Ornithopter: A Machine Designed To Achieve Flight by Means of Flapping Wings

Project : Ornithopter
ORNITHOPTER
A machine designed to achieve flight by means of flapping
wings.
An ornithopter (from Greek ornithos "bird"
and pteron "wing") is an aircraft that flies by
flapping its wings. Designers seek to imitate
the flapping-wing flight of birds, bats,
and insects. Though machines may differ in
form, they are usually built on the
same scale as these flying creatures.
 Submitted By:
 ZAINAB EJAZ
BSE-2014-027
Submitted To:
MA’AM SUMAIRA SHAUKAT
Fatima Jinnah Women University

Bachelors in Software Engineering
[Zainab Ejaz] Page 1

ORNITHOPTER:
Introduction:
Natural fliers like birds and insects have captivated the minds of human inventors
through history. The ease and grace with which they take to the air vastly surpasses
the state of the art in aircraft and their control systems. This is not to say that
modern aircraft designs are ineffective, they are excellent in many respects.
Propellers and turbines are very efficient methods of producing thrust and airfoils
efficiently produce lift. A Boeing 747 achieves a dimensionless cost of transport
(energy used divided by weight times distance) of 0.1, equivalent to a soaring
albatross, and does it with amazing reliability, but it will never match the
maneuverability of the albatross. The problem mirrors legged versus wheeled
locomotion well. Wheels provide a stable, easy to analyze, and very efficient way
of getting around with the sacrifice of a large amount of agility. Legs are
notoriously difficult to control and current implementations are energy inefficient
and flapping wing flight parallels this well. The unsteady fluid dynamics of
flapping wings are poorly understood and it's difficult to get an ornithopter (the
term used henceforth to refer to a flapping wing vehicle) to maneuver as desired.

Interest in the design and control of ornithopters has grown in recent years as
interest has grown in the area of Micro Aerial Vehicles or MAVs. These small
flying machines have struck the imaginations of many as ideal platforms for a
variety of tasks including systems monitoring and surveillance where a swarm of
tiny agents would be unobtrusive and have better access to confined areas than
larger flying vehicles .
This thesis covers two years of work on the Phoenix ornithopter project, a 1.8
meter wingspan flapping wing flying robot, picking up from just after proof of
concept work performed at the lab. From that point on two hardware revisions
were produced of the Phoenix, one in summer 2007 and one in summer 2008. In
the time between these summers flight testing and analysis was performed.
Sustained steady level flight under computer control was finally achieved in
August 2008.
The word "ornithopter" comes from the Greek words for "bird" and "wing." An
ornithopter is a birdlike machine that generates lift and thrust by flapping its wings.
An ornithopter doesn't need to have feathers, though. The first ornithopters
capable of flight were toys built in the late 19th century in France. Large-scale,
piloted ornithopters were first developed in the early 20th century. Piloted
ornithopters come in two basic categories:
 engine powered
 human powered.
Most orithopters are about the size of small birds. Larger, man-carrying models
have been attempted, but so far without proven success. Airplane-sized
ornithopters have accelerated to takeoff speed on a runaway, but full takeoff has
never really been successful. The ornithopter was popularized in Frank
Herbert's Dune book series, as well as in the recent movie Sky Captain and the
World of Tomorrow.
Bird-sized model ornithopters are cheaply available and used by hobbyists
worldwide. The ornithopter was first designed by Leonardo da Vinci and drawn
in some detail in his notebooks. In lieu of feathers, it used a membrane, showing
that da Vinci had some basic understanding of the mechanism of flight. It was
meant to be man-powered, but did not produce enough lift to take off. The da Vinci
ornithopter was likely never built.
The closest we have come to a large ornithopter is a project run by the University
of Toronto, called Project Ornithopter. The ornithopter resembles a propeller prop
plane, but lacks a propeller and instead has flapping wings. As stated before, it has

been accelerated at takeoff speed down a runaway, but has not yet attempted full
flight.
The first ornithopter was possibly built in Germany by Karl Friederich Meerwein
in 1781 as a proof-of-concept for heavier-than-air flight. It is claimed to have
flown, but more likely glided after being launched from a high place. When the
aerodynamic principles of flight were elucidated mathematically in 1799 by
George Cayley, it became obvious that gliders were more convenient than
ornithopters, so much research in this direction was abandoned.
Some interesting projects have used chemically powered artificial muscles to flap
the wings of small ornithopters. One day, robots like these might be used as
imitation birds for surveillance. A benefit of chemically powered ornithopters is
that they do not necessarily use combustion for power and thereby spare the sky
from pollution.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUMAN POWERED AVIATION

Human-Powered Aviation
It is no surprise that humanity’s first attempts at flight were in the form of birdlike,
human-powered ornithopters. The great artist and engineer Leonardo Da Vinci is
often credited as the first to
propose a reasonable flying
machine in 1490: a giant bat-
shaped craft that uses both the
pilot’s arms and legs to power
the wings. Though the aircraft
was never built, and we now
know that it would not have
flown, it was a remarkable
achievement considering the
knowledge of the day. At the
turn of the 20th century, focus
shifted both in the method of
thrust production, from flapping
wings to the propeller, and the
method of power generation, from the human body to the internal combustion
engine. With the aerodynamic problem greatly simplified, the impossibility of
human flight was disproved by the Wright brother’s flight in 1903 and the stage

was set for the boom of aircraft developments in the decades to come. Though
work on human-powered aircraft was still carried on from time to time by several
groups in various countries, it would be three-quarters of a century before anyone
mastered the art of human-powered
flight.
Paul MacCready's Albatross HPA in

flight at NASA's Dryden Flight
Research Center.
The first truly successful HPA came in
1977 when Paul MacCready’s
Gossamer Condor flew a one-mile
figure-of-eight course in 7 ½ minutes
to capture the £50,000 Kremer Prize.
What followed was breakneck
development in the field, and a mere
two years later the Gossamer Albatross flew 36 km across the English Channel,
earning the team the second Kremer Prize. To date, the greatest HPA
accomplishment was by M.I.T.’s Daedalus, which in 1988 flew 119 km from Crete
to Santorini, an incredible feat
worthy of the aircraft’s
mythological name. These
and many other HPA projects
have pioneered methods of
lightweight composite
construction, power
transmission, and multi-
disciplinary aero-structural
optimization, much of which
has been published and made
available to those eager to
pursue the field.
MIT's Daedalus HPA in flight
at NASA's Dryden Flight
Research Center.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ORNITHOPTER

No practical ornithopter has yet been built big enough for people to fly in, although a
team at the University of Toronto has been making progress since the 1970's. They
have developed a fully functional engine powered scale model, and in 2006 made the
first short flight of a full-size manned ornithopter. Other successful efforts have been
made since the 1870's.
Leonardo Davinci's drawing from 1485 to the early 1490's were the first
conceptualizations of practical winged mechanical flight. Although this design was
never actually built, and the design is not really practical for a working device,
Davinci's design for the flapping mechanism comes close to maximizing the efficient
use of human power.
1490
All histories of ornithopters begin with Leonardo Da Vinci's
human powered design. Although this was not capable of
flight, it showed a great deal of careful thought and engineering. For example, the
membrane wings clearly demonstrate Da Vinci's understanding that feathers are
not required for successful flapping-wing flight. Also, the actuation mechanism
comes close to optimizing the energy suppliable by the human engine.
1874
The first documented and witnessed flights of a mechanical flapping-wing aircraft
were performed by Alphonse Penaud's rubber-powered model ornithopter in
France. This established the template for subsequent model ornithopters, differing
only in detail and materials.

1929
The human-powered ornithopter by Alexander Lippisch
was towed into the air and, upon release, would perform
powered glides. This research was complemented by
published papers describing Dr. Lippisch's theories for
flapping-wing flight. This work took place in Germany.
1959
Emil Hartman also built a human-powered ornithopter that
was towed into the air (by car), and then released to
perform powered glides. This didn't have the same
theoretical complement as Lippisch's work, but it was a
very respectable effort in that it demonstrated the
definition of a true ornithopter being birdlike, but not
being a slavish copy of a bird. This work was done in
England.
1960's
Percival Spencer, of the United States, developed a remarkable series of engine-
powered free-flight ornithopter models. These were made in various sizes, with
different engine sizes, and are clearly an original accomplishment. A modernized
remotely-piloted version of this has been recently developed by Sean Kinkade of
Florida.
1991
The Harris/DeLaurier engine-powered model demonstrated the technology
required for a full-scale aircraft. This is recognized by the FAI as the first
successful engine-powered remotely-piloted ornithopter.
1999

The Project Ornithopter engine-powered piloted aircraft, which is based on the

technology of the Harris/DeLaurier model, self accelerated (flapping alone) on
level pavement to lift-off speed.
CONSTRUCTION AND MECHANISM OF FLIGHT:

How It Works
The full-scale ornithopter is an engine powered aircraft that carries one pilot. All of
the thrust and nearly all of the lift is created by the mechanical flapping of the
ornithopter's wings. The two wings of the craft are joined by a centre section which
is moved up and down by pylons connected to the drivetrain. The wings' thrust is
due primarily to a low-pressure region around the leading edge, which integrates to
provide a force known as "leading-edge suction". The wings also passively twist in
response to the flapping. This is due to a structure that is torsionally compliant in
just the right amount to allow efficient thrusting ("aeroelastic tailoring"). It should
be noted, though, that twisting is required only to prevent flow separation on
sections along the wing. It does not produce thrust in the same way as required by
sharp-edged wings with little leading-edge suction . For a more in-depth
description of the full-scale ornithopter's functioning please refer to "The
Development and Testing of a Full-Scale Ornithopter " in the Research section.
Don't miss our 3D interactive model of the ornithopter in the MultiMedia section!
Ornithopters and Flapping-

Wing Flight
The problem of flapping-wing
flight has been tackled by countless
engineers and craftsmen, but until
recently only moderate success had

been achieved. The Subsonic Aerodynamics laboratory under Professor James

DeLaurier at the University of Toronto has been a prolific contemporary
contributor to the body of knowledge concerning flapping-wing flight, with
successes in remote-controlled ornithopters, flapping-wing micro air vehicles, and
even a full-scale human-piloted engine powered ornithopter.
The University of Toronto's engine-powered ornithopter, "Big Flapper", during
dawn flight testing at Downsview airport,
In 1991 the Professor DeLaurier and UTIAS were awarded the “Diplôme
d’Honneur” by the FAI for having flown the world’s first engine-powered
remotely-piloted ornithopter. Theoretical and experimental research intensified in
subsequent years, culminating in the successful flight of a full-scale piloted
ornithopter on July 8th, 2006. A patented wing-twisting mechanism and extensive
research in aeroelastic tailoring has kept the University of Toronto at the forefront
of ornithopter innovation for the last 20 years.
How Birds Fly
When a bird is gliding, it flies the same way as an
airplane. As the wings move through the air (blue lines),
the special airfoil shape of the wings causes the air
pressure above the wings to be lower than the pressure
underneath. The difference in pressure is lift, a force that
acts roughly perpendicular to the wing surface and keeps
the bird from falling.
Flapping flight uses the same principle, but the movement of the wings
is more complicated. There are three important motions in addition to
the bird's forward motion:
1. Flapping 2. Twisting 3. Folding

By flapping its wings down, together

with the forward motion of the body, a
bird can tilt the lift of its wings forward
for propulsion. Why don't birds simply
move their wings up and down, without
twisting and folding? Notice that the outer part of the wing moves down
much farther than the inner part close to the body. Twisting allows each
part of the wing to keep the necessary angle relative to the airflow. If
part of the wing is angled lower than the airflow, there might not be
enough lift. If part of the wing is pointed too high, there could be a lot of
drag. The wings are flexible, so they twist automatically.
Wing folding isn't essential - ornithopters fly without it - but it helps
birds fly with less effort. To see why it is helpful, think about what
happens during the upstroke. Because the wing is going up, the lift
vector points backward, especially in the outer portion of the wing. The
upstroke actually slows the bird down! By folding its wings (decreasing
the wingspan) a bird can reduce drag during the upstroke.

In addition to the three basic movements described here, birds can do a

lot of other things with their wings to allow them to maneuver in the air.
Instead of using their tails for flight control, they move their wings
forward and backward for balance. To make a turn, they can twist the
wings or apply more power on one side. For slow flight, birds can flap
their wings almost forward and backward instead of vertically; the
upstroke and downstroke produce lift without forward body motion.
Since flapping wings are subject to unsteady flows - they not only move
but accelerate through the air - they can produce more lift than fixed
wings and are resistant to stalling.
ORNITHOPTER FLIGHT DYNAMICS AND CONTROL

 Operating principle of the flapping wing
At the wing downstroke the lift distribution is bigger altogether than when
gliding and more shifted towards the wing tip. Thus, thrust is generated
along the whole wing span during stroke motion. This works similar to a
propeller blade with a very large pitch – only that the propeller torque force
that has to be overcome, is here called lift.
At the wing upstroke circumstances are reversed. Overall, the lift
distribution is smaller and more shifted towards the wing root. Moving in
the direction of the lift force, the flapping wing now acts as a wind turbine
blade. If the lift force is big enough, it presses the wing upwards even
without a mechanical drive. Thereby, the wing operates with the operating
drag of a wind turbine against the flight direction.
 Basic motion components of a bird wing
In addition to the forward motion
Flapping: motion at shoulder point
Pulling: dragging of the outboard wing section during upstroke by the
inboard wing section
Inclination: determined by the inclination of the stroke axis
Twisting: increases toward wing tip mostly during upstroke in the direction
of a positive angle of incidence and during the downstroke in the direction of
a negative angle of incidence

Turning: (of the wing root) especially when flying with thrust and mostly in
the direction of wing twisting
Sweep: of the outboard wing section during upstroke with the backward
motion of the wing tip.
The flapping motion of the wing is absolutely necessary for thrust
generation. In general, also the wing twisting is necessary for aerodynamic
reasons.
In contrast, the turning and sweeping of the wing, as well as the pulling of
the outboard wing section serve only to increase efficiency.
 Methods of wing twisting:

a) Passive wing twisting
b) Active wing twisting
c) Aeroelastically wing twisting
d) Aeroelastically controlled wing twisting
e) Controllable wing twisting
- radio controlled
- automatically controlled
Design Stages
1. Active articulated torsional drive
(for the two principal motions)
First, the wings beat up and down, whereby a lever mechanism causes the degree
of deflection to increase from torso to the wing tip.
Second,the wing twists in such a way that its leading edge is directed upwards
during the upward stroke(positive angle of incidence). If the rotation were solely
due to wing’s elasticity passive torsion would result. If the sequencing of the
torsion and its magnitude are controlled by an actuator, the wing’s torsion is active.
2. The Wing:
Lift and propulsion in birds
The wing should consist of two-part arm wing spar with an axle bearing located on
the torso, a trapezoidal joint, and a hand wing spar.
The arm wing generates lift and the hand wing beyond the trapezoidal joint
provides propulsion.
Both spars of the inner and outer wing are torsional resistant. The active torsion is
achieved by servomotor at the end of the outer wing which twists the wing against
the spar via the outmost rib of the wing.
3. Partially linear kinematics for optimal thrust

When the bird lifts its wings, the servomotor for active torsion twists the tips of the

hand wings to a positive angle of attack, which is then changed to a negative angle
a fraction of a wing beat period.
The angle of torsion remains constant between these phases.
Due to this sequence of motions, the airflow along the wing profile can be
optimally used to generate thrust.
4. The torso (the fuselage)

The battery, engine, transmission mechanism, and the control and regulation
electronics are housed in the bird torso.
By means of a two-stage helical transmission, the exterior rotor motor causes the
wings to beat up and down with the required reduction ratio. This motor is fitted
sensors that precisely registers the wing’s position.
Both flapping and bending forces are conveyed from the transmission to the hand
wing via flexible links.
To make the bird agile and maneuverable, the opposing motion of the head and
torso section is synchronized by means of a system of cables and servomotors.
Thus the torso bends aerodynamically with simultaneous weight displacement.
5. The tail section an aid for lift and control

The tail of the bird also produces lift; it functions as both pitch elevator and a yaw
rudder.
When the bird flies in a straight line, the V-position of its two flapping wings
stabilizes it in a similar way as a conventional vertical stabilizer(Fin) of an aircraft.
To initiate turn to the left or to the right, the tail is tilted; when it is rotated about
the longitudinal axis, a yawing moment about the vertical axis is produced.
6. Control and regulation

The on-board electronics allow precise and thus efficient control of wing torsion as
a function of wing position.
For this purpose, a powerful microcontroller calculates the optimal setting of the
two servomotors which adjust the torsion of each wing.
The flapping motion and torsion are synchronized by three sensors, which
determine the absolute position of the motor for the flapping motion.
Since the active joint torsion drive requires precise coordination between the
flapping and twisting motions, it is subjected to continuous all round monitoring.
PROJECT ORNITHOPTER
Articulated flapping wings


Description of flapping wing constructions which have been developed

together with the den EV-models
1. Requirements
The design layout demands on a technical flapping wing-
among other things-results from the theoretical
distribution of lift based on Robert T. Jones (USA 1950
and 1980) and the therefore necessary angle of incidence
along the half span of the wing.
Here, for example, the relevant, extensively optimised
functional distributions for a gently inclined flight of a
rectangular flapping wing with the all-round airfoil
CLARK-Y are shown. In this case, the angle of incidence
at the wing root remains constant. The distributions of the
downwash angle along the span are straight-lined in all
three cases.
In the flapping wing design the moment of inertia round
the stroke axis and the rotating axis of the flapping wing are also important.
2. Aeroelastic controlled articulated flapping wing

This isasic spar framework of a profiled flapping wing
with an articulation for an additional flap motion of the
hand wing spar. This is pulled down by a spring (spring
device here not shown).
 While gliding flight with its medium lift force, the
hand wing takes over the stretched center position.
 On downstroke in the hand wing area the lift forces distinct increase and the
hand wing strokes up against the spring force.
 If on upstroke the lift forces decrease the spring force pulls down the hand
wing.
The small, on aerodynamic forces dependent and thereby
aeroelastic stroke movement of the hand wing will be
used by levers (brown for arm wing, green for hand
wing) to control the twisting along the whole wing. In

this way an articulated flapping wing with aeroelastic controlled twisting has been
developed.
With the exception of the wing root rib all ribs are put freely rotatable on the spars.
For the covering of the flapping wing the highly elastic polyurethane film Platilon
U 04 is planed.
The mode of operation of this articulated flapping wing, with its wing twisting by
wing bending against the stroke direction, resembles a little to that of a bird's wing.
But according to studies by Karl Herzog at birds the motion of the hand wing
happens in another way. For them, the rotary motion of the hand wing is
mechanically coupled with the forward and backward motion of the wing tip when
spreading and pulling up the wings. This coupling is tighly in the stretched wing
position and with increasing back-swept wing tips only loosely
Technical drawing of the wrist

joint
Wrist joint of the wing in up-
and downstroke position
Wrist joint with the
torsion lever of the
arm wing and the
wire rope to lock the
wing twisting in
gliding Function of
the wrist joint of the
wing. The yellow lever shows the rotation of the hand wing.
EV6 in flight, at wing upstroke

3. With expanding wing twisting

This is the functional model of a stroke amplitude expanding
wing spar in short form called shift spar. This mechanism can
be used at main and at auxiliary spars of flapping wings.
Linkage above:
Shift linkage dismounted
Linkage below:
Shift linkage mounted
At a stroke moving of the middle shift linkage - here downward - the outer right
spar section implements expanded stroke amplitude.
Technical drawing for a shift spar in a coaxil tube-in-tube

construction Joints of the shift spar with different center
distances for transmitting the flapping motion (1:1.5).
Complete coaxial shift spars.
Adjacent one can see the spar framework of a profiled
flapping wing for active wing twisting at the arm wing section by main spar
rotation.
There is a stroke amplitude expanding auxiliary wing spar is used. In doing so the
twisting at the hand wing section is increased. The spar shift linkage is hereby
mounted coaxially.

The rib at the wrist is fixed firmly to the main spar and the auxiliary spar hinges
fixed firmly to the wing root rib. All the other ribs are stuck on the spars rotating
freely. The covering is done with an elastic foil.
For a passive or aeroelastic twisting the rib at wrist should to be pivoted on the
main spar.
4. With adjustable twisting moment

By splitting the flapping and twisting tasks of a
flapping wing on a main and an auxiliary spar its
twisting moment can be designed adjustable.
Adjacent, the framework configuration of an
aeroelastic twistable flapping wing with an
adjustable twisting moment becomes obvious.
The adjustment is affected by the torsion lever at
the wing root.
The rest of the other ribs not shown here are fixed to the spars rotating freely. The
covering is done with an elastic foil. Also shell and foam wings can be designed
adjustable this way.
If you apply this system on a non-flapping aerofoil, a
propeller blade or a wind turbine blade, their twisting can
be controlled by the auxiliary spar.
Generally, the different types of wing systems can be
combined together in many ways.
In the adjacent picture for example, the auxiliary spar of the arm wing with its
torsional elastic force is used as a spring device for the small flap moving of the
spar of the hand wing of an aeroelastic controlled articulated flapping wing.
The arm wing torsion linkage AT and the arm wing
auxiliary spar AHi are hereby fixed firmly together. This
way, the auxiliary spar-torsional moment will be
transformed into a torque of the torsion linkage AT. This is
pivoted at the front and presses down the spar of the hand
wing in the indicated rotary direction. The pressure will be
adjusted with the inlying lever InH at the wing root.

The profiled arm part of this articulated flapping wing can also be combined with a
membrane hand wing. This is possible a useful design for medial climbing and
gliding flights.
Adjacent, the wing mechanism near the fuselage with the setting mechanism of the
turning moment of the auxiliary spar, the damper of the wing twisting at the upper
final wing stroke position and the servo to keep the wing twisting in glide position.
5. Aeroelastic controlled articulated flapping wing with adjustable

twisting moment and expanding wing twisting at the wing tip
Wing framework of the model EV8 (2004), designed as an aeroelastic controlled

articulated flapping wing, combined with a stroke amplitude expanding auxiliary
spar of the hand wing at the wing tip section.
 The twisting elasticity of this flapping wing can be adjusted by the torsion of
the auxiliary spar of the arm wing at the wing root.
 The downstroke twisting is slowed down by a dashpot.
 The twisting when gliding can be fixed by a radio-controlled servo.

The downstroke twisting here corresponds with the theoretical guidelines almost to
the wing tip. But still disturbing is the high mass moment of inertia of this flapping
wing round its axis of flapping and twisting.
In flight practice the articulated flapping wing has a big advantage.
The bending of the hand wing in comparison to the arm wing
depends on lift of the hand wing. At the same time it determines the
distribution of the angle of incidence along the wing span. If the
amplitude of the bending is estimable on flight pictures, the lift
forces of the hand wing in comparison to the gliding flight can be
estimated. Furthermore, the distribution of the angle of incidence
the moment of the picture was taken can easily be suggested. With
these tow information's selective adjustments of the twisting
moment of the flapping wing, the driving power and the cycle time
ratio are possible. Especially flight pictures taken approximately in
the middle of up- and downstroke are informative.
6. Covering of flapping wings

As well as for the other EV-models a 0.050 mm thick elastic polyurethane-foil was
used as cover for the aforesaid wing. Double-sided adhesive tape
was used adhere the foil to the wing framework. Version of a
trailing edge for flapping wings composed of a fishing line at the
end of the airfoil wrapped with an adhesive tape.
MECHANISM OF FLIGHT:
Flapping Flight
Now we take a look at ornithopters and birds and how they fly. An ornithopter is
simply a bird-like flying machine. Rather than forcing air over an unmoving wing
with a propeller, an ornithopter flaps like a bird to stay in the air. Flapping flight
isn't much different than airplane flight. The wings have to generate lift and thrust
to counter weight and drag just like a plane does. The flapping motion is what
causes the problem for most people who wonder about birds.

The reason flapping flight looks confusing:

When a bird flaps downward, everything seems to make sense. But when it flaps
upward, it would seem that the result would cancel out the downstroke. The
question is: Why doesn't flapping up push the bird down?
The best way to answer this would be to envision the bird's wing as though it were
the wing of an airplane. The flapping motion in this mental picture would resemble
a change in the angle of attack (angle of the wing relative to the airflow) of the
wing. As long as the bird is moving forward, the wings are always generating lift.
It is important to remember that a bird's wing is not rigid. As it flaps, it changes the
shape of its wings to get the best lift for each position. Also, the tail of the bird also
generates a certain amount of lift and helps to stabilize the bird.
Energy Analysis
It is now time to examine how energy is utilized in an ornithopter. To do this we
will perform a qualitative energy analysis and discuss how to find the actual power
output of the ornithopter and its efficiency.
First, let's look at where the energy is stored and transferred. In my ornithopter,
which is rubber-band powered, the process begins with the crank. As I wind the
crank, the kinetic energy is transferred and stored in the wound up rubber-band.
This is the first area where friction can increase the force required and therefore
reduce the efficiency a bit. When the "Freebird" is raised up before flight,
gravitaional potential energy is given to it. So, the total potential energy before
flight can be expressed as follows:
Total PE = PErubber-band + PEgravitational

The ornithopter is then released and begins to fly. This is a very complex motion in
which the energy is transferred and transformed in many ways. First, as the rubber-
band unwinds, its energy is transformed into kinetic energy causing the crank to
turn. Again, note that friction is a factor in how much energy is wasted in this
transfer. The crank moves the wing struts, another process in which friction could
have an effect, and the struts cause the wings to pump. The moving wings give the
ornithopter lift and thrust, propelling it forward and keeping it in the air, giving the
entire ornithopter kinetic energy.
Power is the change in the amount of kinetic energy (in this case, of the
ornithopter) for a unit of time. We can qualitatively show this like so:
Power = Change in KEornithopter / Time
Efficiency is the ratio of potential energy before the event to the total energy
afterward. Qualitatively, this can be expressed as follows:
Efficiency = (KEused in flight + PEremaining) / PEtotal before
Now, with a knowledge of some physics equations, we can calculate the power
output (in Watts) and the efficiency of the ornithopter numerically. First, the
potential energy must be found. Before we stated this:
Total PE = PErubber-band + PEgravitational
The potential energy of the rubber-band can be measured with some creative
devices, and the gravitational potential energy can be calculated as follows:
PEgrav = Mass x Height x Gravitational acceleration
The gravitational acceleration on the surface of the earth is approxomately 9.8
m/s2.
We stated earlier the expression for power. In this case, the change in KE would
simply be the KE at the end of the flight, and the time would be the time of the
flight. So:
KE = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity2
so. . .
Power = (1/2 x Mass x Velocity2) / Time
And of course, the efficiency can be calculated using the expression from above.
Cool.

The principle of flight of ornithopters

The basic operating principle of a flapping wing has already been discovered by
Otto Lilienthal (1889). To help understanding an effective way of flying of big
ornithopters his functional description is still trend-setting to the present day. But
many details are still not understood.
Always there have been several different versions of the flapping flight theory.
They all exist in parallel and their specifications are widely distributed. Calculating
the balance of forces even of a straight and merely slowly flapping wing remained
difficult to the present day. In general, it is only possible in a simplified way.
Furthermore, the known drives mechanism and especially wing designs leave a lot
to be desired.
In every respect ornithopters are still standing at the beginning of their design
development. But powerful drives make very beautiful flights already possible.
2. Operating principle of the flapping wing
Diagram 1
Optimized lift distributions for a gently inclined climb flight with limited wingspan

Diagram 2
Optimized lift distributions for a gently inclined climb flight with unlimited
wingspan On a stretched flapping wing lift is generated similar to an inflexible
airfoil flown against from the front. But during the wing upstroke the air flow hits
the wing rather from above and in the downstroke rather from bottom. These
modifications are small in the area of the wing root and gets bigger towards the
wing tip. With permanent changing twisting the flapping wing must adapt to these
alternating incoming flow directions. But in the interest of thrust generation the lift
distribution must not be constant along the wing span over the flapping cycle.
During the wing downstroke the lift distribution is bigger altogether than when
gliding and more shifted towards the wing tip. It is easy to imagine that thrust is
generated along the whole wing span during stroke motion. This works similar to
a propeller blade with a very large pitch - only that the propeller torque force that
has to be overcome is here called lift and is also used like that.
At the wing upstroke circumstances are reversed. Overall, the
lift distribution is smaller and more shifted towards the wing
root. With the stroke movement in the direction of the lift force
the flapping wing now acts as a wind turbine blade. If the lift
force is big enough it presses the wing upward even without a
mechanical drive. Thereby, the wing operates with the
operating drag or working drag, of a wind turbine against the
flight direction (please takes a look at the vector diagram).
Forces at the stork wing in the upstroke
At the same time, the outboard wing areas are
flown against rather from above. There indeed is
generated negative lift but similar to a propeller
also thrust (Please look at the vector diagram).

Whether in the upstroke the wind turbine or the propeller function dominates
depends on the wing twisting and on the shape of the lift distribution (for more
details, please see following chapter).
Comparison of aerodynamic machines
The adjacent picture clarifies that the comparison does not apply in all respects to a
propeller or to a wind turbine. The velocity proportions at the flapping wing are
completely different. But the rotating machines are not designed for simultaneous
lift generation. Furthermore, at the flapping wing the lift force at mid-span of the
wing is never zero - as like at the rotating machines.
A flapping wing is an aerodynamic machine with two strokes, the upstroke and the
downstroke. In unaccelerated horizontal flight of a flying wing ornithopter
the degree of efficiency of this machine is equal to zero. It only moves itself but
emits no power.
But if you add a fuselage and a tail unit to the flying wing ornithopter, the flapping
wing must apply power to overcome the parasitic drag. Now the flapping wing
renders output. Now, paradoxically - with an otherwise unchanged flight attitude -
the efficiency factor becomes bigger than before (bigger than zero). For example
the efficiency factor of the flapping wing increases with the size of the tail unit
while keeping the balance of forces. So the parameter efficiency factor is relatively
inapplicable for evaluating flapping wing. The total thrust gets bigger the more the
lift distributions of the up- and downstroke are different from each other -
especially at the outboard wing area where the most working will be performed. If
the difference equals zero working drag and thrust have the same size and cancel
out each other. The total thrust equals zero, then. At an existing lift difference the
thrust is also increased with increasing flapping frequency and flapping amplitude.
The size of lift is also specified by the angle of incidence at the wing root. With the
above-mentioned lift distributions the angle of incidence during the flapping
motion of the wing is always kept constant. The pictured differences of lift at the
wing root results only from different induced downwind angles.
To equalize the smaller lift at the wing tip during the upstroke, at least partly the
lift should be increased at the wing root at the same time. Here, no researches are
known about the angle of incidence at the wing root of birds. To balance the total
lift during the flapping motion, E. v. Holst (1943) suggests a turning of the wing
root synchronic to the wing twisting. There the angle of incidence should get larger
in the upstroke and smaller in the down stroke. But this is not to be seen on birds in
cruising flight or only in a minor way.

Another way to generate a constant total lift force shows a swan. It increases
considerably the angle of attack at the wing root in the lower wing position. But
then it reduced the angle once again during the upstroke.
Also, it may be birds increases the angle of attack and/or the airfoil camber in the
area of the elbow in the upstroke. Also by this way will be supported the shifting of
the lift in the direction to the wing root and the lift force in the upstroke gets larger
und the total lift more constant, respectively.
For a steady flight, all forces - more precisely, force impulses - affecting the
ornithopter during a complete wing beat cycle must be in balance. The propeller
effect must not only balance the wind turbine effect but also all remaining drags of
the wing and the aircraft. At the same time, the positive part of the lift must
outbalance the negative to an extent, that it can carry the weight of the aircraft.
Flapping wing properties during flight

1. Gently inclined climb flight
At the wing upstroke the aerodynamic forces along the wing can be adjusted by
suitable wing twisting so that the torsional moments round the wing hinge
balanced themself (Please look at the following diagram 3). Here, the wing area
close to the fuselage acting as a wind turbine directly powers the outboard wing
area acting as a propeller. This is the 1st possibility to use the wind turbine energy.
There is no energy consumption or transfer at this upstroke configuration. The
wing can virtually be flapped up by the drive without effort. Propeller and wind
turbine effects cancel out each other. The overall effect of the upstroke in the thrust
direction is thus equal to zero.
Diagram 3

A special lift distribution at the upstroke when the stroke momentum of the inner
and outer wing section balanced each other exactly. Thus, the wing can be moved
upwards without an external force.
Due to the lever action of the wing at this upstroke setting the positive lift close to
the fuselage must be bigger than the negative lift at the wing tip. In total, there still
remains some positive upstroke lift. The wing down stroke with its generally
strong generation of lift and thrust can ensure the balance of the remaining forces
during the whole flapping cycle.
Would one do without lift in favour of thrust generation in the upstroke the
following should be considered. To generate the complete lift impetus only in the
downstroke - in virtually half of the available time - the lift force and consequently
the wing area, too, would have to be almost doubled. This and the corresponding
lift fluctuations are only appropriate in exceptions.
As to be seen in the diagram 1 shown lift distributions the average lift of both
working cycles are different in size. At least at low flapping frequency, this will
result in an obvious pendulous movement of the fuselage. But due to thereby
generated variations of the angle of incidence it deadens itself quite effectively.
These variations are not included in the diagrams.
Naturally, other settings are possible in the area close to the preceding lift
distribution. They are well suited for gently inclined climb flights with a moderate
flapping frequency. My EV-ornithopters have been built for this way of flying.
2. Cruising flight *
Starting from the previously described flight scenario for the horizontal
cruising flight it is more advantageous to
increase the total lift during the upstroke
and shift it a little more towards the wing
tip. There, only a little bit of negative lift
is generated - if any at all (Please look at
the force vectors of the following
picture). But by this way, the wind
turbine effect and its working drag are
increased.
Forces at the wing of a stork during up- and
down stroke by Otto Lilienthal

That this should be beneficial is amazing at first. The wind turbine effect now can
no longer be used for generating thrust in the area of the wing tip. Would it not be
better simply to increase the flapping frequency?
According to a proposal by Otto Lilienthal the wind turbine or the wing upstroke
energy may also be used again in a2nd possibility. At first, the working drag slows
down the flying ornithopter. Thereby detracted kinetic energy of the model can be
accumulated in a spring. This spring must be positioned in a fashion that it is
tensioned at the upstroke. It relaxes in the downstroke, supports thereby the
flapping movement, generates thrust and transfers wing upstroke energy back to
the kinetic energy of the model.
A 3rd possibility for using the wind turbine force lies in the acceleration of the
wing mass in upstroke direction. If the wings are then slowed down at the upper
final wing position by a spring and accelerated in downstroke direction, retransfer
of the upstroke energy is also affected in this way. Thereby, the acceleration of the
wing must not be limited to the initial stage of the upstroke.
In the upstroke, a mechanical drive of the flapping wing is not necessary in these
cases. The wing even releases energy to the above-mentioned springs. Anyway, the
wind turbine motion must act against any force otherwise no lift can be developed
on a freely movable wing.
The wing upstroke energy output normally is relatively small.
It will be adjusted bigger the more flow-favorable the aircraft is built
A good way to decrease the wind turbine effect in spite of strong lift generation is
the pulling or the dragging of the outboard wing section during the upstroke of the
inboard wing section. Thereby the outboard section of the wing becomes a winglet
to the inboard section of the wing.
 - This mainly has a bisecting effect on the effective wind turbine span.
 - At the same time, it reduces with its winglet effect the induced drag
of the inboard wing section.
 - Furthermore, it reduces problems of wing inertia especially in the area
of the upper final wing position.
To enable at the upstroke strong lift at the inboard wing section it will be equipped
with large airfoil camber.

Swan in cruising flight

Close to the water surface a Mute Swan
during cruising flight. The downstroke
twisting is negligibly low.
 Here, for a lift generated upstroke of the
inboard wing section the angle of incidence of the wing root will be
temporarily decreased at the beginning.
 In the upstroke increase and decrease of the angle of incidence move like a
wave from the wing root to wing tip. Therefore wing twisting changes the
direction in the upstroke.
 Due to the pressure difference on the upper and lower side of inboard wing
section the turnable outboard wing section intends to stroke up. But it is
probably prevented by the negative lift at the wing tip section.
 The leading inboard wing section stoped at the upper position until the
outboard wing section reached the top of its stroke.
 After the outboard wing section was pulled up hanging on its hinge, also its
turning in the upper stroke position occurs only with the lift.
If in total lift results in the upstroke, the flapping wing permanently acts indeed as
an aerodynamic two-stroke machine in lift direction, but as seen in flight direction
alternatingly reversed. Nevertheless, via wind turbine energy utilisation the whole
drive energy will be used for thrust generation - of course with the usual losses of
the profile drag and of the induced drag. But these also always accrue for the lift
generation.
In spite of changing acceleration direction, flight velocity should be kept constant.
Thereby are definitely advantageous a high stroke frequency and a large model
mass.
During such cruising flight configurations of the upstroke, its lift increase more
than during the gently inclined flight. Apart from thrust generation also lift
generation during downstroke can be released. Therefore, its lift distribution will
be shifted rather towards the wing root and concurrently be adjusted smaller.

Diagram 4
Distributions of lift for a cruising flight with unlimited wingspan. Also the
distribution of the upstroke is optimized in relation to the induced drag.
Altogether, in cruising flight the lift distributions of both of the work cycles have
been approximated to those of gliding. One approximates them the more flow-
favourable the aircraft is built. Less thrust is then necessary. Furthermore, the
induced drag of the downstroke decreases noticeably this way.
Perhaps it might be enough to shift the lift only a little along the span, without
changing its size - in the upstroke towards the wing root, in the downstroke
towards the wing tip. However, a twisting of the wing root is necessary for that.
Seagull in cruising flight

During the whole downstroke and at the
beginning of the upstroke the angle of attack
is increased in the center of the half span.
The advantages of the flapping wing working
in opposite directions during wing up- and
downstroke lies especially in the relative even lift generation. The perpendicular
movement of the fuselage disappears almost completely in horizontal flight.
Altogether, a very effective steady cruising flight can be achieved with thrust only
directed forward and not upward. Thereby, the flapping frequency is obviously
lower than during the following way of flying.
3.3 Strong inclined climb and hovering flight

Precedingly, flight situations are described during which lift is directed upward and
thrust forward. The all up weight is thereby carried by the wing lift. In short, this
can be called Flying with lift.

But similar to a helicopter, during flapping flight the weight force

can be balanced by a slipstream directed downward or by a thrust
force directed upward. This is Flying with thrust. Thereby, the
wing upstroke practically affected only with the drive. At least in
steady flight, the thrust force is always perpendicular to the wing-
stroke plane and can be adjusted according to their inclination.
Small
bird on approach
If the thrust force points exactly in flight direction, there is either pure flying with
thrust (perpendicular climb flight) or pure flying with lift (horizontal flight). In
settings between these extremes and during a horizontal motion not too slow, the
balance of all up weight is affected both by thrust and by lift directly generated at
the wing. These mixed configurations are also assigned to flying with thrust.
The taking off of an ornithopter, hovering on the spot, strong inclined climbing
flight and slow horizontal flight are only possible according to the method flying
with thrust.
In contrast, moderate fast horizontal flights can be conducted with both ways of
flying - with quite a different demand for power, though. Relatively fast horizontal
flights or cruising flight can be achieved only by flying with lift.
In flight praxis, especially the inclination of the stroke plane acts as identification
criteria for ways of flying. In horizontal flight it is vertical to the flight direction.
If it differs considerably (more than about 10 degrees) it is flying with thrust.
Furthermore, a big upstroke wing twisting in a passive wing twisting is an
indication for this way of flying - at least at high Reynolds numbers. Also, a
relatively high power consumption relating to the horizontal velocity points to a
flying with thrust.
Furthermore, the legs of birds, at least of the larger ones, are not
fully stretched backwards when flying with thrust and their body
still is not fully directed in flight direction. But in publications of
bird flight research it is only rarely pointed out to these both
unequal ways of horizontal flight. The high power consumption
during slow flight is commonly only ascribed to the thereby
increasing induced drag.
Flying with thrust can be carried out in technical model making since the
beginnings of aviation. But in horizontal flight of large and weightily ornithopters
this way of flying demands considerably more energy than flying only with lift.

Otto Lilienthal had already distinguished clearly between these two ways of
powered flying among birds and has pointed out the enormous flight energy during
slow flight.
How does an ornithopter create thrust and lift - despite of alternating

flapping directions?
The answer can be found in the Handbook

(handbook How Ornithopters Fly only in
German) based on well-known results of research.
Apart from the aerodynamics of up- and downstroke,
the dynamics of the flapping wing is also taken into
consideration. The correlations are described with
equations and diagrams. Your own calculations are
made possible, which may be helpful for developing
specific ornithopter models. Furthermore, you will
find useful tips for ornithopter models in practice.
The relatively simple equations for changing
circulation distributions make it possible to vary the
lift distribution and to determine the appropriate
wing twisting.

Vortex system behind an ornithopter

The ornithopter subject also extends to the field of bionics. It is an attempt to
develop better ornithopters by understanding the biological design principles of
birds.
The handbook was translated in French by Jean-Louis Solignac. With his
knowledge as an aerodynamics expert and with his experience he has contributed a
lot to the improvement of the handbook.
Jean-Louis Solignac, Maître de Recherche, acted as deputy head of the
departmentPrinciples of Aerodynamics in the directorate of aerodynamics of the
national French research institute O.N.E.R.A. (Office National d'Études et de
Recherches Aérospatiales).
1. The photos of the handbook


2. Calculating flapping wings under the

precondition of quasi-stationary conditions
First, the flapping wing is theoretically devided into stripes with a
very small span. Then, for each of these wing sections the
aerodynamic forces are calculated under stationary or constant
oncoming airflow conditions. Their sum results from a numerical
integration over the whole wing span.
Configuration of the forces
This way, you get the total forces of lift and propulsion of
the flapping wing at a fixed moment of time of the flapping
cycle. The corresponding wing twisting, the profile- and
induced drag can be determined in the course of this
calculating scheme, too.
Locations for calculation
This process is repeated in equal time segments of the wing stroke motion.
Thereby, the changed factors as for instance the distribution of circulation,
conditions of oncoming airflow or the dihedral of the wing form the basis. At the
same time, stationary conditions are postulated. It is therefore presumed that the
airflow does not change during the time span of calculating. Furthermore, unsteady
airflow behaviour is not considered.
That way - thus by stringing together different steady conditions - time force
progression under quasi-steady conditions results.
The force of a whole stroke motion can be obtained by
numeric integration of the force progression over the
considered time span. Thereby, up- and downstroke of the
wing are advisably considered separately. Finally, the
summary of up- and downstroke forces leads to the total
forces of a whole flapping cycle.
Frequency of wing beats and the weight of birds
But according to Erich von Holst this quasi-steady method only leads to useful
results during a fast forward flight with relatively low flapping frequencies (large
birds). Otherwise, the influences of unsteady airstream behavior become too

strong. Later publications verify these constraints. As an example also the

following analysis by M. Neef.
3. Result of the latest research

Dr.-Ing. Matthias F. Neef has examined in his dissertation Analysis of the flapping
flight by numeric flow design engineering the unsteady flow at a moved wing.
Thereby, he reached a similar vorticity system as aforesaid. However, his picture
with a sinusoidal flapping motion-sequence is more specified and more detailed.
Isolines of the circulation along the flight path
4. The tip vortex of the flapping wing

The isolines of circulation of a flapping wing shown above also can be visualized
as single vortex filaments.
Vortex filaments runing parallel and with a similar direction
of circulation, twist themselves to a single vortex in their
shared center at the wake of the wing.
Wingtip vortices of
the flapping wing
This way, the majority of the vortex filaments combined build up the wing tip
vortex. During the flapping cycle its starting point is moving back and forth along

the trailing edge of the wing - especially in the upstroke. Therefore, the vortex trail
behind the flapping wing in plan view shows lateral contractions in regular
intervals.
Also at birds, which are flying in cruise flight the lateral
movement of the starting point of the vortex along the
trailing edge of the wing has already been observed. This
continuous-vortex gait is contrary to the vortex-ring gait
when birds Flying with thrust.
Helical wingtip vortices or slipstreams of a bird in continuous-vortex gait during
cruise flight
When we imagine the wing tip vortex in the adjacent picture in three-dimensions
be aware a surprising view.
The starting point of the vortex of one wing side not only moves back and forth
along the trailing edge of the wing. It also follows the flapping motion. Seen in
flight direction these both movements together resulted in an approximately
circular path line. If now also include the forward motion of the flapping wing one
sees the helical shape of the wing tip vortex spreading backwards.
Also the tip vortices of a propeller are arranged in a helical shape. They wrapped
the propeller slip stream and are an essential part of it. In opposite to the propeller
at the flapping wing simply the windings of the tip vortices are pulled more apart.
Hence, in the three-dimensional view of this vortex picture will be visible
a slipstream at each side of the flapping wing.
An according vortex structure is desirable also at ornithopters in cruise flight.
Therefore also in the upstroke, a large lift must exist - maybe larger than indicated
here - and the transition between the lift distributions of up- and downstroke must
be smooth. In the movie recording of a flying swan for example, you see that the
increase and decrease of the angle of incidence moves like a wave from the wing
root to wing tip.
In order to generate large thrust at an ornithopter, the cross-section of the
slipstream is to make as large as possible. Shifting of the spanwise distribution of
lift is a dominant factor here. At downstroke the lift should be shifted as far as
possible towards to the wing tip and at upstroke towards to the wing root.
Furthermore the stroke angle of the wing should be chosen relatively large without,
however, losing sight of thereby decreasing lift.

In case of very great demand of thrust, the shifting of the span wise distribution of
lift in upstroke can be supported by a strong downward bending and/or backward
bending of the hand wing. At the same time birds are using the shortening of the
arm wing.
5. Formation flight of birds

Downwash distributions at the wing of an ornithopter in
cruise flight.
V-shaped staggered flight formations result in a
measurable energy conservation for each single
individual. This is particularly the result of aerodynamic
influences. With the aid of the ornithopter theory conclusions can be drawn about
the mode of functioning concerning the energy savings.
In connection with its lift the leading bird necessarily generates a wing tip vortex at
both wing tips. For it this implies a loss of energy. It is
relatively big for birds with high wing loadings and short,
tapered wing shapes. But the following bird can try to tap the
energy content of one of both wing tip vortices to make its
own flight work easier.
Drag reduction at the formation flight of birds

Well known is the hypothesis that the following bird uses a field of uplift of its
leading bird. It is generated by the tip vortex spreading backwards at the outer edge
of the flight formation. This up wind enables the following bird to increase its own
thrust without performing additional flight energy. But it is more effective to use
the angular momentum of the incoming vortex to reduce the wing tip vortex of its
own wing.
Flock of birds in flight
The problem for the following bird is the optimal adjustment
of all distances in the three-dimensional space behind the
leading bird. It must try to adjust the distances to the flapping
wings of its leading bird in a way that the proper part of the
leading bird's vortex passes it in a suitable moment and at the

optimal position. It can surely feel the best flight position, but thereby it must also
make compromises.
Other flapping wing designs

In designing of ornithopter models there are mainly two major tasks, the
development of the drive technology and the development of the flapping wing. In
general, the wide interest lies in the drive systems and components. But the main
problem of the development of such aircrafts are the flapping-wings. In this field
of design desire differs very widely from reality.
Below, the attempt is being made, to give a rough overview about the physical
characteristics of known flapping wings. But this collection doesn't claim to be
complete.
1. The bird wing, the ideal

Naturally, the great archetype for technical flapping wings is the living bird wing.
His great effectiveness due to his manifold possibilities to move purposeful and to
change the shape will certainly be unobtainable in aero modelling for a long time.
This is also true for his weight distribution and his sensor technology.
In this drawing by K. Herzog the anatomic subdivision of
the bird's wing in arm- and hand section is pictured. It can
also to be used advantageously when describing technical
flapping wings. The longitudinal parts of these wing
sections are rather different depending on bird species.
2. Membrane flapping wings

Application range
Membrane flapping wings especially are changing the direction of chamber in the
hand wing section according to the flapping direction. This way, they can produce
much thrust and achieve steep climbing flights (flying with Thrust). But up to now
they are less suited for gliding flights and for flying with lift.

2.1 The sail as archetype

A sail - though in other circumstances - has about the
same function as a flapping wing. It shall generate as
much thrust as possible under changing approach flow
directions.
By material selection, layout, division into parts, sail
trim and rig tuning the sail characteristics can vary in
wide ranges. Battens give the sail more stability and an
optimal shape. A lot of descriptions with sophisticated
tips about the fabrication of the sail and its practical
use can be found.
Indeed, a lot of systems of membrane flapping wings
have been developed, but detailed information about them is barely available
2.2 Simple membrane flapping wings

The pinion feather by obviously was optimized for
thrust generation. Therefore, he increased the chord in
the outer wing area. But this pinion feather was not
intended for generating lift at the same time. It is merely
a propeller for changing the direction of rotation.
Tim was the first in mass-produced rubber powered flapping
wing model - with simple membrane flapping wings -
invented by Albertini Prosper and de Ruymbeke Gérard
(France 1969).
The membrane printing of Tim in the marginal picture was
drafted by K. Herzog.
Under the designation Tim Bird this model is available in
trade till today.
2.3 Simple membrane flapping wing with

battens

Here a famous Membrane Flapping Wing, equipped with small battens for

stabilisation of the membrane, developed by A. Pénaud (France 1872)
2.4 Active twisting by spar rotation
This is a membrane flapping

wing by Erich v.
Holst(1943) with drive-controlled wing twisting in the
arm wing section by spar rotation. Only the rib at the end
of the arm wing (number 9) is fixed to the spar. It is linked with a crank
drive which effects the stroke movement as well as the rotary movement of the
spar.
The twisting in the hand wing section happens largely passively. In addition, a
transition from cross to longitudinal battens can be seen. In spite of alternating
profile chamber direction during a flapping cycle a relatively purposeful increase
of wing twisting tip wards is made possible.
The bird models by K. Herzog (1963) follow this scheme, too.
2.5 Aeroelastic twisting by spar torsion

The flapping wing model of the Czech Cenek Chalupsky
(1934) was flying steadily without a tail unit. Its achieved
climb power is still considered remarkable today.
 Weight 3.1 kg
 wing span 2m
 cane spar 10-15m
 covering [109 oz]

 ceiling [79 in]

 linen [394-590 in]
Each flapping wing of this ornithopter has two spars. The
straight, bending resistant spar (H1) transmits the power of the
stroke motion. The bended torsion elastic spar (H2)
determines the magnitude of the wing twisting.
Both spars cross approximately in the center of the half span.
At the cross point they are movably interlinked. For the torsion elastic spar (H2)
not to bend backward too much a string or an elastic thread is apparently tightened
between the tips of the spars.
During downstroke of the wings the lifting forces are increased. The spar H2 and
the wing are twisting. The magnitude of the twisting acts in accordance with the
magnitude of the lift force and the stiffness of the spar. It therefore happens
aeroelastically.
Additionally to the twisting the tip of the spar H2 bends upwards in the
downstroke. As a reaction it bends downwards at the other side of the cross point -
thus, in the section of the arm wing. Thereby, the camber of the airfoil is increased
a little. Thereby, an adaptation to the requirements of an effective stroke motion
takes place.
2.6 Flying wing ornithopter

Here an ornithopter without a tail unit, developed by Jean-Louis Solignac (France,

2000).
The flapping wing model has a very simple and light driving mechanism and is
powered by a rubber motor. With a wing span of 15 cm (5.9 in) it has a weight of
only 0.6 grams (0.021 oz [US]). The airplane performances are amazingly good.
The particular about this flapping wing is the down cambered airfoil shaped by
battens. Thereby it flies in a stable attitude without a tail unit. This can
theoretically be explained with the shifting of the pressure point of thin airfoils. It
can be tested in the adjacent experiment with a paper airplane. The cross-section of
this paper airplane equates to a down chambered airfoil.
If you keep the center of gravity at the same distance dform the leading edge like at
the paper airplane, also a lightweight flying wing glider made of balsa is flying
perfectly.
2.7 In tandem
Ornithopter with two sets of flapping wings based on a
Dragonfly, developed by Erich von Holst (1943).
Here, for simplifying the mechanism both opposite
halves of a wing are rigidly fixed to a unit. This way, the
pressure point of the model is fixed between the two
wing units.
In such tandem arrangements with wings flapping in
opposite directions the vertical pendulousness of the
fuselage should be avoided. This, however, bears the
disadvantage that the backmost flapping wing is in the turbulence wake of the front
one. Only for very small wings and at very small Reynolds numbers this may be
beneficial.
2.8 Thrust-Wing
By mechanisation of a Dragonfly's flight principle Erich von Holst has developed
his Thrust-Wing (1940s) with two in the opposite direction rotating three-blade
wings.

The flapping angle in one stroke direction constitutes 180° or 360° for a complete
flapping cycle. Three instead of two wing blades per rotor offer a constant
supporting force.
In contrast to a propeller at the Trust-Wing also can be generated a considerable
lift force perpendicular to the direction of flight. One must only increase the
Thrust-Wing advance ratio - similar to a normal flapping wing - and fly with a
small positive angle of attack of the Thrust-Wing axis. (The advance ratio is the
ratio between the distance moving forward one revolution and the diameter of the
Thrust-Wing.)
This is a fine example for an innovative transfer of biological principles of a
flapping wing in engineering. But the specialism bionics did not exist at that time.
2.9 Oscillating stretched wing

Thrust also can be produced by raising and lowering a
stretched wing in flight. But thereto the lift or the
transverse force during the upward motion must be smaller
than during downward motion. The bigger the difference,
the better for the thrust. Furthermore, a continual alignment
of the angle of incidence is normally necessary.
Here a strikingly simple generation of an accordant oscillating motion of the wing
by using an eccentrically pivoted rotating mass consisting of the mainspring and
the gear. In this case the wing is aeroelastic twistable. The idea was coined by W.
B. Mituritscha (probably from Russia, 1953).
Unfortunately, a forward and backward motion of the wing occurs along the way.
However, this can be avoided by a second counter rotating mass.
There are diverse proposals to generate an oscillation motion of the wing by a pilot
who is flying in a hang-glider or another ultralight aircraft - for example by fast
press-ups or knee-bends.
Entirely different model experiments with oscillating wings shows Karl-Heinz-
Helling with his Double flapping wing airplane (2008).
2.10 Rotating wings

To avoid the accelerating forces at the final stroke positions flapping

wings rotating on a cone-shaped shell where sometimes built whose apex lies at the
wing root.
Examples:
The Rotor Dragonfly (1944 and 1989) by
Adolf Piskorsch
and the flight model by Horst Händler (1989).
Both ends of the driveshaft are bended in Horst Händler's
model. Thereon, the wings are attached freely twistable.
The angle of incidence is guided by the upward pointing
levers on the wings.
2.11 With non-twistable arm wing section

This is a membrane flapping wing with a non-twistable
arm wing section and passive twisting at hand wing
section.
The arm wing is triangle shaped and has a large wing
depth at the wing root. Arm- and hand wing membrane
overlap in wing span direction. Obviously, the hand wing
spar could make a little flap movement at the wrist. Later
the hand wing depth was enlarged.
This flapping wing design of the Seagull was developed by
Percival H. Spencer (USA 1958)
Today, this design principle of flapping wings with inserted battens is widely-used.
3. Profiled flapping wings

Application range
Profiled flapping wings or double-sided covered wings may work with a very high
efficiency. With their mostly relatively low flapping frequency and the small
operating range of lift coefficient of a simple airfoil not much thrust can be

produced. Not, at least, if the full lift must be generated concurrently (flying with
lift). Therefore, profiled flapping wings are suited especially for a level flight, the
gently inclined climbing flight and of course for changing to gliding flight.
3.1 With artificial feathers

To ease the twisting, the closed airfoil can be fanning-out.
So far, this is particularly used for large manned
ornithopters.
Adjacent, a flapping wing with staggered wing tips of the
manned Schwan 1, developed by Walther Filter (1955, at
the Hannover fair 1958). The angle of incidence deflection
of the feathers designed as several wings was controllable.
Even for splay and straddle movement of the feathersthere
are old design proposals. In contrast, with EV7bonly with
simple feather implementations experiments have been
made.
A further example for artificial feathers is the Icarus by
Emiel Hartman (England 1959).
More recent experiments with artificial feathers are to be
seen at the
 Birdman Georges Fraisé (France 2005) and
 Ornithopter Project by Ryszard Szczepañski (Poland
2002).
3.2 With inclined hinge of the hand wing

A special version of a flapping wing derives from K.
Herzog (1963). With this wing, the rotation or the twist
axis is not standing vertical to the stroke axis.

The arm wing should perform a flapping motion and a twisting motion at the
shoulder joint. With rubber threads between arm- and hand wing the latter was
pulled down a little (aeroelastic wing).
This is also an early suggestion for an articulated flapping wing with an additional
flap movement of the hand wing.
The kink of the profile between the arm and the hand wing lies approximately at
the same location as on theabove-mentioned membrane wing by P. H. Spencer.
3.3 Twisting by tilting the leading edge of the wing

The feature of the pitch propeller by John Drake lies in the
twisting of the leading edge, not the trailing edge of the
flapping wing (England, flight tests in 1978).
3.4 With stepped twisting

An approximate wing twisting can also be achieved by a
stepped rotation of relative non-twistable wing sections.
The model EV4 (1979) was also equipped with such a
rotation of single wing sections. But in this case, the
rotation was controlled by the wing drive.
A typical representative of a passive stepped twisted wing
is the Step-Twister with his foam wings (Depron) by Karel
Pustka (2004). The developing gap between the wing
sections is covered with a membrane.

3.5 Twisting by stroke movement of the auxiliary spar

Here, the wing twisting is generated by a phase-delayed
stroke movement of the main and auxiliary spar -
developed by Emile Räuber (France 1909).
This technology was also used at the EV2 (1976). In the

margin, the wings with their two spars powered separately
are to be seen.
The function is similar to the wing of a Dragonfly. Here,
too, the phase-delayed flapping movement of the main
and auxiliary spar determines the amount of the wing
twisting.
Dragonfly picture
Furthermore, the Dragonfly obviously works with a
strong spar at the leading edge. With the phase-delayed flapping movement of
three spars the camber of the airfoil can be influenced, too.
The supports or linkages of the three spars at the body are clearly recognizable as
dark, partly crossing structures at the back of the Dragonfly.
3.6 Servo controlled wing twisting

This is a lifelike and airworthy half-size replica of pterosaurs - a
Quetzalcoatlus Northropi (QN).
The aerodynamics of this ornithopter should equate the original
as far as possible. The idea comes from the creative genius Paul
MacCready Ph.D. (USA 1985).
The twisting of the wings was controlled by servos and the flight
attitude was stabilized by backward and forward motions of the
wing tips and nodding motions of the head.

3.7 Shearflex principle

Here an aeroelastic twistable profiled flapping wing
according to the Shearflex Principle. This system makes a
relatively inelastic covering applicable. If the twisting
along the wing is constant and not to excessive, the airfoil
contour accuracy is therefore very good.
Here, the twist elasticity will mainly be determinate by the
spar designed as wing leading edge.
This system was invented by Professor James D.
DeLaurier and Jeremy M. Harris (Canada 1994).
The ornithopter with its tripartition of the flapping wing is
interesting, too. Jeremy M. Harris 1977 has applied it for
patent.
On the adjacent photo James D. DeLaurier and Jeremy M.
Harris can be seen with their remote-controlled model, 3
m in span and with combustion motor. A sustained flight
was achieved 1991.
Here, a corresponding replica with an electrical drive
system by Horst Händler (1994).
3.8 Oscillating wing tips

The main spar of the Snowbird has no hinge, and instead
flexes to produce the desired flapping motion. By this way
the wing tips perform an oscillating motion. Thereby the
wing twists passively under aerodynamic loads.
The principle of a wire powered wing oscillation has some
marked advantages particularly for man powered
ornithopters:

 fail-safe wing position for gliding

 applicable for large wing spans with its accordingly low induced drag
 very few moving parts
Todd Reichert has played an important role in
developing of the Snowbird and he also has flown
it successfully. It was the world`s first officially
certifieded short flight of a human-powered
ornithopter (Canada 2010).
3.9 Shell wing

A wing with an active wing twisting by a drive controlled
spar rotation, developed by Albert Kempf (France 1998,
Apparently, the upper side of the wing consists of a
cambered hard shell, which is shaped with foam on the
lower side to a profiled airfoil wing.
A long thin plate with a cambered cross section may be

twisted easily and wrinkle-free. Also the aforesaid Shearflex
principle is using this property. This flapping wing category here is called shell
wing.
Such equipped Truefly is to be seen in the adjacent picture
- an ornithopter with a wonderful flying sight. It also was
the first ornithopter which achieved strong climbing flights
with profiled flapping wings.
Ornithopter models EV1 to EV4

1. Ornithopter model EV1
 first flight 1975

 wing span 2.90 m

 Weight 5.4 kg
 wing loading 5.3 kg/sqm
 max wing chord 0.44 m
 flapping cycle 0.8 s
 flapping angle 60 deg
EV1 in powered flight
EV1 in gliding flight
EV1 with its wings in the upper final stroke position

The twisting along the whole span unfortunately was too
small for powered flight. It was made harder by the large
rigid trailing edge.

Wing twisting in the downstrokeBecause the high wing

loading the model flies relatively fast. The advantage of
this is that the wing twisting must not be big.

 weight 5.4 kg
 max wing chord 0.42 m
The active twisting of the wings resulted from the
separate controlling of the main and auxiliary spars in
stroke direction.
For covering the wing the elastic foil type Platilon U
04was used for the first time, thickness 0.03 and 0.05 mm.
EV1 in comparison with EV2, top view


The EV3 did not get past the phase of design. Only plans exist (terminated 1978).

 Weight 4.8 kg
 aspect ratio 10
 Airfoil [120 in]
The arm and hand wing sections were actively pitch
controlled separately from the drive at the relevant
section root. The arm wings were rigid. The hand wings
should be twisted aeroelastic. The twisting of the hand
wing was appropriate for gliding.
EV4 in flight, in wing down stroke
In the area of the hand wing you can see a small aeroelastic twisting.


 weight 5.2 kg

 Weight 5.2 kg
 aspect ratio 7.4
EV6 in the upstroke

with a relatively constant
twisting along the whole
wing. Thus, the angle of
incidence grows linear
towards the wing tip.
EV6 in the downstroke

There is also a constant twisting along the whole wing.

7. Ornithopter model EV7a

 weight 4.6 kg
Wing twisting
At the EV7a again was used aeroelastic twisting
along the whole wing. At rest the wing takes the twist
position of the upstroke (look also at the preceding
picture).
While gliding
Wing root fairing

No inclination of the stroke plane applied. Therefore, a
bend results in the trailing edge at the transition
between the rotational symmetric wing adapter roller
and the airfoil of the wing.

Ornithopter model EV7b

 weight 4.8 kg
 aspect ratio 10
 airfoil NACA 4412
Wing with feathers

To enlarge the wing twisting near the wing tips
experiments with feathers have been made. The twisting
of each wing feather should be significantly larger than
in the case of the continuous airfoil - especially during
the downstroke.
The feathers were not designed to decrease the induced
drag, because that would be too difficult.
EV7b in gliding flight

The connection line of the feather tips corresponded to the
ideas of the designer. The feather tips continued the
camber and twisting of the hand wing.
In powered flight (in direction of down stroke) the

bending of the feathers was often quite variable as seen in
the following fly-by of an ornithopter.
Usually it is quite useful in gliding.

Ornithopter model EV7c

 weight 4.7 kg
 airfoil of arm wing S1020
 airfoil at the wing tip E203
The new wing mechanism which replaced the auxiliary spar of the hand wing was
not successful.

 first gliding flight in 2000
 wing span 2.8 m
 Weight 3.6 kg
 wing loading 5.9 kg/qm
 aspect ratio (wing) 11.7
 airfoil of arm wing S1020
Today, ornithopter designs are still on the minds, as well as the drawing boards,
of adventurous and imaginative people determined to achieve the old dream of
flight with flapping wings. Some success has been achieved recently toward a
practical ornithopter by James DeLaurier and his team at the University of Toronto
Institute for Aerospace Studies. With the help of four research students, test pilot
Jack Sanderson and a few other volunteers, DeLaurier achieved his lifelong dream
of flying a full-scale ornithopter on Jul. 8, 2006, at Downsview Park, Toronto.

Equipped with a 24-horsepower engine and a model airplane turbo booster, the
Project Ornithopter vehicle flew for 14 seconds at an average speed of 88 km/h, in
the process traveling a third of a kilometer.
RC ornithopters are a relatively new addition to the world of radio control flying,
and they're completely different to any other type of aircraft.
Avitron 2 ornithopter:
Future Applications of the Ornithopter
The ornithopter, though firmly rooted in the psyche of many aerospace designers
as ancient technology, has much to offer as a means of advancing the science of

aerial vehicles. As scientists like Dr. John McMasters have observed, "a door is
fmally opening to the realization that there may be much more to learn in further,
truly multidisciplinary investigations of the biomechanics of flight as it may relate
to a wide range of practical aircraft types" (McMasters & Cummings, 2004, p. 3).
In the burgeoning field of unmanned micro air vehicles, ornithopters have found a
niche for which they are especially well suited.
Unmanned Aerial Systems

One of the principal advantages of an ornithopter as an unmanned aerial system,
especially one used for surveillance purposes, is the low aeroacoustic signature of
such an aircraft (DeLaurier & Harris, 1993).
Compared with fmed-wing, propeller-driven aircraft, and even those with high-
efficiency, slowly rotating propellers, omithopters have the potential to be the
quietest of any aircraft design (DeLaurier & Harris, 1993).
In addition to low audio profiles, ornithopters are inherently well suited to small
scale aerial vehicles because of their aerodynamic properties.
A flapping-wing aircraft has considerable advantages in small-scale designs
because of efficient operations at low Reynolds numbers combined with the ability
to fly by thrust alone (Shkarayev & Silin, 2009).
Though the small size means that micro ornithopters are more susceptible to wind
gusts than larger vehicles, the potential for enhanced maneuverability, including
hovering, and even backward flight, makes flapping wing designs a subject of keen
interest (Shyy et al., 2010).
Micro Aerial Vehicles (MAVs) currently in development, such as the Microbat, are
proof that ornithopter technology, though still in the early stages of development as
a technology, has much to contribute to the science of aerial remote sensing (Singh
& Chopra, 2008).
VSTOL Applications
Flapping wing designs have the potential to not only revolutionize the field of
micro-sized aircraft, but to drastically change how Very Short Take Off and
Landing (VSTOL) aircraft are utilized.

Though most research in ornithopter flight has dealt with the dynamics of cruise
flight, it is not unreasonable to speculate that flapping wing technology contains
the elements necessary to support not only VSTOL capabilities, but also the
possibility of high speed subsonic flight (DeLaurier & Harris, 1993).
Unquestionably, myriad other applications for flapping wing technology exist that
have yet to be identified; and even some that have, such as continuously variable-
span wings based on those of gliding birds, have yet to be solved (McMasters &
Curnrnings, 2004). The prospect of quiet, efficient, and maneuverable aircraft
technology capable of applications of any size is reasonable assurance that
ornithopter development will continue well into the future.
Conclusion
Inspired by nature, ornithopters were long considered the only viable means by
which man could achieve the freedom of flight that proved so elusive. As lighter-
than-air and eventually fixed-wing machines overshadowed the development of
flapping wing aircraft, ornithopters were marginalized and often discounted as a
futureless technology. Examining the past for inspiration and developmental
breakthroughs in ornithopter design shows that flapping-wing flight is far from the
pipe dream it has been often characterized to be. Instead, ornithopters occupy the
rare position of being critical to the formative stages of aviation as well as to its
future. As technology unfailingly advances and aerospace designers continually
seek new ideas, the ornithopter once again has emerged as a kind of technological
chimera, combining seemingly incongruous elements of aviation's distant past and
inspiration from nature with revolutionary technology to create an adaptable
solution to the needs of the ever-developing science of aviation.

=============THE END=============

Ornithopter: A Machine Designed To Achieve Flight by Means of Flapping Wings

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ornithopter: A Machine Designed To Achieve Flight by Means of Flapping Wings

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project : Ornithopter

Fatima Jinnah Women University

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 1

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 2

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 3

A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUMAN POWERED AVIATION

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 4

Paul MacCready's Albatross HPA in

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 5

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE ORNITHOPTER

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 6

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 7

The Project Ornithopter engine-powered piloted aircraft, which is based on the

CONSTRUCTION AND MECHANISM OF FLIGHT:

Ornithopters and Flapping-

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 8

been achieved. The Subsonic Aerodynamics laboratory under Professor James

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 9

By flapping its wings down, together

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 10

In addition to the three basic movements described here, birds can do a

ORNITHOPTER FLIGHT DYNAMICS AND CONTROL

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 11

 Methods of wing twisting:

3. Partially linear kinematics for optimal thrust

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 12

4. The torso (the fuselage)

5. The tail section an aid for lift and control

6. Control and regulation

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 13

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 14

Description of flapping wing constructions which have been developed

2. Aeroelastic controlled articulated flapping wing

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 15

Technical drawing of the wrist

EV6 in flight, at wing upstroke

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 16

3. With expanding wing twisting

Technical drawing for a shift spar in a coaxil tube-in-tube

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 17

4. With adjustable twisting moment

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 18

5. Aeroelastic controlled articulated flapping wing with adjustable

Wing framework of the model EV8 (2004), designed as an aeroelastic controlled

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 19

6. Covering of flapping wings

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 20

The reason flapping flight looks confusing:

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 21

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 22

The principle of flight of ornithopters

2. Operating principle of the flapping wing

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 23

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 24

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 25

Flapping wing properties during flight

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 26

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 27

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 28

Swan in cruising flight

[Zainab Ejaz] Page 29

Seagull in cruising flight