg and ve l ocities
ballute saw numerousloci
of less than 300 fps were required within the sampling altitude envelope,
applications as a supersonic
ranging from 200,000 to 100,000 ft mean sea level (MSL) . This prog ram
included the first practical application of extremely low-gage (fractionaldecelerator or stabilization
mil) plastic films in BALL UTE construction and the first BALLUTE mis.
4
device
Slon at Reynolds numbers as low as 4 X 10 .
Recovery Systems _ _ ______________

GOO DYE A R

A ER OS P AC E

Examples

Gemini ejection seat stabilization

Meteorological Sounding Rocket
Decelerator

GEMIN I BALLUTE

a TM , Goodyear Aerospace Corporation, Akron, Ohio.

Proposed as pilot for Mars Viking

Mission by Martin Marietta
J
j)

Ref: Goodyear Aerospace Corp

Sky diver (right) wi th helmet-mounted movie camera

pho t ographs first live tes t jump with Gemini Ballute

RS-61

06/29/2016

8
Typical meteorological BALLUTE i s 12.5 (l in

jpl.nasa.gov

Recent Experience: NASA LDSD ballute

Jet Propulsion Laboratory
California Institute of Technology

Developed as a parachute
deployment pilot device
Flown at Mach 2.7, 500 Pa in
a blunt-body wake
Specs:
Silicone-coated Kevlar
broadcloth
Pyrotechnic-initiated
methanol inflation aid
Mortar-deployed
18 kg mass
8000 N drag force
Heavily relied on analysis,
with minimal testing prior to
supersonic flight

4.4 m

Burble fence
8x 6 tall
ram-air inlets
Inlet support
cords

8x flush ram-air
inlets (not shown
in inflated state)

16x gores
Riser

Inflation aid

Pre-Decisional for Internal Discussion Purposes Only.

The technical data in this document is controlled under the U.S. Export Regulations, release to foreign persons may require an export authoriz

06/29/2016

jpl.nasa.gov

LDSD Supersonic Flight Dynamics Test Overview

06/29/2016

10

jpl.nasa.gov

Recent Experience: NASA LDSD Supersonic

Test:

06/29/2016

11

jpl.nasa.gov

After success of LDSD ballute, how can this

be infused into a Mars mission?
1. Parachute deployment (same use as LDSD)
2. Supersonic decelerator
On a heavy robotic mission (4.4m trailing ballute
against 6 m attached toroid)
Aerodynamic decelerator assisting supersonic
retropropulsion (human-scale)

06/29/2016

12

jpl.nasa.gov

Ballutes as Parachute Deployment Devices

0=2/(
2/2+1/)

4.5
4
Pilot Ballute Diameter, m

Preliminary ballute
sizing for parachute
deployment:

3.5
3

Nominal Inputs
q = 800 Pa
Beta = 50 kg/m2
C D = 0.6
VLS = 45 m/s

2.5
2
1.5

Assumptions:
1
Constant deployment
0.5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
mass
Parachute Diameter, m
Constant Cd
Nominal inputs represent typical Mars conditions
Constant q
Mach 1.7, 400 Pa parachute deployment
200 kg/m2 vehicle ballistic coefficient
38 m/s parachute line stretch velocity
06/29/2016

13

jpl.nasa.gov

Parachute Deployment Device (PDD):

Mass Comparison
In order to compare mortars to pilot
deployment, we consider the
following:
Parachute mass model, f(D0)
Ballute mass model, f(D0)
Mortar mass model, f(meject)
Pilot ballute model, (previous
chart)

Deployment System Mass, kg

100
80
60

Mortar
Nominal PDD
PDD, Beta = 50
LDSD PDD Model
LDSD PDD Actual
MSL PDD Model
MSL Mortar Actual

40
20
0
10

06/29/2016

15

20
25
30
Parachute Diameter, m

35

Conclusions:
Ballute PDD offers mass savings
over parachute mortar
40 Parachute mortar has advantage
of single stage system
Trade simplicity with mass
14

jpl.nasa.gov

SIADS: Trailing Ballute vs Attached Toroid

Future Mars landing mission with
a ballistic coefficient of 230 kg/
m2 and low L/D

The trajectory never achieves

deployment conditions of the current
technology parachutes

Mach Number

2.5
2

Need for a supplementary

decelerator. We considered Off
the Shelf tech SIADs on a 4.7 m
diameter aeroshell:

1.5
1
SIAD + Chute
Pilot Ballute + Chute
Chute Only
Chute Deployment Box

0.5
0

0.5

1.5

Dynamic Pressure, kPa

06/29/2016

Trailing ballute (4.4 m LDSD)

Attached toroid (6 m LDSD)

Both SIADs deployed at Mach 3

for a direct comparison

15

jpl.nasa.gov

SIADS: Trailing Ballute vs Attached Toroid

Attached Toroid

Trailing Ballute

106 kg (6 m diameter +
gas generators, no cover
panels)
More complicated
mechanical interface
Uses relatively empty real
estate on back shell
Requires thermal
protection during
hypersonic phase

33 kg (4.4 m diameter +
mortar)
Relatively simple
mechanical interface
Must share aft section of
entry vehicle with
parachute

06/29/2016

16

jpl.nasa.gov

Ballutes for High Ballistic Coefficient Vehicles

Without new designs and
qualifications, parachutes cant
be used with high (>= 500 kg/
m2) ballistic coefficient
vehicles

25

Mach Number

20

Terminal velocity exceeds Mach

number limits for parachutes
Dynamic pressure is 10x typical

15
10
5
0

This defines what

environments the ballute
needs to survive

MSL
High - Case
Mach q Box

10

15

Dynamic Pressure, kPa

06/29/2016

20

25

Desire capability at Mach 4 and 5

kPa

17

jpl.nasa.gov

Ballute-Assisted Supersonic Retropropulsion

9.3 m ballute minimizes decelerations
mass (50% less decel mass)

Required Deceleration Mass, kg

1600
Total
Propellant
Ballute System

1400
1200

Inputs:

1000
800
600
400
200
0

Calculated deceleration
mass as a function of
ballute diameter.

5
10
Ballute Diameter, m

4.5 m ballute provides

25% less deceleration
mass
06/29/2016

15

9 metric ton entry mass,

single stage entry, 4 m
diameter aeroshell
Low L/D (0.24)
No parachute, fully
propulsive descent
Ballute is deployed at
Mach 3.5
18

jpl.nasa.gov

Technology Development
Heating
Drives deployment Mach number
Current deployment limits from conservative CFD + thermal
model
Temperature measurements are needed to validate models

Fabric Development
Past ballutes have used lightweight high-temperature fabrics
LDSD ballute used the lightest Kevlar fabric that was available
within schedule and budget constraints
LDSD fabric had more than enough strength, but suffered from
low seam efficiencies due to the characteristics of the fabric

Ballute Accomodation
Mechanical configurations should be studied to determine how to
package a ballute and parachute into the aft of the aeroshell
06/29/2016

19

jpl.nasa.gov

Summary
Ballutes have a lengthy history of providing drag and
stability at supersonic conditions
LDSD ballute was flown twice successfully
4.4 m diameter was particularly large for the parachute
deployment

Ballutes can offer mass savings when used as a

parachute deployment device
Ballutes can also be used as supersonic decelerators
Prior to parachute deployment
Prior to retropropulsion

06/29/2016

20

jpl.nasa.gov

Additional References

Brandeau et al., Ballutes for Supersonic Deceleration at Mars, IEEE Aero March
2016
Clark, I. G., Adler, M., Manning, R., Summary of the First High-Altitude, Supersonic
Flight Dynamics Test for the Low-Density Supersonic Decelerator Project, 23rd AIAA
Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Technol- ogy Conference and Seminar, March
2015, Daytona Beach, FL, AIAA 2015-2100.
Tanner, C. L., OFarrell, C., Gallon, J. G., Clark, I. G., Bose, D. B., Witkowski, A.,
Woodruff, P., Pilot Deployment of the LDSD Parachute via a Supersonic Ballute,
23rd AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Technology Conference and Seminar,
March 2015, Daytona Beach, FL, AIAA 2015-2128.
Muppidi, S., Van Norman, J. W., OFarrell, C., Bose, D., Clark, I., Computational
Analysis and Post-Flight Validation of Ballute Aerodynamics, 23rd AIAA Aerodynamic Decelerator Systems Technology Conference and Seminar, March 2015,
Daytona Beach, FL, AIAA 2015- 2116.
Alexander, W. C. and Lau, R. A., State-of-the-Art Study for High-Speed Deceleration
and Stabilization Devices, NASA Contractor Report CR-66141, Sep 1966.

06/29/2016

21

jpl.nasa.gov

Acknowledgements

This work was performed as part of the Low Density

Supersonic Decelerators project at the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a
contract with NASA.

06/29/2016

22

jpl.nasa.gov

jpl.nasa.gov

2016 California Institute of Technology. Government sponsorship acknowledged.