目的 通过类空投试验， 对比研究冲压式快速空投气囊和传统缓冲气囊的着陆过程和着陆缓冲效果。方法 以冲压式快速空投气囊为研究对象， 建立气囊模型， 制作类空投气囊和降落伞模型； 在高约23 m处， 分别进行不使用任何缓冲、 采用传统缓冲气囊、 采用冲压式快速空投气囊的类空投试验。结果采用传统缓冲气囊进行类空投时， 装满水的玻璃瓶和矿泉水瓶损坏概率分别为22.2%和11.1%； 采用冲压式快速空投气囊进行类空投时， 损坏概率均为0。结论 冲压式快速空投气囊的类空投效果远远好于传统缓冲气囊， 为深入研究冲压式快速空投气囊打下了基础。

The aim of this study was to compare the landing process and the landing cushioning effect of the punching quick airdrop airbag and the traditional cushioning airbag through simulated airdrop tests. This paper took the punching quick airdrop airbag as the research object to establish the airbag model, and prepared the simulated airdrop airbag model and the parachute test model. At a height of 23 meters, three simulated airdrop tests were conducted, without any cushioning, with the traditional airbag and with the punching quick airdrop airbag, respectively. When the traditional airdrop airbag was adopted, the damage probability of the glass bottles filled with water was 22.2%, and that of the mineral water bottles filled with water was 11.1%. When the punching quick airdrop airbag was adopted, the damage probabilities of the glass bottles and the mineral water bottles were both zero. In conclusion, the simulated airdrop tests showed that the cushioning effect of the punching quick airdrop airbag was much better than that of the traditional airbag.