Abstract
The equations of motion of an insect with flapping wings are derived and then simplified to that of a flying body using the “rigid body” assumption. On the basis of the simplified equations of motion, the longitudinal dynamic flight stability of four insects (hoverfly, cranefly, dronefly and hawkmoth) in hovering flight is studied (the mass of the insects ranging from 11 to 1,648 mg and wingbeat frequency from 26 to 157 Hz). The method of computational fluid dynamics is used to compute the aerodynamic derivatives and the techniques of eigenvalue and eigenvector analysis are used to solve the equations of motion. The validity of the “rigid body” assumption is tested and how differences in size and wing kinematics influence the applicability of the “rigid body” assumption is investigated. The primary findings are: (1) For insects considered in the present study and those with relatively high wingbeat frequency (hoverfly, drone fly and bumblebee), the “rigid body” assumption is reasonable, and for those with relatively low wingbeat frequency (cranefly and howkmoth), the applicability of the “rigid body” assumption is questionable. (2) The same three natural modes of motion as those reported recently for a bumblebee are identified, i.e., one unstable oscillatory mode, one stable fast subsidence mode and one stable slow subsidence mode. (3) Approximate analytical expressions of the eigenvalues, which give physical insight into the genesis of the natural modes of motion, are derived. The expressions identify the speed derivative M u (pitching moment produced by unit horizontal speed) as the primary source of the unstable oscillatory mode and the stable fast subsidence mode and Z w (vertical force produced by unit vertical speed) as the primary source of the stable slow subsidence mode.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ellington C.P., van den Berg C., Willmott A.P. and Thomas A.L.R. (1996). Leading edge vortices in insect flight. Nature 347: 472–473
Dickinson M.H., Lehman F.O. and Sane S.P. (1999). Wing rotation and the aerodynamic basis of insect flight. Science 284: 1954–1960
Sun M. and Tang J. (2002). Unsteady aerodynamic force generation by a model fruit fly wing in flapping motion. J. Exp. Biol. 205: 55–70
Thomas A.L.R. and Taylor G.K. (2001). Animal flight dynamics. I. Stability in gliding fight. J. Theor. Biol. 212: 399–424
Taylor G.K. and Thomas A.L.R. (2002). Animal flight dynamics. II. Longitudinal stability in flapping flight. J. Theor. Biol. 214: 351–370
Taylor G.K. and Thomas A.L.R. (2003). Dynamic flight stability in the desert locust Schistocerca gregaria. J. Exp. Biol. 206: 2803–2829
Sun M. and Xiong Y. (2005). Dynamic flight stability of a hovering bumblebee. J. Exp. Biol. 208: 447–459
Gebert, G., Gallmeier, P., Evers, J.: Equations of motion for flapping flight. AIAA Paper, pp 2002–4872 (2002)
Etkin B. and Reid L.D. (1996). Dynamics of Flight: Stability and Control. Wiley, New York
Ellington C.P. (1984). The aerodynamics of hovering insect flight. II. Morphological parameters. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 305: 17–40
Ellington C.P. (1984). The aerodynamics of hovering insect flight. III. Kinematics. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 305: 79–113
Ennos A.R. (1989). The kinematics and aerodynamics of the free flight of some diptera. J. Exp. Biol. 142: 49–85
Meriam J.L. (1975). Dynamics. Wiley, New York
Burington R.S. (1973). Handbook of Mathematical Tables and Formulas. McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (10232010 and 10472008).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sun, M., Wang, J. & Xiong, Y. Dynamic flight stability of hovering insects. Acta Mech Sin 23, 231–246 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10409-007-0068-3
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10409-007-0068-3