Aerodynamic Analysis of Fixed-Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Moving in Swarm
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a close-formation flight of two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and the aim of the study is to improve the understanding of the vortex effects between fixed-wing UAVs in a swarm using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools. To validate the numerical method, results of a variable-density wind tunnel test from the literature were used. This numerical CFD analysis was used to determine the lift coefficient (CL) and the drag coefficient (CD) values for a single UAV at various angles of attack. When examining the aerodynamic impact areas behind the UAV, the longitudinal distance between the two UAVs is not particularly effective for close flight. Therefore, CFD analyses were carried out on the two UAVs for both vertical and lateral distances. The optimum position for close-formation flight was identified using CL/CD ratios. The results of the analysis indicate that the most effective flights, across all lateral positions, occur when the two UAVs are vertically at the same height. In terms of aerodynamic efficiency, the most effective points for close-formation flight for wingspan b are at lateral distances of 0.875 b and 1 b. At these positions, flight efficiency can be increased by approximately 11.5%.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Air Traffic Management and Optimization · Aerospace and Aviation Technology · Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Institute of Pure and Applied Sciences, Marmara University, Istanbul 34722, Türkiye
References (27)
Show source-provided references
1. Shao, Z., Yan, F., Zhou, Z., and Zhu, X. (2019). Path planning for multi-UAV formation Rendezvous based on distributed cooperative particle swarm optimization. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9132621 ↗
2. Beitrag zur erklärung des winkelfluges einiger zugvöge
3. Formation flight of birds10.1126/science.168.3934.1003 ↗
4. Hansen, J.L., and Cobleigh, B.R. (2002, January 5–8). Induced moment effects of formation flight using two F/A-18 aircraft. Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference and Exhibit, Monterey, CA, USA.10.2514/6.2002-4489 ↗
5. Pahle, J., Berger, D., Venti, M., Duggan, C., Faber, J., and Cardinal, K. (2012, January 13–16). An initial flight investigation of formation flight for drag reduction on the C-17 aircraft. Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, Minneapolis, MN, USA.10.2514/6.2012-4802 ↗
6. Modeling of aerodynamic coupling between aircraft in close proximity10.2514/1.7579 ↗
7. Singh, D., Antoniadis, A.F., Tsoutsanis, P., Shin, H., Tsourdos, A., Mathekga, A., and Jenkins, K.W. (2018). A multi-fidelity approach for aerodynamic performance computations of formation flight. Aerospace, 5.10.3390/aerospace5020066 ↗
8. A continuous modeling method via improved pigeon-inspired optimization for wake vortices in UAVs close formation flight10.1016/j.ast.2021.107259 ↗
9. Comparison of predicted and measured formation flight interference effects10.2514/1.9278 ↗
10. Trumic, E., and Swamy, K.S. (2021). Aerodynamic Performance Analysis of a UAV Using CFD and VLM. [Master’s Thesis, Linköping University].
11. Numerical investigation of the aerodynamic interference in 2-aircraft formation flight10.1088/1742-6596/2280/1/012017 ↗
12. Optimization of positional parameters of close-formation flight for blended-wing-body configuration10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01019 ↗
13. Numerical aerodynamic characteristics analysis of the close formation flight
14. Shin, H., Antoniadis, A.F., and Tsourdos, A. (2017, January 13–16). Parametric study on efficient formation flying for a blended-wing UAV. Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), Miami, FL, USA.10.1109/ICUAS.2017.7991453 ↗
15. Aerodynamic efficiency and performance enhancement of fixed-wing UAVs10.1016/j.ast.2019.105575 ↗
16. Design, optimization and application of two-element airfoils for tactical UAV10.1177/16878132221137027 ↗
17. Pastor, L.G.S. (2022). Numerical Design and Optimization of a Rescue UAV’s Wing. [Bachelor’s Thesis, Universitat Politècnica de València].
18. Arabacı, S.K., and Dilbaz, F. (2019, January 11–13). Aerodynamic Analysis of Anka UAV and Heron UAV. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Energy Research, Marmaris, Turkey.
19. Zore, K., Sasanapuri, B., Parkhi, G., and Varghese, A. (2019, January 8–9). ANSYS mosaic poly-hexcore mesh for high-lift aircraft configuration. Proceedings of the 21st Annual CFD Symposium, Bangalore, India.
20. Marquès, P., and Da Ronch, A. (2017). Aerodynamic Performance Analysis of Three Different Unmanned Re-entry Vehicles. Advanced UAV Aerodynamics, Flight Stability and Control, Wiley. [1st ed.].10.1002/9781118928691 ↗
21. Numerical simulation of flow over NACA 0015 airfoil with different turbulence models
22. Menter, F.R. (1993, January 6–9). Zonal two equation k-ω turbulence models for aerodynamic flows. Proceedings of the 24th Fluid Dynamics Conference, Orlando, FL, USA.10.2514/6.1993-2906 ↗
23. Jacobs, E.N., Ward, K.E., and Pinkerton, R.M. (1935). The Characteristics of 78 Related Airfoil Sections from Tests in the Variable-Density Wind Tunnel, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Report No. 460.
24. Steenwijk, B., and Druetta, P. (2023). Numerical study of turbulent flows oner a NACA 0012 airfoil: Insights into its performance and the addition of a slotted flap. Appl. Sci., 17.10.3390/app13137890 ↗
25. Çengel, Y., and Cimbala, J.M. (2008). Akışkanlar Mekaniği, Güven Bilimsel. [1st ed.].
26. (2024, May 13). Baykar. Available online: https://baykartech.com/tr/uav/bayraktar-tb2/.
27. Munk, M.M. (1923). The Minimum Induced Drag of Aerofoils, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Report No. 121.