The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Computational Fluid Dynamic Study of Hawkmoth Hovering
Open accessAbstract
A computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modelling approach is used to study the unsteady aerodynamics of the flapping wing of a hovering hawkmoth. We use the geometry of a Manduca sexta-based robotic wing to define the shape of a three-dimensional ‘virtual’ wing model and ‘hover’ this wing, mimicking accurately the three-dimensional movements of the wing of a hovering hawkmoth. Our CFD analysis has established an overall understanding of the viscous and unsteady flow around the flapping wing and of the time course of instantaneous force production, which reveals that hovering flight is dominated by the unsteady aerodynamics of both the instantaneous dynamics and also the past history of the wing. A coherent leading-edge vortex with axial flow was detected during translational motions of both the up- and downstrokes. The attached leading-edge vortex causes a negative pressure region and, hence, is responsible for enhancing lift production. The axial flow, which is derived from the spanwise pressure gradient, stabilises the vortex and gives it a characteristic spiral conical shape. The leading-edge vortex created during previous translational motion remains attached during the rotational motions of pronation and supination. This vortex, however, is substantially deformed due to coupling between the translational and rotational motions, develops into a complex structure, and is eventually shed before the subsequent translational motion. Estimation of the forces during one complete flapping cycle shows that lift is produced mainly during the downstroke and the latter half of the upstroke, with little force generated during pronation and supination. The stroke plane angle that satisfies the horizontal force balance of hovering is 23.6°, which shows excellent agreement with observed angles of approximately 20–25°. The time-averaged vertical force is 40% greater than that needed to support the weight of the hawkmoth.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Classifications, applications, and design challenges of drones: A review
Hassanalian, M., & Abdelkefi, A. (2017) · Progress in Aerospace Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.paerosci.2017.04.003 · Cited by 1,454
Wake topology and hydrodynamic performance of low-aspect-ratio flapping foils
DONG, H., MITTAL, R., & NAJJAR, F. M. (2006) · Journal of Fluid Mechanics · doi:10.1017/s002211200600190x · Cited by 429
The aerodynamics of revolving wings I. Model hawkmoth wings
Usherwood, J. R., & Ellington, C. P. (2002) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.205.11.1547 · Cited by 398
Self-citationWhen vortices stick: an aerodynamic transition in tiny insect flight
Miller, L. A., & Peskin, C. S. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.01138 · Cited by 169
Metadata
- Authors
- Liu, H., Ellington, C. P., Kawachi, K., Van Den Berg, C., & Willmott, A. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Biology
- Publisher
- The Company of Biologists
- Published
- 1998-02-15
- Volume
- 201
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 461-477
- ISSN
- 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9145
- OpenAlex
- W2144693117
- Cited by
- 471
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 28.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Computational Fluid Dynamic Study of Hawkmoth Hovering. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1242/jeb.201.4.461
- The paper
- Liu, H., Ellington, C. P., Kawachi, K., Van Den Berg, C., & Willmott, A. P. (1998). A Computational Fluid Dynamic Study of Hawkmoth Hovering. Journal of Experimental Biology. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.201.4.461
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.