Search

We present the first integrative computational fluid dynamics (CFD) study of near- and far-field aerodynamics in insect hovering flight using a biology-inspired, dynamic flight simulator. This simulator, which has been built to encompass multiple mechanisms and principles related to insect flight, is capable of 'flying' an insect on the basis of realistic wing-body morphologies and kinematics. Our CFD study integrates near- and far-field wake dynamics and shows the detailed three-dimensional (3D) near- and far-field vortex flows: a horseshoe-shaped vortex is generated and wraps around the wing in the early down- and upstroke; subsequently, the horseshoe-shaped vortex grows into a doughnut-shaped vortex ring, with an intense jet-stream present in its core, forming the downwash; and eventually, the doughnut-shaped vortex rings of the wing pair break up into two circular vortex rings in the wake. The computed aerodynamic forces show reasonable agreement with experimental results in terms of both the mean force (vertical, horizontal and sideslip forces) and the time course over one stroke cycle (lift and drag forces). A large amount of lift force (approximately 62% of total lift force generated over a full wingbeat cycle) is generated during the upstroke, most likely due to the presence of intensive and stable, leading-edge vortices (LEVs) and wing tip vortices (TVs); and correspondingly, a much stronger downwash is observed compared to the downstroke. We also estimated hovering energetics based on the computed aerodynamic and inertial torques, and powers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three-dimensional unsteady computations of the flow past a fruit fly Drosophila under hovering and free flight conditions are computed. The kinematics of the wings and the body of the fruit fly are prescribed from experimental observations. The computed unsteady lift and thrust forces are validated with experimental results and are in excellent agreement. The unsteady aerodynamic origin of the time-varying yaw moment is identified. The differences in the kinematics between the right and the left wings show that subtle change in the stroke angle and deviation angle can result in the yaw moment for the turning maneuver. The computed yaw moment reaches a peak value at the beginning of the maneuver and remains positive throughout the remainder of the maneuver. The origin of the yaw moment is investigated by computing the center of pressures on each wing and the individual moment arms. This investigation leads to the conclusion that it is the forward force and a component of the lift force that combine to produce the turning moment while the side force alone produces the restoring torque during the maneuver. The vorticity shed from the wing's leading edge and the tips show a loop like structure that during stroke reversals pinches off into A-like structures that have not been previously observed in the wakes of flapping fliers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aerodynamics and forewing-hindwing interaction of a model dragonfly in forward flight are studied, using the method of numerically solving the Navier-Stokes equations. Available morphological and stroke-kinematic parameters of dragonfly (Aeshna jancea) are used for the model dragonfly. Six advance ratios (J; ranging from 0 to 0.75) and, at each J, four forewing-hindwing phase angle differences (γd; 180°, 90°, 60° and 0°) are considered. The mean vertical force and thrust are made to balance the weight and body-drag, respectively, by adjusting the angles of attack of the wings, so that the flight could better approximate the real flight. At hovering and low J (J=0, 0.15), the model dragonfly uses separated flows or leading-edge vortices (LEV) on both the fore- and hindwing downstrokes; at medium J (J=0.30, 0.45), it uses the LEV on the forewing downstroke and attached flow on the hindwing downstroke; at high J (J=0.6, 0.75), it uses attached flows on both fore- and hindwing downstrokes. (The upstrokes are very lightly loaded and, in general, the flows are attached.) At a given J, at γd=180°, there are two vertical force peaks in a cycle, one in the first half of the cycle, produced mainly by the hindwing downstroke, and the other in the second half of the cycle, produced mainly by the forewing downstroke; at γd=90°, 60° and 0°, the two force peaks merge into one peak. The vertical force is close to the resultant aerodynamic force [because the thrust (or body-drag) is much smaller than vertical force (or the weight)]. 55–65% of the vertical force is contributed by the drag of the wings. The forewing-hindwing interaction is detrimental to the vertical force (and resultant force) generation. At hovering, the interaction reduces the mean vertical force (and resultant force) by 8–15%, compared with that without interaction; as J increases, the reduction generally decreases (e.g. at J=0.6 and γd=90°, it becomes 1.6%). A possible reason for the detrimental interaction is as follows: each of the wings produces a mean vertical force coefficient close to half that needed for weight support, and a downward flow is generated in producing the vertical force; thus, in general, a wing moves in the downwash-velocity field induced by the other wing, reducing its aerodynamic forces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Here we present the first digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) analysis of the flow field around the wings of an insect (the tobacco hawkmoth Manduca sexta, tethered to a 6-component force-moment balance in a wind tunnel). A leading-edge vortex (LEV) is present above the wings towards the end of the downstroke, as the net upward force peaks. Our DPIV analyses and smoke visualisations match the results of previous flow visualisation experiments at midwing, and we extend the experiments to provide the first analysis of the flow field above the thorax. Detailed DPIV measurements show that towards the end of the downstroke, the LEV structure is consistent with that recently reported in free-flying butterflies and dragonflies: the LEV is continuous across the thorax and runs along each wing to the wingtip, where it inflects to form the wingtip trailing vortices. The LEV core is 2-3 mm in diameter (approximately 10% of local wing chord) both at the midwing position and over the centreline at 1.2 m s-1 and at 3.5 m s-1 flight speeds. At 1.2 m s-1 the measured LEV circulation is 0.012±0.001 m² s-1 (mean ± S.D.) at the centreline and 0.011±0.001 m² s-1 halfway along the wing. At 3.5 m-1 LEV circulation is 0.011±0.001 m² s-1 at the centreline and 0.020±0.004 m² s-1 at midwing. The DPIV measurements suggest that if there is any spanwise flow in the LEV towards the end of the downstroke its velocity is less than 1 m s-1. Estimates of force production show that the LEV contributes significantly to supporting body weight during bouts of flight at both speeds (more than 10% of body weight at 1.2 m s-1 and 35-65% of body weight at 3.5 m s-1). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Here we show, by qualitative free- and tethered-flight flow visualization, that dragonflies fly by using unsteady aerodynamic mechanisms to generate high-lift, leading- edge vortices. In normal free flight, dragonflies use counterstroking kinematics, with a leading-edge vortex (LEV) on the forewing downstroke, attached flow on the forewing upstroke, and attached flow on the hindwing throughout. Accelerating dragonflies switch to in-phase wing-beats with highly separated downstroke flows, with a single LEV attached across both the fore- and hindwings. We use smoke visualizations to distinguish between the three simplest local analytical solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations yielding flow separation resulting in a LEV. The LEV is an open U-shaped separation, continuous across the thorax, running parallel to the wing leading edge and inflecting at the tips to form wingtip vortices. Air spirals in to a free-slip critical point over the centreline as the LEV grows. Spanwise flow is not a dominant feature of the flow field - spanwise flows sometimes run from wingtip to centreline, or vice versa - depending on the degree of sideslip. LEV formation always coincides with rapid increases in angle of attack, and the smoke visualizations clearly show the formation of LEVs whenever a rapid increase in angle of attack occurs. There is no discrete starting vortex. Instead, a shear layer forms behind the trailing edge whenever the wing is at a non-zero angle of attack, and rolls up, under Kelvin-Helmholtz instability, into a series of transverse vortices with circulation of opposite sign to the circulation around the wing and LEV. The flow fields produced by dragonflies differ qualitatively from those published for mechanical models of dragonflies, fruitflies and hawkmoths, which preclude natural wing interactions. However, controlled parametric experiments show that, provided the Strouhal number is appropriate and the natural interaction between left and right wings can occur, even a simple plunging plate can reproduce the detailed features of the flow seen in dragonflies. In our models, and in dragonflies, it appears that stability of the LEV is achieved by a general mechanism whereby flapping kinematics are configured so that a LEV would be expected to form naturally over the wing and remain attached for the duration of the stroke. However, the actual formation and shedding of the LEV is controlled by wing angle of attack, which dragonflies can vary through both extremes, from zero up to a range that leads to immediate flow separation at any time during a wing stroke. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies have demonstrated that a quasi-steady model closely matches the instantaneous force produced by an insect wing during hovering flight. It is not clear, however, if such methods extend to forward flight. In this study we use a dynamically scaled robotic model of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster to investigate the forces produced by a wing revolving at constant angular velocity while simultaneously translating at velocities appropriate for forward flight. Because the forward and angular velocities were constant wing inertia was negligible, and the measured forces can be attributed to fluid dynamic phenomena. The combined forward and revolving motions of the wing produce a time-dependent free-stream velocity profile, which suggests that added mass forces make a contribution to the measured forces. We find that the forces due added mass make a small, but measurable, component of the total force and are in excellent agreement with theoretical values. Lift and drag coefficients are calculated from the force traces after subtracting the contributions due to added mass. The lift and drag coefficients, for fixed angle of attack, are not constant for non-zero advance ratios, but rather vary in magnitude throughout the stroke. This observation implies that modifications of the quasi-steady model are required in order to predict accurately the instantaneous forces produced during forward flight We show that the dependence of the lift and drag coefficients upon advance ratio and stroke position can be characterized effectively in terms of the tip velocity ratio - the ratio of the chordwise components of flow velocity at the wing tip due to translation and revolution. On this basis we develop a modified quasi-steady model that can account for the varying magnitudes of the lift and drag coefficients. Our model may also resolve discrepancies in past measurements of wing performance based on translational and revolving motion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studies of insect flight have focused on aerodynamic lift, both in quasi-steady and unsteady regimes. This is partly influenced by the choice of hovering motions along a horizontal stroke plane, where aerodynamic drag makes no contribution to the vertical force. In contrast, some of the best hoverers — dragonflies and hoverflies — employ inclined stroke planes, where the drag in the down- and upstrokes does not cancel each other. Here, computation of an idealized dragonfly wing motion shows that a dragonfly uses drag to support about three quarters of its weight. This can explain an anomalous factor of four in previous estimates of dragonfly lift coefficients, where drag was assumed to be small. To investigate force generation and energy cost of hovering flight using different combination of lift and drag, I study a family of wing motion parameterized by the inclined angle of the stroke plane. The lift-to-drag ratio is no longer a measure of efficiency, except in the case of horizontal stroke plane. In addition, because the flow is highly stalled, lift and drag are of comparable magnitude, and the aerodynamic efficiency is roughly the same up to an inclined angle about 60°, which curiously agrees with the angle observed in dragonfly flight. Finally, the lessons from this special family of wing motion suggests a strategy for improving efficiency of normal hovering, and a unifying view of different wing motions employed by insects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aerodynamic force generation and mechanical power requirements of a dragonfly (Aeschna juncea) in hovering flight are studied. The method of numerically solving the Navier-Stokes equations in moving overset grids is used. When the midstroke angles of attack in the downstroke and the upstroke are set to 52° and 8°, respectively (these values are close to those observed), the mean vertical force equals the insect weight, and the mean thrust is approximately zero. There are two large vertical force peaks in one flapping cycle. One is in the first half of the cycle, which is mainly due to the hindwings in their downstroke; the other is in the second half of the cycle, which is mainly due to the forewings in their downstroke. Hovering with a large stroke plane angle (52°), the dragonfly uses drag as a major source for its weight-supporting force (approximately 65% of the total vertical force is contributed by the drag and 35% by the lift of the wings). The vertical force coefficient of a wing is twice as large as the quasi-steady value. The interaction between the fore- and hindwings is not very strong and is detrimental to the vertical force generation. Compared with the case of a single wing in the same motion, the interaction effect reduces the vertical forces on the fore- and hindwings by 14% and 16%, respectively, of that of the corresponding single wing. The large vertical force is due to the unsteady flow effects. The mechanism of the unsteady force is that in each downstroke of the hindwing or the forewing, a new vortex ring containing downward momentum is generated, giving an upward force. The body-mass-specific power is 37 W kg-1, which is mainly contributed by the aerodynamic power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]