Force balance in the take-off of a pierid butterfly: relative importance and timing of leg impulsion and aerodynamic forces

Abstract

SUMMARYUp to now, the take-off stage has remained an elusive phase of insect flight that was relatively poorly explored compared with other maneuvers. An overall assessment of the different mechanisms involved in force production during take-off has never been explored. Focusing on the first downstroke, we have addressed this problem from a force balance perspective in butterflies taking off from the ground. In order to determine whether the sole aerodynamic wing force could explain the observed motion of the insect, we have firstly compared a simple analytical model of the wing force with the acceleration of the insect's center of mass estimated from video tracking of the wing and body motions. Secondly, wing kinematics were also used for numerical simulations of the aerodynamic flow field. Similar wing aerodynamic forces were obtained by the two methods. However, neither are sufficient, nor is the inclusion of the ground effect, to predict faithfully the body acceleration. We have to resort to the leg forces to obtain a model that best fits the data. We show that the median and hind legs display an active extension responsible for the initiation of the upward motion of the insect's body, occurring before the onset of the wing downstroke. We estimate that legs generate, at various times, an upward force that can be much larger than all other forces applied to the insect's body. The relative timing of leg and wing forces explains the large variability of trajectories observed during the maneuvers. Supplementary material available online at

Surface tension dominates insect flight on fluid interfaces

“…This argues against the hypothesis of a transition between interfacial and airborne flight simply by increasing wing force. However, it highlights the importance of additional take-off mechanisms as observed by Marden et al (2000) and Bimbard et al (2013), such as reducing the number of legs in contact with water or jumping off the surface. An important possible contribution to further enhancing the A wide range of q shows five distinct trajectory regimes: (i) periodic and confined to interface, period equal to or half the wingbeat period; (ii) chaotic, confined to the interface; (iii) chaotic, takes off from the interface with some time delay; (iv) periodic and confined to interface, period equal to wingbeat period; (v) instantaneous take-off.…”

On the diverse roles of fluid dynamic drag in animal swimming and flying

“…Of course, 'insect-inspired' is a rather broad label, considering the wide variety of insect wing morphologies and kinematics, and one can reasonably expect different force balances in, say, tiny insects performing clap-fling [100,101] or larger insects in cruising flight [102] or taking-off [103]. Wing compliance has been identified as one of the key points that determine the performance of flapping wings [82,83,[104][105][106].…”

Whiteflies stabilize their take-off with closed wings

“…The maximal upwards acceleration should be limited by the aerodynamic performance of the wings and the maximal power output of the flight muscles (Marden, 1987). However, pushing against the ground with the legs can be used to achieve steeper and/ or faster take-offs (Bimbard et al, 2013;Pond, 1972;Provini et al, 2012). The contribution of the leg thrust for take-off may range from 0% in animals that rely solely on the wings (e.g.…”