In this paper, we investigate the hydrodynamics of swimmers with three caudal fins: a round one corresponding to snakehead fish (Channidae), an indented one corresponding to saithe (Pollachius virens), and a lunate one corresponding to tuna (Thunnus thynnus). A direct numerical simulation (DNS) approach with a self-propelled fish model was adopted. The simulation results show that the caudal fin transitions from a pushing/suction combined propulsive mechanism to a suction-dominated propulsive mechanism with increasing aspect ratio (AR). Interestingly, different from a previous finding that suction-based propulsion leads to high efficiency in animal swimming, this study shows that the utilization of suction-based propulsion by a high-AR caudal fin reduces swimming efficiency. Therefore, the suction-based propulsive mechanism does not necessarily lead to high efficiency, while other factors might play a role. Further analysis shows that the large lateral momentum transferred to the flow due to the high depth of the high-AR caudal fin leads to the lowest efficiency despite the most significant suction.
LindseyCC.Form, function, and locomotory habits in fish. Fish Physiol1979;
7: 1–100.
2.
LighthillMJ.Hydromechanics of aquatic animal propulsion. Annu Rev Fluid Mech1969;
1: 413–446.
3.
LighthillMJ.Aquatic animal propulsion of high hydromechanical efficiency. J Fluid Mech1970;
44: 265–301.
4.
BlakeRWLiJChanKHS.Swimming in four goldfish Carassius auratus morphotypes: understanding functional design and performance employing artificially selected forms. J Fish Biol2009;
75: 591–617.
5.
WebbPW.Body form, locomotion and foraging in aquatic vertebrates. Am Zool1984;
24: 107–120.
6.
WebbPW.Steady’ swimming kinematics of tiger musky, an esociform accelerator, and rainbow trout, a generalist cruiser. J Exp Biol1988;
138: 51–69.
7.
WolfgangMJAndersonJMGrosenbaughMA, et al.
Near-body flow dynamics in swimming fish. J Exp Biol1999;
202: 2303–2327.
8.
ChopraMGKambeT.Hydromechanics of lunate-tail swimming propulsion. Part 2. J Fluid Mech1977;
79: 49–69.
9.
LiG-jZhuLLuX-y.Numerical studies on locomotion perfromance of fish-like tail fins. J Hydrodyn2012;
24: 488–495.
10.
Van BurenTFloryanDBrunnerD, et al.
Impact of trailing edge shape on the wake and propulsive performance of pitching panels. Phys Rev Fluids2017;
2: 014702.
11.
FeilichKLLauderGV.Passive mechanical models of fish caudal fins: effects of shape and stiffness on self-propulsion. Bioinspiration Biomim2015;
10: 036002.
12.
BorazjaniISotiropoulosF.On the role of form and kinematics on the hydrodynamics of self-propelled body/caudal fin swimming. J Exp Biol2010;
213: 89–107.
13.
LiuGRenYDongH, et al.
Computational analysis of vortex dynamics and performance enhancement due to body–fin and fin–fin interactions in fish-like locomotion. J Fluid Mech2017;
829: 65–88.
14.
HanPGeorgeVLauderH, et al.Hydrodynamics of median-fin interactions in fish-like locomotion: effects of fin shape and movement. Phys Fluids2020;
32: 011902.
15.
ZhongYDuR.Parametric study of the swimming performance of a novel robot fish with active compliant propulsion mechanism. In: Proceedings of the ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Volume 5A: 40th Mechanisms and Robotics Conference, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA, 21-24 August, 2016.
16.
LiuJDukesIHuH. Novel mechatronics design for a robotic fish. In: 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Edmonton, Alta., 2005, pp. 807–812. IEEE.
17.
Valdivia y AlvaradoPYoucef-ToumiK.Design of machines with compliant bodies for biomimetic locomotion in liquid environments. J Dyn Syst, Meas, Control2006;
128: 3–13.
18.
EppsBPValdivia y AlvaradoPYoucef-ToumiK, et al.
Swimming performance of a biomimetic compliant fish-like robot. Exp Fluids2009;
47: 927–939.
19.
LiuJ-DHuH.Biologically inspired behaviour design for autonomous robotic fish. Int J Automat Comput2006;
3: 336–347.
20.
BainbridgeR.Caudal fin and body movement in the propulsion of some fish. J Exp Biol1963;
40: 23–56.
21.
BainbridgeR.The speed of swimming of fish as related to size and to the frequency and amplitude of the tail beat. J Exp Biol1958;
35: 109–133.
22.
LiaoJC.The role of the lateral line and vision on body kinematics and hydrodynamic preference of rainbow trout in turbulent flow. J Exp Biol2006;
209: 4077–4090.
23.
JayneBCLauderGV.Speed effects on midline kinematics during steady undulatory swimming of largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides. J Exp Biol1995;
198: 585–602.
24.
LuoHDaiHde SousaPF, et al.
On the numerical oscillation of the direct-forcing immersed-boundary method for moving boundaries. Comput Fluids2012;
56: 61–76.
25.
TianFDaiHLuoH, et al.
Fluid-structure interaction involving large deformations: 3d simulations and applications to biological systems. J Comput Phys2014;
258: 451–469.
26.
SongJLuoHHedrickTL.Three-dimensional flow and lift characteristics of a hovering ruby-throated hummingbird. J R Soc Interface2014;
11: 20140541.
27.
SongJTobalskeBWPowersDR, et al.
Three-dimensional simulation for fast forward flight of a calliope hummingbird. R Soc Open Sci2016;
3: 160230.
28.
SongJZhongYLuoH, et al.
Hydrodynamics of larval fish quick turning: a computational study. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2018;
232: 2515–2523.
29.
MingTJinBSongJ, et al.
3d computational models explain muscle activation patterns and energetic functions of internal structures in fish swimming. PLOS Comput Biol2019;
15: e1006883.
30.
WangJWainwrightDKLindengrenRE, et al.
Tuna locomotion: a computational hydrodynamic analysis of finlet function. J R Soc Interface2020;
17: 20190590.
31.
MittalRDongHBozkurttasM, et al.
A versatile sharp interface immersed boundary method for incompressible flows with complex boundaries. J Comput Phys2008;
227: 4825–4852.
32.
BlakeRW.Fish functional design and swimming performance. J Fish Biol2004;
65: 1193–1222.
33.
MaiaALauderGVWilgaCD.Hydrodynamic function of dorsal fins in spiny dogfish and bamboo sharks during steady swimming. J Exp Biol2017; 220: 3967–3975.
34.
DaiHLuoHDoyleJF.Dynamic pitching of an elastic rectangular wing in hovering motion. J Fluid Mech2012;
693: 473–499.
35.
TriantafyllouMSYueDKPMaertensAP.Efficiency of fish propulsion. Bioinspir Biomimet2015;
10: 046013–046023.
36.
BorazjaniIDaghooghiM.The fish tail motion forms an attached leading edge vortex. Proc R Soc B2013;
280: 20122071.
37.
GemmellBJColinSPCostelloJH, et al.
Suction-based propulsion as a basis for efficient animal swimming. Nat Commun2015;
6: 8790.
38.
EloyC.On the best design for undulatory swimming. J Fluid Mech2013;
717: 48–89.
39.
Van ReesWMGazzolaMKoumoutsakosP.Optimal morphokinematics for undulatory swimmers at intermediate Reynolds numbers. J Fluid Mech2015;
775: 178–188.
40.
AndersonJMStreitlienKBarrettDS, et al.
Oscillating foils of high propulsive efficiency. J Fluid Mech1998;
360: 41–72.
41.
AkanyetiOPutneyJYanagitsuruYR, et al.
Accelerating fishes increase propulsive efficiency by modulating vortex ring geometry. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA2017;
114: 13828–13833.
42.
LiCDongH.Three-dimensional wake topology and propulsive performance of low-aspect-ratio pitching-rolling plates. Phys Fluids2016;
28: 071901.
43.
BrooksSGreenMA.Experimental study of body-fin interaction and vortex dynamics generated by a two degree-of-freedom fish model. Biomimetics2019;
4: 67.
44.
StandenEMLauderGV.Hydrodynamic function of dorsal and anal fins in brook trout(Salvelinus fontinalis). J Exp Biol2007;
210: 325–339.
45.
ShadwickRELauderGV.Fish physiology: Fish biomechanics. 1st Ed. 2006. Academic Press.
46.
BiewenerAPatekS.Animal locomotion.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2018.
47.
JFransje van WeerdenDAPReidCKHemelrijkA.Meta-analysis of steady undulatory swimming. Fish Fish2014;
15: 397–409.
