Overview of Micro Air Vehicle System Design

and Integration Issues

Robert C. Michelson
Georgia Tech Research Institute, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA

from predominantly birds as reflected in the morphology of

1 Introduction 1 their creations. The problems of scaling biologically inspired
2 Concept Genesis 1 designs up to human-carrying proportions were not appreci-
ated, and practically all failed principally due to the lack of
3 The Quest for a Useful MAV 2
an adequate propulsion system as exemplified by DaVinci’s
4 MAV Design Philosophies 3 man-powered flapping-wing machine.
5 MAV Design Considerations 4 More recently, attempts to move in the direction of tiny
Acknowledgments 11 flying machines that match the scale of birds and even the
Nomenclature 11 smaller insects have come into vogue. The nature of flight at
References 12 these scales is perhaps better understood by today’s design-
ers than it was by those of DaVinci’s time, but beyond the
first-order appreciation for Reynolds number differences, the
realm of miniature flight vehicles is still an unplumbed depth,
1 INTRODUCTION with only a handful of researchers working consistently in
the area. Couple this with the difficulty of storing useful
“No other air vehicle design space has presented the mix of amounts of energy in light-weight packages at these small
challenges as that of miniature flight platforms. By definition scales, and we end up with few practical designs and noth-
these tiny platforms are unmanned and endeavor to invade ing that comes close to the endurance and performance of its
the flight regime of birds and insects. In order to do so, the biological counterpart (Michelson, 2004).
creators of these aerial robots must address the same physical
design constraints which have already been mastered by the 2 CONCEPT GENESIS
world of airborne biology, including low Reynolds number
aerodynamics, high energy density, and extreme miniaturiza- Interest in tiny flying machines had its origins with the notion
tion” (Michelson, 2004). that a small insect-like flying platform could be devised
Mankind is fascinated by flight and from the earliest for covert operations. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency
times, birds and insects have been the models by which flight (CIA) experimented with the creation of a remotely con-
has been studied. Renaissance designers of notional aircraft, trolled pneumatic “dragon fly”. A RAND Corporation study
such as Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci, adopted inspiration conducted in 1993 discussed the potential use of sensor-
carrying insects and the concept of truly “micro” air vehicles
(Hundley and Gritton, 1994). Japanese researchers attempted
to stimulate motorneurones in cockroaches to control the
insect trajectory by a radio-link (BBCi Sci/Tech, 1998).

Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
 2 Micro Air Vehicles
Figure 1. MIT Lincoln Labs MAV concept model. Reproduced
with permission from Michelson and Neqvi (2003) 
c The v́on
Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics.
People also began testing tiny airplanes powered by biolog-
ical motors (flies glued to a fuselage with fixed wings), a
practice that was actually a subject of experimentation at the
turn of the twentieth century by Nikola Tesla (Cheney, 1981).
During the early 1990s, MIT Lincoln Labs conceived
of a small airplane (see Figure 1) that could carry a tiny
electro-optical reconnaissance system. Based on aerody-
namic principals alone, this notional platform design was
unlikely ever to fly; however, it did serve as a catalyst for
serious discussions within the US government as to the roles
and missions for a micro air vehicle. At roughly the same
time, a picture of what was touted as the world’s smallest
helicopter appeared in the media. Although this ultimately
turned out not to be a free-flight vehicle (instead, a demon-
stration of externally powered subminiature electric motors
turning small twisted paper propellers to cause a “fuselage”
to rise up along a guide wire), it did bolster interest in the
notion of a “micro” air vehicle.
“Micro Air Vehicle (MAV) is a most unfortunate name
given to this class of air vehicles because none are
truly “micro” and the original (ca. 1995) official Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) vehicle def-
inition requiring a maximum 15 cm (6 inch) dimension con-
firmed the name to be a total misnomer” (Michelson, 2006).
Around 1995 DARPA gathered the perceived micro air
vehicle technology leaders together for a workshop that
would ultimately lead to the creation of a $35M DARPA
program to develop MAV technologies and several MAV
systems. Questions addressed by the original stakehold-
ers (which included MIT Lincoln Labs, the Georgia Tech
Research Institute, Sarcos Labs, and the US Naval Research
Laboratory) ranged from mission definitions, likely platform
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
technologies, performance issues, and the very definition of
a “micro” air vehicle itself. Ultimately a micro air vehi-
cle would be defined as “being less than 15 cm” because
this represented the juncture at which low Reynolds num-
ber effects begin to dominate, and beyond which, integration
of energy, propulsion, aerodynamic structures, and intelli-
gence is a necessity (Michelson, 2004). This loose definition
begged the question as to whether a MAV must fit within a
15 cm sphere, a 15 cm diameter cylinder, or a cube having
15 cm sides – the latter two interpretations allowing for diag-
onal dimensions greater than 15 cm. Also, could a MAV have
moving parts (propellers or rotors) that when manually posi-
tioned were within the 15 cm limit, but once deployed could
violate the defined volume?
Back in 1997, DARPA’s vision for MAVs was that the
individual soldiers at the platoon, company, or brigade level
would use such vehicles for reconnaissance and surveillance,
battle damage assessment, targeting, emplacing sensors,
communications relays, or for sensing chemical, nuclear,
or biological substances. The 15 cm vehicles would be able
to conduct real-time imaging, have ranges of up to 10 km
and speeds of up to 30 miles per hour for missions that are
20 minutes to two hours long (US DoD, 1997).
3 THE QUEST FOR A USEFUL MAV
Thus, the DARPA vision was for a predominantly outdoor
asset. However, the same forces of nature that discourage
insect and bird flight during thunder storms are also at play
when considering MAV flight. Several cogent questions arise
when designing a MAV system. Since military applications
have dominated DARPA thinking and that of the various
agencies now funding MAV developments around the world,
is it tactically practical to expect soldiers to wait until the wind
stops blowing before they can employ their MAV? Also, does
size really matter in the “look-over-the-hill” scenario?
For example, consider this last question, as it was one of
the most touted mission scenarios used to justify MAV devel-
opment. Because not all technologies are scalable, limitations
will be placed on MAV operations, which seriously impact
both navigation and communication.
“A 15 cm MAV can only support a maximum antenna aper-
ture of 15 cm (using the spherical size definition). Depending
upon antenna type, this dictates a frequency of operation in
the 2 GHz range. At this frequency, foliage penetration is
difficult and line-of-sight transmissions are necessary. Were
a soldier to send his MAV only 1 km ahead of his current
position to look over a 30 m (98 ft) hill that is 60 m (196 ft)
away, it would have to attain an altitude in excess of 500 m
(1640 ft) above the target area in order to avoid occlusion
 Overview of Micro Air Vehicle System Designand Integration Issues 3
by the hill while maintaining line-of-sight with the soldier’s
ground control station” (Michelson, 2004).
At altitudes in excess of 33 m (100 ft) the MAV would be
neither seen nor heard . . . but neither would a larger air vehi-
cle of perhaps ten times the size. This has been demonstrated
during the Iraq war by existing “mini drones” that are much
larger than the classical MAV. The difficulty in flying at the
15 cm scale with marginal performance and endurance while
negotiating weather, when vehicles of superior capability to
address most missions are already fielded assets, raises the
question, “why MAVs?” There is a strong case for the devel-
opment of MAVs, however. The mission space for which
size really does matter is “indoors and in confined spaces”
where the environment is controlled or at least protected.
After two decades of serious unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)
development and more than a decade of funding for MAV
projects, no assets yet exist that can rapidly and covertly pen-
etrate buildings, tunnels/caves, bunkers, and other enclosures.
MAVs offer the potential to enter enclosures by non-obvious
means (upper story openings), and navigate their interiors
more effectively (e.g., circumventing obstacles such as stairs
and ground objects) and while doing so more rapidly than
ground robots. MAVs “present a new paradigm in reconnais-
sance where close-in interaction is encouraged rather than a
stand-off capability. Key to this behavior is small size, slow
flight, and the ability to navigate without GPS” (Michelson,
2006).
In order for practical MAVs to be created for either indoor
or outdoor applications, they must first be able to fly, be con-
trollable, and have a useful endurance. Key to the ability to fly
is an efficient aerodynamic structure with a sufficiently high
lift-to-drag ratio that it can support the weight of its struc-
ture in flight. Weight and strength of materials are essential
elements to the creation of any flying vehicle; however, at a
scale of 15 cm or less, the area of the aerodynamic surfaces
is limited and the gross weight that can be sustained in flight
quickly becomes less dependent on aerodynamic efficiency
than on propulsive power. Propulsive power for a useful mis-
sion endurance is then a function of the energy density of the
fuel carried.
Being able to lift the weight of the MAV structure in addi-
tion to its fuel is but half of the problem in developing a
useful mission-capable system. The air vehicle must also be
controllable, either by an operator or through its own auton-
omy. Controllability is comprised of both “inner loop control”
(that is, maintaining a self-stable attitude in the presence of
external forces such as wind gusts), and “outer loop control”
(the ability to change direction, altitude, and speed). Most
research to date has focused on aerodynamics and flexible
structures, with propulsion (energy) and controllability (actu-
ation) receiving far less attention. In fact, energy storage and
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
actuation techniques are essential to useful MAV designs, as
they dictate endurance and mission utility.
4 MAV DESIGN PHILOSOPHIES
It is logical and expected that the first MAVs would be
designed as scaled-down manned aircraft, since that is
the most familiar design space. Fixed-wing MAVs and
rotary-wing MAVs are naturally modeled after conventional
airplanes and helicopters. Closer investigation reveals that
one can not simply scale down large designs to the 15 cm
scale and below, because the interaction of objects moving
through air changes as the size of the objects diminish. Classi-
cal aerodynamics used to design airfoils in manned airplanes
and helicopters no longer applies as the scale of the airfoil
approaches that of small birds and insects because of the
reduction in Reynolds number which describes the behavior
of the air as seemingly much more viscous. Reynolds number
(Re) is a dimensionless number that relates inertial forces of
an object such as an airfoil, to viscous forces in a fluid (air).
Thinner airfoils are a typical result of designs optimized for
lower Reynolds numbers.
Since the problem of flight at these scales has already been
demonstratively proven feasible by every free-flying creature
known to man, some members from within the robotics, aero-
dynamics, and biology communities have combined ideas
to explore biologically based MAV designs, which bear lit-
tle resemblance to fixed- or rotary-wing manned aircraft
morphologies.
Biomimicry (copying biological systems) is typically inef-
fective as biological structures often serve multiple purposes,
and when taken “out of context” with the individual, may not
function as expected. A perfect copy of an insect wing in and
of itself is not necessarily going to create an efficient lifting
surface for a fixed-wing MAV. More than just the wing must
be copied – in this case, the employment (flapping) of the
wing is critical to its function.
A better engineering approach is to use “biological inspi-
ration” rather than biomimicry. Using biological inspiration,
the designer looks at biological structures in terms of their
function, and then figures out how to leverage the physical
principles involved, to create a mechanical analog that is not
an exact copy, but works with similar principles and is able to
be implemented. Implementability is essential to a valid MAV
design philosophy. At present, engineers understand how the
muscles in the Hawk Moth (Manduca sexta) cause the wing
to flap for propulsion, and how they can be phased to create
differential flapping for flight control. However, the engineers
have yet to create an actuator with the efficiency, weight, elon-
gation, and speed of the Hawk Moth muscle and are therefore
 4 Micro Air Vehicles
Figure 2. Hawk Moth (Manduca sexta), male (c Wikimedia
Commons, Shawn Hanrahan at the Texas A&M Collection in Col-
lege Station, Texas).
unable to replicate a free-flying Hawk Moth (see Figure 2)
in hardware. On the other hand, engineers have measured
and observed the kinematics of the Hawk Moth flapping-
wing (Willmott, Ellington and Thomas, 1997; Willmott and
Ellington, 1997), and coupling this knowledge with other
techniques not found in the animal kingdom, have devised
flapping MAVs that can be built using present technology
(Michelson, 2002).
5 MAV DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
In practice, fielded MAVs tend to fall into the same gen-
eral categories of subsystem weight fractions relative to the
gross takeoff weight: energy storage 50%, propulsion 20%,
airframe 20%, and payload 10%. The percentages between
airframe and propulsion may be larger or smaller relative to
one another depending on the methods used for propelling
the airframe and the level of integration between the two. For
example, an engine and propeller are less integrated with the
airframe than would be the case with a flapping-wing arrange-
ment. MAV design considerations are therefore somewhat
independent of configuration; however, since weight is so
critical to endurance (and hence practical utility), it is clear
that minimizing the weight associated with energy storage
has the most profound effect on performance. Extremely high
energy density sources become unstable and dangerous, so
initially, MAV design philosophies should embrace optimiza-
tion of all other subsystems to the greatest degree and then
concentrate on maximizing performance for a particular mis-
sion by increasing the energy density of the stored onboard
fuel source. The design space for increasing energy density is
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
greater (and therefore more flexible) than that of optimizing
other parameters such as lift, decreased drag, or strength of
materials.
5.1 Aerodynamics
MAVs operate in the low Reynolds number regime below
100 000. Characteristics such as the lift-to-drag ratio of a
flight vehicle change considerably from those of manned
aircraft upon entering the low Reynolds number regime. In
particular, flow separation and laminar–turbulent transition
can result in substantial changes in required airfoil shape in
order to maintain or enhance aerodynamic performance.
With the breakdown of classical aerodynamic analysis
methods, MAVs are often best tested empirically to gain an
understanding of their actual behavior. Many factors come
into play when trying to optimize MAV designs of all types
(fixed, rotary, and flapping) including laminar–turbulent tran-
sition, angles of attack, leading edge vortex evolution and
progression, airfoil shapes, stall margins, structural flexi-
bility, and time-dependent fluid and structural dynamics of
the MAV as a system. In addition, techniques and phe-
nomenology never considered in manned aircraft design can
be leveraged for increased flight efficiency including various
unsteady lift-enhancement mechanisms such as leading-edge
vortex control, wake capture, and clap-and-fling mechanisms.
Lightweight, low-speed MAVs are often more rigid than
larger vehicles due to the non linear scaling of the strength
of materials (consider the wing flexing of a Northrop Global
Hawk versus that of an Aerovironment WASP). In the pres-
ence of wind gusts, the wing structures are less apt to flex and
hence the entire body of the MAV undergoes “heave”. Not
only does the control of the MAV become complicated, but
the aerodynamics of the air flow over the structure can differ
radically from that expected at high Reynolds numbers.
5.2 Structures and materials
MAV structures must be strong, but moreover, lightweight.
Because the strength of materials does not scale proportion-
ately as things get smaller, we find that materials that would
be otherwise unsuitable for aircraft use at a larger scale can
become quite useful at the 15 cm MAV scale and below. For
example, aircraft parts that might be created with a fused
deposition modeling machine from ABS plastic would be
useful in creating molds for actual flight-worthy aluminum
components, but at the scale of a MAV, the fused deposition
modeling machine could create flight-ready components out
of the same ABS plastics formerly relegated only to model
 Overview of Micro Air Vehicle System Designand Integration Issues 5
making. Because these smaller structures are often stiffer at
these scales, MAVs can tend to be very rigid unless inten-
tionally made flexible as has been done with interstitial wing
materials at the University of Florida (Ifju, et al., 2001). Flex-
ible structures can also be used to eliminate actuators with
the concomitant benefit of reduced weight and power con-
sumption. For example, in flapping-wing vehicles, the wings
typically rotate about their root to achieve different angles
of attach on the up-stroke (thrust) and the down-stroke (lift).
Strong actuators that are free to move in the flapping direc-
tion as well as create rotation at twice the flapping frequency
are required. If instead the wing is able to attain a partic-
ular angle of attack based on up-stroke and down-stroke
aerodynamic loading, the need for twist actuators is actually
obviated through the use of smart materials. This technique
is employed in the design of the Entomopter, which does not
use any wing actuators other than the prime flapping drive
motor (Michelson and Naqvi, 2003).
Another aspect of MAV design that is intimately tied to
the correct selection of materials is the method of control
surface actuation. Most control surface actuators are elec-
tromechanical in nature, although other ways exist to effect
control (Michelson, 2002). Actuators must be able to move
with enough deflection to effect a change in the flow over a
control surface while at the same time having sufficient force
to do so under all flight conditions. Further, for reasons sta-
bility, actuators must have sufficient bandwidth to allow the
desired critically damped vehicle response to a commanded
input. Various actuation materials have some of these charac-
teristics, but often, not all. In addition, some materials are con-
strained to work only at high voltages or high currents, which
are incompatible with the very limited onboard energy source.
Some actuator types that have been considered for use
with MAVs include conducting shape memory polyurethane
(CSMPU) or shape memory alloys like NITINOL wire (high
current demand/bandwidth limited), piezoelectric materi-
als (high voltage/low motion), electroactive polymers (high
voltage), rheological fluids (bandwidth/interface issues),
or ionic polymeric-metal composites (IPMC) (reasonable
bandwidth/low voltage/high motion/short life). There are
non-electrical actuation solutions as well, including poly-
mer hydrogels, chemically fueled pistons, and pneumatic “air
muscles”. As these actuators shrink in size, different tech-
nologies present better or worse solutions based on the throw,
force, reaction frequency, and actuation energy required.
5.3 Flight control
Stability and control of outdoor MAVs is a matter of great
concern because there is not enough power, mass, or control
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
surface area on a MAV to fight the extremes of the environ-
ment. MAVs can fly very fast in order to pass through local
wind gusts without significant offset; however, this makes
them less useful in “close-in” reconnaissance. Fixed-wing
MAVs are particularly susceptible to roll perturbations,
and even if flown by a ground pilot, need roll stability
augmentation.
Increasing demands are being placed on the hardware
and software that comprise MAV guidance and control sys-
tems. As MAVs become more autonomous, guidance and
control systems must support advanced functions such as
automated decision making, obstacle avoidance, target acqui-
sition, target tracking, artificial vision, and interaction with
other manned and unmanned systems. While performance
requirements are increasing, the acceptable form factors
(size and weight) of these systems are decreasing. In some
instances, the weight of all onboard electronics (both avion-
ics and payload) may be under 10 g. Current miniaturization
techniques can accommodate this physical footprint; how-
ever, the main challenge continues to be processor speed and
storage capacity to allow for an ever increasing degree of
onboard intelligence.
5.3.1 Attitude control and navigation
At the lowest levels, inner loop flight control is concerned
with simply maintaining the vehicle in the correct attitude
(roll, pitch, yaw) while maneuvering through environmental
perturbations (wind, precipitation). For autonomous flight,
it is common to separate the flight control problem into an
inner loop that controls attitude and an outer loop that con-
trols the translational trajectory of the vehicle. Of particular
interest to both the inner and outer loops is the issue of a
high stability, or updatable, reference. For the inner loop this
is either a gyroscopic reference, integrated accelerometers,
or external passive (EO/IR), or active (radar/sonar) cues. For
the outer loop, GPS is an ideal reference so long as it is
available. Indoors, GPS is unavailable. On the battlefield, it
may be denied. For very small MAVs and nano air vehi-
cles (NAVs), the ability to carry an efficient GPS antenna
is not possible because the vehicle itself falls well below
the wavelength aperture of the L1 and L2 GPS frequencies
(1575.42 MHz and 1227.60 MHz, respectively, or about λ =
22 cm).
Dynamic inversion and neural-network-based adaptations
have been used to increase performance of the attitude control
systems, and a method called pseudocontrol hedging (PCH)
has been used to protect the adaptation process from actuator
limits and dynamics. In doing so, adaptation to uncertainty
in the attitude, as well as the translational dynamics, is intro-
duced to minimize the effects of flight control model error
 6 Micro Air Vehicles
in all six degrees of freedom, thus leading to more accurate
position tracking (Johnson and Kannan, 2005).
Optical flow is another control technique that has gained
popularity since the advent of MAVs. Researchers have deter-
mined that some insects, such as the honey bee, observe the
bilateral flow of objects in their field of view in order to assess
their speed and trajectory relative to objects (assumed by the
bee to be on the ground) (Srinivasan et al., 2004).
Advances in software technology have the potential
to revolutionize control system design. Component-based
architectures encourage flexible “plug-and-play” extensibil-
ity and evolution of systems. Distributed object computing
allows interoperation. Advances are being made to enable
dynamic reconfiguration and evolution of systems while they
are still running. Technologies are being developed to allow
networked, embedded devices to connect to each other and
self-organize (Wills et al., 2001).
These capabilities are known as an open control platform
(OCP) architecture that allows complex systems to coordi-
nate distributed interaction among diverse components while
supporting dynamic reconfiguration and customization of the
components in real time. Its primary goals are to accommo-
date rapidly changing application requirements, incorporate
of new technology (such as hardware platforms or sensors),
and allow undegraded operation in heterogeneous or unpre-
dictable and changing environments.
Regardless of the flight control methods employed, the end
result must be a system capable of responding to the high
bandwidth maneuvering requirements posed by the MAV.
Especially for indoor flight scenarios, the MAV must be able
to sense and react to avoid disaster in an obstacle-rich envi-
ronment. Relative to the speed of flight, the onboard sensors
must be able to detect obstacles in enough time for the con-
trol system to replan the trajectory and command actuators
that are able to follow the commanded path before collision
occurs. These dynamics are some of the most challenging for
any flight vehicle.
5.4 Morphology
MAVs fall into three basic categories: fixed-wing, rotary-
wing, and flapping-wing configurations. Combinations of
these are of course also possible. The selection of a
particular configuration is usually driven by mission require-
ments. Outdoor reconnaissance, for example, is best done
by a loitering fixed-wing configuration unless the mission
requires long-term perching and staring, in which case a
rotary-wing configuration might take precedence. If the
outdoor mission involves flights that are close to hostile
observers, a flapping-wing configuration might be selected
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
in an attempt to go unnoticed by mimicking biological
entities.
5.4.1 Fixed-wing MAVs
Typical propeller-driven MAVs are essentially flying wings
where all of the avionics, energy storage, and propulsion is
contained within the planform of the wing. As such, these
3/2
usually end up being “fast flyers” (high CL /CD at speeds
reaching 65 km hr−1 (40 mph) at chord Reynolds numbers
from about 45 000 to 180 000 and at altitudes from 30 to
100 m (98 to 328 ft)).
Because fixed-wing MAVs must fly fast, indoor or con-
fined operation is impractical. The airfoils must be efficient
at low Reynolds numbers so the designer must create a low
aspect ratio wing that is not sensitive to wind shear, gusts,
and the amplified effects of precipitation at this scale. Design
practices developed for airfoils greater than 200 000 (manned
aircraft) are not entirely transferrable to thin-wing designs
intended to operate below 200 000. Separation of the airfoil
boundary layer near the leading and trailing edges of the
wing as well as regions of transition from laminar to tur-
bulent flow are very sensitive at Reynolds number, pressure
gradient, and external environmental effects local to the wing.
Much of the research in thin low Reynolds number airfoils
used in MAV design has come from empirical wind tunnel
data rather than conventional analytics or large-scale data
(Torrres and Mueller, 2000) because the majority of the lift
across the wing surface is influenced by tip vortices.
Fixed-wing MAVs are invariably propeller-driven (see
Figure 3). At low Reynolds numbers special consideration
must also be given to the design of the propeller. As with
any propeller, performance optimization considers twist and
chord distribution, rotational speed, diameter, and the flight
condition. For most outdoor fixed-wing MAV missions, the
Figure 3. Aerovironment fixed wing WASP MAV. Reproduced
with permission from Michelson (2009).
 Overview of Micro Air Vehicle System Designand Integration Issues 7
flight condition is “loitering at altitude” for purposes of recon-
naissance. Therefore the propeller can be designed to for this
condition, being less efficient at powered climb or controlled
descent. It should be noted that while the MAV itself oper-
ates at a low Reynolds number, the propeller (which normally
rotates at a high velocity over the outer third of its diameter
where most of the thrust is generated) is actually operating at
much higher Reynold’s numbers, since Reynolds number is
not only a function of fluid properties such as density and vis-
cosity, but also velocity (greater velocities leading to higher
Reynolds numbers).
5.4.2 Rotary-wing MAVs
Many of the problems associated with the fast flight of fixed-
wing MAVs can be overcome through the use of rotary-wing
implementations because of their ability to fly slowly and
even hover. Efficiency of flight and endurance become a
drawback, however.
“For a given wing design and operating frequency, the min-
imum power required to support a given weight is given by
the best CL /CD ratio: 2.06 at α = 15◦ . A target MAV design
with a 15 cm wingspan and all-up-weight of 50 g would be
reached at a frequency of about 100 Hz, or 6 000 rpm, with a
power requirement of 7 W. The Reynolds number would be
almost 85 000. . .” (Ellington and Usherwood, 2001).
Rotary-wing MAV solutions have been demonstrated
with multiple fixed pitch vertical thrusting propellers
(Jean-Claude Pesce’s “Micro X4”, France, and Martin
Mueller’s “M.A.C.”, Germany) as well as articulated rotors
(Petter Muren’s “Mosquito”, Norway (see Figure 4), and
Figure 4. Muren rotary-wing Mosquito Twin Tail MAV. Repro-
duced with permission from Michelson (2009).
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
Simone Duranti’s coaxial helicopter, Linkoping University,
Sweden).
Still, indoor flight or operations in confined spaces pose
the risk of rotor strikes. Some rotary-wing MAV designers
have placed hoops around their rotor disks, which join the
blade tips. This allows for a stiffer rotor system, increased
gyroscopic stability (especially in non-articulated rotors), as
well as a degree of protection against blade tip strikes, since
only tangential impacts with the bounding ring can occur.
The downside is increased weight.
Weight is also an issue when small redundant propellers
are used with multiple motors. The structure to tie these
redundant propulsors together, as well as the redundancy of
the propulsors themselves, leads to inefficiency compared
to a single rotor design; however, rotors of smaller diam-
eter (<15 cm by the classical MAV definition) must rotate
at higher speeds in order to generate sufficient lift. As the
speed of sound is approached at the rotor blade tip, exces-
sive energy goes into unproductive and potentially damaging
shock waves, so designers often back off from increasing
the rotational speed of a single rotor and move to multiple
slower-turning small rotors/propellers.
A popular MAV configuration is the “quad rotor” design,
but this involves four of every component in the propulsor
transmission, leading to increased complexity and weight.
Performance suffers further from the fact that most “quad
rotors” use non-articulated fixed-pitch propellers, which spin
in the same plane but are oriented in quadrature while being
speed modulated to adjust lift as a means of attitude control.
The entire “quad rotor” fuselage must tilt to fly in any given
direction, with the ensuing loss of lift as the thrust vector tilts
away from providing lift to one supplying a greater horizontal
thrust component.
Some have argued that as Reynolds number decreases, the
difference between the efficiency of a fixed-wing vehicle and
a rotary-wing vehicle approaches parity. Assuming a similar
rotor figure of merit and propeller efficiency “a 15 cm span
MAV with L/D of 5 at CL of 0.2, a hovering vehicle would
require only 12% more power than the fixed wing device”
(Kroo and Kunz, 2001). But forward flight and hover are
completely different cases and the added weight due to the
complexity of a rotary-wing vehicle, especially if it involves
multiple redundant propulsors, quickly worsens as forward
speed increases, even at low Reynolds number.
5.4.3 Flapping-wing MAVs
Unparalleled in the ability to fly slowly and robustly indoors
and in confined spaces is the flapping-wing MAV. Just like a
moth or small bird can fly about in a building, sometimes even
grazing the walls with its wings, a flapping-wing MAV would
 8 Micro Air Vehicles
Figure 5. Flapping-wing Entomopter. Reproduced with permission
from Michelson (2009).
provide the greatest survivability and performance indoors
(see Figure 5).
While all classes of MAV can function outdoors and
are susceptible to the same environmental affects that keep
insects and birds from flying effectively during periods of
high winds or during thunder storms, the ability of flapping-
wing MAVs to safely negotiate tight quarters is based on
high lift mechanisms evolved over the surface of the wing,
which allow slow controlled flight. The reason that a flapping-
wing is more survivable than a rotor is that its energy is
distributed over a wider chord and oscillates from a min-
imum of zero thrust and lift at either end of the flapping
stroke, to its maximum at mid stroke. Maneuverability derives
from the flapping-wing’s differential kinematics, which can
vary in flapping speed, angle of attack, span, or cycle
excursion.
Of greatest significance is the creation of a leading edge
vortex that increases the effective camber, and therefore lift,
of the wing as it flaps. Some insects and birds can reuse the
energy created by the shedding of the leading edge vortex to
extract (reclaim) energy for maneuvering. Then, there are effi-
ciencies that may be realized from the Weis–Fogh “clapping”
mechanism wherein wings can interact with one another to
create an additional vertical thrust vector.
On the other hand, the control of these kinematic degrees
of freedom requires additional fast actuators that reciprocate.
The creation of rotational machinery involves few mov-
ing parts, and if electrically powered, is relatively simple.
Reciprocating machinery is more complex and often heavier.
Further, the necessity to accelerate masses and then deceler-
ate them is inefficient unless a resonant storage mechanism is
employed. In the insect kingdom, a material called “resilin”
allows the insect to convert kinetic energy into stored poten-
tial energy during a half cycle of a wing beat. This energy is
then released back into the second half cycle of the wing beat
in order to accelerate it through its mid point. The resilin can
be thought of as a biological spring. These biological systems
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
are resonant and any MAV design using flapping-wings must
likewise employ resonance if it is to be energy efficient.
Fixed-wing vehicles have decoupled propulsors and lift
mechanisms (with the exception of “P-factor” coupling).
Rotary-wing vehicles and flapping-wing vehicles integrate
propulsion and lift mechanisms into a single structure, in one
case rotating, and in the other case, reciprocating. Because
of the rotational nature of the propulsion systems in both
fixed- and rotary-wing vehicles, resonance is not possible,
but flapping-wing vehicles can leverage this feature to mini-
mize energy consumption during flight. Energy consumption
and efficiency is key to the reason that biological flight takes
advantage of flapping-wings even though life forms with
rotating propulsors in the form of “cork-screw” flagella can
be found.
5.5 Energy storage, propulsion, and non-scaling
items
While much attention is paid to Reynolds number issues when
discussing MAVs, the most critical barriers to the creation of
useful MAVs are energy storage, propulsion, and non-scaling
items. Reynolds number impacts propulsion to a degree, but
unless a useful amount of energy can be stored on created
onboard the vehicle, it will not have the performance or
endurance necessary to carry out useful missions. Similarly,
if the necessary sensors and actuators cannot be miniaturized
to fit within the MAV, it cannot perform a useful mission.
5.5.1 Energy storage
Fully 50% of the gross MAV weight can be consumed with
some sort of energy storage as demonstrated in present
flying MAVs (e.g., Aerovironment Black Widow and its
derivatives). The majority of MAVs developed in the decade
beginning in the late 1990s use electric propulsion. Batter-
ies are just as heavy at the end of the mission than at the
beginning.
“The average power density for present battery technol-
ogy is marginal for small scale flapping-wing flight. Small
birds and insects are consumed with the task of energy har-
vesting: the search for food. Hummingbirds, the smallest of
all avians, feeding on dilute nectar can ingest nearly three
times their body mass in nectar per day to sustain life and
mobility. Their small bodies can not carry large amounts
of food, so to improve efficiency they choose high energy
foods that provide immediate energy access (sugars) as do
many insects. Tiny aerial robots suffer from the same need for
readily available energy. The energy density of the best bat-
tery technologies currently available still cannot match that,
 Overview of Micro Air Vehicle System Designand Integration Issues 9
which is locked chemically in various compounds such as
sugars. For example, more energy can currently be extracted
from a drop of gasoline than a battery the size of a drop of
gasoline” (Michelson and Naqvi, 2003).
Lithium polymer batteries are popular high energy density
cells often used in MAVs. Other lithium combinations are
more energetic and, while offering extreme energy densities,
are either unstable or present a significant explosion hazard
if cells are shorted.
Some have advocated energy harvesting through the use
of solar panels on MAVs. Unfortunately, the efficiency of cur-
rent solar cells (ranging up to 30% for some of the best stacked
gallium arsenide on gallium indium aresenide phosphide
(GAINASP) multi-junction space-qualified cells (GIT Photo-
voltaics CoE, 2009) in sizes that could be carried by an MAV
is insufficient for sustained flight. “The extra weight of such
cells negates their use as an endurance extender and their low
voltage output is incompatible with many of the electronic
actuators proposed (e.g., piezoelectric, electro polymers,
etc.). Finally, night operation or flight through shadows is pre-
cluded” (Michelson and Naqvi, 2003). So at present, the best
choice for energy storage, and one of the few offering poten-
tial for energy harvesting, is chemical energy. This might
lead one to believe that propulsion systems should be internal
combustion engines, but there are chemically fueled motors
that do not involve combustion (e.g., the Reciprocating
Chemical Muscle, US Patent No. 6,446,909) and fuel cells
that convert chemical fuels directly to electricity.
5.5.2 Propulsion
In the hope of making a superior MAV propulsion system,
many millions of dollars and years have been spent on tiny
“button-sized” gas turbine engines (Epstein, 2003) with little
to show for the effort. Small heavy fuel reciprocating inter-
nal combustion engines have been developed with the size
limit at around 0.025 hp (18.6 W) (D-STAR 2009). Present
miniature internal combustion engines suffer from the lack of
efficiency and they do not scale well with decreasing size due
to increased storage volume, which leads to increased thermal
losses and thermal coupling to structure that increases the vol-
ume required for complete combustion. Further, the reaction
rate of the heavy fuels demanded by the military scale unfa-
vorably with increasing storage efficiency, and more energy
dense fuels tend to be heavier and therefore react more slowly
requiring larger volumes. Heat loss to the structure can also
dramatically slow the reaction rate of these fuels. Finally,
hydrocarbon fuels can be difficult to atomize and mix with
air in small volumes.
By far, the most popular propulsion method has been the
brushless electric motor operating from high energy density
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
wing-conformal batteries or, more recently, from fuel cells.
Brushless electric motors have multi-phase winding and use
an external electronic controller to correctly phase the cur-
rent in the windings. While having less torque than brushed
(commutating) motors, brushless DC motors are more con-
trollable and lighter. Current designs tend toward having in
central stator and a coaxial rotor using rare earth magnets.
A special class of propulsion amenable to MAVs is chem-
ical propulsion where a chemical fuel creates gas used
to activate a reciprocating mechanism or a turbine. This
involves gas evolution through non-combustive means such
as decomposition through sublimation, chemical reaction of
two or more constituents, or decomposition in the presence
of a catalyst. In the latter case, the Reciprocating Chemi-
cal Muscle developed as the prime propulsion system for
the flapping-wing MAV known as the “Entomopter” (US
Patent No. 6,082,671) is best known. Any of a number
of monopropellants (such as hydrogen peroxide (H2 O2 ) or
hydrazine (N2 H4 )), when put in contact with an appropriate
catalytic material, will very rapidly decompose into gaseous
constituents without burning. The Reciprocating Chemical
Muscle has been demonstrated with hydrogen peroxide in
the laboratory, and has been designed for use in Mars’ lower
atmosphere using hydrazine. As in the Mars application, one
major advantage of devices such as the Reciprocating Chem-
ical Muscle is that they operate in the absence of oxygen
while having a weight advantage over batteries as the fuel
is consumed and exhausted. The evolved gas from these
reactions is used to create motion via pistons, bellows, or
impellers/turbines whereupon it is converted to rotating (pro-
peller), oscillating (flapping-wing), or rocket thrust energy.
At the smallest scale, some researchers have been looking
at truly micro propulsion using micro-electromechanical sys-
tems (MEMS). MEMS-based gear motors are far too weak to
provide power for flight, but MEMS-based rocket thrusters
with electronic squib-ignited micro fuel reservoirs acting
through MEMS nozzles may offer thrust force ranging from
1 ␮N to few 10 mN (Chaalane, Rossi and Estève, 2006).
5.5.3 Non-scaling items
Not everything can be scaled. The major problem arising
from non-scaling parameters is not only “Reynolds
Numbers” but also “Wavelength”. As air vehicle dimensions
fall below those useful in telemetry, non-line-of-sight
operation becomes difficult. Therefore the ability to navigate
becomes a central issue. For indoor operations, line-of-
sight (LOS) communication makes teleoperation impractical;
vehicle size and masking by the building make GPS imprac-
tical. We are thus led to the conclusion that navigation must
be autonomous with cues from pheromone trails, emitters,
 10 Micro Air Vehicles

a priori architectural knowledge, and self determination. In

terms of design philosophy, MAVs should be created from
the onset with full autonomy as a goal.
“A fully autonomous MAV containing sufficient onboard
intelligence to carry out useful missions has various advan-
tages including:
r Extended range because high frequency line-of-sight
(LOS) links are obviated
r Quicker reaction time to atmospheric perturbations and
obstacle avoidance than can be afforded by a teleoperator
r Potentially greater stealth due to lower bandwidth emis-
sions
r The ability to operate indoors or in urban canyons where
communication is not possible
r Jam resistance
r The potential for beneficial emergent behaviors leading
higher probability of mission success” (Michelson, 2008)
In spite of these inherent advantages, difficulties arise when
testing MAVs suddenly are given the power of autonomy. In
particular, physical flight testing and behavioral testing are
problematic.
5.5.4 Design example addressing MAV-critical
considerations
Under contracts from DARPA, AFRL, the Georgia Institute
of Technology, and the NASA Institute for Advanced Con-
cepts, a MAV was designed from the onset to be (a) fully
autonomous, (b) optimized for close-quarter indoor oper-
ations, and (c) manufacturable. This MAV is biologically
inspired but is not biomimetic. Known as the ‘Entomopter’
(entomo as in entomology + pteron meaning wing, or a
“winged insect machine”) this MAV began not as an air vehi-
cle, but as a propulsion concept once a flapping-wing solution
had been adopted as a general system architecture.
A chemically fueled (high concentration hydrogen per-
oxide) Reciprocating Chemical Muscle has been designed
and is in its fourth generation of development at the time
of this writing. This actuator system has demonstrated 70 Hz
reciprocation rates with throws and evolved power levels nec-
essary to support flight of a self-contained fully autonomous
Entomopter system (Michelson and Amarena, 2001). The
reciprocating chemical muscle uses the energy locked in
various chemical fuels to produce reciprocating motion for
propulsion as well as waste gas products for the operation of
gas bearings, an ultrasonic obstacle avoidance ranging sys-
tem, and full flight control of the vehicle. “In all, precious
and limited energy stored onboard this 50 g MAV is used up
to seven times before it is released:
Figure 6. Induced vortex attachment over the Entomopter’s
flapping-wing by means of circulation controlled “blowing” allows
lift to be modulated with no moving control surfaces. Reproduced
with permission from Michelson and Naqvi (2003)  c The v́on
Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics.
Energy Use 1. A regenerative muscle that consumes var-
ious fuel types in a noncombustive process that yields forces
and frequencies consistent with flapping-wing flight at the
scale of a 15 cm MAV.
Energy Use 2. Reuse of muscle waste gas for circulation-
controlled lift modification of each winglet independently,
thereby allowing stable flight as well as the ability to change
heading for navigation. Stability and control in flight as well
as navigation are achieved by actively modifying the lift of
each wing on a beat-to-beat basis using pneumatic control of
both the laminar flow and the leading edge vortex circulating
over the beating wing [by taking advantage of the Coanda
Effect] (see Figure 6). As such, the Entomopter is not a syn-
thesis of a flapping-wing and an airplane tail. It derives all
of its lift, thrust, AND control from its wings alone, and it is
simple enough to be manufactured affordably.
Energy Use 3. A steerable beam frequency modulated
continuous wave (FMCW) acoustic obstacle avoidance sys-
tem that uses waste gas from the muscle and wing motion to
sense both altitude above the ground and obstacles such as
walls. The FMCW transmission capability is inherent in the
muscle at no energy cost. The same structure that provides
wing flapping also scans the FMCW ultrasonic beam to pro-
vide front, side, and down-looking range measurements for
obstacle avoidance and altimetry. Further, this ranging design
has the potential to track and follow free-moving agents in a
fashion similar to that employed by bats.
Energy Use 4. A limited amount of onboard
thermoelectrically-generated electric power derived from
muscle waste heat resulting from the controlled exothermic

Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
 Overview of Micro Air Vehicle System Designand Integration Issues 11
decomposition of the fuel that can be used for the obstacle
avoidance receiver electronics and onboard intelligence.
Energy Use 5. A mass flow amplifier based on an ejector
to supply higher volumes of lower pressure, cooled gas for
use in circulation control of the wings.
Energy Use 6. Gas bearings for all moving mechani-
cal interfaces. No wetted surfaces or lubricants are required
because waste gas is used as a bearing surface.
Energy Use 7. Directional thrust. If sufficient energy
remains in the waste gas, it can be expelled intelligently to
provide a degree of directional thrust for launch assist, break-
ing, or maneuvering in flight” (Michelson and Naqvi, 2003).
The Hawk Moth (Manduca sexta) was chosen as a base-
line model for the wing aerodynamics. The University of
Cambridge in England was part of the initial Entomopter
design team at the Georgia Tech Research Institute because
it had studied Hawk Moth wing aerodynamics for more than
a quarter of a century and had produced seminal works
describing the Leading Edge Vortex and its effects on the
flapping-wing (Willmott, Ellington and Thomas, 1997; Will-
mott and Ellington, 1997; Ellington et al., 1996; van den Berg
and Ellington, 1997; Liu et al., 1998). The flapping mecha-
nism for the Entomopter has been extended beyond that of
the Hawk Moth to provide a resonant single-piece “X-wing”
construction that takes advantage of torsional resonance in the
Entomopter fuselage to recover flapping energy as is common
to flying insects, which temporarily store potential energy in
either muscles or exoskeletal parts (resilin). Further, by elim-
inating all wing twist actuators by designing the wingslets
to be twist-compliant under load, the flapping mechanism
is greatly simplified (only three moving fuselage/wing parts)
and of minimal weight. A duty-cycle modulated flapper valve
supplies waste gas to each winglet as required by the flight
control system to maintain stability and to navigate. The
wings beat autonomically (necessary to maintain optimal res-
onant flapping) and the Entomopter is designed to fly at a
constant forward speed.
Obstacle avoidance, altimetry, and Doppler ground speed
feedback for the flight control system is derived from the
swept beam active sonar as well as haltere pitch/yaw rate
gyros (similar to those on a Crain Fly (family Tipulidae))
attached to the X-wing flapping actuation motor.
Lift over the wings is modulated by control of the vented
waste gas from the Reciprocating Chemical Muscle as it
exits the trailing edges and tips of the four winglets. This
gives control in all axes with the added advantage of being
able to deliver positive lift on both the down-stroke and
the up-stroke of the wing (unlike most biological entities)
as demonstrated in high α wind tunnel tests (Englar et al.,
1994a; Englar et al., 1994b).
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
The use of a monopropellant fuel allows Entomopter oper-
ation in explosive environments or the absence of oxygen
(such as occurs in the lower atmosphere of Mars). For terres-
trial applications, the weight fraction for the fuel is approxi-
mately 50% of the 50 gram gross takeoff weight of the Ento-
mopter, which falls within the typical region for 15 cm MAVs.
Indoor navigation is intended to be by means of a binary
sensor such as an olfactory system. This would provide
a motivation to fly toward increasing concentrations of a
targeted chemical, while the obstacle avoidance sonar would
provide an overriding motivation to stray from the highest
concentration path until the Entomopter was clear to fly
without obstruction, once again acquiring a concentration
vector to the target. Of course any binary sensor would work
in this application (“seek light,” “seek RF emission,” “seek
sound,” etc.).
5.6 Conclusion
MAVs design presents new challenges to the aerospace engi-
neer because they operate in relatively new flight regimes
where classical design methods begin to fail for reasons asso-
ciated with the physical characteristics of air flow around
small surfaces. Compounding the aerodynamic design issues
are those of miniaturization, energy storage, and non-scaling
items.
Beyond the engineering of efficient MAVs are many
logistical problems yet to be considered: air traffic manage-
ment, manned aircraft “sense and avoid” issues, certification
of the MAV and its support systems, and how to deal with
autonomous operations where the vehicle is too small to see,
may be impossible to communicate with, and of very limited
endurance.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author wishes to acknowledge Mr. Nino Amarena (RCM
chemistry), Dr. Krishan Ahuja (acoustics) and Mr. Robert
Englar (circulation controlled airfoils) of the Georgia Tech
Research Institute, and Prof. Charlie Ellington of Cambridge
University (aerodynamics) for support and guidance dur-
ing various development stages of the Entomopter. Further,
Millennial Vision, LLC is recognized for supporting the writ-
ing of this chapter.
NOMENCLATURE
CL Coefficient of lift
Re Reynolds number
CD Coefficient of Drag
 12 Micro Air Vehicles
RF radio frequency
α angle of attack
λ radio frequency
REFERENCES
BBCi Sci/Tech (1998) Cyberbugs are go, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/
1/hi/sci/tech/61822.stm (accessed 4 March 1998).
Chaalane, A., Rossi, C. and Estève, D. (2006) MEMS-based solid
propellant micro-rocket with micro-igniter on thin membrane
for next generation of low-cost small space and aeronautic
engines, in Technical Proceedings of the 2006 NSTI Nanotech-
nology Conference and Trade Show, vol. 3, Chapter 3, The Nano
Science and Technology Institute (NSTI), pp. 340–343. ISBN:
0-9767985-8-1.
Cheney, M. (1981) Tesla: Man Out of Time, Dorset Press, NY, p. 7.
ISBN: 0-88029-419-1.
D-STAR (2009) D-STAR Engineering Corporation 0.025 hp/20
Watt Heavy Fuel Engine, http://www.dstarengineering.com/
piston-pdfs/Engines 20W.pdf (accessed 18 January 2009).
Ellington, C.P., van den Berg, C., Willmott, A.P. and Thomas,
A.L.R. (1996) Leading-edge vortices in insect flight. Nature, 384,
626–630.
Ellington, C.P. and Usherwood, J.R. (2001) Lift and drag charac-
teristics of rotary and flapping wings, in Fixed and Flapping
Wing Aerodynamics for Micro Air Vehicle Applications (ed. T.J.
Mueller), AIAA, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, vol.
195, Chapter 12, p. 246.
Englar, R.J., Smith, M.J., Kelley, S.M. and Rover, R.C., III (1994a)
Development of circulation control technology for application to
advanced subsonic transport aircraft, part I: airfoil development.
AIAA Paper No. 93-0644, Log No. C-8057, published in AIAA
J. Aircraft, Sept–Oct 1994, 31(5), 1160–1168.
Englar, R.J., Smith, M.J., Kelley, S.M. and Rover R.C., III (1994b)
Development of circulation control technology for application to
advanced subsonic transport aircraft, part II: transport applica-
tion. AIAA Paper No. 93-0644, Log No. C-8058, published in
AIAA J. Aircraft, Sept–Oct 1994, 31(5), 1169–1177.
Epstein, A.H. (2003) Millimeter-scale, MEMS gas turbine engines.
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2003, Power for Land, Sea,
and Air, June 16–19, 2003, GT-2003-38866, Atlanta, Georgia,
USA.
Hundley, R.O. and Gritton, E.C. (1994) Future technology-driven
revolutions in military operations. RAND Corporation, Docu-
ment No. DB-110-ARPA.
Ifju, P., Ettinger, S., Jenkins, D. and Martinez, L. (2001) Composite
materials for micro air vehicles. Vol. 46, Book 1. 46th Interna-
tional Society for the Advancement of Material and Processing
Engineering Symposium, May 6–10, 2001, 1926–1937.
Johnson, E. and Kannan, K. (2005) Adaptive trajectory control for
autonomous helicopters. J. Guidance Control Dyn., 28(3), 524–
538. 0731-5090.
Kroo, I. and Kunz, P. (2001) Mesoscale flight and miniature rotor-
craft development, in Fixed and Flapping Wing Aerodynamics for
Micro Air Vehicle Applications (ed. T.J. Mueller), AIAA Progress
Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering, Online © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article is © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
This article was published in the Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering in 2010 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470686652.eae401
in Astronautics and Aeronautics, vol. 195, Chapter 23, American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) p. 505.
Liu, H., Ellington, C.P., Kawachi, K., van den Berg, C. and Willmott,
A.P. (1998) A computational fluid dynamic study of hawk moth
hovering. J. Exp. Biol., 201, 461–477.
Michelson, R.C. and Amarena, C.S. (2001) 4th generation recipro-
cating chemical muscle: reciprocating chemical muscle (RCM)
for specialized micro UAVs and other nonelectric anaerobic
aerospace actuation applications, prepared under Grant No.
F086300010007 to the US Air Force Research Laboratories
(AFRL/MNGN), October 15, 2001.
Michelson, R.C. (2002) The Entomopter, Neurotechnology for
Biomimetic Robots, The MIT Press, pp. 481–509. ISBN: 0-262-
01193-X.
Michelson, R.C. and Naqvi, M.A. (2003) Beyond biologically-
inspired insect flight, von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics
RTO/AVT Lecture Series on Low Reynolds Number Aerodynamics
on Aircraft Including Applications in Emerging UAV Technology,
Brussels, Belgium, November 24–28, 2003.
Michelson, R.C. (2004) Novel approaches to miniature flight plat-
forms. Proc. IME J. Aerosp. Eng., 218 (Special Issue Paper),
363–373.
Michelson, R.C. (2006) Very Small Flying Machines, 2006 Year-
book of Science & Technology, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp.
341–344. ISBN: 0-07-146205-8.
Michelson, R.C. (2008) Test and evaluation for fully autonomous
micro air vehicles. ITEA J., 29(4), 367, ISSN 1054-0229 Inter-
national Test and Evaluation Association.
Srinivasan, M.V., Zhang, S.W., Chahl, J.S., Stange, G. and Garratt,
M. (2004) An overview of insect inspired guidance for application
in ground and airborne platforms. Proc. IME J. Aerosp. Eng., 218,
375–388.
Torrres, G.E. and Mueller, T.J. (2000) Aerodynamics characteristics
of low aspect ratio wings at low Reynolds numbers. Proceedings
of the Conference: Fixed, Flapping and Rotary-Wing Vehicles at
Very Low Reynolds Numbers, University of Notre Dame, Notre
Dame, IN, June 5–7, 2000, pp. 228–305.
US DoD (1997) United States Department of Defense
News Release. http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Dec1997/
b12121997 bt676-97.html.
GIT Photovoltaics CoE (2009) University Center of Excellence
for Photovoltaics at the Georgia Institute of Technology, http://
www.ece.gatech.edu/research/ucep/solarfaq.htm (accessed 13
January 2009).
van den Berg, C. and Ellington, C.P. (1997) The vortex wake of a
‘hovering’ model hawk moth. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 352,
317–328.
Wills, L., Kannan, S., Sander, S., Guler, M., Heck, B., Prasad, J.V.R.,
Schrage, D. and Vachtsevanos, G. (2001) An open platform for
reconfigurable control. IEEE Control Syst. Mag., 21(3), 49–64.
Willmott, A.P. and Ellington, C.P. (1997) The mechanics of flight
in the hawk moth Manduca Sexta. I. Kinematics of hovering and
forward flight. J. Exp. Biol., 200, 2705–2722.
Willmott, A.P., Ellington, C.P. and Thomas, A.L.R. (1997) Flow
visualization and unsteady aerodynamics in the flight of the hawk
moth Manduca Sexta. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B, 352, 303–316.