Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:03:27.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Simulation of flapping wings subjected to gusty inflow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

M. M. De ,
J. S. Mathur  and
S. Vengadesan
M. M. De
Affiliation:
National Aerospace Laboratories Council of Scientific and Industrial ResearchBengaluru Karnataka, India
J. S. Mathur
Affiliation:
National Aerospace Laboratories Council of Scientific and Industrial ResearchBengaluru Karnataka, India
S. Vengadesan*
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Mechanics Indian Institute of Technology MadrasChennai Tamil Nadu, India Department of Mechanical EngineeringVirginia Tech. Blacksburg, USA
*
vengades@iitm.ac.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ornithopters and entomopters should be insensitive to the gusty environment during outdoor operations. Hence, it becomes imperative to understand their behaviour under the influence of gust for ensuring stable flight. In light of this, the present numerical study focused on understanding the aerodynamics of flapping wings with five different planform shapes under the influence of a spatiotemporally varying frontal gust. 3D, unsteady, laminar, and incompressible Navier-Stokes equations were solved using finite volume formulation. A canonical case of asymmetric 1 degree of freedom (DoF) flapping kinematics was considered. Horizontal and vertical force patterns in constant and gusty inflow conditions were numerically computed and compared. Findings were analyzed quantitatively by comparing the differences in the instantaneous force patterns, ordinal scoring approach, and phase space plots. Qualitative comparisons were made based on plots of vortex structures and surface pressure contours for constant and gusty inflow conditions for wings with different planform shapes. Spanwise Lagrangian Coherent Structures (LCS) of all the five wings were also compared. Studies revealed that the elliptical wing exhibited low sensitivity and inverse semi-elliptical wing exhibited high sensitivity to the gusty inflow. Rectangular, triangular and semi-elliptical shaped wings were moderately sensitive to the gusty inflow. This finding, within the limitations of the flapping kinematics and simulation conditions considered for the present study, supported the fact that many natural flyers like forest raptors, non-migratory passerines, pheasants, and partridges have adopted elliptical wing planform for efficient flight.

Keywords

1 DoF asymmetric flappingfrontal gustwing planformQ-criteriaLagrangian coherent structure
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 123 , Issue 1266 , August 2019 , pp. 1170 - 1192
Copyright
© Royal Aeronautical Society 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ania, A., Poirel, D. and Potvin, M. Kinematic and experimental aerodynamic characterisation of the RotaFlap—a novel flapping wing mechanism. Aeronaut J, 2011, 115, (1163), pp 1–13. doi: 10.1017/S0001924000005327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, P. and Knowles, K. The leading-edge vortex and aerodynamics of insect-based flapping-wing micro air vehicles. Aeronaut J, 2009, 113, (1142), pp 253–262. doi: 10.1017/S000192400000292XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elarbi, E. and Qin, N. Effects of pitching rotation on aerodynamics of tandem flapping wing sections of a hovering dragonfly. Aeronaut J, 2010, 114, (1161), pp 699–710. doi: 10.1017/S0001924000004188.Google Scholar
Phillips, N. and Knowles, K. Formation of vortices and spanwise flow on an insect-like flapping wing throughout a flapping half cycle. Aeronaut J, 2013, 117, (1191), pp 471–490. doi: 10.1017/S0001924000008137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zakaria, M.Y., Allen, D., Woolsey, C.A. and Hajj, M.R. Lift and drag of flapping membrane wings at high angles of attack. 34th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Washington, DC, 2012, AIAA-2016-3554, pp 1–15.Google Scholar
Warkentin, J. and Delaurier, J. Experimental aerodynamic study of tandem flapping membrane wings. J Aircr, 2007, 44, pp 1653–1661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, K.B. and Tay, W.B. Numerical analysis of the s1020 airfoils in tandem under different flapping configurations. Acta Mech Sin, 2010, 26, pp 191–201.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, T., Valdez, M., Vanella, M., Balaras, E. and Balachandran, B. Flexible flapping systems: computational investigations into fluid-structure interactions. Aeronaut J, 2011, 115, (1172), pp 593–604. doi: 10.1017/S000192400000628X.Google Scholar
Srinidhi, N.G. and Vengadesan, S. Ground effect on tandem flapping wings hovering. Comput Fluids, 2017, 152, pp 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghommem, M. and Calo, V. Flapping wings in line formation flight: a computational analysis. Aeronaut J, 2014, 118, (1203), pp 485–501. doi: 10.1017/S0001924000009325Google Scholar
Dimitriadis, G., Gardiner, J., Tickle, P., Codd, J. and Nudds, R. Experimental and numerical study of the flight of geese. Aeronaut J, 2015, 119, (1217), pp 803–832. doi: 10.1017/S0001924000010939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, S., Milbank, J., Loxton, B.J. and Melbourne, W.H. Atmospheric winds and their implications for micro air vehicles. AIAA J, 2006, 44, pp 2591–2600.Google Scholar
Lian, Y. and Shyy, W. Aerodynamics of low Reynolds number plunging airfoil under gusty environment. 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, 2007, AIAA Paper 2007-70, pp 1–20.Google Scholar
Wan, T. and Huang, C. Numerical simulation of flapping wing aerodynamic performance under gust wind conditions, 26th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, 2008, 1–11.Google Scholar
Lian, Y. Numerical study of a flapping airfoil in gusty environments, 27th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 2009, AIAA-2009-3952, pp 1–13.Google Scholar
viswanath, K. and Tafti, D.K. Effect of frontal gusts on forward flapping flight, AIAA J, 2010, 48, pp 2049–2062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, S., Chajjed, S. and Krishnan, A. Study of asymmetric hovering in flapping flight, Eur J Mech B/Fluids, 2013, 37, pp 72–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prater, R. and Lian, Y. Aerodynamic response of stationary and flapping wings in oscillatory low Reynolds number flows, 50th AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Nashville, Tennessee, 2012, AIAA-2012-0418, pp 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, J., Jiang, L., Zhao, H., Tao, B. and Lei, B. Numerical study of a variable camber plunge airfoil under wind gust condition, J Mech Sci Technol, 2015, 29, pp 4681–4690.Google Scholar
Jones, M. and Yamaleev, N.K. Effect of lateral, downward and frontal gusts on flapping wing performance, Comput. Fluids, 2016, 140, pp 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhan, J., Xu, B., Wu, J. and Wu, J. Power extraction performance of a semi-activated flapping foil in gusty flow. J Bionic Eng, 2017, 14, pp 99–110.Google Scholar
Betts, C.R. and Wootton, R.J. Wing shape and flight behaviour in butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea and Hesperioidea): a preliminary analysis. J Exp Biol, 1988, 138, pp 271–288.Google Scholar
Combes, S.A. and Daniel, T.L. Shape, flapping and flexion: wing and fin design for forward flight. J Exp Biol, 2001, 204, pp 2073–2085.Google ScholarPubMed
Luo, G. and Sun, M. The effects of corrugation and wing planform on the aerodynamic force production of sweeping model insect wings. Acta Mech Sin, 2005, 21, pp 531–541.Google Scholar
Ansari, S.A., Knowles, K. and Zbikowski, R. Insect like flapping wings in the hover Part 2: effect of wing geometry. J Aircr, 2008, 45, pp 1976–1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zakaria, M.Y., Taha, H.A. and Hajj, M.R. Design optimization of flapping ornithopters: the pterosaur replica in forward flight. J Aircr, 2016, 53, pp 48–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, N., Knowles, K. and Lawson, N.J. Effect of wing planform shape on the flow structures of an insect-like flapping wing in hover, 27th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, 2010, pp 1–14.Google Scholar
Yu, M., Wang, Z.J. and Hu, H. The effect of wing planforms on the aerodynamic performance of thin finite-span flapping wings, 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, Nashville, Tennessee, 2012, AIAA-2012-0757, pp 1–15.Google Scholar
Wang, Q., Goosen, J.F.L. and Keulen, F. Study of design parameters of flapping wings, International Micro Air Vehicle Conference and Competition, 2014, pp 92–101.Google Scholar
Deshpande, P.J., Antony, R., Narayanan, P., Rajashesan, A., Singh, D. and Ramesh, G. Vortex generated by rigid flapping wings of different planforms, 32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Atlanta, GA, 2014, AIAA 2014-2880, pp 1–9.Google Scholar
Shahzad, A., Tian, F.B., Young, J. and Lai, J.C.S. Reynolds number effects on the aerodynamic performance of wing planform shapes in hover, 19th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 2014, pp 1–4.Google Scholar
Shahzad, A., Tian, F.B., Young, J. and Lai, J.C.S. Effect of wing shape, aspect ratio and deviation angle on aerodynamic performance of flapping wings in hover. Phys Fluids, 2016, 28, pp 111901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferziger, J.H. and Peric, M. Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics, 3rd ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 2002.10.1007/978-3-642-56026-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Issa, R.I. Solution of the implicitly discretized fluid flow equations by operator-splitting. J Comput Phys, 1985, 65, pp 40–65.Google Scholar
Gharali, K. and Johnson, D.A. Dynamic stall simulation of a pitching airfoil under unsteady free stream velocity. J. Fluid Struct, 2013, 42, pp 228–244. doi: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2013.05.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Razaei, A.S. and Taha, H.E. Computational study of lift frequency responses of pitching airfoils at low Reynolds number, 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Grapevine, Texas, 9–13 January, 2017, AIAA 2017-0716, pp 1–13.Google Scholar
Taha, H.E. and Razaei, A.S. Unsteady viscous lift frequency response using the triple deck theory, 2018 AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Kissimmee, Florida, 8–12 January, 2018, AIAA 2018-0038, pp 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fejtek, I. and Nehera, J. Experimental study of flapping wing lift and propulsion, Aeronaut J, 1980, 84, pp 28–33.Google Scholar
Abbott, I.H., and Sherman, A. Flow observation with tufts and lampblack of the stalling of four typical airfoil sections in the N.A.C.A variable-density tunnel, NASA-TN-672, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, Washington, October 1938.Google Scholar
Prisacariu, V. and Rau, C. Introduction to morphing technology in Unmanned Aircraft Vehicles (UAV), International Conference of Scientific Paper (AFASES 2011), Brasov, 26th–28th May, 2011.Google Scholar
Fritz, T.E. and Long, L.N. Object-oriented unsteady vortex lattice method for flapping flight, J Aircr, 2004, 41, pp 1275–1290.Google Scholar
Jacobs, E.N. and Sherman, A. Airfoil section characteristics as affected by variations of the Reynolds number, NASA-TR-586, Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory, Washington, September 1937.Google Scholar
Yang, W.Q., Bifeng, S., Wenping, S. and Liguang, W. The effect of span-wise and chord-wise flexibility on the aerodynamic performance of micro flapping-wing, Chin Sci Bull, 2012, 57, (22), pp 2887–2897.10.1007/s11434-012-5249-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, Y.S. and Altman, A. Lift from spanwise flow in simple flapping wings, J Aircr, 2008, 45, pp 1206–1216.Google Scholar
Harland, C. and Jacob, J.D. Gust load testing in a low-cost MAV gust and shear tunnel, 27th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference, 2010, AIAA 2010-4539, pp 487–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rockwood, M., Huang, Y. and Green, M. Tracking coherent structures in massively-separated and turbulent flows, Phys Rev Fluids, 2018, 3, pp 014702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Srinidhi, N.G. and Vengadesan, S. Lagrangian coherent structures in tandem flapping wing hovering, J Bionic Eng, 2017, 14, pp 307–316.Google Scholar