Advertisement

pp 1-17 | Cite as

An Overview of Insect Residue Accretion and Mitigation Strategies on Aerodynamic Surfaces

  • J. G. SmithJr.Email author
  • R. Robison
  • E. Loth
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Polymer Science book series

Abstract

Research in the utilization of laminar flow technologies on aircraft to improve fuel efficiency (and hence be more environmentally friendly) has been ongoing since the conclusion of World War II. A persistent issue with regard to the maintenance of laminar flow, however, is insect residue accretion. The residues are recurrent, distributed randomly across the surface, and have the potential to exceed heights that can result in a premature transition to turbulent flow. Numerous approaches have been explored over the decades, with success being seen in a research setting. In general, implementation of these approaches in the commercial sector has not been realized. These approaches are briefly discussed herein, along with a general description of the relevant insect characteristics and a discussion of why the reduction of insect accretion on aircraft is such a challenging problem.

Keywords

Insect Laminar flow Mitigation Physiology 

Abbreviations

AEROMUCO

AEROdynamic Surfaces by advanced MUltifunctional Coatings

HLFC

Hybrid laminar flow control

LEFT

Leading edge flight test

LF

Laminar flow

NLF

Natural laminar flow

WWII

World War II

References

  1. 1.
    US Energy Information Administration (2017) U.S. Gulf Coast kerosene-type jet fuel spot price FOB, US$ per gallon. http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=jet-fuel. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  2. 2.
    Industrial Equipment News (2017) Lower fuel costs improving airlines profits. http://www.ien.com/operations/news/20852560/lower-fuel-costs-improving-airlines-profits. Accessed 18 Feb 2017
  3. 3.
    Joslin R (1998) Overview of laminar flow control. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA/TP-1998-208705Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Joslin R (1998) Aircraft laminar flow control. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 30:1–29Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kirchner ME (1987) Laminar flow: challenge and potential. In: Hefner JF, Sabo FE (Compilers) Research in natural laminar flow and laminar-flow control part 1. NASA CP-2487, pp 25–45Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boeing (2017) 787 Dreamliner by design: superior technology. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787/by-design/#/superior-tech. Accessed 20 June 2017
  7. 7.
    Boeing (2017) 737 Max at winglet. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max/737-max-winglets/. Accessed 20 June 2017
  8. 8.
    Boeing (2013) Welcome to the family: meet the 787-9. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/787/frontiers-787-9-october-2013/. Accessed 20 June 2017
  9. 9.
    Wagner RD, Fischer MC (1983) Developments in the NASA transport aircraft laminar flow program. AIAA 1983-90 presented at AlAA 21st aerospace sciences meeting, Reno, 10–13 Jan 1983Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maddalon DV, Fisher DF, Jennett LA, Fischer, MC (1987) Simulated airline service experience with laminar flow control leading edge systems. In: Hefner JF, Sabo FE (Compilers) Research in natural laminar flow and laminar-flow control part 1. NASA CP-2487, pp 195–218Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Runyan LJ, Bielak GW, Behbehani R, Chen AW, Rozendaal RA (1987) 757 NLF glove flight test results. In: Hefner JF, Sabo FE (Compilers) Research in natural laminar flow and laminar-flow control part 3. NASA CP-2487, pp 795–818Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    NASA media advisory 15-022 (2017) NASA, Boeing ecoDemonstrator 757 plane come to Shreveport for bug research. https://www.nasa.gov/langley/nasa-boeing-ecodemonstrator-757-plane-come-to-shreveport-for-bug-research. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  13. 13.
    Coleman WS (1961) Roughness due to insects. In: Lachman GV (ed) Boundary layer and flow control: its principles and applications, vol 2. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 682–747Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maresh JL, Bragg MB (1984) The role of airfoil geometry in minimizing the effect of insect contamination of laminar flow sections. AIAA 84-2170 presented at AIAA 2nd applied aerodynamics conference, Seattle, 21–23 Aug 1984Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Atkins PB (1951) Wing leading edge contamination by insects. Note 17Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Coleman WS (1959) The characteristics of roughness from insects as observed for two-dimensional, incompressible flow past airfoils. J Aerosp Sci 25:264–280Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin JC, Whalen EA, Eppink JL, Siochi EJ, Alexander MG, Andino MY (2016) Innovative flow control concepts for drag reduction. AIAA 2016-0864 presented at AIAA SciTech Forum, 54th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, San Diego, 4–8 Jan 2016Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wicke K, Linke F, Gollnick V, Kruse M (2016) Insect contamination impact on operational and economic effectiveness of natural laminar flow aircraft. J Aircr 53:158–167Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Glick PA (1939) The distribution of insects, spiders, and mites in the air. US Dept Agric Tech Bull No. 673Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hardy AC, Milne PS (1938) Studies in the distribution of insects by aerial currents – experiments in aerial tow-netting from kites. J Anim Ecol 7:199–229Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Freeman JA (1945) Studies in the distribution of insects by aerial currents – the insect population of the air from ground level to 300 feet. J Anim Ecol 14:128–154Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Young T, Humphreys B (2004) Liquid anti-contamination systems for hybrid laminar control flow aircraft: a review of critical issues and important experimental results. J Aerosp Eng 218:267–277Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lachman GV (1960) Aspects of insect contamination in relation to laminar flow aircraft. A.R. C. Technical Report C.P. No. 484Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kok M, Smith Jr JG, Wohl CJ, Siochi EJ, Young TM (2015) Critical considerations in the mitigation of insect residue contamination on aircraft surfaces – a review. Prog Aerosp Sci 75:1–14Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Meyer JR (2013) General entomology. North Carolina State University http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent425/index.html. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  26. 26.
    Wyatt GR, Pan ML (1978) Insect plasma proteins. Annu Rev Biochem 47:779–817Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wyatt GR, Loughheed TC, Wyatt SS (1956) The chemistry of insect hemolymph-organic components of the hemolymph of the silkworm, Bombyx Mori, and two other species. J Gen Physiol 39:853–868Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wyatt GR, Kalf GF (1957) The chemistry of insect hemolymph II. Trehalose and other carbohydrates. J Gen Physiol 40:833–847Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nation JL (2001) Insect physiology and biochemistry. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Theopold U, Schmidt O, Soderhall K, Dushay MS (2004) Coagulation in arthropods: defense, wound closure and healing – review. Trends Immunol 25:289–294Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Evans PD, Wigglesworth VB (1990) Advances in insect physiology, vol 22. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Scherfer C, Karlsson C, Loseva O, Bidla G, Goto A, Havemann J, Dushay M, Theopold U (2004) Isolation and characterization of hemolymph clotting factors in Drosophila Melanogaster by a pullout method. Curr Biol 14:625–629Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    De Gregorio E, Han SJ, Lee WJ, Baek MJ, Osaki T, Kawabata SI, Lee BL, Iwanaga S, Lemaitre B, Brey PT (2002) An immune responsive serpin regulates the melanization cascade in Drosophila. Dev Cell 3:581–592Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sugumaran M, Duggaraju R, Generozova F, Ito S (1999) Insect melanogenesis. 11. Inability of Manduca phenoloxidase to act on 5,6-dihydroxyindole-2-carboxylic acid. Pigment Cell Res 12:118–125Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sugumaran M, Nellaiappan K (2000) Characterization of a new phenoloxidase inhibitor from the cuticle of Manduca Sexta. Biochem Bioph Res Commun 268:379–383Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Duckworth HW, Coleman JE (1970) Physicochemical and kinetic properties of mushroom tyrosinase. J Biol Chem 245:1613–1625Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nappi AJ, Ottaviani E (2000) Cytotoxicity and cytotoxic molecules in invertebrates. BioEssays 22:469–480Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cerenius L, Soderhall K (2004) The prophenoloxidase-activating systems in invertebrates. Immunol Rev 198:116–126Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gregoire CH (1953) Blood coagulation in arthropods. 111. Reactions of insect hemolymph to coagulation inhibitors of vertebrate blood. Biol Bull 104:372–393Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mandato CA, Diehl-Jones WL, Downer RGH (1996) Insect hemocyte adhesion in vitro – inhibition by apoliphorin I and an artificial substrate. J Insect Physiol 42:143–148Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Theopold U, Li D, Fabbri M, Scherfer C, Schmidt O (2002) The coagulation of insect hemolymph. Cell Mol Life Sci 59:363–372Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sugumaran M (2002) Comparative biochemistry of eumelanogenesis and the protective roles of phenoloxidase and melanin in insects. Pigment Cell Res 15:2–9Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dushay MS (2009) Insect hemolymph clotting. Cell Mol Life Sci 66:2643–2650Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Krishnan K, Milionis A, Tetteh F, Starr M, Loth E (2015) Fruit fly impact outcomes and residue components on an aerodynamic surface. AIAA 2015-1279 presented at AIAA SciTech, 53rd AIAA aerospace sciences meeting, Kissimmee, 5–9 Jan 2015Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Krishnan K, Robison R, Tetteh E, Loth E, Farrell T, Crouch J, Berry D (2016) Characterization of insect residue on an aerodynamic leading edge. AIAA 2016-3445 presented at AIAA AVIATION Forum, 8th AIAA atmospheric and space environments conference, Washington, 13–17 June 2016Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Peterson JB Jr, Fisher DF (1978) Flight investigation of insect contamination and its alleviation. In: Proceedings of the CTOL transport technology conference, Hampton, NASA CP 2036, Part I, 28 Feb–3 Mar 1978, pp 357–373Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fisher DF, Peterson JB Jr (1978) Flight experience on the need and use of inflight leading edge washing for a laminar flow airfoil. AIAA 1978-1512 presented at AIAA aircraft systems and technology meeting, Los Angeles, 21–23 Aug 1978Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Smith F, Higton DJ (1950) Flight tests on king cobra FZ440 to investigate the practical requirements for the achievement of low profile drag coefficients on a low drag aerofoil. R&M No. 2375, HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gray WE, Davies H (1952) Note on the maintenance of laminar flow wings. R&M 2485. British Aeronautical Research Council (ARC)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Groth EE, Carmichael BH, Whites RC, Pfenninger W (1957) Low drag boundary layer suction experiments in flight on the wing glove of a F94-A airplane – Phase II: suction through 69 slots. NAI-57-318 (BLC-94) (Contract AF-33(616-3108)). Northrop AircraftGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Head MR, Johnson D, Coxon M (1955) Flight experiments on boundary-layer control for low drag. R. & M. No. 3025. British ARCGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Beech G, Nicholas WM (1953) A mechanical type of scraper for dealing with insect contamination of aircraft wings. Armstrong Whitworth Report No WT 53/18Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Anon (1953) Note on the Blackburn and general aircraft wind-tunnel tests of the A.W.A. fly scrapper. Report to the Boundary Layer Control Committee, B.L.C.C. Paper No. B 0142, MOS, LondonGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    DG Group (2017) A bug cleaner with “garage”. http://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/en/library/a-bug-cleaner. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  55. 55.
    Coleman WS (1952) Wind tunnel experiments on the prevention of insect contamination by means of soluble films and by liquids discharged over the surface. Report to the Boundary Layer Control Committee, BLCC Note 39. MOS, LondonGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Croom CC, Holmes BJ (1986) Insect contamination protection for laminar flow surfaces. In: Langley symposium on aerodynamics, vol 1, pp 539–556Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Croom CC, Holmes BJ (1985) Flight evaluation of an insect contamination protection for laminar flow wings. SAE Paper 850860 presented at the general aviation aircraft meeting and exposition, Wichita, 16–19 Apr 1985Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    O’Donoghue D, Young TM, Pembroke JT, O'Dwyer TF (2002) An investigation of surfactant and enzyme formulations for the alleviation of insect contamination on hybrid laminar flow control (HLFC) surfaces. Aerosp Sci Technol 6:19–29Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Coleman WS (1952) Development of a mechanical device for the protection of wings against insect contamination. Report to the Boundary Layer Control Committee, BLCC Note 34. MOS, London; Blackburn and General Aircraft Ltd. Note WT 128Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Tamigniaux TLB, Stark SE, Brune GW (1987) An experimental investigation of the insect shielding effectiveness of a Kreuger flap/wing airfoil configuration. AIAA 1987-2615 presented at 5th applied aerodynamics conference, fluid dynamics and co-located conferences, Monterey, 17–19 Aug 1987Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Pearce WE (1982) Evaluation of laminar flow control systems concepts for subsonic commercial transport aircraft. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA CR 159252Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Backgrounder: the Boeing ecodemonstrator Dent Prog (2017) http://www.boeing.com/resources/boeingdotcom/principles/environment/pdf/Backgrounder_ecoDemonstrator.PDF. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  63. 63.
    Eiss NS, Wightman JP (1983) A fundamental approach to the sticking of insect residues to aircraft wings: semi-annual technical report. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA CR 173063Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Eiss NS, Wightman JP, Gilliam DR, Siochi EJ (1984) A fundamental approach to the sticking of insect residues to aircraft wings: annual technical report. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA CR 173721Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Eiss NS, Wightman JP, Gilliam DR, Siochi EJ (1985) A fundamental study of the sticking of insect residue to aircraft wings. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA CR 176231Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Siochi EJ, Eiss NS, Gilliam DR, Wightman JP (1987) A fundamental study of the sticking of insect residues to aircraft wings. J Colloid Interface Sci 115:346–356Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Barnstorff K (2017) NASA tests green aviation technology on Boeing ecodemonstrator. https://www.nasa.gov/aero/nasa-tests-green-aviation-technology-on-boeing-ecodemonstrator.html. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  68. 68.
    Smith J, Lorenzi T, Wohl C, Penner R, Siochi E (2012) Influence of surface energy on insect residue adhesion. Paper presented at the 35th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, New Orleans, 26–29 Feb 2012Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wohl CJ, Smith JG, Penner RK, Gardner JM, Connell JW, Siochi EJ (2013) Polyimide-based nanocomposite coatings for contamination mitigation of aircraft surfaces. Paper presented at the 36th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, Daytona Beach, 3–6 Mar 2013Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Wohl CJ, Smith JG, Gardner JM, Penner RK, Connell JW, Siochi EJ (2014) Novel epoxy particulate composites for mitigation of insect residue adhesion on wing leading edge surfaces. Paper presented at the 37th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, San Diego, 23–26 Feb 2014Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Shanahan MH, Wohl CJ, Smith JG Jr, Doss JR, Penner RK, Gardner JM, Connell JW, Siochi EJ (2015) Flight testing surfaces engineered for mitigating insect adhesion on a Falcon HU-25C. Paper presented at the 38th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, Savannah, 20–25 Feb 2015Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Wohl CJ, Doss JR, Shanahan MH, Smith JG Jr, Penner RK, Connell JW, Siochi EJ (2015) Influence of surface properties and impact conditions on adhesion of insect residues. Paper presented at the 38th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, Savannah, 20–25 Feb 2015Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Wohl CJ, Smith JG Jr, Palmieri FL, Shanahan MH, Penner RK, Connell JW, Siochi EJ (2017) Fruit fly impact dynamics on fluorinated epoxy composite surfaces. Paper presented at the 40th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, St. Petersburg, FL, 26 Feb–1 Mar 2017Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Bayer IS, Krishnan KG, Robinson R, Loth E, Berry DH, Farrell TE, Crouch JD (2016) Thermal alternating polymer nanocomposite (TAPNC) coating designed to prevent aerodynamic insect fouling. Sci Rep 6:38459.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    AEROdynamic Surfaces by advanced MUltifunctional Coatings (AEROMUCO) (2017) http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/96952_en.html. Accessed 20 Mar 2017
  76. 76.
    Young TM, Tobin EF, Kok M (2012) Laboratory testing of insect contamination for laminar flow applications using an insect-impact test facility. Paper presented at the 28th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, Brisbane, 23–28 Sept 2012Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Kok M, Tobin EF, Zikmund P, Raps D, Young TM (2014) Laboratory testing of insect contamination with application to laminar flow technologies, part 1: variables affecting insect impact dynamics. Aerosp Sci Technol 39:605–613Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Kok M, Raps D, Young TM (2013) Effects of surface roughness and energy on insect residue adhesion to aircraft leading edge surfaces. Paper presented at the 36th annual meeting of the Adhesion Society, Daytona Beach, 3–6 Mar 2013Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Kok M, Mertens T, Raps D, Young TM (2013) Influence of surface characteristics on insect residue adhesion to aircraft leading edge surfaces. Prog Org Coat 76:1567–1575Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Berton B, Courty JC, Kok M, Tobin E, Young TM (2014) Evaluation of functional coatings for laminar flow applications on future business jets through ground and flight testing. AIAA 2014-2578 presented at the AIAA aviation, AIAA flight testing conference, Atlanta, 16–20 June 2014Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kok M, Young TM (2014) Evaluation of insect residue resistant coatings – correlation of a screening method with a conventional assessment technique. Prog Org Coat 77:1382–1390Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Wortmann FX (1974) A method for avoiding insect roughness on aircraft (installation of highly elastic rubber coverings on leading edges), National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA TT-F 15454. (this was a translation of “Eine moglichkeitzur vermeidung der insect tenrauhigkeit an flugzeugen”, 1963). Luftfahrttechnik Raumfahrttechnik 9:272–274Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Yi O, Eiss NS, Wightman JP (1988) Investigation of factors affecting the sticking of insects on aircraft wing surfaces, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA CR 183041Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.NASA Langley Research CenterHamptonUSA
  2. 2.Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations