316
D. Subramanian et al.
manta planforms can be attributed to their aspect ratios. Manta A has an aspect
ratio of 5.05, and Manta B has an aspect ratio of 5.3.
• The drag characteristic is of paramount importance for MAVs, since they have
limitations in terms of on-board power storage. The zero-lift drag is higher for the
manta planforms which is evident from the wake diagrams; this is mainly due to
the larger span of the manta planforms. However, from Fig. 4b, it is evident that
the manta planforms have better drag characteristics between 10° and 20°.
• The C L /C D ratio of the manta planforms is higher than the base planform between
angle of attack 10° and 20° reaching a maximum difference of 5.59% at 10° as
shown in Fig. 3d.
• Although the Zimmerman planform has a higher maximum lift coefficient, the
take-off will not be efficient because the corresponding lift-to-drag ratio is low. In
contrast, the stall angle and angle of attack for maximum aerodynamic efficiency
are closer for the manta ray planforms than for Zimmerman, suggesting a more
efficient take-off whose fuel savings can be used profitably elsewhere. However,
more research is needed to confirm this.
This increases the scope and applications of these designs, having the ability to
take-off and land from remote locations more efficiently. Further, research can be
conducted to decrease the drag of the manta planforms, one method would be to
curl the wingtips within the boundary of the Zimmerman planforms and reduce the
overall area of the modified planform.
References
1. Hassanalian M, Abdelkefi A (2016) Design and manufacture of a fixed wing MAV with
Zimmerman planform. In: 54th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting
2. Mueller TJ, Torres GE (2001) Aerodynamics of low aspect ratio wings at low Reynolds numbers
with applications to micro air vehicle design and optimization. Final Report, University of Notre
Dame, United states
3. Last PR, Stevens JD (2009) Sharks and rays of Australia. Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge
4. Fish FE, Schreiber CM, Moored KW, Liu G, Dong H, Bart-Smith H (2016) Hydrodynamic
performance of aquatic flapping: efficiency of underwater flight in the manta. Aerospace 3
5. Wang Z, Yu J, Zhang A (2016) Hydrodynamic performance analysis of a biomimetic manta ray
underwater glider. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on robotics and biomimetics, ROBIO
2016
6. Marek PLCNG (2008) Design, optimization and flight testing of a micro air vehicle
D. Subramanian et al.
manta planforms can be attributed to their aspect ratios. Manta A has an aspect
ratio of 5.05, and Manta B has an aspect ratio of 5.3.
• The drag characteristic is of paramount importance for MAVs, since they have
limitations in terms of on-board power storage. The zero-lift drag is higher for the
manta planforms which is evident from the wake diagrams; this is mainly due to
the larger span of the manta planforms. However, from Fig. 4b, it is evident that
the manta planforms have better drag characteristics between 10° and 20°.
• The C L /C D ratio of the manta planforms is higher than the base planform between
angle of attack 10° and 20° reaching a maximum difference of 5.59% at 10° as
shown in Fig. 3d.
• Although the Zimmerman planform has a higher maximum lift coefficient, the
take-off will not be efficient because the corresponding lift-to-drag ratio is low. In
contrast, the stall angle and angle of attack for maximum aerodynamic efficiency
are closer for the manta ray planforms than for Zimmerman, suggesting a more
efficient take-off whose fuel savings can be used profitably elsewhere. However,
more research is needed to confirm this.
This increases the scope and applications of these designs, having the ability to
take-off and land from remote locations more efficiently. Further, research can be
conducted to decrease the drag of the manta planforms, one method would be to
curl the wingtips within the boundary of the Zimmerman planforms and reduce the
overall area of the modified planform.
References
1. Hassanalian M, Abdelkefi A (2016) Design and manufacture of a fixed wing MAV with
Zimmerman planform. In: 54th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting
2. Mueller TJ, Torres GE (2001) Aerodynamics of low aspect ratio wings at low Reynolds numbers
with applications to micro air vehicle design and optimization. Final Report, University of Notre
Dame, United states
3. Last PR, Stevens JD (2009) Sharks and rays of Australia. Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge
4. Fish FE, Schreiber CM, Moored KW, Liu G, Dong H, Bart-Smith H (2016) Hydrodynamic
performance of aquatic flapping: efficiency of underwater flight in the manta. Aerospace 3
5. Wang Z, Yu J, Zhang A (2016) Hydrodynamic performance analysis of a biomimetic manta ray
underwater glider. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on robotics and biomimetics, ROBIO
2016
6. Marek PLCNG (2008) Design, optimization and flight testing of a micro air vehicle