Can 1 (Ryan)

Image AddedImage Added

FA = 0.15m^2

Initial/base draft (Ryan)

Cd = 0.0612

Fd = 1.098

Can 2 (Ryan)

FA = 0.147m^2

Shrank down front of bottom profile (this was a mistake don’t do that)

Shrank down tail on the side profile

Cd = 0.0706

Fd = 1.266

Drop 3

FA = 0.13 m^2

Shrink down tail side profile to reduce low pressure drag

Shrink frontal Area

Cd = 0.066

Fd = 1.036

Drop 4

FA = 0.136 m^2

experiment with rounding out front side profile to give a more “airfoil”-y shape?

definitely worse

Cd = 0.072

Fd = 1.173

Drop 5

Image AddedImage Added

FA = 0.1365m^2

very slight concave front of side profile to improve transition from front fillet

point of max frontal area pushed back to 1m from 0.9

Cd = 0.0642

Fd = 1.049

Drop 6

FA = 0.1737m^2

Standardized guide curves (much higher FA and Fd)

Increased concave transition at front

Cd = 0.068

Fd = 1.41

Drop 6 - PoMFA0.9

Image AddedImage Added

FA = 0.173 m^2

PoMFA = 0.9m

Cd = 0.0704

Fd = 1.458

Drop 6 - PoMFA1.1

FA = 0.16977688 m^2

PoMFA = 1.1m

Cd = 0.0698

Fd = 1.42

Drop 6 - PoMFA1.1 2

FA = 0.16200763

PoMFA = 1.1m

Cd = 0.0694

Fd = 1.347

Drop 6 - PoMFA1.1 3

FA = 0.16845423 m^2

PoMFA = 1.1m

Cd = 0.070

Fd = 1.411

Bullet v1 (Gavin)

Image Added

FA = 0.1458 m^2

Initial Bullet design

• Bullet style does not perform as well as Teardrop

Cd = 0.0701

Fd = 1.222

Teardrop v1

Image Added

FA = 0.1365 m^2

Base teardrop canopy

Cd = 0.0666

Fd = 1.088

Teardrop v3

Image Added

FA = 0.166 m^2

Bottom profile made a little straighter, especially near front of canopy

Cd = 0.0668

Fd = 1.328

Teardrop v3.5

Image Added

FA = 0.166 m^2

Same canopy as v3, except straightened side profile at the back

Performed slightly worse - we can assume that a straight profile will not perform as well (tested in v5.5 - 5.6 as well)

Cd = 0.0669

Fd = 1.330

Teardrop v4

Image Added

FA = 0.1478

Flatter side profile , performed much worse than something slightly rounder like v3

Cd = 0.0735

Fd = 1.300

Teardrop v4.5

Image Added

FA = 0.1478

Rounded the side profile and bottom profile out at the front

Cd = 0.0650

Fd = 1.150

Teardrop v5

Image Added

FA = 0.1478

Rounded side profile more

Cd = 0.0649

Fd = 1.147

Teardrop v5.5

Image Added

FA = 0.1410

Slightly straighter side profile in back half

Very low FA

Cd = 0.0639

Fd = 1.078

Teardrop v5.6

Image Added

FA = 0.1410

Only change from 5.5 is a very straight back profile, which again did not perform as well

Cd = 0.0667

Fd = 1.126

v4

cd = 0.0637

fd = 1.342

v4.5

cd = 0.0625

fd = 1.317

v4.6

cd = 0.0617

fd = 1.300

v4.6.1

same as v4.6 but slightly straighter side profile at the back

cd = 0.0629

fd = 1.324

v4.6.2

same as v4.6 but much straighter side profile at the back

cd = 0.0649

fd = 1.367

v4.7

sim didn’t run!

v4.8

cd = 0.0632

fd = 1.330

v4.8.1

Same as v4.8, but straighter side profile at the back

Results do not follow the same trend as v5.5 / v5.6

cd = 0.0626

fd = 1.318

v5

cd = 0.0639

fd = 1.346

v5.5

cd = 0.0664

fd = 1.398

v5.6

cd = 0.0702

fd = 1.479

v5.7

cd = 0.0657

fd = 1.384

v5.8

cd = 0.0664

fd = 1.397