Experiments in Fluids

, 54:1439 | Cite as

Hummingbirds generate bilateral vortex loops during hovering: evidence from flow visualization

  • Sam Pournazeri
  • Paolo S. Segre
  • Marko Princevac
  • Douglas L. Altshuler
Research Article

Abstract

Visualization of the vortex wake of a flying animal provides understanding of how wingbeat kinematics are translated into the aerodynamic forces for powering and controlling flight. Two general vortex flow patterns have been proposed for the wake of hovering hummingbirds: (1) The two wings form a single, merged vortex ring during each wing stroke; and (2) the two wings form bilateral vortex loops during each wing stroke. The second pattern was proposed after a study with particle image velocimetry that demonstrated bilateral source flows in a horizontal measurement plane underneath hovering Anna’s hummingbirds (Calypte anna). Proof of this hypothesis requires a clear perspective of bilateral pairs of vortices. Here, we used high-speed image sequences (500 frames per second) of C. anna hover feeding within a white plume to visualize the vortex wake from multiple perspectives. The films revealed two key structural features: (1) Two distinct jets of downwards airflow are present under each wing; and (2) vortex loops around each jet are shed during each upstroke and downstroke. To aid in the interpretation of the flow visualization data, we analyzed high-speed kinematic data (1,000 frames per second) of wing tips and wing roots as C. anna hovered in normal air. These data were used to refine several simplified models of vortex topology. The observed flow patterns can be explained by either a single loop model with an hourglass shape or a bilateral model, with the latter being more likely. When hovering in normal air, hummingbirds used an average stroke amplitude of 153.6° (range 148.9°–164.4°) and a wingbeat frequency of 38.5 Hz (range 38.1–39.1 Hz). When hovering in the white plume, hummingbirds used shallower stroke amplitudes (\( \bar{x} \) = 129.8°, range 116.3°–154.1°) and faster wingbeat frequencies (\( \bar{x} \) = 41.1 Hz, range 38.5–44.7 Hz), although the bilateral jets and associated vortices were observed across the full kinematic range. The plume did not significantly alter the air density or constrain the sustained muscle contractile frequency. Instead, higher wingbeat frequencies likely incurred a higher metabolic cost with the possible benefit of allowing the birds to more rapidly escape from the visually disruptive plume.

Supplementary material

348_2012_1439_MOESM1_ESM.mp4 (4.5 mb)
The online video (S1) provides the image sequence of bird 6 during trial 5 from the rear-left perspective of the hovering hummingbird. The video shows the sequential development of a vortex loop on the left side of the bird. Frames 59-65 are depicted in figure 1. Frame rate speed has been reduced by 50 times. (MP4 4616 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM2_ESM.mp4 (4.5 mb)
The online video (S2) provides the image sequence of bird 6 during trial 3 demonstrating the frontal perspective of the bird while hovering. The development of vortex loops on the left and right side of the bird as well as the presence of wingtip and root vortices on the left side of the bird can be observed. This sequence is depicted in figure 2, with frame 101 in panels a and b, and frame 165 in panels d and e. Frame rate speed has been reduced by 50 times. (MP4 4615 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM3_ESM.mp4 (4.2 mb)
The online video (S3) provides the image sequence of bird 5 during trial 2 from an off axis rear perspective with a wide field of view of the hovering hummingbird. This video provides a view of the shape of the vortex tube connecting the vortices. Frame 58 is depicted in figure 2 (g,h). Frame rate speed has been reduced by 50 times. (MP4 4271 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM4_ESM.mp4 (4.3 mb)
The online video (S4) provides the image sequence of bird 6 during trial 9 from the lateral perspective of the bird while hovering. Evolution of distal vortices and the wingtip paths during the down- and up-strokes can be observed. Frame 37 is depicted in figure 2 (j,k). Frame rate speed has been reduced by 50 times. (MP4 4437 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM5_ESM.mp4 (10.6 mb)
The online video (S5) provides the image sequence of bird 4 from the rear perspective during hovering. This bird used the highest wing stroke amplitude and lowest wingbeat frequency when hovering in the plume. This video provides views of the wing tip and reversal vortices on the animal’s left side. Frames 347-355 are depicted in figure 3. Frame rate speed has been reduced by 50 times. (MP4 10831 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM6_ESM.m4v (4.5 mb)
The online video (S6) provides a 3D animation of the merged ring vortex model constructed using the available kinematic data. (M4V 4634 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM7_ESM.m4v (4.5 mb)
The online video (S7) provides a 3D animation of the indented merged vortex loop model constructed using the available kinematic data. (M4V 4609 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM8_ESM.m4v (4.5 mb)
The online video (S8) provides a 3D animation of the bilateral vortex loops model constructed using the available kinematic data. (M4V 4596 kb)
348_2012_1439_MOESM9_ESM.m4v (4.5 mb)
The online video (S9) provides a 3D animation of the concentric vortex rings model constructed using the available kinematic data. (M4V 4639 kb)

References

  1. Altshuler DL, Dudley R (2003) Kinematics of hovering hummingbird flight along simulated and natural elevational gradients. J Exp Biol 206:3139–3147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altshuler DL, Princevac M, Pan H, Lozano J (2009) Wake patterns of the wings and tail of hovering hummingbirds. Exp Fluids 46:835–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Altshuler DL, Dudley R, Heredia SM, McGuire JA (2010a) Allometry of hummingbird lifting performance. J Exp Biol 213:725–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Altshuler DL, Welch KC, Cho BH, Welch DB, Lin AF, Dickson WB, Dickinson MH (2010b) Neuromuscular control of wingbeat kinematics in Anna’s hummingbirds (Calypte anna). J Exp Biol 213:2507–2514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson JD (1991) Fundamentals of aerodynamics, 2nd edn. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Bomphrey RJ, Lawson NJ, Harding NJ, Taylor GK, Thomas ALR (2005) The aerodynamics of Manduca sexta: digital particle image velocimetry analysis of the leading-edge vortex. J Exp Biol 208:1079–1094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bomphrey RJ, Lawson NJ, Taylor GK, Thomas ALR (2006) Application of digital particle image velocimetry to insect aerodynamics: measurement of the leading-edge vortex and near wake of a Hawkmoth. Exp Fluids 40:546–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bomphrey RJ, Taylor GK, Thomas ALR (2009) Smoke visualization of free-flying bumblebees indicates independent leading-edge vortices on each wing pair. Exp Fluids 46:811–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buermann W, Chaves JA, Dudley R, McGuire JA, Smith TB, Altshuler DL (2011) Projected changes in elevational distribution and flight performance of montane Neotropical hummingbirds in response to climate change. Glob Change Biol 17:1671–1680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chai P, Dudley R (1995) Limits to vertebrate locomotor energetics suggested by hummingbirds hovering in heliox. Nature 377:722–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chai P, Millard D (1997) Flight and size constraints: hovering performance of large hummingbirds under maximal loading. J Exp Biol 200:2757–2763Google Scholar
  12. Chai P, Chen JS, Dudley R (1997) Transient hovering performance of hummingbirds under conditions of maximal loading. J Exp Biol 200:921–929Google Scholar
  13. Dickinson MH, Lehmann F-O, Sane SP (1999) Wing rotation and the aerodynamic basis of insect flight. Science 284:1954–1960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dudley R (1995) Extraordinary flight performance of orchid bees (Apidae: Euglossini) hovering in heliox (80% He/20% O2). J Exp Biol 198:1065–1070Google Scholar
  15. Ellington CP (1984) The aerodynamics of hovering insect flight. V. A vortex theory. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 305:115–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Epting RJ, Casey TM (1973) Power output and wing disc loading in hovering hummingbirds. Am Nat 107:761–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feinsinger P, Chaplin SB (1975) On the relationship between wing disc loading and foraging strategy in hummingbirds. Am Nat 109:217–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Feinsinger P, Colwell RK (1978) Community organization among neotropical nectar-feeding birds. Am Zool 18:779–795Google Scholar
  19. Feinsinger P, Colwell RK, Terborgh J, Chaplin SB (1979) Elevation and the morphology, flight energetics, and foraging ecology of tropical hummingbirds. Am Nat 113:481–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Green SI (ed) (1995) Fluid vortices. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Hedenström A, Johansson LC, Wolf M, von Busse R, Winter Y, Spedding GR (2007) Bat flight generates complex aerodynamic tracks. Science 316:894–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hedenström A, Muijres FT, von Busse R, Johansson LC, Winter Y, Spedding GR (2009) High-speed stereo DPIV measurement of wakes of two bat species flying freely in a wind tunnel. Exp Fluids 46:923–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hedrick TL (2008) Software techniques for two- and three-dimensional kinematic measurements of biological and biomimetic systems. Bioinspir Biomim 3:034001Google Scholar
  24. Henningsson P, Muijres FT, Hedenström A (2011) Time-resolved vortex wake of a common swift flying over a range of flight speeds. J R Soc Interface 8:807–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hubel TY, Riskin DK, Swartz SM, Breuer KS (2010) Wake structure and wing kinematics: the flight of the lesser dog-faced fruit bat, Cynopterus brachyotis. J Exp Biol 213:3427–3440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hubel TY, Hristov NI, Swartz SM, Breuer KS (2012) Changes in kinematics and aerodynamics over a range of speeds in Tadarida brasiliensis, the Brazilian free-tailed bat. J R Soc Interface 9:1120–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johansson LC, Hedenström A (2009) The vortex wake of blackcaps (Sylvia atricapilla L.) measured using high-speed digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV). J Exp Biol 212:3365–3376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kokshaysky NV (1979) Tracing the wake of a flying bird. Nature 279:146–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Muijres FT, Johansson LC, Barfield R, Wolf M, Spedding GR, Hedenström A (2008) Leading-edge vortex improves lift in slow-flying bats. Science 319:1250–1253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Muijres FT, Johansson LC, Winter Y, Hedenström A (2011) Comparative aerodynamic performance of flapping flight in two bat species using time-resolved wake visualization. J R Soc Interface 8:1418–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Muijres FT, Bowlin MS, Johansson LC, Hedenström A (2012) Vortex wake, downwash distribution, aerodynamic performance and wingbeat kinematics in slow-flying pied flycatchers. J R Soc Interface 9:292–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Norberg U, Kunz T, Steffensen J, Winter Y, von Helversen O (1993) The cost of hovering and forward flight in a nectar-feeding bat, Glossophaga soricina, estimated from aerodynamic theory. J Exp Biol 182:207–227Google Scholar
  33. Ortega-Jimenez VM, Dudley R (2012) Flying in the rain: hovering performance of Anna’s hummingbirds under varied precipitation. Proc R Soc B 279:3996–4002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pennycuick CJ (1988) On the reconstruction of Pterosaurs and their manner of flight, with notes on vortex wakes. Biol Rev 63:299–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rayner JMV (1979) A vortex theory of animal flight. Part 1. The vortex wake of a hovering animal. J Fluid Mech 91:697–730MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rayner JMV, Gordon R (1998) Vizualization and modelling of the wakes of flying birds. Biona Rep 13:165–173Google Scholar
  37. Spedding GR (1987) The wake of a kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) in flapping flight. J Exp Biol 127:59–78Google Scholar
  38. Spedding GR, Rayner JMV, Pennycuick CJ (1984) Momentum and energy in the wake of a pigeon (Columba livia) in slow flight. J Exp Biol 111:81–102Google Scholar
  39. Spedding GR, Rosén M, Hedenström A (2003) A family of vortex wakes generated by a thrush nightingale in free flight in a wind tunnel over its entire natural range of flight speeds. J Exp Biol 206:2313–2344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stolpe M, Zimmer K (1939) Der schwirrflug des kolibri im zeitlupenfilm. J Ornithol 87:136–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wang XX, Wu ZN (2010) Stroke-averaged lift forces due to vortex rings and their mutual interactions for a flapping flight model. J Fluid Mech 654:453–472MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Warrick DR, Tobalske BW, Powers DR (2005) Aerodynamics of the hovering hummingbird. Nature 435:1094–1097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Warrick DR, Tobalske BW, Powers DR (2009) Lift production in the hovering hummingbird. Proc R Soc B 276:3747–3752CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sam Pournazeri
    • 1
  • Paolo S. Segre
    • 2
    • 3
  • Marko Princevac
    • 1
  • Douglas L. Altshuler
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of California RiversideRiversideUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of California RiversideRiversideUSA
  3. 3.Department of ZoologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations