Skip to main content
Log in

Aerodynamic force and flow structures of two airfoils in flapping motions

  • Published:
Acta Mechanica Sinica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aerodynamic force and flow structures of two airfoils in a tandem configuration in flapping motions are studied, by solving the Navier-Stokes equations in moving overset grids. Three typical phase differences between the fore- and aftairfoil flapping cycles are considered. It is shown that: (1) in the case of no interaction (single airfoil), the time average of the vertical force coefficient over the downstroke is 2.74, which is about 3 times as large as the maximum steady-state lift coefficient of a dragonfly wing; the time average of the horizontal force coefficient is 1.97, which is also large. The reasons for the large force coefficients are the acceleration at the beginning of a stroke, the delayed stall and the “pitching-up” motion near the end of the stroke. (2) In the cases of two-airfoils, the time-variations of the force and moment coefficients on each airfoil are broadly similar to that of the single airfoil in that the vertical force is mainly produced in downstroke and the horizontal force in upstroke, but very large differences exist due to the interaction. (3) For in-phase stroking, the major differences caused by the interaction are that the vertical force on FA in downstroke is increased and the horizontal force on FA in upstroke decreased. As a result, the magnitude of the resultant force is almost unchanged but it inclines less forward. (4) For counter stroking, the major differences are that the vertical force on AA in downstroke and the horizontal force on FA in upstroke are decreased. As a result, the magnitude of the resultant force is decreased by about 20 percent but its direction is almost unchanged. (5) For 90°-phase-difference stroking, the major differences are that the vertical force on AA in downstroke and the horizontal force on FA in upstroke are decreased greatly and the horizontal force on AA in upstroke increased. As a result, the magnitude of the resultant force is decreased by about 28% and it inclines more forward. (6) Among the three cases of phase angles, inphase flapping produces the largest vertical force (also the largest resultant force); the 90°-phase-difference flapping results in the largest horizontal force, but the smallest resultant force.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alexander DE. Unusual phase relationships between the forewings and hindwings in flying dragonflies.J Exp Biol, 1984, 109: 379–383

    Google Scholar 

  2. Norberg RA. Hovering flight of the dragonfly Aeschna juncea L., kinematics and aerodynamics. In Swimming and Flying in Nature Wu TY, Brokaw CJ, Brennen C, eds. New York: Plenum Press, 1975. 763–781

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wakenling JM, Ellington CP. Dragonfly flight, II. velocities, accelerations and kinematics of flapping flight.J Exp Biol, 1997, 200: 557–582

    Google Scholar 

  4. Weis-Fogh T. Quick estimates of flight fitness in hovering animals, including novel mechanisms for lift production.J Exp Biol, 1973, 59: 169–230

    Google Scholar 

  5. Somps C, Luttges M. Dragonfly flight: novel uses of unsteady separation flows.Science, 1985, 28: 1326–1328

    Google Scholar 

  6. Saharon D, Luttges M. Dragonfly unsteady aerodynamics: the role of the wing phase relations in controlling the produced flows. AIAA Paper 89-0832, 1989

  7. Saharon D, Luttges M. Visualization of unsteady separated flow produced by mechanically driven dragonfly wing kinematics model. AIAA Paper 88-0569, 1988

  8. Rogers SE, Kwak D, Kiris C. Numerical solution of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations for steady-state and time-dependent problems.AIAA Journal, 1991, 29: 603–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lan SL, Sun M. Aerodynamic properties of a wing performing unsteady rotational motions at low Reynolds number.Acta Mechanica, 2001, 149: 1–13

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Meakin R. Moving body overset grid methods for complete aircraft tiltrotor simulations. AIAA Paper 93-3350, 1993

  11. Hilgenstock A. A fast method for the elliptic generation of three dimensional grids with full boundary control. In: Num Grid Generation in CFM'88. Pineridge Press Ld, 1988. 137–146

  12. Hamdani H, Sun M. Aerodynamic forces and flow structures of an airfoil in some unsteady motions at low Reynolds number.Acta Mechanica, 2000, 145: 173–187

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Wekeling JM, Ellington CP. Dragonfly flight, I. Gliding flight and steady-state aerodynamic forces.J Exp Biol, 1997, 200: 543–556

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shilong, L., Mao, S. Aerodynamic force and flow structures of two airfoils in flapping motions. Acta Mech Sinica 17, 310–331 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02487459

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02487459

Key Words

Navigation