Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:51:17.803Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

To flap or not to flap: comparison between flapping and clapping propulsions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2017

Nathan Martin Open the ORCID record for Nathan Martin [Opens in a new window] ,
Chris Roh ,
Suhail Idrees  and
Morteza Gharib Open the ORCID record for Morteza Gharib [Opens in a new window]
Nathan Martin
Affiliation:
Division of Engineering and Applied Science, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
Chris Roh
Affiliation:
Division of Engineering and Applied Science, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
Suhail Idrees
Affiliation:
Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK
Morteza Gharib*
Affiliation:
Division of Engineering and Applied Science, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A comparison between swimming by flapping and by periodic contractions is conducted. Swimming by flapping is approximated as a pitching plate while swimming by periodic contractions is approximated as clapping plates. A direct comparison is made between the two propulsion mechanisms by utilizing a machine that can operate in either a flapping or a clapping mode between Reynolds numbers of 1880 and 11 260 based on the average plate tip velocity and span. The average thrust generated and the average input power required per cycle are compared between cases where the total sweep angle and the total sweep time are identical. Variation of the kinematics results in a similar thrust between the two mechanisms, but a greater power is required for clapping. Variation of the flexibility results in a consistent decrease in the required power for clapping and a decrease in thrust at high flexibility. Variation of the duty cycle for clapping rigid plates results in a significant increase in thrust and a significant decrease in the required power. Overall, the results suggest that flapping propulsion is the more effective propulsion mechanism within the range of Reynolds numbers tested.

JFM classification

Biological Fluid Dynamics: Biological Fluid Dynamics Biological Fluid Dynamics: Propulsion Biological Fluid Dynamics: Swimming/flying
Type
Rapids
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 822 , 10 July 2017 , R5
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2017 Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bainbridge, R. 1958 The speed of swimming of fish as related to size and to the frequency and amplitude of the tail beat. J. Expl Biol. 35 (1), 109–133.Google Scholar
Colin, S. P., Costello, J. H., Katija, K., Seymour, J. & Kiefer, K. 2013 Propulsion in cubomedusae: mechanisms and utility. PloS One 8 (2), e56393.Google Scholar
Colin, S. P., Costello, J. H. & Kordula, H. 2006 Upstream foraging by medusae. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 327, 143–155.Google Scholar
Dai, H., Luo, H., Ferreira de Sousa, P. J. S. A. & Doyle, J. F. 2012 Thrust performance of a flexible low-aspect-ratio pitching plate. Phys. Fluids 24 (10), 101903.Google Scholar
Gershwin, L.-A. & Collins, A. G. 2002 A preliminary phylogeny of pelagiidae (cnidaria, scyphozoa), with new observations of chrysaora colorata comb. nov. J. Nat. Hist. 36 (2), 127–148.Google Scholar
Graham, W. M. & Kroutil, R. M. 2001 Size-based prey selectivity and dietary shifts in the jellyfish, aurelia aurita . J. Plankton Res. 23 (1), 67–74.Google Scholar
Hunter, J. R. & Zweifel, J. R. 1971 Swimming speed, tail beat frequency, tail beat amplitude, and size in jack mackerel, trachurus-symmetricus, and other fishes. Fish Bull 69 (2), 253–266.Google Scholar
Kim, D., Hussain, F. & Gharib, M. 2013 Vortex dynamics of clapping plates. J. Fluid Mech. 714, 5–23.Google Scholar
Koochesfahani, M. M. 1989 Vortical patterns in the wake of an oscillating airfoil. AIAA J. 27 (9), 1200–1205.Google Scholar
Morandini, A. C., Da Silveira, F. L. & Jarms, G. 2004 The life cycle of chrysaora lactea eschscholtz, 1829 (cnidaria, scyphozoa) with notes on the scyphistoma stage of three other species. Hydrobiologia 530 (1–3), 347–354.Google Scholar
Sambilay, V. C. Jr. 1990 Interrelationships between swimming speed, caudal fin aspect ratio and body length of fishes. Fishbyte 8 (3), 16–20.Google Scholar
Sane, S. P. 2003 The aerodynamics of insect flight. J. Expl Biol. 206 (23), 4191–4208.Google Scholar
Weis-Fogh, T. 1973 Quick estimates of flight fitness in hovering animals, including novel mechanisms for lift production. J. Expl Biol. 59 (1), 169–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willert, C. E. & Gharib, M. 1991 Digital particle image velocimetry. Exp. Fluids 10 (4), 181–193.Google Scholar
Wu, J. C. 1981 Theory for aerodynamic force and moment in viscous flows. AIAA J. 19 (4), 432–441.Google Scholar
Yeh, P. D. & Alexeev, A. 2016 Effect of aspect ratio in free-swimming plunging flexible plates. Comput. Fluids 124, 220–225.Google Scholar