You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Biomimetics
  • Review
  • Open Access

20 July 2023

Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis in Biomimetics Applications: A Review from Aerospace Engineering Perspective

,
and
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Bio-Inspired Flight Systems and Bionic Aerodynamics 2.0

Abstract

In many modern engineering fields, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has been adopted as a methodology to solve complex problems. CFD is becoming a key component in developing updated designs and optimization through computational simulations, resulting in lower operating costs and enhanced efficiency. Even though the biomimetics application is complex in adapting nature to inspire new capabilities for exciting future technologies, the recent CFD in biomimetics is more accessible and practicable due to the availability of high-performance hardware and software with advances in computer sciences. Many simulations and experimental results have been used to study the analyses in biomimetics applications, particularly those related to aerospace engineering. There are numerous examples of biomimetic successes that involve making simple copies, such as the use of fins for swimming or the mastery of flying, which became possible only after the principles of aerodynamics were better understood. Therefore, this review discusses the essential methodology of CFD as a reliable tool for researchers in understanding the technology inspired by nature and an outlook for potential development through simulations. CFD plays a major role as decision support prior to undertaking a real commitment to execute any design inspired by nature and providing the direction to develop new capabilities of technologies.

1. Introduction

Through the evolution of technology, adapting the idea from biology, creatures in nature were viewed as engineering designs with general features. It has directed the pool of inventions towards an increasingly enhanced potential of their capabilities towards engineering capabilities, tools, and mechanisms [1,2]. Hence, our technology significantly emerged by adapting the features and characteristics of nature’s capabilities, which are far superior to human capabilities in many areas. This term, known as ‘biomimetics’,” implied the study of imitating or adapting nature’s mechanisms, methods, and processes. It was coined by Otto H. Schmitt [3]. Biomimetic technology emerged from innovative ideas from the biological sciences into engineering applications that inspired humans for thousands of years, and the results have benefited the quality of life, improved surviving generations, and secured a sustainable future. Through the principles of mechanics, chemistry, physics, materials science, control, mobility, sensors, and other engineering and science fields, this transfer function from nature’s capabilities to artificial devices has drawn the attention of a novel research agenda across various disciplines [2]. The emerging field of biomimetics has also concerned scaling from nano and micro to macro and mega through the integration of biology, natural history, and material sciences [4].
From the perspective of engineering designs, creatures in nature have an enormous pool of creations and inventions that offer boundless potential and motivate new capabilities for thrilling future technologies. There are numerous examples of biomimetic successes that involve exact duplicates, such as the use of fins for swimming and efficient propulsors, greater mimicking of the mastery of flying for understanding the principles of aerodynamics, imitating the biological honeycomb for structural configuration of low weight and high strength, and many more. Adapting nature’s capabilities into engineering capabilities, including tools and mechanisms, required a remarkable effort to critically bridge both fields of biology and engineering. Interestingly, significant progress has been made with biologically inspired capabilities, which are becoming more sensible and possible for man-made technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), biologically inspired mechanisms, biologically inspired structures and tools, biological materials, biosensors, etc. Captivatingly, the greatest challenge in biomimetics is mimicking nature’s capabilities to create devices of miniature size, considering various aspects of biology that are still beyond human understanding.
Inspired by biological mechanisms, research shows that significant advances in computer-based simulation are growing rapidly in accordance with their importance and rapid acceptance for applications in biomimetics. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) is one of the widely adopted methodologies of computer-based simulation, which is defined as a branch of fluid dynamics that uses numerical solutions of the governing equations for simulating real fluid flows [5]. CFD is becoming a key component in developing updated designs and optimizing them through computational simulations. However, recent CFD is still emerging in biomimetics applications due to the complexity of the anatomy and fluid behavior of creatures in nature. Nevertheless, it is becoming more accessible and practicable by virtue of the advent of digital computers with high-performance hardware and software [6]. Since the importance of knowledge of body fluids and system components in fluid flow studies has been growing over the last several years, the advancement of biomimetics practices and technology has been stimulated. The research of biomimetics with the aid of CFD software is still emerging and incorporates mechanisms of biologically inspired capabilities through simulation.
To date, CFD is increasingly applied in a wide range of critical engineering systems, incorporating an expert area of mathematics and a branch of fluid mechanics. CFD modeling has already received tremendous attention from biomimetics research, along with the development of biologically inspired technologies. Furthermore, detailed characterization of complex biological features and the measurement of computation metrics can be determined by incorporating both design features and CFD simulation. Therefore, this paper explores the CFD study using the state-of-the-art in the aeronautical area, highlighting the biomimetics applications.

2. Adaptive Bio-Inspired Applications in Aircraft Technology

In the field of aircraft technology, the basic inspiration and motivation for flying have come from the capabilities of birds, insects, and aquatic animals that are able to generate efficient lift and thrust with the same wing planform. This bio-inspirations attempt attempts to produce engineered systems that possess characteristics in aeronautical applications, in which this has inspired humans towards replicating or mimicking the features and capabilities of the biological evolution in human-engineered systems. The notion of characterizing animal features is far from new. Leonardo da Vinci, the first to develop early blueprints for a “flying machine’ inspired by a bird, adopted a flapping mechanism to produce lift and thrust [2]. Then, the Wright Brothers succeeded in creating and flying the first airplane off the ground by adapting the ability of a pigeon’s wing to create lift. Throughout biological evolution, the increasing demand for integrating the structure and functions to replicate the features of animal species has driven designers towards simpler and more efficient designs; hence, significant progress has been made. Namely, one can take biologically identified anatomical structures and their functions in engineering applications, as in Table 1.
Table 1. Biomimetics studies in engineering applications.
Referring to Table 1, the basic motivation for flying has always come from millions of species of birds and insects. They efficiently generate lift and thrust using the same wing planform. The specialized feathers of the owl have the ability to fly silently with their unique wing features of trailing edge fringe and velvety down that help absorb aerodynamic sound [7], whereas the morphology of insects is way more complex, which aerodynamically produces pressure gradients for lift and thrust by flapping from multiple wings and legs. In fact, dragonflies inspired the idea to build four-winged MAVs [9]. Despite that, the limbs of bats also influenced flight performance, such as the geometry of wings and bones, compliant skin and bones, distribution of sensory hairs across wings, and the physiology of the musculature that drives the wings [9,12]. In the late 1990s, Frank E. Fish discovered the tubercle effect of the flipper of the humpback whale, which acts like a wing and contributes to superior aerodynamic maneuverability that allows greater lift and less drag than a smooth surface fin [15]. The humpback whale flipper received tremendous attention for the influence of rounded tubercles located on the leading edge of flippers in order to design effective wings involving aerodynamic performance [14,15,16,17,18]. Figure 1 shows examples of bio-inspired animals in engineering applications.
Figure 1. Examples of bio-inspired animals in engineering applications.
Increasingly, research on simulations with regard to aerodynamic or hydrodynamic studies of biologically inspired capabilities is particularly focused on the anatomical structures of animal features. CFD modeling has received remarkable interest among researchers, along with the development of technological devices through these inspirations, especially in the aerospace field.

4. CFD Model Construction

Spalart and Venkatakrishnan [61] highlighted that CFD is increasingly being used in the multidisciplinary design and analysis of aerospace technologies. CFD is one of the most powerful tools for examining the behavior of a system, which is beneficial and leads to more innovation in the design of a system through the numerical overview of fluid flow. In the CFD methodology, it is commonly explained in terms of three main categories, known as pre-processor, solver, and post-processor. The procedure for constructing CFD modeling that can be applied to understanding the aerodynamic performance of bio-inspired applications is described in Figure 8.
Figure 8. Sequential diagram of constructing CFD modeling.
Referring to Figure 8, the pre-processor is the modeling element as the input, which includes problem formulation, meshing, boundary condition setting, and generation of the computational model. The solver involves the processing elements, whereas the numerical solution methods involve discretized governing equations and algebraic solutions. The post-processor is the output element of the computational results that can be displayed and is subjected to the acceptable convergence of the equations that are being solved. In relation to the biomimetics study of CFD simulation, these three categories play a major role in ensuring the geometry definition, flow conditions, as well as appropriate discretization and boundary conditions, so that the flow field can be computed appropriately with sufficient accuracy in the region of the model. The most important step is mimicking or replicating the exact measurements of the anatomy of the bio-inspired animal, considering the features of anatomical mechanisms. The selection of a turbulence model is also crucial in order to justify the numerical investigation and the theory behind all the governing equations in the simulation. Then, the model is discretized into a finite set of control volumes to initiate numerical calculations and render solution fields using CFD simulation software.

4.1. Issues Related to CFD Study of Bio-Inspired Aquatic and Flying Animals

Flying animals, including birds and insects, take advantage of their flapping wings to hover and locomote in the air, which is produced by lift and thrust, while aquatic fish need to flap their pectoral and caudal fins to achieve optimal propulsion. This motion is known as the oscillatory motion of wings or fins. Behind the CFD simulation, the main issues are highlighted involving the theoretical knowledge of the governing body.
Governing Purview
Before performing CFD, it is important to understand the governing authority involved. As such, it can be categorized into four aspects: presumptive, geometrical, kinematic, and performance parameters.

4.1.1. Presumptive Parameters

The presumptive parameters can be referred to as “environmental”, describing the properties of fluid that are supposed to be considered in flapping wings or fins. Parameters of the Reynolds number, Re, can be defined by dominant parameters in flapping airfoils such as freestream velocity, U , and kinematic viscosity of air/water, ν , as in Equation (1).
R e = U L 0 ν
where, L 0 is the characteristic length that is represented by the chord length, c , maximum thickness, D, or span length, L, especially for a 3D model of flapping foil. The corresponding Re, is as follows:
R e c = U c ν ,   R e D = U D ν ,   R e L = U L ν
The Mach number is also one of the key parameters in high-speed airflow, yet its effects on flapping wings are rarely mentioned.
Besides that, in solving CFD numerical simulations of flow behavior, the governing equations of Navier-Stokes and other conservative and non-conservative physics laws in mathematical language should be taken into account.
For continuity,
ρ t + . ρ u V = 0
where, V is the velocity vector, and ρ is the density.
For momentum at x, y, and z components,
x c o m p o n e n t :   ρ u t + . ρ u V = p x + τ x x x + τ y x y + τ z x z + ρ f x , y c o m p o n e n t :   ρ v t + . ρ u V = p y + τ x y x + τ y y y + τ z y z + ρ f y , z c o m p o n e n t :   ρ w t + . ρ u V = p z + τ x z x + τ y z y + τ z z z + ρ f z ,
where p is pressure, τ i i denotes stress. In addition, the velocity vector is decomposed in x, y, and z components denoted as u, v, and w, respectively.
While, for energy conservation equations, as follows:
t ρ e + V 2 2 + . ρ e + V 2 2 V = ρ q + ˙ x k T x + y k T y + z k T z u p x v p y   w p z + ( u τ x x ) x + u τ y x y + u τ z x z + v τ x y x   + v τ y y y + v τ z y z + w τ x z x + w τ y z y + w τ z z z     + ρ f . V
where q ˙ is denoted as the volumetric heat addition, e is the specific energy f represents field forces such as gravity, k is the thermal conductivity, and T is temperature.

4.1.2. Geometrical Configuration

In some research work, the geometry mimicking the features of animals can be created in 2D or 3D. For the 2D model, most studies were conducted due to the advantages of a simple problem, easy mathematical description, clear physics, or a simple numerical solution [62].
In mimicking flying and aquatic animals, it is important to create a realistic 3D model of a wing or fin, incorporating the shape, angular dispersions, and wing morphological characteristics such as area, mean chord, length, etc., and modeling it into CAD geometry. Moreover, the reconstruction of the wing/fin surface is also important during the creation of the model as it affects any further numerical simulation setup.
In some other works, the effect of aspect ratio (AR) on 3D flapping wings/fins is considered. The AR is defined as:
A R = L c
where L is the span length and c is the chord length.
Besides that, the flexibility of the wing/fin foils should also be considered, as the shape of the wing/fin may change with its flapping motion. As in the literature, most of the studies presented in the geometry, including the airfoil and AoA at which the airfoil is submitted considering the free stream velocity and boundary conditions.

4.1.3. Kinematic Modeling Parameters

The morphological and kinematic models of both flying and aquatic animals have the same dynamic variation mechanisms when subjected to fluid mediums such as air or water. In most studies reviewed, the simulation of CFD was mostly based on dynamic kinematic analysis subjected to oscillation motion. According to Singh et al. [11], the unsteady flow dynamics induced the oscillation of aerodynamic force and moments of flying animals; thus, a mathematical model with nonlinearity should be considered. Abas et al. [50] highlighted the use of predictive quasi-steady model approximation for the condition of unsteady aerodynamic forces that influenced rotation, translation, rotation-translation coupling, and the added-mass effect. The motion of the wing or fin can be implemented using time histories of attitude angles rotated with respect to three different axes of the local coordinate systems.
The governing equation describing the oscillation motion can be characterized by the Sthrouhal number, the St of the externally imposed frequency, and Re. For the non-dimensional format of incompressible flow using the Navier-Stokes:
S t u Ƭ + u . u = p + 1 R e 2 u
. u = 0
where, u , p and Ƭ are the non-dimensional flow velocity, pressure, and time, respectively.
S t = c r 2   o r   f A U r e f
where c is the mean chord length, r 2 is the radius gyration of the wing, A is the peak-to-peak oscillation amplitude, and stroke period T = 1/f. Therefore, U r e f = 2 r 2 .
Other important factors should be considered, such as reference velocity, stroke frequency, and position at a given time. For 3D angular flapping motions, the relationship between flapping angles and variation with stroke cycle, as well as rotation, are the parameters to be taken into account for any kind of numeric analysis.

4.1.4. Performance Parameters

The parameters describing the performance of fluid dynamic characteristics include lift and drag coefficients for aerodynamic wings, and thrust coefficient, input power, and efficiency for propellers.
The force coefficients are the main parameter used to assess the influence of the different wing motion models.
The lift coefficient, Cl, is defined as:
C l = F l i f t q   ¯ · S
The drag coefficient, Cd, is:
C l = F d r a g q   ¯ · S
where, S is the wing surface and q   ¯ is the mean dynamic pressure, which can be obtained by:
t h e   q ¯ = 1 2 ρ V 2 r e f = 1 2 ρ · 1 T 0 T V + V f l a p t 2 + V d e v t 2 d t
where the integration is calculated based on one flapping cycle with period T [s]. The reference velocity contains the free-stream velocity V , which is non-zero in forward flapping flight; the flapping velocity ( V f l a p and deviation velocity ( V d e v perpendicular to the horizontal plane (in hovering flight).
Another interesting parameter to indicate aerodynamic performance is in terms of thrust coefficient C T ¯ , input power coefficient C P , ¯ and efficiency, η, are mainly for propulsion.
C T ¯ = F ¯ 1 2 ρ V 2 c L
where, F ¯ is a time-averaged drag force, which is defined by:
F ¯ = 1 T 0 T F t d t
where, F t is the instantaneous force component in the x or y direction, and T is the oscillation period.
The mean input power coefficient C P ¯ is:
C P ¯ = P ¯ 1 2 ρ V 3 c L
where the input power, P ¯ , can be calculated by:
P ¯ = 1 T 0 T F l i f t t d h t d t d t + 0 T M θ t d θ t d t d t
where, F l i f t t is the instantaneous force component of lift, M θ t is the instantaneous pitching moment, d h t d t and d θ t d t are derivatives of lift and pitch motion, respectively.
Hence, the efficiency of propulsion can be expressed as:
η = C T ¯ C P ¯
Therefore, it must be noted that the key parameters describing the performance of aerodynamics for flapping wings, fins, or propulsion applications are under the conditions of an oscillating wing or fin subjected to force and moment. The mathematical expression can be expressed for 2D models by incorporating the direction of x and y components. Thus, the aerodynamic performance in CFD simulation is mostly analyzed based on kinematic models with different degrees of complexity based on mimicked flying or aquatic animals.

4.2. Merits and Limitations of Biomimetics-CFD Applications

CFD has received attention from mathematical curiosity and has become an important technique to study complex physical flow patterns and demonstrate their potential, especially in bio-inspired systems. To date, CFD has been adopted by most researchers to investigate the characteristics of fluid flow subjected to the anatomical structure of bio-inspired applications. Hence, it offers benefits such as quick assessment of design variations, facilitation in understanding comprehensive information to interpret the performance, conveying a good understanding of physical mechanisms, and simulation of different conditions. From a theoretical point of view, CFD provides benefits by focusing on modeling and solving the governing equations, as well as investigating the number of approximations used for these equations. Meanwhile, both numerical and experimental techniques highlighted the merits of CFD as an alternative to cost, which is that CFD simulations are relatively inexpensive and will become less expensive as computers become more powerful.
Despite that, CFD still faces several limitations that need to be addressed. In the design and creation of databases as well as in multi-disciplinary applications, the turnaround time associated with CFD has become one of the main factors that limit its use of CFD. This involves the geometry, which may contain gaps, multiple definitions, and intersecting surfaces required to be resolved. The problem of clean geometry specification is more pressing and delicate when meshing techniques are employed. Another limiting factor is the level of skills required of the user of CFD, as CFD involves geometry preparation, meshing, solution setup, and post-processing that require a long lead time. Besides that, the accuracy of the numerical solution is one of the main challenges in applying CFD that is related to numerics, physical modeling (especially transition and turbulence), and the time involved in preparing geometries for conducting mesh generation and aerodynamic analyses. The challenge for CFD is how to adapt to newly emerging architectures such as processors, which may slow the growth of computing power. Besides that, the accuracy of physical modeling became the biggest challenge in performing CFD. This is because the turbulence is quite complex as it requires several steps and is fully integrated with the grid design; this is unaesthetically pleasing.

5. Conclusions

The rapid development of outstanding aerospace and similar industries has led to the substitution of CFD in the analysis, design, certification, and support of aerospace products. Due to the recent advancement in computational technology, numerical solutions for physically and geometrically complex systems, especially those mimicking the features of bio-inspired animals, can also be evaluated using CFD techniques. Besides becoming faster and more affordable by exploiting higher computing power, CFD has become more reliable, more reproducible across users, and better understood and integrated with other disciplines and engineering processes. Therefore, it is important to demonstrate the effectiveness of simulation results relative to the actual mechanisms of animal anatomical features through numerical solutions and physical modeling. The widespread acceptance of aerospace design and analysis, primarily by CFD, will be a remarkable achievement and bring benefits to users, especially researchers and engineering practitioners.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.I.B.; methodology, A.A.B.; software, A.A.B.; resources, E.I.B.; writing—original draft preparation, E.I.B.; writing—review and editing, E.I.B.; visualization, A.A.B.; supervision, K.A.A.; project administration, K.A.A.; funding acquisition, K.A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors would like to convey their gratitude to UPM for granting them the necessities required to advance in bio-mimicry research through the university’s Geran Putra Berimpak (GPB) research grant UPM/800-3/3/1/GPB/2019/9677600.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) in providing opportunities for biomimetics research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bar-Cohen, Y. Biomimetics: Biologically Inspired Technology. In II Eccomas Thematic Conference on Smart Structures and Materials; Soares, C.M., Ed.; CRC Press: Lisbon, Portugal, 2005; pp. 7–15. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bar-Cohen, Y. Biomimetics—Using Nature to Inspire Human Innovation. Bioinspir. Biomim. 2006, 1, P1–P12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Schmitt, O.H. Some Interesting and Useful Biomimetic Transforms. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Biophysics Congress, Boston, MA, USA, 29 August–3 September 1969; p. 297. [Google Scholar]
  4. Hwang, J.; Jeong, Y.; Park, J.M.; Lee, K.H.; Hong, J.W.; Choi, J. Biomimetics: Forecasting the Future of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. Int. J. Nanomed. 2015, 10, 5701–5713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sayma, A. Introduction: CFD Techniques. In Computational Fluid Dynamics; BookBooN: London, UK, 2009; p. 10. ISBN 9788776814304. [Google Scholar]
  6. Versteeg, H.K.; Malalasekera, W. An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics—The Finite Volume Method; Pearson Education Limited: London, UK, 1995; p. 267. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bachmann, T.; Wagner, H. The Three-Dimensional Shape of Serrations at Barn Owl Wings: Towards a Typical Natural Serration as a Role Model for Biomimetic Applications. J. Anat. 2011, 219, 192–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Alerstam, T.; Gudmundsson, G.A.; Jonsson, P.E.; Karlsson, J.; Lindstrom, A. Orientation, Migration Routes and Flight Behaviour of Knots, Turnstones and Brant Geese Departing from Iceland in Spring. Arctic 1990, 43, 201–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Naqvi, M.A.; Abbas, A.; Shah, H.R.; Hamid, M. Nature Inspired Flying Vehicles and Future Challenges in Aerospace. Int. J. Automot. Eng. Technol. 2015, 4, 40–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Salami, E.; Montazer, E.; Ward, T.A.; Nik Ghazali, N.N.; Anjum Badruddin, I. Aerodynamic Performance of a Dragonfly-Inspired Tandem Wing System for a Biomimetic Micro Air Vehicle. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2022, 10, 423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Singh, B.; Yidris, N.; Basri, A.A.; Pai, R. Study of Mosquito Aerodynamics for Imitation as a Small Robot and Flight in a Low-Density Environment. Micromachines 2021, 12, 511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Norberg, U.M. Vertebrate Flight Mechanics, Physiology, Morphology, Ecology and Evolution; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bie, D.; Li, D.; Xiang, J.; Li, H.; Kan, Z.; Sun, Y. Design, Aerodynamic Analysis and Test Flight of a Bat-Inspired Tailless Flapping Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2021, 112, 106557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bushnell, D.M.; Moore, K.J. Drag Reduction in Nature. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1991, 23, 65–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fish, F.E.; Battle, J.M. Hydrodynamic-Design of the Humpback Whale Flipper. J. Morphol. 1995, 225, 51–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Fish, F.E.; Lauder, G.V. Passive and Active Flow Control By Swimming Fishes and Mammals. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 2006, 38, 193–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Miklosovic, D.S.; Murray, M.M.; Howle, L.E. Experimental Evaluation of Sinusoidal Leading Edges. J. Aircr. 2007, 44, 1404–1407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Miklosovic, D.S.; Murray, M.M.; Howle, L.E.; Fish, F.E. Leading-Edge Tubercles Delay Stall on Humpback Whale (Megaptera Novaeangliae) Flippers. Phys. Fluids 2004, 16, 38–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Aftab, S.M.A.; Ahmad, K.A. CFD Study on NACA 4415 Airfoil Implementing Spherical and Sinusoidal Tubercle Leading Edge. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0183456. [Google Scholar]
  20. Pavlov, V.; Rosental, B.; Hansen, N.F.; Beers, J.M.; Parish, G.; Rowbotham, I.; Block, B.A. Hydraulic Control of Tuna Fins: A Role for the Lymphatic System in Vertebrate Locomotion. Sci. Anim. Physiol. 2017, 357, 310–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Triantafyllou, M.S.; Winey, N.; Trakht, Y.; Elhassid, R.; Yoerger, D. Biomimetic Design of Dorsal Fins for AUVs to Enhance Maneuverability. Bioinspir. Biomim. 2020, 15, 035003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Rose, J.B.R.; Natarajan, S.G.; Gopinathan, V.T. Biomimetic Flow Control Techniques for Aerospace Applications: A Comprehensive Review; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2021; Volume 20, ISBN 0123456789. [Google Scholar]
  23. Karthik, H. Computational Fluid Dynamics For Biomimetics: Springtails Are Not a Drag! Can. Sci. Fair J. 2020, 3, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  24. Bixler, G.D.; Bhushan, B. Fluid Drag Reduction and Efficient Self-Cleaning with Rice Leaf and Butterfly Wing Bioinspired Surfaces. Nanoscale 2013, 5, 7685–7710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kumar, S.K.; Pendyala, S. Computational Analysis of Morphing Geometry Inspired From Butterfly Wings in the Application Micro Aerial Vehicles. J. Robot. Autom. Res. 2022, 3, 300–307. [Google Scholar]
  26. Zhang, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, S.; Huang, W.; Weng, Q. Kinematic and Aerodynamic Investigation of the Butterfly in Forward Free Flight for the Butterfly-Inspired Flapping Wing Air Vehicle. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ghosh, K. CFD Analysis of Butterfly Type Ornithopter. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 2020, 7, 7368–7371. [Google Scholar]
  28. Senda, K.; Obara, T.; Kitamura, M.; Nishikata, T.; Hirai, N.; Iima, M.; Yokoyama, N. Modeling and Emergence of Flapping Flight of Butterfly Based on Experimental Measurements. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2012, 60, 670–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sanuki, K.; Fujikawa, T. Motion Analysis of Butterfly-Style Flapping Robot Using Cfd Based on 3d-Cad Model and Experimental Flight Data. J. Robot. Mechatron. 2021, 33, 216–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Aaroh; Zuber, M.; Khader, S.M.A.; Kalburgi, S.; Basri, E.I.; Ahmad, K.A. Performance of a Monarch Butterfly for Various Flapping Angle. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 126–130. [Google Scholar]
  31. Bomphrey, R.J.; Nakata, T.; Phillips, N.; Walker, S.M. Smart Wing Rotation and Trailing-Edge Vortices Enable High Frequency Mosquito Flight. Nature 2017, 544, 92–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Luo, Y.; He, G.; Liu, H.; Wang, Q.; Song, H. Aerodynamic Performance of Dragonfly Forewing-Hindwing Interaction in Gliding Flight. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 538, 012048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Rajendra Prasad, K.; Venkatasubbaiah, G.; Syamsundar, C. Computational Fluid Dynamics of Hovering in Flapping Insect Wings. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2020, 9, 3642–3648. [Google Scholar]
  34. Khan, M.A.; Padhy, C. Aerodynamic and Experimental Analysis of Bio-Mimic Corrugated Dragonfly Aerofoil. INCAS Bull. 2020, 12, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Shern, L.Y.; Sa’at, F.A.Z.M.; Wahap, M.A.A. CFD Study of A Micro Air Vehicle (MAV). J. Mech. Eng. Technol. 2022, 14, 25–45. [Google Scholar]
  36. ZHOU, C.; ZHANG, Y.; WU, J. Effect of Flexibility on Unsteady Aerodynamics Forces of a Purely Plunging Airfoil. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 2020, 33, 88–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nakata, T.; Liu, H.; Bomphrey, R.J. A CFD-Informed Quasi-Steady Model of Flapping-Wing Aerodynamics. J. Fluid Mech. 2015, 783, 323–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nguyen, A.T.; Kim, J.K.; Han, J.S.; Han, J.H. Extended Unsteady Vortex-Lattice Method for Insect Flapping Wings. J. Aircr. 2016, 53, 1709–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, Y.; Yonezawa, K.; Xu, R.; Liu, H. A Biomimetic Rotor-Configuration Design for Optimal Aerodynamic Performance in Quadrotor Drone. J. Bionic Eng. 2021, 18, 824–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Li, Y.; Yonezawa, K.; Liu, H. Effect of Ducted Multi-Propeller Configuration on Aerodynamic Performance in Quadrotor Drone. Drones 2021, 5, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhang, H.; Wen, C.; Yang, A. Optimization of Lift Force for a Bio-Inspired Flapping Wing Model in Hovering Flight. Int. J. Micro Air Veh. 2016, 8, 92–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jadhav, S.S.; Lua, K.B.; Tay, W.B. Effect of Clap-and-Fling Mechanism on Force Generation in Flapping Wing Micro Aerial Vehicles. Bioinspir. Biomim. 2019, 14, 036006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Nguyen, K.; Au, L.T.K.; Phan, H.V.; Park, H.C. Comparative Dynamic Flight Stability of Insect-Inspired Flapping-Wing Micro Air Vehicles in Hover: Longitudinal and Lateral Motions. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 2021, 119, 107085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Olejnik, D.A.; Muijres, F.T.; Karásek, M.; Honfi Camilo, L.; De Wagter, C.; de Croon, G.C.H.E. Flying Into the Wind: Insects and Bio-Inspired Micro-Air-Vehicles With a Wing-Stroke Dihedral Steer Passively Into Wind-Gusts. Front. Robot. AI 2022, 9, 820363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Perl, I.; Maya, R.; Sabag, O.; Beatus, T. Lateral Instability in Fruit Flies Is Determined by Wing-Wing Interaction and Wing Elevation Kinematics. Phys. Fluids 2023, 35, 041904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ghosh, K. Numerical Analysis of the Three-Dimensional Aerodynamics of a Thrush Nightingale (Luscinia Luscinia). Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 2020, 7, 1325–1331. [Google Scholar]
  47. Kumar, V.S.; Kumar, D.; Goyal, T.; Mohite, P.M.; Kamle, S. Development and Application of PP-CNT Composite for Hummingbird Inspired MAV Flapping Wings. In Proceedings of the International Micro Air Vehicle Conference and Competition, Delft, The Netherlands, 1 June 2014; Volume 208016, pp. 180–187. [Google Scholar]
  48. Geder, J.; Ramamurti, R.; Viswanath, K. Simulation of a Flapping Wing UAV Using a Coupled CFD-Control Tool. In Proceedings of the 33rd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference, Dallas, TX, USA, 22–26 June 2015; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  49. Yang, X.; Pei, Y.; Yang, W.; Nian, P.; Song, B. Numerical Simulation of a Bio-Inspired Flexible Flapping-Wing Based on Experimental Measured Deformation. In Proceedings of the 32nd Congress of the International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences (ICAS) 2021, Shanghai, China, 6–10 September 2021; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  50. Bin Abas, M.F.; Singh, B.; Ahmad, K.A.; Ng, E.Y.K.; Khan, T.; Sebaey, T.A. Dwarf Kingfisher-Inspired Bionic Flapping Wing and Its Aerodynamic Performance at Lowest Flight Speed. Biomimetics 2022, 7, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bodling, A.; Sharma, A. Numerical Investigation of Noise Reduction Mechanisms in a Bio-Inspired Airfoil. J. Sound Vib. 2019, 453, 314–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ananthan, V.B.; Akkermans, R.A.D. Trailing Edge Noise Reduction Using Bio-Inspired Finlets. J. Sound Vib. 2023, 549, 117553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bardera, R.; Rodríguez-Sevillano, Á.A.; Barroso, E.; Matías, J.C. Numerical Analysis of a Biomimetic UAV with Variable Length Grids Wingtips. Results Eng. 2023, 18, 101087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. da Silva Benoit, A.G.M.; do Araujo, L.S.; Schaffazick, L.H.; Demarco, G.; dos Santos, C.G. Preliminary Studies of the Influence of Surface Temperature on the Aerodynamic Coefficients of Biomimetic-Based Airfoils. In Proceedings of the XXVIII Congresso Nacional de Estudantes de Engenharia Mecânica, Santa Maria, Brazil, 9–13 May 2022. [Google Scholar]
  55. Arrondeau, B.; Rana, Z.A. Computational Aerodynamics Analysis of Non-Symmetric Multi-Element Wing in Ground Effect with Humpback Whale Flipper Tubercles. Fluids 2020, 5, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Papadopoulos, C.; Katsiadramis, V.; Yakinthos, K. Influence of Tubercles’ Spanwise Distribution on Swept Wings for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 2021, 235, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Bhatia, D.; Zhao, Y.; Yadav, D.; Wang, J. Drag Reduction Using Biomimetic Sharkskin Denticles. Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res. 2021, 11, 7665–7672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Marimuthu, S.; Al-Rabeei, S.; Boha, H.A. Three-Dimensional Analysis of Biomimetic Aerofoil in Transonic Flow. Biomimetics 2022, 7, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Meng, H.; Lou, J.; Chen, T.; Xu, C.; Chen, H.; Yang, Y.; Cui, Y. Cantilever-Based Micro Thrust Measurement and Pressure Field Distribution of Biomimetic Robot Fish Actuated by Macro Fiber Composites (MFCs) Actuators. Smart Mater. Struct. 2021, 30, 035001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Jaya, A.S.; Rukmono, L.Y.W. The Biomimetic Fin Performance Evuluation for an Efficient Autonomous Underwater Vehicle to Support the Revolution in Military Affairs in Underwater Defense. J. Pertahanan 2021, 7, 376–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Spalart, P.R.; Venkatakrishnan, V. On the Role and Challenges of CFD in the Aerospace Industry. Aeronaut. J. 2016, 120, 209–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wu, X.; Zhang, X.; Tian, X.; Li, X.; Lu, W. A Review on Fluid Dynamics of Flapping Foils. Ocean Eng. 2020, 195, 106712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.