Flow Visualization in the Wake of the Flapping-Wing MAV 'DelFly II' in Forward Flight

Perçin, Mustafa; Eisma, H.E.; Oudheusden, B.W. van; Remes, B. D. W.; Ruijsink, R.; Wagter, Christophe De

doi:10.2514/6.2012-2664

Cited by 22 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Its wingspan is 0.28 m and it weighs about 16 g without onboard sensor. It was chosen as the test platform because it has been the subject of much of the previous research [2], [5]- [7], making it a proven and well-tested configuration. The wing of the DelFly is shown in Figure 3.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical simulation of a flapping wing MAV based on wing deformation capture analysis

Tay

Baar

Perçin

et al. 2016

34th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D Numerical simulations of a biplane flapping wing MAV have been performed using an immersed boundary method Navier-Stokes finite volume solver. To obtain a realistic simulation, the wing deformation has been captured using a stereo-vision system. The raw data obtained is further post-processed using Kriging interpolation and the results with and without the interpolation are compared. Results show that Kriging interpolation gives smoother force variation and is able to give reasonable converged solution using only ten wing positions (frames) over one period. The simulation results managed to capture the first peak of the experimental force results both in terms of approximate location and magnitude. However, the simulation only managed to capture the second peak in term of location; its magnitude is smaller than the experimental force. Various reasons for the discrepancies have been discussed. Nevertheless, the simulations reveal strong leading edge and tip vortices, which will enable us to get a better understanding of the underlying flapping wing aerodynamics. Nomenclaturec = mean chord length of wing ct = thrust coefficient dx = minimum grid size f = reduced frequency fc = external body force p = pressure Q = Q criterion Re = Reynolds number S = wing surface area t = time, nondimensionalized with the flapping period T = flapping period Uref = reference velocity

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical simulation of a flapping wing MAV based on wing deformation capture analysis

Tay

Baar

Perçin

et al. 2016

34th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the free flight case, reflective markers placed on the wing surface just behind the leading edge ( Figure 2) were used for the determination of the stroke angle; whereas, the leading edge spars [39] are used for stroke angle determination in the case of balance measurements. The angle is very similar when the wings at each side of the of the ornithopter are close to each other in a closed position (i.e., clap phase) and the difference is the largest at the end of out-stroke due to substantial deformation of the wing surface that lags behind the leading edge spar during a flap cycle.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the DelFly is an inherently stable platform that does not require active sub-flap commands over the flapping period for attitude and maneuver control -similar strategy was applied by Dietl and Garcia [35], [36]. The assumption of non-moving atmosphere neglects the vortices and wake structures generated by the flapping flight [37], assuming the flow as being steady around the platform.…”

Section: B Free Flight Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tethered vs. free flight force determination of the DelFly II Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicle

Caetano

Perçin

Visser

et al. 2014

2014 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The determination of dynamic forces acting on a Flapping Wing Micro Aerial Vehicle (FWMAV) is a challenging task due to the unsteady nature of force generation mechanisms. To assure a proper force identification in future researches, this work compares two different methods to obtain the longitudinal forces acting on FWMAVs and discusses their applicability regions. The methods were 1) calculation of forces from the recordings of the FWMAV's position in a free flight condition; 2) direct force measurements in a tethered flight condition in a wind tunnel. The DelFly II is used as the FWMAV test platform in the measurements. During free flight experiments, its position and attitude were recorded at a rate of 200Hz using an external visual tracking system, whose acquired information was then analyzed to obtain the flight states and calculate the forces and moments that act on the platform during flight, under a set of kinematic assumptions. Subsequently, similar flight conditions were tested in the tethered situation. An ATI Nano-17 Titanium force transducer was used to measure time-resolved forces. The results for the most common flight regime of the DelFly, which is a slow forward flight at a high body pitch angle, are presented. It is shown that the tethered force balance tests agree with the free flight data when assessing the aerodynamic forces that are perpendicular to the stroke plane of the flapping wing. However, the forces that act along the stroke plane are coupled with structural dynamic terms, thus affecting the final lift and thrust identification. These results point to inadequate force identification in fixed point force measurements, due to effect the of the dynamic modes of the FWMAV body, thus advising proper cross-comparing between experimental methods.

show abstract

“…eqs. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] were found to converge in the static case, while during flight they vary to a limited extent, typically in conjunction with maneuvers. It can for instance be observed in fig.…”

Section: A Fusion Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While significant insight is now available on both fronts, thanks to studies on insects and birds [1,2,3,4], and, more recently, increasingly on robotic test platforms [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15], the high complexity of flapping flight still poses a considerable challenge to FWMAV development. Additionally, it is still considerably difficult to obtain realistic experimental data, particularly in free flight and in different flight regimes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Onboard/Offboard Sensor Fusion for High-Fidelity Flapping-Wing Robot Flight Data

Armanini

Karásek

Croon

et al. 2017

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flow Visualization in the Wake of the Flapping-Wing MAV 'DelFly II' in Forward Flight

Cited by 22 publications

References 13 publications

Numerical simulation of a flapping wing MAV based on wing deformation capture analysis

Numerical simulation of a flapping wing MAV based on wing deformation capture analysis

Tethered vs. free flight force determination of the DelFly II Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicle

Onboard/Offboard Sensor Fusion for High-Fidelity Flapping-Wing Robot Flight Data

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About