Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Electronics in Agriculture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compag

CFD simulation and experimental verification of the spatial and temporal T

distributions of the downwash airflow of a quad-rotor agricultural UAV in
hover
Qiwei Guoa,b,1, Yaozong Zhub,1, Yu Tanga,b, , Chaojun Houb, Yong Hec, Jiajun Zhuangb,
⁎

Youliang Zhengd, Shaoming Luoa

a
College of Automation, Guangdong Polytechnic Normal University, Guangzhou 510665, China
b
Academy of Contemporary Agriculture Engineering Innovations, Zhongkai University of Agriculture and Engineering, Guangzhou 510225, China
c
College of Biosystems Engineering and Food Science, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
d
Guangdong Science & Technology Infrastructure Center, Guangzhou 510033, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The plant protection effect of an agricultural unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) with multiple rotors is closely
Quad-rotor agricultural UAV related to its speed and direction and the spatial and temporal distributions of the effective coverage of the
Downwash airflow downwash airflow. By combining compressible Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations, the shear
CFD simulation stress transport (SST) k turbulence model, sliding grid technology and the Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure
Spatial and temporal distribution
Linked Equations (SIMPLE) algorithm, this paper establishes a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the
downwash airflow of the quad-rotor agricultural UAV in hover and discusses the distribution of the downwash
airflow in the spatial and temporal dimensions. The simulation results show that most areas of the downwash
airflow tend to be stable within 4.5 s, and due to the downward flow characteristics after the stabilization, the z-
direction (perpendicular to the ground) velocity of the downwash airflow directly under the rotor is the highest
with a maximum value of −8.96 m/s, which accounts for the main part of the downwash flow. The rotor
downwash airflow flows downward in spiral form and the phenomenon of “contraction and expansion” is ob-
vious during the downwash flow. Closer to the ground, the coverage area of the z-direction velocity is larger, the
pressure distribution is more uniform, and the airflow exhibits an “upwash” phenomenon due to the “ground
effect”. The test and simulation values at test points from 1 m to 2.5 m and 0.75 m exhibit the same variation
trend with maximum relative errors of 10% and 15%, and the numerical simulation is accurate.

1. Introduction
Compared with manual backpack sprayers and traditional ground-
based pesticide applications, agricultural UAVs, which are no longer
restricted by factors such as the height and shape of trees or crop
growth, have the advantages of effectiveness in spraying operation,
taking off and landing without a runway, and autonomous operation
and have been widely used in areas such as crop spraying and polli-
nation in recent years (Li and Tomas, 2014; He et al., 2017; Mogili and
Deepak, 2017; Yang et al., 2017a; Lan and Chen, 2014). The results
show that the flight parameters, downwash airflow of the rotor and
climatic conditions will affect the operation of agricultural UAVs. The
coverage width, velocity size and distribution of the downwash airflow
of the rotor are the main factors that affect the droplet deposition and
the spray target percentage (Tang et al., 2017; Qin et al., 2016; Lv et al.,
2019).
Scholars have conducted related research on the distribution char-
acteristics of the downwash airflow of agricultural UAVs. Although a
field test could not comprehensively obtain three-dimensional (3D)
data of the rotor downwash airflow, combining CFD technology with
the test could well capture the detailed characteristics of the downwash
airflow in the spatial flow and analyze the causes of the flow phe-
nomenon. Based on the CFD method and the SST k turbulence
model, Zhang et al. (2017) conducted a numerical simulation of the N-3
single-rotor agricultural UAV downwash wind field, carried out a wind
field test, and verified that the z-direction velocity (perpendicular to the
ground downward) was the main component of the downwash air ve-
locity. Yang et al. (2017b) used the renormalization group (RNG)

⁎
Corresponding author at: College of Automation, Guangdong Polytechnic Normal University, Guangzhou 510665, China.
E-mail address: ty2008@zhku.edu.cn (Y. Tang).
1
These two authors contributed equally to this work and should be considered co-first authors.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105343
Received 8 December 2019; Received in revised form 8 March 2020; Accepted 9 March 2020
Available online 14 March 2020
0168-1699/ © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Q. Guo, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343

k turbulence model and dynamic grid technology to research the agricultural UAV as the research object, studies the distribution char-
distribution characteristics of a six-rotor agricultural UAV downwash acteristics of downwash airflow in the spatial and temporal dimensions
airflow in hover. The results showed that the flow characteristics of the for a quad-rotor agricultural UAV in the hover state by combining
airflow in the “inlet” and “outlet” regions of the adjacent rotor make the compressible RANS equations, SST k turbulence model, sliding grid
velocity distribution of the downwash airflow significantly asymmetric. technology and SIMPLE algorithm. The z-direction velocity test ex-
Yoon et al. (2016) conducted a numerical simulation and an experi- periment is designed to measure the wind field of a quad-rotor agri-
mental verification of the downwash wind field of a quad-rotor UAV in cultural UAV in hover, and the reliability of the simulated data is ver-
hover, and the verification results showed that the interference airflow ified by fitting the measured and simulated values, which provide a
between two adjacent rotors would affect the accuracy of the experi- reference for research on the operating process parameters of an agri-
mental test data. Jung et al. (2014) researched the mechanism of the cultural UAV under the coupled airflow disturbance of downwash.
interaction between the downwash airflow and the tail fin of a dual-
rotor UAV and achieved an accurate CFD simulation of the inlet and
Abbreviations
outlet regions of the downwash airflow between the two rotors. Zheng
et al. (2018) conducted a numerical simulation analysis of the down- CFD Computational fluid dynamics
wash airflow of a six-rotor plant protection UAV at different heights SIMPLE Semi-Implicit Method for Pressure Linked Equations
that combined sliding grid technology. The results showed that the UAV Unmanned aerial vehicle
RANS Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes
more uniform the distribution of the downwash flow field, the smaller
RNG Renormalization group
the ground effect will be with an increase in hover height. Zhang et al. SST Shear stress transport
(2018) established a 3D CFD model of the downwash airflow of a six- 3D Three-dimensional
rotor plant protection UAV based on a porous model. The research re-
sults show that the aggregation of the downwash airflow would makes
the velocity distribution of the downwash airflow more uniform, thus 2. Materials and methods
improving the flow rate of the airflow. Li et al. (2019) researched the
mechanism of the interaction between the downwash wind field of a 2.1. Datasets
UAV and the vortex generated in a rice canopy and constructed a
follow-up model that included the movement parameters of the UAV In this paper, the RANS equation is used as the basic control
body and the vortex movement of the rice canopy to improve the equation to calculate the unsteady airflow field of a quad-rotor agri-
precise target accuracy of the spraying operation of the UAV. cultural UAV. A source term Q caused by rotation is added to the RANS
In terms of airfield parameter measurement technology for rotor- equation (Robert and Murman, 1985; Agarwal and Deese, 1987), and
craft UAVs, Wang et al. (2016) measured the airfield of an oil-powered the equation can be expressed as follows:
single-rotor UAV working in a rice field by setting three direction
sensors for a wind speed measurement in a one-way linear array. The WdVol + [F (W ) G (W )] dS = QdVol
results showed that the fastest airflow occurs in the flying direction in t Vol V (1)
parallel, followed by the speed of the airflow in the flight direction and
the vertical direction, and the width of the downwash airflow increases (qn qb)
with a decrease in flight altitude. Finally, the optimal flight altitude was
u (qn qb) + pn x
proposed for a UAV in field operation. Li et al. (2015) arranged an array u
of wind speed sensors in a rice canopy, obtained the airflow velocity at W= v ,F= v (qn qb) + pn y
different heights inside the canopy, and explored the mechanism of the (qn qb) + pnz
interaction between the downwash airflow and crop canopy. The re- E
H (qn qb ) + pnb (2)
sults showed that the lower the canopy height, the greater the at-
tenuation rate of the downwash airflow velocity. Wang et al. (2013)
measured the velocity of the downwash airflow in the x, y and z di- 0
0
rections, utilized a balanced distribution law of the spatial mass of the xx n x + yx n y + zx n z
droplets, and proved that the downwash airflow had a significant im-
G= xy n x + yy n y + zy n z ,Q= 0
pact on the behavior of the droplets; the downward airflow perpendi-
xz n x + yz n y + zz n z
cular to the ground direction could improve the deposition of the
0
droplets. The local velocity of the downwash airflow can be measured x nx + y ny + z nz (3)
by using sensor measurement, but the flow characteristics of the
downwash airflow cannot be effectively measured. Therefore, some where W is a conservation vector; F(W) and G(W) are the non-viscous
scholars designed visualization experiments of a wind field to study the flux and viscous flux; Q is the source term caused by rotor rotation;
flow characteristics and distribution of the downwash airflow. Based on and p are the fluid density and pressure; u, v and w are the fluid velocity
the airflow visualization technique, Mylapore and Schmita (2015) di- components; E is the internal energy of a fluid unit; Vol denotes the
rectly observed the streamline of a rotor fuselage and the streamline normal vector of the control surface; Ω denotes the rotating speed of the
distribution of the downwash airflow on the ground by using visual rotor; qn and qb denote the fluid velocity and speed grid along the normal
material labeling technology. Based on machine vision, Ricardo et al. component of the mesh surface, respectively; and xx / yy / zz , xy / xz / yz and
(2016) researched the ripple characteristics caused by the downwash x / y / z are the related viscous quantities.
airflow in the water surface of a multi-rotor UAV. Although the vortex The k turbulence model can be used to simulate the fully de-
structure of downwash flow is complex, a visualization of the flow field veloped flow of turbulence far from the wall. The k turbulent
can effectively observe the flow pattern and characteristics of the model can reliably solve problems for boundary layers in different
downwash airflow in space; it is relatively difficult to capture these pressure gradients. Based on both models, Menter (1993) first proposed
details by purely experimental means. the SST turbulence model, which is more sensitive to the strength of the
In conclusion, studies on the wind field of a rotorcraft UAV mainly vortex flow.
focus on the spatial dimension, and scientific research achievements on k
the flow characteristics of rotor downwash flow in the temporal di- ( k) + ( kui) = [ k ] + Gk Yk + Sk
t xi xi xj (4)
mension are rarely reported. Therefore, this paper takes a quad-rotor

2
Q. Guo, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343

( )+ ( ui ) = [ ]+G Y +D +S UAVs, it is necessary to refine the local grid in the computational field,
t xi xi xj (5) as shown in Fig. 1. The coordinate axes are defined as follows: the
positive direction of the y-axis is perpendicular to the grid surface. The
k = µ + µt {F1/ K , 1 + (1 F1)/ k ,2} (6) x-axis is parallel to the grid surface, and the z-axis is vertical to the
ground. The rotor is the most important part in the numerical simula-
= µ + µt {F1/ , 1 + (1 F1)/ ,2} (7)
tion. However, there are many irregular curved surfaces in the rotors,
k 1 and a fine triangular grid is employed to generate the surface mesh of
µt = 1 F2 the rotor, as shown in Fig. 2. The total number of grids is 5.8 million.
max[ , ] (8)
1 In the numerical simulation model, the pressure outlet boundary
was used for the wall; the upper surface of the total calculation domain
= 2 ij ij (9) and the lower surface were set as the non-slip wall. The data between
4 2 the static domain and four rotation domains are exchanged through the
F1 = tanh( 1 ), F2 = tanh( 2) (10)
interface boundary. The direction of gravitational acceleration is along
500µ 4 k 500µ the negative direction of the z-axis. The sliding grid technology was
k 2 k
1 = min[max( , ), + 2
], 2 = max( , ) used to calculate the rotation of the rotor, and the rotation speed is set
0.09wy y 2 ,2 D y 0.09 y y 2
at 2500 rpm. The rotation axis and steering were set according to the
(11) actual situation. Because the downwash flow is caused by the rotor
where G k and Gw are turbulent kinetic energies; k and are the diffusion rotating at a high speed, the SST k turbulence model was selected,
rates of the k and equations; Yk and Y are turbulence due to diffusion; which is suitable for complex shear stress flow. An unsteady transient
D is an orthogonal divergence term; Sk andS are user-defined para- calculation was adopted with a time step length of 0.0001 s and 30
meters; k and are turbulence energy coefficients of thek and iterations for each step length. The total number of steps was 16000,
equations; µt is the turbulent viscosity coefficient; D+is the positive the convergence residual was set as 10−4, and the flow field of the rotor
direction of the orthogonal diffusion term. after a 5-s rotation was calculated.

2.2. Boundary conditions and calculation methods 2.3. Experimental verification of the wind speed test

Because the rotors are far from the fuselage, only the rotors are
retained in the whole calculation model, which has little influence on
the development and evolution of the downwash airflow (Yang et al.,
2018a). In this paper, the hover flow field of a quad-rotor UAV is stu-
died. The total calculation domain is defined as a cylinder with a height
of 5 m and a radius of 6 m. The center coordinates of the four rotors and
the upper and lower surfaces of the computational domain are (−0.5,
0.5, 0), (0.5, 0.5, 0), (−0.5, −0.5, 0), (0.5, −0.5, 0), (0, 0, 2) and (0, 0,
−3.2), respectively. To ensure the accuracy of the numerical simula-
tion, the calculation domain is divided into a static domain and four
cylindrical rotation domains, including the rotors. In order to describe
the distribution characteristics in detail, the downwash airflow field is
divided into four zones directly under the rotors: two “airflow inlet
zones”, two “airflow outlet zones” and the “central zone”. Since this
paper mainly focuses on the rotor downwash airflow for agricultural
In order to avoid the impact of environmental wind, according to
the parameters of the ZHKU-0404-01 quad-rotor agricultural UAV
shown in Fig. 3d, an indoor test platform has been built for this test,
including the movable bracket, rotor, power system and wireless re-
mote control system. The movable bracket consists of aluminum alloy
components, and the bracket is equipped with a lifting suspension arm.
The detailed parameters of the quad-rotor agricultural UAV and test
system are shown in Table 1.
To verify the accuracy of the numerical simulation of the downwash
airflow field, the z-direction velocity test is carried out. In Fig. 1, rotor 1
and rotor 3 rotate clockwise, and rotor 2 and rotor 4 rotate antic-
lockwise. To facilitate the measurement of the downwash airflow ve-
locity, according to the rotor steering, the flow field is divided into 9
measurement areas: four zones under the rotor, two “airflow outlet
zones”, two “airflow inlet zones” and one “central zone”. A test pole is

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the computational domain 1. Airflow inlet zones; 2. The central zone; 3. Airflow outlet zone; 4. The zone under the rotor; 5. The refined
part; 6. The unrefined part.

3
Q. Guo, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343

Fig. 2. The grid of the rotor surface.

placed in each area, and a test point is placed on the test pole at 25 cm Table 1
intervals. The GM8902+ vane wheel anemometer produced by Bene- Main parameters of the test platform.
tech Ltd. is adopted to measure the z-direction velocity of downwash air Parameter Numeric value Remark
flow. Its specific size is shown in Fig. 3c, with a length of 26.7 cm, a
width of 7.5 cm, a measurement range of 0.8 m/s–45 m/s and a mea- Test height/m 3
surement accuracy of ± 3%. Rotor diameter/m 0.6 Model: M-2880
Rotor speed/rpm 2500 Full load speed
The wind speed measurement method is as follows: according to the Installation wheelbase/m 1
division of downwash wind field in Fig. 1, the distribution of the Carrier weight/kg 2.5 Maximum load
measurement points is as shown in Fig. 3a, in which the measurement UAV size/m 1/1/0.6 Length/Width/
points in “the zones under the rotors” are arranged below the rotor Height
Electric machinery M10
center and the measurement points in other areas are arranged directly
Tachometer Range: 0–9999 rpm AT-8 digital
under the area center. The distance between two adjacent measurement tachometer
points in the vertical direction is 25 cm. The GM8902+ is fixed on the Wind speed tester Error: ± 3% GM8902+
movable telescopic tripod, and the vane wheel is placed parallel to the Value range:
ground to ensure that the windward end is vertical and upward. The 0.8 m/s−45 m/s

quad-rotor UAV is hung at a height of 3 m as shown in Fig. 3b. After the

rotor speed becomes stable, the GM8902+ is moved to the measure-
ment point, and the rest of the test points are measured as shown in
Fig. 3a. Each measurement point is measured for 30 s each time, and
the sampling period is set as 1 s. The average value of the measurement
data after repeating three times is used to ensure the accuracy of the
test.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Analysis of the time-varying characteristics of the downwash wind field
Fig. 4 shows the distribution characteristics of the z-direction ve-
locity of the rotor downwash flow in the temporal dimension. At 1 s, the
rotor downwash flow has not yet reached the ground, and at 2 s, the
rotor downwash flow has reached the ground; however, compared with
3 s and 4 s, its coverage area on the ground is smaller. At 3 s and 4 s, the
downwash flow distributions are basically the same. During the flow,
the rotor downwash flow develops downward in a cylindrical shape.
Fig. 5a shows the evolution of the z-direction velocity of the rotor
downwash flow with time under the rotor. From 0 to 1.5 s, the z-di-
rection velocity increased rapidly. At 2 s, the z-direction velocity of the
rotor downwash flow became stable in the area from 2 m to 2.5 m
above the ground. At 3 s, the z-direction velocity of the rotor downwash
flow became stable in the area from 1 m to 1.5 m above the ground.
Fig. 5b, c and d show the evolution of the z-direction velocity with time
in the “airflow inlet zone”, the “airflow outlet zone” and the “central
zone”. From 0 to 1.5 s, the z-direction velocity of the rotor downwash
flow in the three zones increased rapidly and decreased rapidly, which

Fig. 3. Z-direction velocity test experiment. (a) Distribution of z-direction velocity measurement points. (b) The z-direction velocity test experiment. (c) GM8902+.
(d) The ZHKU-0404-01 quad-rotor agricultural UAV.

4
Q. Guo, et al.
Fig. 4. Distribution of the rotor downwash flow at different times (a) t = 1 s (b) t = 2 s (c) t = 3 s (d) t = 4 s.
Fig. 5. Velocity at different times in the different zones. (a) The zone under the rotor. (b) Airflow inlet zones. (c) The central zone. (d) Airflow outlet zones.
was caused by the turbulence due to the high-speed rotating rotors. The
z-direction velocity of the rotor downwash flow became stable in the
“airflow inlet zone” from 1 m to 2.5 m above the ground at 2 s. In the
“airflow outlet zone” from 2 m to 2.5 m above the ground, the z-di-
rection velocity of the rotor downwash flow became stable at 2 s but
stabilized at 4 s from 1 m to 1.5 m above the ground. In the “central
zone”, the z-direction velocity became stable from 1 m to 1.5 m above
the ground at 4 s. In all four zones, there are different variation laws for
the z-direction velocity at 0.5 m above the ground: in the zone under
the rotor and the “airflow outlet zone”, the z-direction velocity tended
to increase after 4 s. In the “airflow outlet zone”, the z-direction velo-
city continuously decreased. In the “central zone”, the value of the z-
direction velocity rapidly decayed to 0 during 1–4 s and then increased.
Combined with the analysis of Fig. 4, this phenomenon was caused by
the irregular movement of the rotor downwash flow after hitting the
ground, which explains the difference in the z-direction velocity be-
tween the zone near the ground and the other altitude in the airflow
zone. In conclusion, the z-direction velocity of the rotor downwash flow
became stable after 4 s, except in the zone of 0–0.5 m above the ground.
Following the stability of the rotor downwash flow, the z-direction
velocity in the zone under the rotor decreased with decreasing altitude
5
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343
due to the weakening of the influence of the rotor. Different from the
region directly below the rotor, the z-direction velocity of the down-
wash airflow in the other three regions increased with a decrease in
altitude after stability because the compression of the atmosphere and
induction of the airflow led to the interaction with the downwash flow.
At the same time and at the same height, the velocity of the downwash
airflow in the z-direction directly under the rotor is greater than that in
the other three regions.
3.2. Analysis of the spatial variation characteristics of the downwash wind
field
According to the above research results, after the downwash airflow
becomes stable, the main velocity area is distributed directly under the
rotor. To obtain the variation characteristics of the rotor downwash
flow, the stable airflow was selected for analysis. The velocity dis-
tributions of the x-, y- and z-directions in the xoz plane are presented in
Fig. 6. As the four rotors are distributed in circumference, the velocity
distribution of the downwash airflow is symmetrical. Fig. 6a shows that
the z-direction velocity, which has a maximum value of −8.96 m/s,
accounts for the main part of the downwash airflow velocity due to the
Q. Guo, et al.
Fig. 6. Three-dimensional velocity cloud in the xoz plane. (a) Z-direction velocity, (b) X-direction velocity, (c) Y-direction velocity, (d) Streamlines of the spiral
effect.
downward flow characteristics after stabilization. Fig. 6b shows a cloud
diagram of the x-direction velocity, and the magnitude of the x-direc-
tion velocity before reaching the ground is kept at approximately ±
0.8 m/s; however, after the downwash flow reaches the ground, the
magnitude of the x-direction velocity increases to ± 3.7 m/s suddenly,
due to the stagnation occurring to the z-direction velocity and the
airflow direction changing to the x-direction, showing a phenomenon in
which the downwash flow first contracted and spread out in all direc-
tions after reaching the ground, which is consistent with the results of
Kutz and Kebler (2013). Fig. 6c shows that the downwash airflow flows
downward in spiral form, which is consistent with the results of Yang
et al (2019), and the spiral effect begins to weaken when the downwash
airflow develops 1 m above the ground. The spiral effect is a helix wind
field similar to a small tornado generated directly under the rotor
driven by the high-speed rotating motor. The streamline diagram of the
spiral effect airflow is shown in Fig. 6d. The spiral effect may have the
following advantages and drawbacks with regard to its application in
agricultural UAV. First, the spiral wind field can increase the downward
speed of the droplets and blow open the top of the crop canopy, al-
lowing the droplets to quickly enter the interior of the canopy. This
helps to increase the penetration of the spray droplets in the crop ca-
nopy and enhance the deposition effect of the droplets sprayed by the
agricultural UAV at the bottom of the crop canopy, in agreement with
Hofman and Solseng (2017). Second, according to Bernoulli's principle,
6
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343
the pressure difference generated by the spiral wind field between the
upper and lower surfaces of the leaves will be formed, which will
generate torque on the leaves and make the leaves turn continuously.
The spiral wind field will also make the droplets drift in the horizontal
direction, which is helpful for enabling the droplets to hit the front and
back surfaces of the crop leaves at the same time. It can effectively hit
the pests hiding on the back of leaves and improve the spraying effect
(Yang, et al., 2018b). Third, the spiral wind field may draw the droplets
that are near the outside of the wind field into the inside of the wind
field and increase the target hit rate of the sprayed droplets. Fourth,
when the UAV carries out the pollination task, the downward spiral
wind field directly acts on the crop stalk and other parts, using the
impact to vibrate the pollen. Then, under the transportation of the
horizontal wind field, the parent pollen will be scattered on the mother
plant, enhancing the pollination effect and improving the crop yield,
which agrees with the results of Li et al. (2017). However, when the
UAV is capturing multispectral or hyperspectral images, the spiral wind
field will easily make the target shake, resulting in the fuzzy effect of
the UAV imaging operation, limiting the UAV imaging operation dis-
tance by more than 25 m (Zhuang, et al., 2018; Farzaneh, et al., 2019).
The z-direction velocity not only accounts for the main part of the
downwash velocity of the rotor but can also restrain the drift and im-
prove the deposition rate of the crop canopy (Yang et al., 2018b).
Therefore, the analysis of the variation characteristics of the z-direction
Q. Guo, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343

canopy. In the zone under the rotor, which is 2.5–3 m above the
ground, the z-direction velocity increases rapidly. This is probably be-
cause the airflow around the center of the rotor constantly meets and
overlaps in the acceleration process, making the z-direction speed
under the rotor center reach a maximum value 2.5 m above the ground.
From 0.5 m to 2.5 m above the ground, as the air resistance and the
influence of the rotor decreased, the z-direction velocity decreased with
decreasing altitude. In the zone from 0 m to 0.5 m above the ground,
the z-direction velocity rapidly decayed to zero, probably because the
airflow spread to the surroundings after the downwash airflow con-
tacted the ground, resulting in excessive momentum loss. Compared
with the z-direction velocity of the downwash airflow in the other three
zones, there is no significant difference in the z-direction velocity of the
downwash airflow within 2.5 m ~ 3 m above the ground. However, in
the area from 1 m to 2.5 m above the ground, there are obviously
different trends between the zone under the rotor and the other three
zones. The z-direction velocity in the other three regions increased to
Fig. 7. Velocity of the downwash flow in the z-direction in the different regions. different degrees. This may be because in the zone from 1 m to 2.5 m
above the ground, the downwash airflow was squeezed by the atmo-
sphere and the peripheral airflow kept flowing in, leading to frequent
Table 2
airflow flow in the three regions and increasing the downwash velocity.
Covering area of the downwash airflow at different heights.
The z-direction velocity of these three regions is ordered as follows: the
The distance from ground (m) 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0.2 “airflow inlet zone” > the “airflow outlet zone” > the “central zone”.
Area (m )2
2.54 3.27 4.28 5.59 6.05 5.66
Combined with the research results of Yang et al. (2017b), the rotation
relationship between adjacent rotors leads to the difference in the z-
direction velocity in the three zones.
velocity in space can provide a reference for UAV spraying operations. The effective coverage area of the z-direction velocity can affect the
As shown in Fig. 7, compared with the z-direction velocity in the four drift trajectory of the droplets, thus affecting the spraying range of the
regions, the z-direction velocity in the zone under the rotor was the plant protection UAV. According to the research of Zhang et al. (2017),
largest, indicating that this region has the strongest ability to inhibit the this paper defines the area where the absolute value of downwash ve-
drift of a medicinal liquid and improve the deposition rate of the crop locity is greater than 0.5 m/s as the effective coverage area and creates

Fig. 8. z-direction velocity distribution of the downwash flow in the xoy section at different heights (a)z = −0.7, 2.5 m from the ground, (b)z = −1.2, 2 m from the
ground, (c)z = −1.7, 1.5 m from the ground, (d)z = −2.2, 1 m from the ground, (e)z = −2.7, 0.5 m from the ground, (f)z = −3, 0.2 m from the ground.

7
Q. Guo, et al.
Fig. 9. The x-, y- and z-direction velocities. (a) The x-direction velocity in the xoz (y = 0.5) plane. (b) The z-direction velocity in the xoz (y = 0.5) plane. (c) The y-
direction velocity in the yoz (x = 0.5) plane. (d) The z-direction velocity in the yoz (x = 0.5) plane.
clipping surfaces in Fluent software to obtain the area that conforms to
the definition of the effective coverage area in the xoy cross section
with different heights (z = −0.7, Z = −1.2, z = −1.7, z = −2.2,
z = −2.7 and z = −3). The effective coverage area can be obtained by
integral operation in the post-processing software Techplot (Tecplot
360 2018/R2). Table 2 shows the coverage area of the downwash air-
flow at different heights. With a decrease in height, the coverage area of
the downwash airflow increases, but after the downwash airflow ap-
proaches the ground, the coverage area decreases slightly due to the
“ground effect”. The ground effect is the phenomenon in which the
downwash air rises up and spreads around at the same time after
contacting the ground, which may have the following advantages and
drawbacks with regard to the application of agricultural UAV. First,
when the UAV is operating in the field (the operating object is rice or
wheat), the ground effect will make the canopy of the operating object
produce a vortex phenomenon. The research shows that there is a
certain mathematical relationship between the location of the vortex
and the target location of the spray droplets. The recognition and lo-
cation of the crop canopy vortex by machine vision can be used to
improve the hit rate of the spray (Li et al., 2017). Second, for low stalk
crops, the flight height of the UAV should be higher to some extent
since the upward vortex flow near the ground would interfere with
droplet deposition (Yang, et al., 2018b). However, the ground effect
wind field will easily blow away the fertilizer particles scattered around
the crops.
Fig. 8 shows the distribution of the z-direction velocity in the xoy
plane at different altitudes. Fig. 8a shows that there are four symme-
trical circular high-speed regions directly below the rotor. As men-
tioned above, the peak velocity in the z-direction was distributed in the
8
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343
range of 3/4r–R in the rotor. The reason is that the rotor in this part has
the largest contact area with the downwash airflow. As the downwash
airflow approaches the ground, the z-direction velocity in the high-
speed circular area gradually decreases, but its coverage area increases.
Combining Table 2 with Fig. 8, the coverage area of the z-direction
velocity at 0.2 m is less than that at 0.5 m, as indicated in Fig. 8. The
reason is that the upwash velocity is larger than the downwash velocity,
which leads to upward flow in this part. The research shows that the
velocity in the Z direction has a great influence on the spray effect,
especially the penetration of droplets, and has a certain inhibition effect
on the drift of droplets; i.e., the stronger the wind field in the Z di-
rection, the smaller the drift of droplets (Yang et al., 2017b; Tang et al.,
2018; Hou et al., 2019). As shown in Fig. 8, the distance below the rotor
is inversely proportional to its wind speed. Fig. 8a, b and c show that
the wind field from 0.5 to 1.5 m below the rotors still has a large
downwash speed in the Z direction. According to the experimental re-
sults of Tang et al., 2018, it is considered that agricultural UAV can
achieve optimal droplet deposition at an operational height of 1.2 m.
Therefore, it is suggested that the ideal spray distance range below the
rotors of the agricultural UAV should be 0.5–1.2 m.
From the above description, it is known that the larger velocity
region is mainly distributed under the rotor. To understand the velocity
variation of the downwash airflow in more detail, Fig. 9 shows a cloud
diagram of the x-, y- and z-direction velocities under the rotor along
the x and y axes, where the positive and negative directions of the
velocity direction refer to the positive and negative directions of the
coordinate axis, respectively. By comparing the velocities in different
directions at the same height, it is verified that the z-direction velocity
plays a dominant role in the downwash airflow. Fig. 9a and c show the
Q. Guo, et al. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343

Fig. 10. The pressure distribution. (a) The xoz (y = 0.5 m) plane. (b) The xoy (z = −2.95 m, 0.25 m from the ground) plane. (c) The xoy (z = −2.70 m, 0.5 m from
the ground) plane. (d) The xoy (z = −2.45 m, 0.75 m from the ground) plane.

Table 3
Experimental measurements and simulation values of the z-direction velocity for the marked point.
Zone Value Measurement height (m)

2.5 2.25 2 1.75 1.5 1.25 1 0.75 0.5

Undue rotor1 qs −7.21 −6.93 −6.76 −6.43 −5.89 −5.40 −5.08 −4.73 −4.60
qt −6.91 −6.70 −6.34 −6.10 −5.44 −5.04 −4.68 −4.18 −3.71
e 4.34 3.84 10.1 5.46 8.26 7.14 8.55 13.16 23.95
Airflow inlet zone1 qs −0.43 −1.00 −1.14 −1.50 −2.24 −2.44 −2.50 −2.52 −2.41
qt – −0.94 −1.08 −1.41 −2.05 −2.38 −2.28 −2.19 −1.96
e – 6.38 5.55 6.18 9.12 2.33 7.66 15.26 23.06
Airflow outlet zone1 qs −0.70 −1.21 −1.21 −1.51 −1.89 −1.94 −1.90 −1.42 −1.20
qt – −1.15 −1.09 −1.41 −1.72 −1.79 −1.75 −1.24 −0.8
e – 5.22 11.01 11.1 9.88 8.38 9.71 14.52 25.0
The central zone qs −0.70 −0.72 −0.93 −0.89 −1.48 −1.69 −1.70 −1.44 −1.15
qt – – −0.86 −0.81 −1.38 −1.58 −1.85 −1.25 −0.9
e – – 12.49 6.02 7.2 5.2 8.1 14.91 23.78

variations in the x- and y-direction velocities of the downwash airflow
at different altitudes. With a decrease in height, both the x- and y-di-
rection velocities are attenuated, which indicates that the downwash
airflow is in a contracting state during the process of flowing to the
ground, and the contracting speed decreases with a decrease in height.
This is in line with the characteristics of a “continuous intersection and
superposition of airflow around the rotor center in the acceleration
process” proposed above.
Combined with Fig. 9b and d, it can be concluded that the air z-
direction velocity has two symmetrical peaks along the x- and y-di-
rections in the xoz(y = 0.5) plane and yoz(x = 0.5) plane. With a
decrease in the distance from the ground, the highest peak of the air z-

9
Q. Guo, et al.
Fig. 11. Simulated value and test value of the z-direction velocity. (a) The zone under the rotor, (b) The “airflow inlet zone”, (c) The “airflow outlet zone” (d) The
“central zone”.
direction velocity decreases gradually. Fig. 10a shows the pressure
distribution in the xoz(y = 0.5) plane. With the diffusion of the rotor
downwash flow, the pressure of the downwash airflow is smaller than
that of the atmosphere. However, in the area of −2.8 ≤ y ≤ −3.2, the
air pressure suddenly increases to 101,336 Pa. Fig. 10b, c and d show
the pressure distribution nephograms and pressure contour maps di-
rectly below the UAV rotors on the xoy section (0.25, 0.5 and 0.75 m
from the ground, respectively). The results show that the closer the
wind field is to the ground, the larger the pressure distribution area is,
and the more uniform the pressure distribution will be.
The above phenomenon can be explained by the following two as-
pects: According to Bernoulli's principle, the higher the velocity, the
lower the pressure is; in addition, after reaching the ground, the airflow
z-direction velocity changed to the y-direction velocity or the velocity
of the upwash in the plane, leading to the retention of the airflow near
the ground.
3.3. Experimental verification
The downwash distribution data were obtained by CFD simulation
and tests, and the relative error margin between the simulation and test
results was defined as follows:
|qt qs |
e=
qt
where qt is the value of the test in m/s and qs is the simulation value in
m/s.
Table 3 and Fig. 11 show the simulated value, test value and relative
error of the marked points in the zone directly under rotor1, the
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343
“airflow inlet zone1”, the “airflow outlet zone1” and the “central zone”.
As shown in Fig. 11, the test value and simulation value maintained the
same variation trend. According to Table 2, the relative error of the
simulated values is less than 10%, compared to the text value of the
marked points 1–2.5 m above ground, which is consistent with the
results of Yang et al. (2017b). As shown in Fig. 11, at the marked points
0.5 m and 0.75 m from the ground, the relative errors are 25% and 15%
respectively, the reason for these relative errors is that the influence of
the ground effect of the downwash airflow increases the possibility of
test errors, which is similar to the discussion on the causes of the ex-
perimental relative errors in the research results of Zhang et al. (2017).
In addition, the simulated values of the marked points are larger than
the test values, because some environmental factors may cause ex-
cessive momentum loss of the downwash airflow in an actual test but
are ignored in the simulation calculation. In the “airflow inlet zone”,
the “airflow outlet zone” and the “central zone”, because the airflow
flows sparsely and the value of velocity is small and fails to reach the
starting value of the sensor (0.8 m/s), there are no test values.
4. Conclusions
In this paper, the spatial and temporal distributions of the down-
wash airflow of a quad-rotor agricultural UAV in hover are studied, and
the z-direction velocity of the downwash flow is measured. The main
(12) results are as follows.
(1) The z-direction velocity of the downwash airflow directly under the
rotor increases rapidly during 0–1.5 s and tends to be stable after
3 s. The z-direction velocity of the downwash flow field in the
10
Q. Guo, et al.
“airflow inlet zone”, “airflow central zone” and “airflow outlet
zone” first increases rapidly and then decreases rapidly, and the
region is stable after 4 s. When the airflow field is stable, the
downwash flow develops to the ground in the form of a cylinder.
The downwash airflow directly under the rotor has a maximum
velocity in the z-direction.
(2) The downwash airflow develops downward in a spiral motion and
undergoes a process of “contraction and diffusion”. The z-direction
velocity accounts for the main part of the downwash airflow velo-
city, and the maximum value is close to −9 m/s. The z-direction
velocity of the downwash airflow directly under the rotor first in-
creases rapidly within 2.5–3 m from the ground. When the distance
from the ground decreases, the z-direction velocity attenuation
accelerates. The downwash airflow velocity of the airflow inlet
zone, outlet zone and central zone continues to increase between
1 m and 3 m from the ground and decreases between 0 m and 1 m
from the ground. The airflow central zone has an upper washing
velocity between 0 m and 1 m from the ground. The coverage area
of the velocity in the z-direction of the downwash airflow increases
with decreasing height. Near the ground, the coverage area de-
creases slightly due to the “ground effect”.
(3) The test value and simulation value in this paper maintain the same
variation trend. In the area directly below the rotor, the average
relative error of the test value and simulation value at each test
point 1–2.5 m away from the ground is less than 10%, the average
relative error of the test value and simulation value at the test point
0.75 m away from the ground is less than 15%, and the average
relative error of the test value and simulation value at each test
point 0.5 m away from the ground is less than 25%. The accuracy of
the numerical simulation results is verified.
(4) The distance below the rotor is inversely proportional to its wind
speed in the z-direction, and it is suggested that the ideal spray
distance range below the rotors of the ZHKU-0404-01 quad-rotor
agricultural UAV should be 0.5–1.2 m.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge support from the Project of Guangdong
Province Support Plans for Top-Notch Youth Talents, China (no.
2016TQ03N704); the Project of Guangdong Province Universities and
Colleges Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme, China (No. 2016); the Key
Project of Universities in Guangdong Province, China (no.
2017KZDXM047); the Rural Revitalization Strategy Project of
Guangdong Province, China (no. 2019KJ138); the Postdoctoral Science
Foundation (No. 2018M643358); the Planned Science and Technology
Project of Guangdong Province, China (nos. 2019A050510045 and
2019B020216001); the Planned Science and Technology Project of
Guangzhou, China (no. 201904010206); and the Key Laboratory of
Spectroscopy Sensing, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, P.R.
China (No. 2018ZJUGP001).
References
Agarwal, R., Deese, J., 1987. Euler calculations for flow field of a helicopter rotor in
hover. J. Aircraft. 24 (4), 231–238.
Farzaneh, D., Farhad, S., Seyed, H., 2019. UAV-based multispectral imagery for fast Citrus
Greening detection. J. Plant. Dis. Protect 126, 307–318.
He, X.K., Jane, B., Andreas, H., Jan, L., 2017. Recent development of unmanned aerial
vehicle for plant protection in East Asia. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 10 (3), 18–30.
11
Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 172 (2020) 105343
Hou, C.J., Tang, Y., Luo, S.M., et al., 2019. Optimization of control parameters of droplet
density in citrus trees using UAVs and the Taguchi method. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 12
(4), 1–9.
Hofman, V., Solseng, E., 2017, Reducing spray drift [Online]. Available: < http://hdl.
handle.net/10365//5111 > .
Jung, Y.S., You, J.Y., Kwon, O.J., 2014. Numerical investigation of prop-rotor and tail-
wing aerodynamic interference for a tilt-rotor UAV configuration. Mech. Sci. Technol.
28 (7), 2609–2617.
Kutz, B.M., Kebler, M., 2013. Experimental and numerical examination of a helicopter
hovering in ground effect. Aeronaut. J. 4 (4), 397–408.
Lan, Y.B., Chen, S.D., 2014. Current status and trends of plant protection UAV and
spraying technology in China. Int. Precis. Agric. Aviat. 1 (1), 53–59.
Li, J.Y., Zhou, Z.Y., Lan, Y.B., 2015. Distribution of canopy wind field produced by rotor
unmanned aerial vehicle pollination operation. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 31 (3),
77–86 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Li, J.Y., Lan, Y.B., Wang, J.W., et al., 2017. Distribution law of rice pollen in the wind
field of small UAV. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 10 (4), 32–40.
Li, J.Y., Shi, Y.Y., Lan, Y.B., Guo, S., 2019. Vertical distribution and vortex structure of
rotor wind field under the influence of rice canopy. Comput. Electron. Agric. 159,
140–146.
Li, Z.G., Tomas, C., 2014. Quantitative evaluation of mechanical damage to fresh fruits.
Trend. Food. Sci. Tech. 35 (2), 138–150.
Lv, M.Q., Xiao, S.P., Tang, Y., He, Y., 2019. Influence of UAV flight speed on droplet
deposition characteristics with the application of infrared thermal imaging. Int. J.
Agric. Biol. Eng. 12 (3), 10–17.
Menter, F., 1993. Zonal two equation model for aerodynamic flows. In: American Institute
of Aeronautics and Astronautics, IEEE 24th Fluid Dynamics Conference, Paper No.
1993-2906.
Mogili, U.R., Deepak, B.B.V.L., 2017. Review on application of drone systems in precision
agriculture. Proc. Comput. Sci. 133, 502–509.
Mylapore, A., Schmita, F., 2015. An experimental investigation of ground effect on a quad
tilt rotor in hover. J. Am. Copter. Soc. 60 (1), 1–14.
Qin, W.C., Qiu, B.J., Xue, X.Y., Chen, C., et al., 2016. Droplet deposition and control effect
of insecticides sprayed with an unmanned aerial vehicle against plant hoppers. Crop.
Prot. 85, 79–88.
Ricardo, P., Ricardo, M., et al., 2016. Paulo, R., Francisco, M., Water detection from
downwash-induced optical flow for a multi rotor UAV. In: Oceans IEEE.
Robert, T., Murman, E., 1985. Solution method for a hovering helicopter rotor using the
euler equations. In: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 23rd
Aerospace Sciences meeting, Paper No.1985-436.
Tang, Q., Zhang, R.R., Chen, L.P., Xu, M., et al., 2017. Droplets movement and deposition
of an eight-rotor agricultural UAV in downwash flow field. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 10
(3), 47–56.
Tang, Y., Hou, C.J., Luo, S.M., et al., 2018. Effects of operation height and tree shape on
droplet deposition in citrus trees using an unmanned aerial vehicle. Comput.
Electron. Agric. 148, 1–7.
Wang, C.L., He, X.K., Wang, X.N., Jane, B., 2016. Testing method of spatial pesticide
spraying deposition quality balance for unmanned aerial vehicle. Trans. Chin. Soc.
Agric. Eng. 32 (11), 54–61 (in Chinese with English abstract).
Wang, P., Hu, L., Zhou, Z.Y., Yang, W.S., et al., 2013. Wind field measurement for sup-
plementary pollination in hybrid rice breeding using unmanned gasoline engine
single-rotor helicopter. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Eng. 29 (3), 54–61 (in Chinese with
English abstract).
Yang, S.L., Yang, X.B., Mo, J.Y., 2017a. The application of unmanned aircraft systems to
plant protection in China. Prec. Agric. 19 (2), 278–292.
Yang, F.B., Xue, X.Y., Zhang, L., Sun, Z., et al., 2017b. Numerical simulation and ex-
perimental verification on downwash air flow of six-rotor agricultural unmanned
aerial vehicle in hover. Int. Agric. Biol. Eng. 10 (4), 41–53.
Yang, F.B., Xue, X.Y., Cai, C., et al., 2018a. Numerical simulation and analysis on spray
drift movement of multirotor plant protection unmanned aerial vehicle. Energies. 11
(9), 1–20.
Yang, Z., Qi, L., Wu, Y., 2018. Influence of UAV down-wash airflow for droplet pene-
tration. In: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, ASABE Annual
Internation Meeting, Paper No.1800254.
Yang, S.H., Liu, X.X., Chen, B.T., Li S.X., Zheng Y.J., 2019. CFD models and verification of
the downwash airflow of an eight-rotor UAV. In: American Society of Agricultural
and Biological Engineers, ASABE Annual Internation Meeting, Paper No.1901018.
Yoon, S., Lee, H., Pulliam, T., 2016. Computational analysis of multi-rotor flows. In:
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 54th Aerospace Sciences
meeting, pp. 812–823.
Zhang, S.C., Xue, X.Y., Sun, Z., Zhou, L., et al., 2017. Downwash distribution of single-
rotor unmanned agricultural helicopter on hovering state. Int. Agric. Biol. Eng. 10
(5), 14–24.
Zheng, Y.J., Yang, S.H., Liu, X.X., Wang, J., et al., 2018. The computational fluid dynamic
modeling of downwash flow field for a six-rotor UAV. Front. Agric. Sci. Eng. 5 (2),
159–167.
Zhang, H., Qi, L.J., Wu, Y.L., Liu, W.W., et al., 2018. Research on spatio-temporal dis-
tribution of down-wash airflow for multi-rotor plant protection UAV based on porous
model. Trans. Chin. Soc. Agric. Mach. 50 (02), 112–122 (in Chinese with English
abstract).
Zhuang, J.J., Luo, S.M., Hou, C.J., Tang, Y., He, Y., Xue, X.Y., 2018. Detection of orchard
citrus fruits using a monocular machine vision-based method for automatic fruit
picking applications. Comput. Electron. Agric. 152, 64–73.