Advertisement

Materials Design Principles of Fish Scales and Armor

  • Hermann Ehrlich
Chapter
Part of the Biologically-Inspired Systems book series (BISY, volume 4)

Abstract

Models for new engineering designs are based on high-performance natural materials and systems including biological materials. Fish scales, which serve in the animal for many functional roles simultaneously, possess high biomimetic potential for bioinspiration and development of different armor-based constructs, superoleophobic as well as self cleaning surfaces. The diversity of fish scale shapes, their mechanical properties and broad variety of biomimetic applications are discussed in this chapter.

Keywords

Drag Reduction Fish Scale Pressure Drag Fish Skin Armor System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Banerjee I, Pangule RC, Kane RS (2011) Antifouling coatings: recent developments in the design of surfaces that prevent fouling by proteins, bacteria, and marine organisms. Adv Mater 23(6):690–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bechert DW, Hoppe G, Reif WE (1985) On the drag reduction of the shark skin. In: AIAA shear flow control conference, vol AIAA 85–0546. AIAA, Boulder, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  3. Bechert DW, Bruse M, Hage W et al (1997) Experiments on drag reducing surfaces and their optimization with an adjustable geometry. J Fluid Mech 338:59–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benjanuvatra N, Dawson G, Blanksby B (2002) Comparison of buoyancy, passive and net active drag forces between Fastskin TM and standard swimsuits. J Sci Med Sport 5:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhushan B (2011) Biomimetics inspired surfaces for drag reduction and oleophobicity/philicity. Beilstein J Nanotechnol 2:66–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhushan B (2012) Bioinspired structured surfaces. Langmuir 28(3):1698–1714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bigi A, Gandolfi M, Koch MHJ et al (1996) X–ray diffraction study of in vitro calcification of tendon collagen. Biomaterials 17:1195–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bishop MC (2002) Lorica segmentata vol I. A handbook of articulated roman plate armour, JRMES monograph 1. The Armatura Press, Duns, pp vii–120Google Scholar
  9. Blake RW (1983) Fish locomotion. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Blake RW (2004) Fish functional design and swimming performance. J Fish Biol 65(1193):1222Google Scholar
  11. Brennan AB, Baney RH, Carman ML, Estes TG, Feinberg AW, Wilson LH, Schumacher JF (2006) Surface topography for non–toxic bioadhesion control. US patent no 7,143,709, 5 Dec 2006Google Scholar
  12. Brown M (2012) Piranha-proof fish offer body armour inspiration. http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-02/13/piranha-proof-fish. Accessed 14 June 2012. Published on-line 13 Feb 2012. Copyright © 2012, Condé Nast UK. Reprinted with permission
  13. Browning et al (2013) Reprinted from Browning A, Ortiz C, Boyce MC (2013) Mechanics of composite elasmoid fish scale assemblies and their bioinspired analogues. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 19:75–86. Copyright (2013), with permission from ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  14. Bruet BJF (2008) Multiscale structural and mechanical design of mineralized biocomposites. Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Bruet et al (2008) Reprinted by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd: Bruet BJF, Song J, Boyce MC and Ortiz C (2008) Materials design principles of ancient fish armour. Nat Mater 7:748–756. Copyright © 2008, Rights Managed by Nature Publishing GroupGoogle Scholar
  16. Bushnell D, Moore K (1991) Drag reduction in nature. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 23:65–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Callow JA, Callow ME (2011) Trends in the development of environmentally friendly fouling–resistant marine coatings. Nat Commun 2:244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ceramic Armor/Military Defense & Security (published on-line http://www.coorstek.com/markets/aerospace_defense/armor_protection.php), Accessed 15 May 2014. Copyright © 2014 CoorsTek, Inc. Reprinted with permission
  19. Cheng Q, Li M, Yang F et al (2012) An underwater pH–responsive superoleophobic surface with reversibly switchable oil–adhesion. Soft Matter 8:6740–6743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chung et al (2007) Reprinted with permission from Chung KK, Schumacher JF, Sampson EM et al (2007) Impact of engineered surface microtopography on biofilm formation of Staphylococcus aureus. Biointerphases 2(2):89–94. Copyright 2007, AIP Publishing LLCGoogle Scholar
  21. Colgate JE, Lynch KM (2004) Mechanics and control of swimming: a review. IEEE J Ocean Eng 29(660):673Google Scholar
  22. Creaser CW (1926) The structure and growth of scales of fishes in relation to the interpretation of their life history with special reference to the sunfish Eupomotis gibbosus. Misc Publ Univ Michigan Mus Zool 17:1–82Google Scholar
  23. Cui J, Fu Y (2012) A numerical study on pressure drop in microchannel flow with different bionic micro–grooved surfaces. Bionic Eng 9:99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Currey JD, Brear K (1990) Hardness, Young’s modulus and yield stress in mammalian mineralized tissues. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1:14–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dean B, Bhushan B (2010) Shark-skin surfaces for fluid-drag reduction in turbulent flow: a review. Phil Trans R Soc A 368(1929):4775–4806, by permission of the Royal SocietyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fratzl P, Weinkamer R (2007) Nature’s hierarchical materials. Progr Mater Sci 52(8):1263–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Garrano et al (2012) Reprinted from Garrano MCA, La Rosa G, Zhang D, Niu LN, Tay FR, Majd H, Arola D (2012) On the mechanical behavior of scales from Cyprinus carpio. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 7:17–29. Copyright (2012), with permission from ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  28. Genzer J, Marmur A (2008) Biological and synthetic self–cleaning surfaces. MRS Bull 33:742–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goldsworthy AK (1996) The Roman army at war 100 BC–200AD. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Han X, Wang J (2011) A novel method for fabrication of the biomimetic shark–skin coating. Adv Mater Res 239–242:3014–3017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Han X, Zhang DY (2008) Study on the micro–replication of shark skin. Sci China Ser E Tech Sci 51:890–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Han X, Zhang D, Li X, Li Y (2008) Bio–replicated forming of the biomimetic drag–reducing surfaces in large area based on shark skin. Chinese Sci Bull 53:1587–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hebrank MR (1980) Mechanical properties and locomotor functions of eel skin. Biol Bull 158:58–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Herodotus (1954) The histories. Penguin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Hochschule Bremen (2007) Europäische patentanmeldung “antifouling coating” EP 06 018 001.5Google Scholar
  36. Howell D, Behrends B (2006) A review of surface roughness in antifouling coatings illustrating the importance of cutoff length. Biofouling 22(5–6):401–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Humer F (2006) Legionsadler und Druidenstab. Archäologischer Park Carnunthum, Petronell-Carnuntum, 327 ppGoogle Scholar
  38. Ikom et al (2003) Reprinted from Ikom T, Kobayashi H, Tanakaa J, Walshb D, Mann S (2003) Microstructure, mechanical, and biomimetic properties of fish scales from Pagrus major. J Struct Biol 142(3):327–333. Copyright (2003), with permission from ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  39. Kesel AB, Liedert R (2007a) Antifouling coating. EP 06 018 001.5. 2007Google Scholar
  40. Kesel AB, Liedert R (2007b) Learning from nature: non–toxic biofouling control by shark skin effect. In: SEB 2007 Abstracts. CBP Part A 146(4):130Google Scholar
  41. Landreneau EB (2011) Scales and scale–like structures. Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College StationGoogle Scholar
  42. Lang AW, Motta P, Hidalgo P, Westcott M (2008) Bristled shark skin: a microgeometry for boundary layer control? Bioinsp Biomim 3:046005 (9pp). doi: 10.1088/1748-3182/3/4/046005. Copyright © 2008 IOP Publishing Ltd. Reprinted with permissionCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lauder GV (2011) Swimming hydrodynamics: ten questions and the technical approaches needed to resolve them. Exp Fluids 51:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Laufer B (1914) Chinese clay figures, vol 13. Field Museum of Natural History, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  45. Lee S–J, Lee S–H (2001) Flow field analysis of a turbulent boundary layer over a riblet surface. Exp Fluids 30:153–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lin et al (2011) Reprinted from Lin YS, Wei CT, Olevsky EA, Meyers MA (2011) Mechanical properties and the laminate structure of Arapaima gigas scales. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 4(7):1145–1156. Copyright (2011), with permission from ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  47. Liu K, Jiang L (2011) Bio–inspired design of multiscale structures for function integration. Nano Today 6:155–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Liu K, Jiang L (2012) Bio–Inspired self–cleaning surfaces. Annu Rev Mater Res 42:231–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Liu MJ, Wang ST, Wei ZX et al (2009) Bioinspired design of a superoleophobic and low adhesive water/solid interface. Adv Mater 21:665–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Liu X, Gao J, Xue Z et al (2012) Bioinspired oil strider floating at the oil/water interface supported by huge superoleophobic force. ACS Nano 6(6):5614–5620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mann S (2001) Biomineralization. Principles and concepts in bioinorganic materials chemistry. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Meunier F, Brito P (2004) Histology and morphology of the scales in some extinct and extant teleosts. Cybium 28:225–235Google Scholar
  53. Mollendorf J, Termin A, Openheim E et al (2004) Effect of swim suit design on passive drag. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36:1029–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Motta P (1977) Anatomy and functional morphology of dermal collagen fibers in sharks. Copeia 1977:454–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Oeffner and Lauder (2012) Republished with permission of The Company of Biologists Ltd, from Oeffner J, Lauder GV (2012) The hydrodynamic function of shark skin and two biomimetic applications. J Exp Biol 215:785–795. Copyright (2012); permission conveyed through Copyright Clearance Center, IncGoogle Scholar
  56. Ortiz C, Boyce MC (2008) Materials science–bioinspired structural materials. Science 319:1053–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Price P (1983) An interesting find of Lorica Plumata from the Roman Fortress at UK. In: Bishop MC (ed) Roman military equipment: proceedings of a seminar held in the department of ancient history and classical archaeology at the University of Sheffield, SheffieldGoogle Scholar
  58. Robinson HR (1975) The armour of imperial Rome. Lionel Leventhal Limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  59. Salta M, Wharton JA, Stoodley P et al (2010) Designing biomimetic antifouling surfaces. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 368(1929):4729–4754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schumacher JF, Carman ML, Estes TG et al (2007) Engineered antifouling microtopographies–effect of feature size, geometry, and roughness on settlement of zoospores of the green alga Ulva. Biofouling 23(1–2):55–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shadwick RE, Lauder GV (2006) Fish biomechanics. Elsevier Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  62. Shephard KL (1994) Functions for fish mucus. Rev Fish Biol Fish 4:401–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sire JY, Donoghue PCJ, Vickaryous M (2009) Origin and evolution of the integumentary skeleton in non–tetrapod vertebrates. J Anat 214:409–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Song J (2011) Multiscale materials design of natural exoskeletons: fish armor. PhD dissertation, Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 282 pGoogle Scholar
  65. Song et al (2010) Reprinted from Song J, Reichert S, Kallai I et al (2010) Quantitative microstructural studies of the armor of the marine threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). J Struct Biol 171(3):318–331. Copyright (2010) with permission from ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  66. Song J, Ortiz C, Boyce MC (2011) Threat–protection mechanics of an armored fish. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 4(5):699–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sudo S, Tsuyuki K, Ito Y et al (2002) A study on the surface shape of fish scales. JSME Int J Ser C 45:1100–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Timms HWM (1905) The development, structure and morphology of the scales in some teleostean fish. Quart J Micr Soc 49:39–69Google Scholar
  69. Torres FG, Troncoso OP, Nakamatsu J et al (2008) Characterization of the nanocomposite laminate structure occurring in fish scales from Arapaima gigas. Mater Sci Eng C 28:1276–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tuteja et al (2007) From Tuteja A, Choi W, Ma M et al (2007) Designing superoleophobic surfaces. Science 318(5856):1618–22. Reprinted with permission from AAASGoogle Scholar
  71. Vermeij GJ (2006) Nature: an economic history. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  72. Vernerey FJ, Barthelat F (2010) Reprinted from Vernerey FJ, Barthelat F (2010) On the mechanics of fishscale structures. Int J Solids Struct 47(17):2268–2275. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd, with permission from ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  73. Wainwright SA, Vosburgh F, Hebrank JH (1978) Shark skin: a function in locomotion. Science 202:747–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wang LF, Song JH, Ortiz C et al (2009) Anisotropic design of a multilayered biological exoskeleton. J Mater Res 24(12):3477–3494. © Cambridge University Press 2009. Reproduced with permissionCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wang X, Li J, Lee JD, Eskandarian A (2012) On the multiscale modeling of multiple physics. In: Li S, Gao X (eds) Handbook of micromechanics and nanomechanics. Pan Stanford Publishing Pte Ltd, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  76. Wilga CD, Lauder GV (2002) Function of the heterocercal tail in sharks: quantitative wake dynamics during steady horizontal swimming and vertical maneuvering. J Exp Biol 205:2365–2374Google Scholar
  77. Wilga CD, Lauder GV (2004) Hydrodynamic function of the shark’s tail. Nature 430:850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Young GC (2010) Placoderms (armored fish): dominant vertebrates of the Devonian period. Annu Rev Earth Planet Sci 38:523–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zhang L, Zhang Z, Wang P (2012a) Smart surfaces with switchable superoleophilicity and superoleophobicity in aqueous media: toward controllable oil/water separation. NPG Asia Mater 4:e8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Zhang X, Gu J, Cao W et al (2012b) Bilayer–fish–scale ultrabroad terahertz bandpass filter. Optics Lett 37:906–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zhu et al (2011) With kind permission from Springer Science+Business Media: Zhu D, Vernerey F, Barthelat F (2011) The Mechanical Performance of Teleost Fish Scales. In: Mechanics of biological systems and materials, vol 2: conference proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics series. Springer. Copyright © 2011, Springer Science+Business Media, LLCGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhu D, Barthelat F, Vernerey FJ (2012a) The intricate multiscale mechanical response of natural fish–scale composites. In: Li S, Gao X (eds) Handbook of micromechanics and nanomechanics. Pan Stanford Publishing Pte Ltd, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  83. Zhu D, Ortega CF, Motamedi R et al (2012b) Structure and mechanical performance of a “modern” fish scale. Adv Eng Mater 14:B185–B194. Copyright © 2012 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim. Reprinted with permission from John Wiley and SonsCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hermann Ehrlich
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Experimental PhysicsTU Bergakademie FreibergFreibergGermany

Personalised recommendations