Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

Optimization kinematics for flapping wing

Prepared for : Dr. Rais Zain, Dr. Taufiq Mulyanto
Prepared by: Nguyen Tien Dat
I.

Introduction.
1.1.Background
Nowadays, UAVs ( unmanned aerial vehicles) becomes popular in the world.
They are aircraft without a pilot on board. It means that they can be remotely
piloted, or completely autonomous. You can see UAVs in your daily lives.
There are many application of UAVs. Normally, they will bring a camera on
board, and provide a live video to operator, or they can bring some sensor
types like chemical, biological, radiation They are small, no pilot, so, they
can be used in risky condition, where no people can come in. They appear in
many field ranging from photography, cinemas, to military or transfer the
package. Following the time, the price of UAVs become cheaper, and with
200$, you can have a UAV for yourself.
1.2. Types of UAVs, and comparison
There are 3 types of UAVs, and the application of UAVs is also depended on
the types of the UAVs
First, its the fixed wing UAVs. They are similar to airplanes. It means
that, the aerodynamics of theirs is the same with airplanes. To produce enough
lift, the wing needs to keep moving until it reach the certain minimal speed.
Thus, the fixed wing UAVs is efficient, and very suitable for the duty when it
needs maximum flight time. They are very stable because of the structure of
them, with design of tails. However, the limitation of them is the size. Most of
them is big, and operates outdoor.
Next is rotary wing UAVs. They are the most popular types. They use
rotating bladed rotors to generate the lift, normally is four, and they know as
quadrocopters. Their design cannot be stable like fixed wings, and the flight
time is less than fixed wing; but, it means that they can be very maneuverable,
and can easily to move quick, change the direction without disturbances. Their
applications is large. They can take-off vertically, and slowly in any direction,
which make them useful in urban environments, even indoors.

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

The last type, the flapping wing UAVs, is still new in the world. The
inspiration of them is taken from the insects and small birds. However, its
still very hard to reach the design, or understanding the aerodynamics of
flapping wings. However, natural flyers with flapping wing, like
hummingbird, they can exhibit long flight times( without any energy income),
and they can perform difficult movement of their body in the air. Especially,
the potential of them in military is very big. The flapping wing UAVs can be
mimic the bird, or insect, so it can easily come into the rival area.
1.3.Objective
A design-oriented model for the unsteady aerodynamics of a flapping wing
has been developed. Within this project, objective function is to maximize the
propulsive efficiency. And to achieve it, calculations is presented in the
performance prediction of a mechanical flying pterosaur replica.
II.

Formulation of the optimization problem.

Firstly, I assume that the wing is spanwise rigid. However, it is possible to modify
the kinematics of the model to allow for spanwise bending and twisting.
Next, the wing is divided into 12 strips, and it is impossible to have cross flow
between the strips. The wing must have a high aspect ratio.

Fig 2.1. Schematic diagram of a Pterosaur Replica wing.

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

The motion of the wing is continous sinusoidal with equal times between upstroke
and downstroke.
Objective function is stated as:
Min

The design variables is:

Flapping frequency (f) :x(2)
Flapping amplitude: x(1)

The pitching angle relative to the free-stream: a x(4)

The dynamic twist angle: 0 x(3)
With constraints:
0 < x(1) < 90
0 < x(2) < 20
180
0 < x(3) <
; (b : wingspan)
b
x(3)b
x(3)b
- 90 < x(4) < 90 2
2
With initial condition
Air density,
Kinematic viscosity,v
Forward velocity, U
Wingspan,b

2.38*10^-3 [lbs^2/ft^4]
1.57*10^-4 [ft^2/s]
36 [ft/s]
18 [ft]

Section

10

Chord(ft)

0.744

0.607

0.51 0.45 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.36 0.30 0.28 0.23 0.127
5
2
6
1
4
3
9
9
1

Fig 2.2. Assumed strip theory equivalence to whole wing motion

11

12

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

2.1.Wing kinematics

Fig 2.3. A front and section view of flapping wing

So, the model of my project is specified from Delaurier (1993a) as a guide. I use
this formula and the parameters to optimize the propulsive efficiency.
The plunging motion is given by:

h (y)cos( t) ( x(1) y)cos( t)

: flapping angle amplitude
y: the coordinate along the semispan.
We have:
.

h ( x(1) y)sin( t) ;
..

h 2 ( x(1) y) cos( t) ;
Dynamic twist, assume to vary linearly along the span,

(0 y)sin(t ) ( x(3) y)sin(t )

0 : the magitude of the linear variation of dynamic twist.

The total pitch angle of the airfoil chord with respect to the free stream velocity U
is given by:

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

a x(4)

a : pitch angle of flapping axis with respect to U.

We have:
.

( x(3) y) cos(t ) ;
..

2 ( x(3) y)sin(t ) ;

For plunging motion, the plunging velocity is always perpendicular to the chord
line. So, the plunging velocity is the normal componet of the velocity of the
leading edge:

Vplunging h cos( a ) h cos( x(4))

When examining the pitching motion, the leading edge is taken as the reference
point. It is also the point about which the pitching rotation acts, and therefore the
velocity at this point is

3 .
Vpitching c
4
As for the forward motion, dealing only with the wings motion, the pitch angle of

the flapping axis, a , is zero. Hence the dynamically varying pitch angle, ,
will also be the instantaneous geometric angle of attack. Thus,the forward velocity
is given by
Vforward U ( )

Finally, the relative angle of attack at the

3
-chord location due to the wings
4

motion is given by

Vplunging Vpitching Vforward

U

To calculate the forces generated during a flapping cycle, the flow relative
velocity and flow relative angle of attack should be determined. Using the derived
expression of relative angle of attack at

3
- chord location due to the wings
4

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

motion given by above equation, the flows relative angle of attach at

3
- chord
4

location is given by:

'

AR
C G ' (k ) .
( F ' (k)
) 0
AR 2
2U k
U

Where:

0
U

2(

0 a
2 AR

) 2(

0 x(4)
2 AR

);

C1k 2
;
F (k) 1 2
(k C 2 2 )
'

G ' (k)

C1

C1C2 k
;
(k 2 C 2 2 )

0.5 AR
;
(2.32 AR)

C2 0.181

0.772
;
AR

The relative flow velocity at

3
-chord location, V, must include the downwash as
4

well as the wings motion relative to U. This is accomplished by including '

the expression, giving
.

1 .
V {[U cos h cos( a )]2 [U ( ' a ) c ]2 }1/2
2
.
1 .
{[U cos h cos( x(4))]2 [U ( ' x(4)) c ]2 }1/2
2

2.2.Force calculations
To compute the normal and chordwise forces acting on each wings section,
the flow over the section must first be determined. The strip theory allows for
an approximation to localised post stall behaviour. Flow separation, or
stalling, is assumed to occur abruptly, and hence a condition for this transition
has to be defined.
.

3 c
3 c
Criterion ' a
' x(4)
( stall )max
4 U
4 U

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

When the attached flow range is exceeded, totally separated flow is assumed
to abruptly occur.
2.2.1. Normal force (attatched flow)
The sections total attached flow normal force is

dN dNc dNa
dN c : the normal force due to circulation
dN a : an additional normal force contribution comes from the

apparent mass effect.

Cn ( y) : the normal force coefficient

dN c

UV
2

Cn ( y ) cdy

: the atmospheric density

dy: the width of the wing section

Cn ( y) 2 ( ' 0 a ) 2 ( ' 0 x(4))

dN a

c 2
4

vdy

v : the rate of change of the midchord normal velocity componet

due to the wings section

.
1 ..
v U ' c
4

2.2.2. Normal force(separated flow)

The normal force, under separated flow conditions, is given by
dNsep (dNc )sep (dNa )sep
^

(dN c ) sep (Cd )cf

V Vn
2

cdy ;

(dNc ) sep : the normal force due to circulation, when the flow over

the section is separeted.

1
(dN a ) sep dN a
2
(dN a ) sep : the normal due to apparent mass effect changes when the

flow over the section is separated.

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

2.2.3. Chordwise force(attatched flow)

dDcamber 2 0 ( ' a )
2 0 ( ' x(4))

UV

UV
2

cdy

cdy

dDcamber : the chordwise force due to camber

.

1 c UV
dTs s 2 ( ' a
)
cdy
4U
2

1 c UV
s 2 ( ' x(4)
)
cdy
4U
2
dTs : the chordwise force due to leading edge section

dD f (Cd ) f

Vx
2

cdy

dD f : the chordwise friction drag

The total attatched chordwise force is given by:

dFx dTs dDcamber dD f

2.3.Thrust
dT dFx cos dN sin

1 m
Lj
m j 1

Discrete element intergrations were performed. So, assuming the time

intergration to be approximated by a summation at discrete cycle
increments, j run from 1 to m (m =20: time intervals).
2.4.Power calculations:

P out T U

The flight speed,U, is constant, the average power output is determined by

multiplying the average thrust with the flight speed.
.

.
.
1 .
1 .
dPin dFx hsin( a ) dN[h cos( a ) c ] dN a [ c ] dM ac dM a
4
4
.
.
.
.
.
1
1 .
dFx hsin( x(4)) dN[h cos( x(4)) c ] dN a [ c ] dM ac dM a
4
4

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

Finally, with the average input and output power of the wing known, the
average propulsive efficiency can be calculated from

P out

Pin

III.

Modern method to solve the problem using Matlab

Fmincon
With initial value: x0 = [0.56,2.0,0.07,0.122]
So, in this problem, i use fmincon matlab to solve this, the result is
x0 =
0.5600

2.0000

0.0700

0.1220

the values of function value and constraints at starting point

f=
1.8427
c=
-1.0100
-0.5600
-18.0000
-2.0000
-0.1045
-0.0700
-1.4378
-1.6818
ceq =
[]
Local minimum possible. Constraints satisfied.
fmincon stopped because the predicted change in the objective function
is less than the default value of the function tolerance and constraints
are satisfied to within the default value of the constraint tolerance.
<stopping criteria details>
Active inequalities (to within options.TolCon = 1e-06):
lower
upper ineqlin ineqnonlin
5
x=
1.1295 0.7585 0.1745 -0.2031
fval =
1.2159
max_power_efficient =

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

0.8224
The values of constraints at optimum solutionn
c=
-0.4405
-1.1295
-19.2415
-0.7585
0
-0.1745
-1.7464
-1.3403
ceq =
[]
Conclusion:
Maximum proplusive efficiency is approximately 82.24 %
With flapping amplitude: 72.20
flapping frequency: 0.7585 (hz)
dynamic twist: 5.540 /m
pitching angle: - 1.40

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

With initial value: x0 = [2.0 2.0 5.0 0.122];

fmincon stopped because it exceeded the function evaluation limit,
options.MaxFunEvals = 400 (the default value).
xsol =
1.5688

0.4126

0.1745 -0.1888

fval =
1.2131
max_efficency_propulsive =
0.8243
ans =
x: [29x4 double]
fval: [29x1 double]

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

Ga result:
Intial value
X0 = [0.56,2.0,0.07,0.122];
Optimization terminated: stall generations limit exceeded
and constraint violation is less than options.TolCon.
xsol =
1.5123

0.3223

0.1744 -0.1500

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

fval =
1.2130
max_efficiency_propulsive =
0.8244
ans =
x: []
fval: []

With initial value X0 = [-1 -2 0.0 0.0];

Optimization terminated: maximum number of generations exceeded.
xsol =
1.1839

0.5282

0.1744 -0.1985

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

fval =
1.2117
max_efficiency_propulsive =
0.8253
ans =
x: []
fval: []

With initial value X0 = [100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0];

Optimization terminated: maximum number of generations exceeded.

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

xsol =
0.9118

0.6681

0.1745 -0.1856

fval =
1.2117
max_efficiency_propulsive =
0.8253
ans =
x: []
fval: []

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

Simulated Anealing:
x0 = [0.56,2.0,0.07,0.122];
Optimization terminated: change in best function value less than options.TolFun.
xsol =
0.4409

1.4681

0.1383 -0.1847

fval =
1.2285
max_efficiency_propulsive =
0.8140
ans =
x: []
fval: []

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

x0 = [100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0];

Optimization terminated: change in best function value less than options.TolFun.
xsol =
1.2213

0.4145

0.0944 -0.1682

fval =
1.2226
max_efficiency_propulsive =
0.8179

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

ans =
x: []
fval: []

x0 = [50.0 34.0 1.0 20.0]

Optimization terminated: change in best function value less than options.TolFun.
xsol =

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

0.4385

1.5926

0.1653 -0.2123

fval =
1.2270
max_efficiency_propulsive =
0.8150
ans =
x: []
fval: []

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

IV.

Analysis and conclusion

From the result above, we can see the difference between 3 methods. In my
research, I use 3 method, fmincon, genetic algorithm, and simulated annealing, by
using matlab. I divide 3 cases for each method, with difference initial value. First,
initial value will stay in feasible region; next, it will stay outside feasible region,
and finally I will choose randomly initial value.
So, from the table above, It show that the difference between 3 methods. We can
see the value of objective function in 3 cases, in each cases, the value of objective
function is biggest when I use genetic algorithm. In the first cases, the difference
of objective function between GA and SA and fmincon is 0.06 % and 1%. The
next case is 0.12% and 0.89%. The final case is 0.49% and 1.24%. Due to the
result, we can see that with genetic algorithm, the value of objective function will
get the best result, compare to the others.
And from the result of this table, we also can see that when fmincon have been
effected by initial value more than GA and SA. With the changing of initial value,
GA and SA are not be effected a lot, the value of objective function just change a
little.
Each variable have a role in designing an ornithopters. However, in the future, I
will concentrate in flapping amplitude and flapping frequency. With difference
flapping amplitude, I have difference mechanism of wing. It means that, the
shape, the structure of the wing can be changed, depend on the flapping
amplitude. Flapping frequency give a vital role in designing, because it will decide
the power system for UAV. UAVs have the limitation of the weight, it cannot too
heavy, it means that, you cannot choose whatever types of rotor. The rotor can
make a higher frequency, it also much heavier than the others. That why we need
to optimize flapping frequency, to fit with the weight of UAVs.

V.

Recommendation.
During the time to work with this research, I met some problems. Firstly, its the
model mathematical of flapping wing UAVs. all the formula I mention above are
not stay in a paper, theyre in many different paper. Of course, I must find a paper
like a main reference, but there are many information which are not included in
this paper. Secondly, its time to coding. Because the formula come from many

Nguyen Tien Dat

23614703
Design Optimization

paper, it means that there are some formula not suitable for my case. At that time,
I must read again the theoretical about flapping wing. And finally, when I do
completely the code for my model mathematical, I have to show the result and
analysis the result to show the difference between 3 methods I use. Thus, my
model is simple, so the difference is not much.
In the future, I can use the result, and use the model of mathematical to simulate
the aerodynamics forces. From that, I can validate the formula and design a real
model of UAVs.