Skip Navigation

Integrative and Comparative Biology 2002 42(2):232-242; doi:10.1093/icb/42.2.232
© 2002 by The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Walker, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


Functional Morphology and Virtual Models: Physical Constraints on the Design of Oscillating Wings, Fins, Legs, and Feet at Intermediate Reynolds Numbers1

Jeffrey A. Walker2,1
1 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Southern Maine, 96 Falmouth St., Portland, Maine 04103

Why do some animals swim by rowing appendages back and forth while others fly by flapping them up and down? One hypothesis suggests the answer lies in the sharply divergent physical environments encountered by small, slow animals, and large, fast animals. Flapping appendages allow large animals to move through a fluid environment quickly and efficiently. As size and speed decrease, however, viscous drag increasingly dominates the force balance, with negative consequences for both rowing and flapping appendages. Nevertheless, comparative data suggest that flapping does not occur in animals at Reynolds numbers (Re) less than about 15. I used a computer simulation experiment to address the question, "Below what Re is rowing more effective than flapping?" The simulation, which employed a simple quasi-steady, blade-element model of virtual oscillating appendages, has several important results. First, the mechanical efficiency of both rowing and flapping decrease dramatically with scale. Second, the performance of rowing can increase substantially by taking advantage of several dynamic shape modifications, including area and span reduction during the recovery stroke. Finally, the relative performance of rowing and flapping is dependent on the advance ratio, which is a function of the travel speed relative to the oscillation frequency. The model predicts that rowing is more efficient than flapping at Re < 20 for animals moving throughout the range of typically observed advance ratios.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Exp. Biol.Home page
B. J. Borrell, J. A. Goldbogen, and R. Dudley
Aquatic wing flapping at low Reynolds numbers: swimming kinematics of the Antarctic pteropod, Clione antarctica
J. Exp. Biol., August 1, 2005; 208(15): 2939 - 2949.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
J. A. Walker and M. W. Westneat
Kinematics, Dynamics, and Energetics of Rowing and Flapping Propulsion in Fishes
Integr. Comp. Biol., November 1, 2002; 42(5): 1032 - 1043.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.