↓ Skip to main content

How wing kinematics affect power requirements and aerodynamic force production in a robotic bat wing

Overview of attention for article published in Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
How wing kinematics affect power requirements and aerodynamic force production in a robotic bat wing
Published in
Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, May 2014
DOI 10.1088/1748-3182/9/2/025008
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Bats display a wide variety of behaviors that require different amounts of aerodynamic force. To control and modulate aerodynamic force, bats change wing kinematics, which, in turn, may change the power required for wing motion. There are many kinematic mechanisms that bats, and other flapping animals, can use to increase aerodynamic force, e.g. increasing wingbeat frequency or amplitude. However, we do not know if there is a difference in energetic cost between these different kinematic mechanisms. To assess the relationship between mechanical power input and aerodynamic force output across different isolated kinematic parameters, we programmed a robotic bat wing to flap over a range of kinematic parameters and measured aerodynamic force and mechanical power. We systematically varied five kinematic parameters: wingbeat frequency, wingbeat amplitude, stroke plane angle, downstroke ratio, and wing folding. Kinematic values were based on observed values from free flying Cynopterus brachyotis, the species on which the robot was based. We describe how lift, thrust, and power change with increases in each kinematic variable. We compare the power costs associated with generating additional force through the four kinematic mechanisms controlled at the shoulder, and show that all four mechanisms require approximately the same power to generate a given force. This result suggests that no single parameter offers an energetic advantage over the others. Finally, we show that retracting the wing during upstroke reduces power requirements for flapping and increases net lift production, but decreases net thrust production. These results compare well with studies performed on C. brachyotis, offering insight into natural flight kinematics.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Sweden 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 69 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 21%
Researcher 14 19%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Professor 5 7%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 13 17%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 32 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Computer Science 3 4%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 15 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2025.
All research outputs
#3,835,805
of 31,482,640 outputs
Outputs from Bioinspiration & Biomimetics
#158
of 785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,305
of 257,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bioinspiration & Biomimetics
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,482,640 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 257,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.