The Mathematics of Flat Parachutes

Prepared By: J.R. Brohm

NAR #78048
CAR #S680

Date: September 4, 2004

1.0 Introduction

As all rocketeers know, the prevailing device for model rocket recovery is by far the
ubiquitous parachute. Parachutes for model rocketry purposes are available in a broad
range of sizes and a rainbow of colors, and are made from a variety of different
materials. However, the modeler may choose to make his own parachute, sometimes to
save the cost of commercial parachutes, but more often because his project requires a
non-standard size. This is often the case for competition or special payload models,
where a particular non-standard diameter is needed for a duration event or a certain
rate of descent.

Perhaps the most complete shape for a parachute is a hemisphere. Many rocketeers will
recall that this was the shape of the parachutes used in the Space Program, successfully
delivering manned payloads to rest in the ocean for subsequent sea recovery
operations. While hemispherical parachutes function very well, they can be complex to
make, as the shape is 3 dimensional. Making a hemispherical shape requires the
modeler to cut pieces of material into special curved segmental shapes, called gores,
which when fitted together will form the hemisphere.

Fortunately hemispherical parachutes aren’t really needed in most modeler’s

applications. Most commonly available parachutes are in fact created from standard
two-dimensional (i.e.: flat) geometric figures such as hexagons or octagons. When
billowed from the weight of a model, these parachutes do a very good job
approximating the performance of a hemispherical parachute. More importantly,
because these parachutes are derived from flat figures, their nature makes them easier
for the modeler to work with.

This paper explores the polygonal geometry that characterizes the conventional two-
dimensional (i.e.: flat) parachute figures that most rocketeers use as their recovery
method today. We will develop a general solution that will permit us to calculate the size
(diameter) of the parachute needed to deliver a required minimum canopy area. This
solution will work perfectly well for a hexagonal or octagonal parachute, or for any other
regular polygonal shaped parachute.

Mathematics of Parachutes 1 September 4, 2004

2.0 Parachute Considerations

Before examining the geometry associated with flat parachutes, the first question that
needs to be answered is - How big of a parachute do I need? The rate of descent will be
dependent on the area of the parachute; once we know the required minimum area, a
little geometry will tell us the diameter (size) we need to make the parachute.

In his book, “Model Rocket Design and Construction”, 2 nd Edition, Tim Van Milligan
(Apogee Components) provides a useful formula for calculating the minimum parachute
area needed for a safe descent speed for a given model rocket mass. The formula is
given as:

2gm
AP 
C d V 2

Where:

g= the acceleration due to gravity, 9.81 m/s2 at sea level

m = the mass of the rocket (propellant consumed)

 = the density of air at sea level (1225 g/m3)

Cd= the coefficient of drag of the parachute – estimated to be 0.75 for a round canopy

V = the descent velocity of the rocket, 11 to 14 ft/s (3.35 m/s to 4.26 m/s) being
considered a safe descent speed.

With this descent rate equation, and a good calculator, one can readily find the needed
minimum parachute area for a particular model or mission. To determine its size
(diameter), we must generate an expression that relates area to size, and we must take
into consideration the shape we choose for the parachute, as shape and diameter will
dictate available surface area.

Mathematics of Parachutes 2 September 4, 2004

3.0 Parachute Geometry

Let’s inscribe an n-sided polygon inside a circle. As an inscribed polygon, its vertices will
be tangent to the circle, and the distance from its center to any vertex will be r, the
radius of the circle. Figure 3-1 illustrates what an inscribed polygon looks like; in this case
we have chosen to inscribe a regular octagon inside the circle.

r r

Figure 3-1: Inscribed Polygon

In this illustration two lines are shown, each originating from the center of the circle and
extending to a vertex; together they form an isosceles triangle, the triangle having two
identical sides r and a base the length of the polygons’ side. If similar lines were drawn to
each remaining vertex, we would readily see that the octagon is made up of 8 identical
isosceles triangles. We can extend this principle generally and say that an n-sided
polygon is made up of n identical triangles, each triangle corresponding to one of the
polygons’ sides.

We can also see that the area of the polygon is just the sum of the areas of the triangles
that comprise it; here, in the case of this particular polygon, its area is equal to 8 times
the area of one triangle, or:

AO= 8AT , where AT is the area of the triangle and AO is the area of the octagon.

Generalizing for any n-sided polygon, our expression for area is:

AP = nAT

With this concept now established, a little geometry will permit us to calculate the
dimensions of our parachute. To do this, we simply need to establish the area of the
elemental triangle that makes up the polygon, and then use the relationship above to
calculate the total area.

Mathematics of Parachutes 3 September 4, 2004

Let’s extract this triangle from the polygon and take a closer look at it:

2

r r

Figure 3-2: The Elemental Triangle

We know that the area of this triangle is:

s sh
AT  •h 
2 2

We will now manipulate this relationship so that it can be expressed entirely in terms of r.
To do this, we will use some trigonometry.

As reasoned earlier, an n-sided polygon is made up of n identical, elemental triangles.

The angle subtended at the triangle’s apex is since there are n triangles making up the
polygon, the value of  must be 360/n. For our purposes, we are interested in the angle
between r and h; since this is half of remember, we are dealing with an isosceles
triangle), its value must be 360/2n, or 180/n once reduced.

We can derive the following expressions from the characteristics of the triangle:

s/ 2 s   180    180  

  sin   sin  ;  s  2r sin 
r 2r 2  n   n 

and

h  180    180  
 cos  ;  h  r cos 
r  n   n 

Mathematics of Parachutes 4 September 4, 2004

 sh
Recalling that the area of the triangle is A T  , we can then make the substitutions for
2
s and h and get:

 180    180  
2r sin  • r cos 
 n   n   180    180  
AT   r 2 sin  cos 
2  n   n 

There is a trigonometric identity that can be used to further reduce this expression, as
follows:

For an angle  , sin2  2 sin cos

180   360    180    180  

Here, if we set   , then sin2  sin   2 sin  cos 
n  n   n   n 

Applying this identity to our expression for A T , we get:

r2  180    180   r  360  

2
AT  • 2 sin  cos  sin 
2  n   n  2  n 

Substitute this result into our expression for A P , and the area of our n-sided polygon
becomes

nr 2  360  
AP  sin 
2  n 

We now have a general expression in terms of the radius, r, which we can use to
calculate the area of any n-sided polygon.

Typically, we measure the diameter of a parachute as opposed to its radius, so with a

little more algebra, we can transform the result into one expressed in terms of diameter.

d
Recall that r  , where d is the diameter of the parachute/circle:
2

2
d
n 
 360   nd  360  
2
2
Then A P  sin  sin 
2  n  8  n 

For practical purposes, we would calculate the required parachute area for a particular
model from the descent rate equation. Once we know the area, we can use the
expression from above to determine the required diameter, depending on the type of
the parachute we intend to make (hexagonal, octagonal, or other).

Rearranging our equation, we can solve for d:

Mathematics of Parachutes 5 September 4, 2004

 2A P
d2
 360  
n sin 
 n 

We can complete the exercise definitively by substituting the descent rate equation for
parachute area in the place of AP; then we get:

4gm
d2
 360  
nC d V2 sin 
 n 

Let’s work out some practical examples. For a hexagonal parachute, we know n  6 .

So plugging 6 in for n, we get:

 d  1 .2408 A P

For an octagonal parachute, we know n=8:

 d  1.1892 A P

Why should it make sense for the coefficient (the multiplier) of the parachute area to be
smaller for an octagon? Well, if we recall Figure 3-1, it can be readily seen that the area
of an octagon will be larger (cover more of the circle) than that of a hexagon for the
same radius. So to arrive at the same parachute area, the diameter of a hexagonal
parachute will need to be larger than that of an octagonal one.

Mathematics of Parachutes 6 September 4, 2004

4.0 Other Ways of Looking at the Same Thing

In the previous section, we derived an expression that related parachute diameter to the
parachute’s shape and area. Finding the diameter is important, as this parameter is the
most useful one for laying out the parachute.

However, with some further algebraic manipulation we can re-work the result we found
to express the area of the parachute in terms of the size of its sides, and also in terms of
the distance measured from one side across to an adjacent side. These re-worked
expressions provide an alternate way of calculating the area of a known parachute.

Let’s go back and look at the Elemental Triangle:

2

r r

s
Figure 4-1: The Elemental Triangle

s    180  
Recall that  sin   sin 
2r 2  n 

s
Then r 
 180  
2 sin 
 n 

 180    180  
Recall that A T  r 2 sin  cos 
 n   n 

Substituting for r:

Mathematics of Parachutes 7 September 4, 2004

 s2  180    180  
AT  sin  cos 
2  180    n   n 
4 sin  
 n 

Reducing gives:

 180  
s2 cos 
 n  s2
AT  
 180    180  
4 sin  4 tan 
 n   n 

ns2
 A P  nA T 
 180  
4 tan 
 n 

This result gives us the area of the parachute expressed in terms of the length of a side.

Let’s re-express the relation in terms of the distance from side to adjacent side – let’s call
this distance D.

D
Then D  2h ;  h 
2

h  180  
 cos 
r  n 

h D
r 
 180    180  
cos  2 cos 
 n   n 

Substituting this value for r into the equation for AT, we get:

 180  
D 2 sin 
D2  180    180    180  
2
 n  D
AT  sin  cos   tan 
 180    n   n   180   4  n 
4 cos2   4 cos 
 n   n 

nD 2  180  
 A P  nA T  tan 
4  n 

This result gives us the area of the parachute expressed in terms of the distance
measured from side to adjacent side. Note that this expression is only valid for polygons
with an even number of sides.

Mathematics of Parachutes 8 September 4, 2004

5.0 Conclusions & Findings

This paper demonstrates several ways to determine the area of a parachute depending
on the parameters available. It provides a formula for determining the minimum
diameter needed to provide a parachute canopy of prescribed area, a calculation that
is important if the modeler intends to make the parachute himself.

The following summarizes the findings of this analysis:

5.1 Minimum Parachute Area for a Given Model

2gm
AP 
C d V 2

(Reference “Model Rocket Design and Construction”, 2nd Edition, Tim Van Milligan
(Apogee Components)).

5.2 Diameter of a Parachute, given its Area

2A P
d2
 360  
n sin 
 n 

For a Hexagonal parachute, d  1.2408 A P

For an Octagonal parachute, d  1 .1892 A P

5.3 Area of a Parachute, given its Diameter

nd 2  360  
AP  sin  ; n = the number of sides of the parachute.
8  n 

For a Hexagonal parachute, AH  0.6495d2

For an Octagonal parachute, A O  0.7071d2

5.4 Area of a Parachute, given the length of a Side

ns2
AP  ; s = the length of a side.
 180  
4 tan 
 n 

Mathematics of Parachutes 9 September 4, 2004

For a Hexagonal parachute, AH  2.5981s2

For an Octagonal parachute, A O  4.8284s2

5.5 Area of a Parachute, given the distance between opposite sides

nD 2  180  
AP  tan  ; D = the distance between adjacent sides, and n must be even.
4  n 

For a Hexagonal parachute, AH  0.8667D2

For an Octagonal parachute, A O  0.8284D2

Mathematics of Parachutes 10 September 4, 2004

 Appendix A: An Explicit Derivation for the Hexagonal Parachute

We can cross check the correctness of the general expression by looking at the
characteristics of a hexagonal parachute. For this parachute, there will be 6 sides and it
will be comprised of 6 elemental triangles. Unique in this case is the fact that all of the
interior angles of each triangle are of the same value. Since two of the triangle sides are
known to be equal to r, and with all angles equal, we can safely reason that the third
side, the base, must also be equal to r. This leads to the conclusion that the elemental
triangle in this case is an equilateral triangle. Figure A-1 illustrates this elemental triangle:

30 
r r

60 
r/ 2

Figure A-1: Elemental Triangle from a Hexagon

Using the Pythagoras Theorem, we can draw the following relationships:

r2
r2   h2 ;
4

r2  1  3r 2
h2  r 2   r 2 1   
4  4 4

3
h  r
2

r 3 2
AT  •h  r
2 4

6 3 2 3 3 2 d
AH  6 A T  r  r ; but r 
4 2 2

2
3 3 d 3 3 2
 AH     d
2  
2 8

Mathematics of Parachutes 11 September 4, 2004

 8 AH 2A H
And d  2  1 .2408 A H
3 3 3 3

This is the same result we obtained earlier when we set n=6 in the general formula.

Mathematics of Parachutes 12 September 4, 2004