Literature DB >> 25079868

Hummingbird wing efficacy depends on aspect ratio and compares with helicopter rotors.

Jan W Kruyt1, Elsa M Quicazán-Rubio2, GertJan F van Heijst3, Douglas L Altshuler4, David Lentink5.   

Abstract

Hummingbirds are the only birds that can sustain hovering. This unique flight behaviour comes, however, at high energetic cost. Based on helicopter and aeroplane design theory, we expect that hummingbird wing aspect ratio (AR), which ranges from about 3.0 to 4.5, determines aerodynamic efficacy. Previous quasi-steady experiments with a wing spinner set-up provide no support for this prediction. To test this more carefully, we compare the quasi-steady hover performance of 26 wings, from 12 hummingbird taxa. We spun the wings at angular velocities and angles of attack that are representative for every species and measured lift and torque more precisely. The power (aerodynamic torque × angular velocity) required to lift weight depends on aerodynamic efficacy, which is measured by the power factor. Our comparative analysis shows that AR has a modest influence on lift and drag forces, as reported earlier, but interspecific differences in power factor are large. During the downstroke, the power required to hover decreases for larger AR wings at the angles of attack at which hummingbirds flap their wings (p < 0.05). Quantitative flow visualization demonstrates that variation in hover power among hummingbird wings is driven by similar stable leading edge vortices that delay stall during the down- and upstroke. A side-by-side aerodynamic performance comparison of hummingbird wings and an advanced micro helicopter rotor shows that they are remarkably similar.
© 2014 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  aspect ratio; hovering; hummingbird; performance; quasi-steady; wing

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25079868      PMCID: PMC4233735          DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2014.0585

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J R Soc Interface        ISSN: 1742-5662            Impact factor:   4.118


  34 in total

Review 1.  The aerodynamics of insect flight.

Authors:  Sanjay P Sane
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.312

2.  Capillary-to-fiber geometry and mitochondrial density in hummingbird flight muscle.

Authors:  O Mathieu-Costello; R K Suarez; P W Hochachka
Journal:  Respir Physiol       Date:  1992-07

Review 3.  Hummingbird flight: sustaining the highest mass-specific metabolic rates among vertebrates.

Authors:  R K Suarez
Journal:  Experientia       Date:  1992-06-15

4.  Contractile properties of the pigeon supracoracoideus during different modes of flight.

Authors:  Bret W Tobalske; Andrew A Biewener
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.312

5.  Lift production in the hovering hummingbird.

Authors:  Douglas R Warrick; Bret W Tobalske; Donald R Powers
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-08-05       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Details of insect wing design and deformation enhance aerodynamic function and flight efficiency.

Authors:  John Young; Simon M Walker; Richard J Bomphrey; Graham K Taylor; Adrian L R Thomas
Journal:  Science       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Analysis of the transitional flow field over a fixed hummingbird wing.

Authors:  Yossef Elimelech; Charles P Ellington
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 3.312

8.  Three-dimensional kinematics of hummingbird flight.

Authors:  Bret W Tobalske; Douglas R Warrick; Christopher J Clark; Donald R Powers; Tyson L Hedrick; Gabriel A Hyder; Andrew A Biewener
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.312

9.  Fiber type homogeneity of the flight musculature in small birds.

Authors:  Kenneth C Welch; Douglas L Altshuler
Journal:  Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 2.231

10.  Ontogeny of aerodynamics in mallards: comparative performance and developmental implications.

Authors:  Terry R Dial; Ashley M Heers; Bret W Tobalske
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 3.312

View more
  22 in total

1.  Power reduction and the radial limit of stall delay in revolving wings of different aspect ratio.

Authors:  Jan W Kruyt; GertJan F van Heijst; Douglas L Altshuler; David Lentink
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2015-04-06       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 2.  The role of the leading edge vortex in lift augmentation of steadily revolving wings: a change in perspective.

Authors:  Mostafa R A Nabawy; William J Crowther
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.118

3.  Hummingbirds control turning velocity using body orientation and turning radius using asymmetrical wingbeat kinematics.

Authors:  Tyson J G Read; Paolo S Segre; Kevin M Middleton; Douglas L Altshuler
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.118

4.  Power of the wingbeat: modelling the effects of flapping wings in vertebrate flight.

Authors:  M Klein Heerenbrink; L C Johansson; A Hedenström
Journal:  Proc Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 2.704

Review 5.  Dynamic experimental rigs for investigation of insect wing aerodynamics.

Authors:  Paul Broadley; Mostafa R A Nabawy; Mark K Quinn; William J Crowther
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 4.293

6.  The evolution of darker wings in seabirds in relation to temperature-dependent flight efficiency.

Authors:  Svana Rogalla; Michaël P J Nicolaï; Sara Porchetta; Gertjan Glabeke; Claudia Battistella; Liliana D'Alba; Nathan C Gianneschi; Jeroen van Beeck; Matthew D Shawkey
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 4.293

7.  How Lovebirds Maneuver Rapidly Using Super-Fast Head Saccades and Image Feature Stabilization.

Authors:  Daniel Kress; Evelien van Bokhorst; David Lentink
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The influence of flight style on the aerodynamic properties of avian wings as fixed lifting surfaces.

Authors:  John J Lees; Grigorios Dimitriadis; Robert L Nudds
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-10-20       Impact factor: 2.984

9.  A Quasi-Steady Lifting Line Theory for Insect-Like Hovering Flight.

Authors:  Mostafa R A Nabawy; William J Crowthe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-08-07       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Three-dimensional simulation for fast forward flight of a calliope hummingbird.

Authors:  Jialei Song; Bret W Tobalske; Donald R Powers; Tyson L Hedrick; Haoxiang Luo
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 2.963

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.