曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

assemble different canopies to different harness and
container systems. This is an important ability for
today’s rigger in that there are dozens of possible combinations.
Determining compatibility is more than simply
determining the volume compatibility of a canopy
to a container size. Other factors, which need to be
considered, are the deployment type, TSO certification,
and placard limitations.
VOLUME
The most important criteria in determining compatibility
is the volume of the canopy. The canopy has to
Figure 4-44. Harness 3-ring inspection.
Figure 4-45. Riser release end.
Figure 4-46. Release housings.
Figure 4-47. 3-ring release handle.
4-11
fit into the container in such a manner as to not place
undue stress on the system when packing, and to be
extracted by the pilot chute during deployment. The
container manufacturer usually provides a volume
chart of their systems stating what the volumes are for
the various model sizes. The canopy manufacturer
should provide the volumes of the canopy models.
Measuring canopy volumes has proven to be an imprecise
science as there are various methods that can be
used. The most common method involves placing the
canopy in a tubular chamber and compressing it with a
standard amount of weight for a set time. The displaced
volume is then measured. Figure 4-48 shows the official
Parachute Industry Association (PIA) volume
chamber. The PIA has measured canopy volumes since
1984 and publishes a chart of canopy volumes in their
TS-104, Canopy Volume Study. While some canopy
manufacturers disagree with the resultant numbers,
most container manufacturers and riggers agree that it
is an independent test method and use this chart to
determine volume compatibility.
DEPLOYMENT TYPE
Chapter 2—Design and Construction, described the
different types of canopy deployment devices. In some
instances, the container system needs to be of a specific
configuration to accommodate a certain deployment
device. An example of this would be where a
round canopy utilizing a Type 1 configuration is
packed into a pilot emergency parachute system. In this
case the pilot chute is compressed directly onto the
floor of the container system. [Figure 4-49] This same
canopy can be packed into a sport reserve container,
but the sport rig has two internal or staging flaps that
compress and hold the canopy in place and are locked
together by the bridle. [Figure 4-50] The pilot chute is
then packed on top of the internal flaps. The rigger
needs to know and understand these differences to
determine how the two components interface for compatibility.
TSO CERTIFICATION AND PLACARD
LIMITATIONS
This area is one where many riggers have some confusion.
According to AC 105-2, “the strength of the
harness must always be equal to or greater than the
maximum force generated by the canopy during certification
tests.”
In the case where the harness is certificated under
TSO-C23b and the canopy under TSO-C23c, the
maximum generated force of the canopy must not
exceed the certificated category force of the harness
Figure 4-48. PIA volume chamber.
Figure 4-49.Type 1 deployment in a pilot emergency rig.
Figure 4-50.Type 1 deployment in a sport piggyback.
4-12
and container; i.e., Low Speed Category (3,000
pounds) and Standard Category (5,000 pounds). In
this instance, no additional marking on the container
is necessary.
In the case where the canopy is certificated under TSOC23b
and the harness under TSO-C23c, the strength of
the harness must be equal to or greater than the certificated
category force of the canopy.
For the current TSO-C23d, the average peak force
measured during the strength drops must be placarded
on the outside of the harness. In this case, the strength
of the canopy must not exceed that of the harness.
All of the above areas must be considered by the rigger
when making the determination as to whether a
particular canopy and rig combination is compatible.
If there is any doubt, the rigger should contact the rig
manufacturer for guidance.
For most people, parachute rigging is all about packing
parachutes. Rigging and packing may be synonymous,
but there is a distinct difference. In its truest form, parachute
rigging is the practice of assembling a parachute
system with its various components into an operative
assembly. Packing is the practice of folding the parachute
canopy in an organized manner such that it fits into the
container system and allows the canopy to open when the
　
中國航空網 m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Parachute Rigger Handbook(38)