NASA's Orion Capsule Parachute Assembly System (CPAS) Project is now in the qualification phase of testing, and the Adams simulation has continued to evolve to model the complex dynamics experienced during the test article extraction and separation phases of flight. The ability to initiate tests near the upper altitude limit of the Orion parachute deployment envelope requires extractions from the aircraft at 35,000 ft-MSL. Engineering development phase testing of the Parachute Test Vehicle (PTV) carried by the Carriage Platform Separation System (CPSS) at altitude resulted in test support equipment hardware failures due to increased energy caused by higher true airspeeds. As a result, hardware modifications became a necessity requiring ground static testing of the textile components to be conducted and a new ground dynamic test of the extraction system to be devised. Force-displacement curves from static tests were incorporated into the Adams simulations, allowing prediction of loads, velocities and margins encountered during both flight and ground dynamic tests. The Adams simulation was then further refined by fine tuning the damping terms to match the peak loads recorded in the ground dynamic tests. The failure observed in flight testing was successfully replicated in ground testing and true safety margins of the textile components were revealed. A multi-loop energy modulator was then incorporated into the system level Adams simulation model and the effect on improving test margins be properly evaluated leading to high confidence ground verification testing of the final design solution. Nomenclature

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Airdrop testing of parachutes is a complicated endeavor that requires the custom design and certification of many critical components. The most direct path to certifying a component is to perform full scale testing with margin over the maximum loads expected to be seen in operation. However, other constraints often preclude the opportunity to perform full scale testing. In this paper, we present a case study where a problem arises in a joint that had been certified with a full scale test. There was no time or budget available to repeat the full scale testing after a redesign of the joint. Instead, we present a method of testing each failure mode at the component level to support a certification by analysis approach. The analysis itself was not complicated, but tradeoffs had to be made between different failure modes to arrive at the optimal design. The same approach was also applied back to the original joint to confirm that the failure mode that was not seen in full scale testing would have been caught by the proposed analysis. In the end, the new design was certified by analysis and worked without issue for the final six airdrop tests that used this joint. NomenclatureCM = center of mass CPAS = capsule parachute assembly system MOS = margin of safety PCDTV = parachute compartment drop test vehicle PHDJ = PTV Hold Down Joint PTV = parachute test vehicle WLL = working load limit