Ceiling effects on the aerodynamics of a flapping wing with advance ratio

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 021904
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 6888-6894
Author(s):  
Muhamad Ridzuan Arifin ◽  
A.F.M. Yamin ◽  
A.S. Abdullah ◽  
M.F. Zakaryia ◽  
S. Shuib ◽  
...  

Leading-edge vortex governs the aerodynamic force production of flapping wing flyers. The primary factor for lift enhancement is the leading-edge vortex (LEV) that allows for stall delay that is associated with unsteady fluid flow and thus generating extra lift during flapping flight. To access the effects of LEV to the aerodynamic performance of flapping wing, the three-dimensional numerical analysis of flow solver (FLUENT) are fully applied to simulate the flow pattern. The time-averaged aerodynamic performance (i.e., lift and drag) based on the effect of the advance ratio to the unsteadiness of the flapping wing will result in the flow regime of the flapping wing to be divided into two-state, unsteady state (J<1) and quasi-steady-state(J>1). To access the benefits of aerodynamic to the flapping wing, both set of parameters of velocities 2m/s to 8m/s at a high flapping frequency of 3 to 9 Hz corresponding to three angles of attacks of α = 0o to α = 30o. The result shows that as the advance ratio increases the generated lift and generated decreases until advance ratio, J =3 then the generated lift and drag does not change with increasing advance ratio. It is also found that the change of lift and drag with changing angle of attack changes with increasing advance ratio. At low advance ratio, the lift increase by 61% and the drag increase by 98% between α =100 and α =200. The lift increase by 28% and drag increase by 68% between α = 200 and α = 300. However, at high advance ratio, the lift increase by 59% and the drag increase by 80% between α =100 and α = 200, while between α =200 and α =300 the lift increase by 20% and drag increase by 64%. This suggest that the lift and drag slope decreases with increasing advance ratio. In this research, the results had shown that in the unsteady state flow, the LEV formation can be indicated during both strokes. The LEV is the main factor to the lift enhancement where it generated the lower suction of negative pressure. For unsteady state, the LEV was formed on the upper surface that increases the lift enhancement during downstroke while LEV was formed on the lower surface of the wing that generated the negative lift enhancement. The LEV seem to breakdown at the as the wing flap toward the ends on both strokes.      


2016 ◽  
Vol 808 ◽  
pp. 485-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong-Seob Han ◽  
Jo Won Chang ◽  
Jae-Hung Han

Time-varying force/moment measurements and digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) were conducted to reveal the influence of an advance ratio $J$ on an insect-like flapping wing. A scaled-up robotic model and a servo-driven towing tank were employed to investigate nine individual $J$ cases – $J=0$ (hovering), 0.0625, 0.1250, 0.1875, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.0 and $\infty$ (gliding motion) – at a high Reynolds number ($Re\sim 10^{4}$). At $J\leqslant 0.25$, the aerodynamic forces slightly increased from those in hover ($J=0$). The centres of pressure in these cases were concentrated in the outboard section, and the leading-edge vortices (LEVs) grew more conically than those in hover. Spanwise cross-sectional DPIV indicated that the wings generated more balanced downwashes, which effectively supported the slight lift increments in this range. At $J>0.25$, a drastic force drop appeared as $J$ increased. The DPIV results in the $J=0.5$ case clearly showed a strong trailing-edge vortex on the outboard trailing edges encroaching into the upper surface, which had been occupied by the LEV for lower $J$. The LEV vorticity was noticeably weakened, and coherent substructures with substantial turbulence accompanied this vorticity. In the $J=1.0$ case, such encroachment was extended to 50 % of the section, and the LEV outboard became significantly irregular. The near-wake structures also showed that the $J=1.0$ case had the narrowest downwash area, with unstable root and tip vortices, which reflected considerable attenuation in the lift enhancements. It was of note that all of these vortical behaviours were clearly distinguishable from aspect ratio ($AR$) effects. The $J$ even played a similar role to that of the $AR$ in the Navier–Stokes equation. These findings clearly indicated that the $J$ could be an independent quantity governing the overall vortical system and lift enhancing mechanism on a flapping wing of a flapping-wing micro air vehicle.


2015 ◽  
Vol 75 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Yusoff ◽  
N. Iswadi ◽  
A.H. Zulkifly ◽  
Sh. Mohd Firdaus ◽  
M.Z. Abdullah ◽  
...  

Flapping-Wing Micro Air Vehicles (FW-MAVs) are small hand-held flying vehicles that can maneuver in constrained space owing to its lightweight, low aspect ratio and the ability to fly in low Reynolds number environment. In this study, the aerodynamic characteristics such as time-averaged lift of camber wings with different five wind tunnel test models with 6, 9, 12, and 15 percent camber were developed and the results were compared with time-averaged lift of a flat wing in order to assess the effects of camber wing on the aerodynamic performance for flapping flight applications. The experiments were performed in an open circuit wind tunnel with of non-return airflow with a test section of (0.3 x 0.3) m and capable of speeds from 0.5 to 30 m/s. The time-averaged lift as functions of advance ratio of the flapping motions with respect to the incoming flows are measured by using a strain gauge balance and KYOWA PCD-300A sensor interface data acquisition system. It is found that camber would bring significant aerodynamic benefits when the flapping flight is in unsteady state regime, with advance ratio less than 1.0. The aerodynamic benefits of camber are found to decay exponentially with the increasing advance ratio. Cambered wing shows significantly higher lift in comparison to the flat wing.


Author(s):  
Wei Shyy ◽  
Hikaru Aono ◽  
Chang-kwon Kang ◽  
Hao Liu

Author(s):  
Yutong Wang ◽  
Shankar Kalyanasundaram ◽  
John Young

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document