4.5 Article

Aerodynamics of a bio-inspired flexible flapping-wing micro air vehicle

Journal

BIOINSPIRATION & BIOMIMETICS
Volume 6, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1748-3182/6/4/045002

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. JSPS, Japan [18656056, 18100002]
  2. CKSP
  3. JSPS
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18656056, 21360078, 18100002] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

MAVs (micro air vehicles) with a maximal dimension of 15 cm and nominal flight speeds of around 10 m s(-1), operate in a Reynolds number regime of 10(5) or lower, in which most natural flyers including insects, bats and birds fly. Furthermore, due to their light weight and low flight speed, the MAVs' flight characteristics are substantially affected by environmental factors such as wind gust. Like natural flyers, the wing structures of MAVs are often flexible and tend to deform during flight. Consequently, the aero/fluid and structural dynamics of these flyers are closely linked to each other, making the entire flight vehicle difficult to analyze. We have recently developed a hummingbird-inspired, flapping flexible wing MAV with a weight of 2.4-3.0 g and a wingspan of 10-12 cm. In this study, we carry out an integrated study of the flexible wing aerodynamics of this flapping MAV by combining an in-house computational fluid dynamic (CFD) method and wind tunnel experiments. A CFD model that has a realistic wing planform and can mimic realistic flexible wing kinematics is established, which provides a quantitative prediction of unsteady aerodynamics of the four-winged MAV in terms of vortex and wake structures and their relationship with aerodynamic force generation. Wind tunnel experiments further confirm the effectiveness of the clap and fling mechanism employed in this bio-inspired MAV as well as the importance of the wing flexibility in designing small flapping-wing MAVs.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available