4.7 Review

Flow Control for Unmanned Air Vehicles

Journal

ANNUAL REVIEW OF FLUID MECHANICS
Volume 54, Issue -, Pages 383-412

Publisher

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-fluid-032221-105053

Keywords

active flow control; unmanned air vehicles; leading-edge vortex stabilization; circulation control; sweeping jets; plasma actuators

Funding

  1. Israel Science Foundation [2778/20]
  2. Office of Naval Research [N00014-19-1-2280]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Advancements in unmanned air vehicle technology have led to vehicles with different configurations and sizes. Smaller UAVs rely on vortex generation for lift and maneuvering, while larger UAVs use externally driven and autonomous fluidic systems. Energy efficiency and the development of accurate aerodynamic and flight dynamics models are major challenges.
The pervasiveness of unmanned air vehicles (UAVs), from insect to airplane scales, combined with active flow control maturity, has set the scene for vehicles that differ markedly from present-day configurations. Nano and micro air vehicles, with characteristic Reynolds numbers typically less than 105, rely on periodically generated leading-edge vortices for lift generation, propulsion, and maneuvering. This is most commonly achieved by mechanical flapping or pulsed plasma actuation. On larger UAVs, with Reynolds numbers greater than 105, externally driven and autonomous fluidic systems continue to dominate. These include traditional circulation control techniques, autonomous synthetic jets, and discrete sweeping jets. Plasma actuators have also shown increased technological maturity. Energy efficiency is a major challenge, whether it be batteries and power electronics on nano and micro air vehicles or acceptably low compressor bleed on larger UAVs. Further challenges involve the development of aerodynamic models based on experiments or numerical simulations, as well as flight dynamics models.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available