Advertisement

Meccanica

, Volume 53, Issue 4–5, pp 1105–1114 | Cite as

Spider weight dragging and lifting mechanics

Article
  • 198 Downloads

Abstract

Spiders can produce different types of silk for a variety of purposes, such as making webs for capturing prey, sheets for wrapping, anchorages for connecting threads to surfaces, nest-building, cocoons for protecting eggs, dragline for safe locomotion and ballooning. An additional mechanism, only recently video recorded and never discussed in the literature, is spider weight lifting. Of conceptual importance comparable to that of other key spider mechanisms such as ballooning, spider weight lifting—preceded by a dragging phase for vertical alignment of weight and anchorage—is studied here. It emerges as a smart technique, allowing a single spider to lift weights in principle of any entity just using a tiny pre-stress of the silk. Such a pre-stress already occurs naturally with the weight of the spider itself when it is suspended from a thread. Large deformations, high ultimate strain, nonlinear stiffening, re-tensioning of the silk fibers and extra height of the anchoring points are all characteristics of empirical spider silk and of this lifting technique. It will be demonstrated that they all help to increase the efficiency of the mechanism. Toy experiments inspired by the spider lifting are finally proposed and compared with the theory.

Keywords

Spider Silk Lifting Dragging 

Notes

Acknowledgements

N.M.P. is supported by the European Commission H2020 under the Graphene Flagship Core 1 No. 696656 (WP14 “Polymer composites”) and FET Proactive “Neurofibres” Grant No. 732344. N.M.P. has performed the toy experiments with the help of his children Giuseppe Maria, Benedetta and Maria Consolata, warmly acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Foelix RF (1996) Biology of spiders, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press/Georg Thieme Verlag, New York/StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lefevre T, Rousseau ME, Pezolet M (2007) Protein secondary structure and orientation in silk as revealed by Raman spectromicroscopy. Biophys J 92(8):2885–2895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vollrath F, Mohren W (1985) Spiral geometry in the garden spider’s orb web. Naturwissenschaften 72(12):666–667ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vollrath F (2010) Spider silk: evolution and 400 million years of spinning, waiting, snagging, and mating. Nature 466(7304):319ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vollrath F, Knight DP (2001) Liquid crystalline spinning of spider silk. Nature 410(6828):541–548ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Agnarsson I, Kuntner M, Blackledge TA (2010) Bioprospecting finds the toughest biological material: extraordinary silk from a giant riverine orb spider. PLoS ONE 5(9):e11234ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Du N et al (2006) Design of superior spider silk: from nanostructure to mechanical properties. Biophys J 91(12):4528–4535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Omenetto FG, Kaplan DL (2010) New opportunities for an ancient material. Science 329(5991):528–531ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shao ZZ, Vollrath F (2002) Materials: surprising strength of silkworm silk. Nature 418(6899):741ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu Y, Shao ZZ, Vollrath F (2005) Relationships between supercontraction and mechanical properties of spider silk. Nat Mater 4(12):901–905ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Swanson BO et al (2006) Variation in the material properties of spider dragline silk across species. Appl Phys A Mater Sci Process 82(2):213–218ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gosline JM et al (1999) The mechanical design of spider silks: from fibroin sequence to mechanical function. J Exp Biol 202(23):3295–3303 (266) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swanson BO et al (2009) The evolution of complex biomaterial performance: the case of spider silk. Integr Comp Biol 49(1):21–31MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rammensee S et al (2008) Assembly mechanism of recombinant spider silk proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(18):6590–6595ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sahni V et al (2012) Cobweb-weaving spiders produce different attachment discs for locomotion and prey capture. Nat Commun 3(1106):1–7Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vollrath F et al (1996) Structural organization of spider silk. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 263(1367):147–151ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lazaris A et al (2002) Spider silk fibers spun from soluble recombinant silk produced in mammalian cells. Science 295(5554):472–476ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lin S et al (2015) Predictive modelling-based design and experiments for synthesis and spinning of bioinspired silk fibres. Nat Commun 6:6892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alam MS, Wahab MA, Jenkins CH (2007) Mechanics in naturally compliant structures. Mech Mater 39(2):145–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aoyanagi Y, Okumura K (2010) Simple model for the mechanics of spider webs. Phys Rev Lett 104(3):038102ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ko FK, Jovicic J (2004) Modeling of mechanical properties and structural design of spider web. Biomacromol 5(3):780–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Keten S, Buehler MJ (2010) Nanostructure and molecular mechanics of spider dragline silk protein assemblies. J R Soc Interface 7(53):1709–1721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alam MS, Jenkins CH (2005) Damage tolerance in naturally compliant structures. Int J Damage Mech 14(4):365–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hansell MH (2005) Animinal architecture, 1st edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tarakanova A, Buehler MJ (2012) The role of capture spiral silk properties in the diversification of orb webs. J R Soc Interface 9(77):3240–3248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pugno N (2011) The theory of multiple peeling. Int J Fract 171(2):185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Varenberg M, Pugno NM, Gorb SN (2010) Spatulate structures in biological fibrillar adhesion. Soft Matter 6(14):3269–3272ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bosia F, Buehler MJ, Pugno NM (2010) Hierarchical simulations for the design of supertough nanofibers inspired by spider silk. Phys Rev E 82(5):056103ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Berardo A, Pantano MF, Pugno N (2016) Slip knots and unfastening topologies enhance toughness without reducing strength of silk fibroin fibres. Interface Focus 6:20150060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bosia F, Lepore E, Alvarez NT, Miller P, Shanov V, Pugno N (2016) Knotted synthetic polymer or carbon nanotube microfibres with enhanced toughness, up to 1400 J/g. Carbon 102:116–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pantano MF, Berardo A, Pugno N (2016) Tightening slip knots in raw and degummed silk to increase toughness without losing strength. Sci Rep 6:18222ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pugno N (2014) The “Egg of Columbus” for making the world’s toughest fibres. PLoS ONE 9(4):e93079ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cranford SW, Buehler MJ (2012) Biomateriomics, 1st edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Agnarsson I, Blackledge TA (2009) Can a spider web be too sticky? Tensile mechanics constrains the evolution of capture spiral stickiness in orb-weaving spiders. J Zool 278(2):134–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Opell BD, Bond JE (2001) Changes in the mechanical properties of capture threads and the evolution of modern orb-weaving spiders. Evol Ecol Res 3(5):567–581Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sensenig A, Agnarsson I, Blackledge TA (2010) Behavioural and biomaterial coevolution in spider orb webs. J Evol Biol 23(9):1839–1856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Boutry C, Blackledge TA (2009) Biomechanical variation of silk links spinning plasticity to spider web function. Zoology 112(6):451–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cranford SW et al (2012) Nonlinear material behaviour of spider silk yields robust webs. Nature 482(7383):72–76ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pugno NM, Cranford S, Buehler MJ (2013) Synergetic material and structural optimization yields robust spider web anchorages. Small 9:2747–2756CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Bio-Inspired and Graphene Nanomechanics, Department of Civil, Environmental and Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly
  2. 2.School of Engineering and Materials ScienceQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Ket Lab, Edoardo Amaldi FoundationItalian Space AgencyRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations