The heaviest bat has a body mass of about 1.5 kg, which is about 10 times lower than the largest living bird species. Why this is so has puzzled scientists working on flight mechanics, since the power requirements increase approximately equally much for bats and birds. The solution lies in the muscular capacity in generating forces that beat the wings in active flight. While birds have one major depressor muscle responsible for a forceful downstroke, bats have several smaller muscles doing that same job. But the total muscle mass is smaller in bats, resulting in a lower maximum wingbeat frequency. When plotting scaling relationships for expected power required to fly, and power available from the flight muscles, it turns out that the power available curve (calculated on the basis of wingbeat frequency) does not increase as steeply as that of power required for flight. Where the two curves cross when plotted against body mass, you have the point of maximum mass for sustainable flight. In bats, this is about 1.5 kg, as shown in a new paper by Ulla Lindhe Norberg and Åke Norberg, of Gothenburg university, published in Journal of Experimental Biology. The same analysis was made earlier by Colin Pennycuick, which fixed the upper size sustained bird flight at about 12 kg. It seems as if birds have more muscle power allowing bigger size than bats. A question that follows is whether the basic bat design, having many flight muscles, prevent evolution of large size than about 1.5 kg, or if there are some additional factors limiting size?
10 February 2012
Sized by the wingbeat
The heaviest bat has a body mass of about 1.5 kg, which is about 10 times lower than the largest living bird species. Why this is so has puzzled scientists working on flight mechanics, since the power requirements increase approximately equally much for bats and birds. The solution lies in the muscular capacity in generating forces that beat the wings in active flight. While birds have one major depressor muscle responsible for a forceful downstroke, bats have several smaller muscles doing that same job. But the total muscle mass is smaller in bats, resulting in a lower maximum wingbeat frequency. When plotting scaling relationships for expected power required to fly, and power available from the flight muscles, it turns out that the power available curve (calculated on the basis of wingbeat frequency) does not increase as steeply as that of power required for flight. Where the two curves cross when plotted against body mass, you have the point of maximum mass for sustainable flight. In bats, this is about 1.5 kg, as shown in a new paper by Ulla Lindhe Norberg and Åke Norberg, of Gothenburg university, published in Journal of Experimental Biology. The same analysis was made earlier by Colin Pennycuick, which fixed the upper size sustained bird flight at about 12 kg. It seems as if birds have more muscle power allowing bigger size than bats. A question that follows is whether the basic bat design, having many flight muscles, prevent evolution of large size than about 1.5 kg, or if there are some additional factors limiting size?
Labels:
bat flight,
maximum size,
scaling,
wingbeat frequency
02 February 2012
New publication in French Academy journal
Labels:
bat-flapper,
leading edge vortex,
RoBat,
wind tunnel
20 January 2012
The Dickinson lab website in new dress
Browsing around I recently found that the Dickinson lab, where AFL memeber Florian Muijres now is a postdoc, has a new look. The old classic version can still be accessed, while the new lab website "FlyRanch" demarcates the move by this lab from CalTech, Los Angeles, to University of Washington, Seattle. The webiste shows the great range of research done by this lab. Have a look and get impressed. The lab members are assigned different characters and characteristics of typical fantasy literature creatures. The leader of the clan, overlord Michael himself is "ruthless and fearless"! Now we look forward to see which character Florian will assume.A new paper in Current Biology from FlyRanch deals with polarized light perception in fruit flies, and could be consulted as a typical contribution.
17 January 2012
Climate change affects flight speed in wandering albatrosses
A new study published in the current issue of Science reports about climate change related effects in flight behavior in wandering albatrosses, breeding on Crozet Islands in the southern Indian Ocean. Due to climate change related phenomena the mean wind speed has increased in the southern oceans, between 50 and 60 S. Albatrosses use dynamic soaring, which is a way of extracting energy by soaring in the wind gradient in the boundary layer of the sea. The stronger the wind, the faster the albatrosses can fly. A french team, lead by Henri Weimerskirch, has studied wandering albatrosses on the Crozet Islands during 20 years. During this period the winds have increased, and the scientists have been able to measure related properties in the albatrosses. The albatrosses now forage further to the south, their flight speed has increased from 10 to 12 m/s, and their daily travel rate during foraging journeys has increased from 500 to 700 km/day. Better foraging success has led to improved breeding success, and the albatrosses have increased by about 1 kg in body mass. It seems as if we here have a positive effect related to the ongoing climate change, but the scientists mention that the predicted scenario of wind change will come to a deterioration further down the trail, so the observed effects may be temporary. It is very nice, though, to see a study reporting an association between climate change and flight speed.
Labels:
albatross,
Crozet Isalnd,
Diomedea exculans,
flight speed,
wind
13 January 2012
Span efficiency of desert locusts
In a new paper, AFL-postdoc Per Henningsson, now working in the flight group at Oxford University, and Richard Bomphry have published a paper about "Time-varying span efficiency through the wingbeat of desert locusts" in the journal Interface. They use time-resolved PIV to work out the span efficiency, which is something that we have tried also in Lund. In a previous paper Richard Bomphrey had estimated that span-efficiency is 0.89 at mid-downstroke in the locust. The Oxford Group uses a slightly different calculation method that is customary in Lund, and so we will read this paper for our next lab meeting. The question is how much the difference in method matters to the final result, if it matters at all. It is nice to see the spread of PIV in the animal flight research community, and there are certainly still lots of research needed to be done. The answer, by the way, was 0.79.
Labels:
desert locust,
Schistocerca gegaria,
span efficiency
05 January 2012
New paper about aerodynamics in slow-flying flycatcher
Just of the press from the Journal of the Royal Society Interface is a paper about pied flycatcher aerodynamics, by aouthors Florian Muijres, Melissa Bowlin, Christoffer Johansson and Anders Hedenström. Stereo flow-visualization was used to study the wake vortices shed off the wings of flycatchers as they flew slowly in the wind tunnel. The results sow that the aerodynamic force is mainly from the downstroke, resulting in a closed vortex loop. The results also show that the tail is involved in deflecting the downwash, resulting in an aerodynamic efficiency comparable to that of cruising flight. During the upstroke the wings generate no significant forces, but the body-tail configuration does to some degree, and so the upstroke phase of slow flight is not completely uninteresting from an aerodynamics viewpoint.
Labels:
aerodynamics,
Ficedula hypoleuca,
pied flycatcher,
PIV,
slow flight,
wind tunnel
04 January 2012
Old and New Activities within Animal Flight Lab
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)