540 likes | 707 Views
after Nachtigall, 1978. ‘Quasi-steady’ analysis (blade element theory). total force. wind tunnel. lift n. drag n. U. C L. a n. U n. a n. C D. 1.0. C L. 0.5. C D. lift n = ½ C L ( a n ) U n 2 r S. 0. N. 0. 0.5. 1.0. drag n = ½ C D ( a n ) U n 2 r S. lift = S lift n.
E N D
‘Quasi-steady’ analysis (blade element theory) total force wind tunnel liftn dragn U CL an Un an CD 1.0 CL 0.5 CD liftn = ½ CL (an) Un2r S 0 N 0 0.5 1.0 dragn = ½ CD (an) Un2r S lift = S liftn N drag = S dragn
3 2 locust c f fruit fly 1 c f crane fly 0 lift coefficient 1 - 0 1 2 3 4 drag coefficient range needed to support flight 1.3 0.8
2D wing model at 45o angle of attack leading edge vortex leading edge direction of motion trailing edge
early late increase from leading edge vortex early value required For QSBE 2p late F
leading edge vortex
2D translating flat plate 3D revolving flat plate at low Re leading edge vortex prolonged attachment Karman street
Ftrans lift total 3 . 5 a 3 . 0 CD drag U 2 . 5 2 . 0 3.0 CL 45o 1 . 5 force coefficients 1.5 1 . 0 CL 0 -9o 0 . 5 -1.5 0 . 0 3.0 45o - 0 . 5 1.5 - 9 0 9 1 8 2 7 3 6 4 5 5 4 6 3 7 2 8 1 9 0 CD -9o 0 angle of attack (degs) -1.5 0 1 2 3 time (secs)
3 flapping model fruit fly 2 1.8 locust 1.3 c f fruit fly 1 0.8 c f crane fly 0 lift coefficient 1 - 0 1 2 3 4 drag coefficient
vs. u 3 constant angular velocity (72 deg/sec) 2 CL 1 0 constant forward velocity (0.157 m/s) -1 0 1 2 3 4 CD
Translating model 3D wing at 45o angle of attack, Re 110 David Lentink
Revolving motion 3D model at 45o angle of attack, Re 110 David Lentink
downstroke 3 2 1 upstroke 4 1.delayed stall 2.rotational lift 3. stroke reversal 4.wake capture &added mass
down up translational quasi-steady 1.5 measured force 1.0 net force (10-5 N) 0.5 0 down up stroke cycle
Dear Prof. Dickinson, July 28, 2006 I report on aviation for The Wall Street Journal and wonder if I could trouble you for a professional judgment. Some entrepreneurs attempting to build a large commercial aircraft with small flapping wings have approached me to write a story about their project, and I'm trying to get a sense of whether their idea is at all realistic. They say their design is based, in part, on your research and development work. But obviously there is a huge difference between simulating a tiny insect and building a 100-passenger aircraft. The company is called JCR Technology, in case you have come across them. Their website, which so far seems only to be in French, has information about their design and some computer-graphic simulations. Would you or someone in your lab have a few minutes to look at this and assess whether it is realistic to develop or simply to far-fetched? I would be happy to call to discuss your work more, and how it has prompted this idea. Best regards, Dan Michaels
Integrative Approach sensory systems sensory feedback central nervous system motor commands mechano- sensory musculoskeletal system vision kinematics & forces olfaction dynamics& environment Behavior
Eyes (8800 cells) image & optic flow sensor Wing Sensors (1000 cells) wing loading and contact Ocelli (300 cells) light-based orientation Antennae (2000 cells) olfaction, hearing, airspeed Halteres (900 cells) angular rate gyroscope sensory system of flies Each wing stroke, the fly’s brain integrates input from 15,000 cells. 0.5 mm
infrared sensitive cameras fabric enclosure infrared light 1200 angular velocity (o s-1) 0 1m 10 sec -1200 side view side view top view 5000 frames/sec, 150 msec duration Tammero&Dickinson, JEB 2002, Mark Fry, Ros Sayamen
visual feedback
50 50% 50% number 25 ~90o ~90o 0 -90 0 +90 saccade angle Saccades are triggered by visual input. Tammero&Dickinson, JEB 2002a
flight arena “fly’s eye view” Flies turn away from expansion. Tammero&Dickinson, JEB 2002a
fly angular velocity of stripe left- right stroke amplitude gain ‘closed-loop’ flight simulators IR diode LED display wingbeat analyzer
Stripe Fixation Michael Reiser
center left right summary of expansion reflexes
downstroke muscles upstroke muscles power muscles
b1(first basalar) steering muscles
b1 50 ms wing motion
phaseadvance phasedelay steering muscle control
high speed camera IR LED panel visual target flight path
2) tilt of stroke plane 30 degs 1) increase in stroke amplitude 0.25 1.0 yaw torque (10-8 Nm) kinematics changes during saccades
torque to turn left right counter-torque to stop turning What triggers counter-turn?
mechanosensory feedback
magnet N IR camera LED arena S CPU N mirror magnet S magnetictether
eyes halteres ‘loose’ saccades vs. ‘rigid’ saccades torque with rigid tether angular velocity with loose tether 400 os -1 100 ms 5x10-9 nNm
pitch Coriolis force sensor arrays halteres
150 orientation (deg) 100 50 stimulus fly 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 time (ms)