Slashdot Mirror


Mechanical Butterflies?

MImeKillEr writes "According to an article on BBC News, two researchers from Oxford took highspeed photographs of an Admiral butterfly in a specially-designed windtunnel to study how butterflies fly. The resulting research brings insight into small-scale flight dynamics. Although the article doesn't give an ETA on this, they expect to be able to build an aircraft with a 10cm wingspan that will be either autonomous or radio controlled. This will allow them to be used in rescue missions, cave exploration and possibly even on Mars."

14 of 340 comments (clear)

  1. Don't forget... by doubleyewdee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you could put cameras on these things they would be great for espionage. I imagine the military would love to see some tiny radio controlled flying vehicles with video capture capability.

    --


    you can take the road that takes you to the stars...
  2. Could you imagine... by myLobster · · Score: 5, Funny


    ...if the MSN marketroids ever got their hands on this technology...arrgh the butterflies...they're everywhere...

    --

    Ceci n'est pas une .sig
    1. Re:Could you imagine... by sheriff_p · · Score: 5, Funny

      Fly my prettys, fly!

      --
      Score:-1, Funny
  3. the World we Live in by buswolley · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "This will allow them to be used in rescue missions, cave exploration and possibly even on Mars."

    and possibly, terrorism. and possibly Big Brother's lil Helpers, and possibly a pest to native birds who try to eat them.

    What a world we live in!

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  4. So let me get this straight... by D-Cypell · · Score: 5, Funny

    We are planning to send a fleet of mechanical butterflies to mars...

    Good morning slashdot!

  5. I heard this on NPR by imrdkl · · Score: 5, Insightful
    And enjoyed the final note:
    Invasion by swarms of butterflies not likely in the future.
  6. In other news... by D-Cypell · · Score: 5, Funny

    Although the west assures the world that butterfly aircraft will be used for exploritory purposes, iraq believes that the butterflies will be used for offensive purposes...

    They have responded by ordering several large nets.

  7. mars mission? by n3k5 · · Score: 5, Informative

    In the atmosphere of Mars, the are only 1.5% the molecules we have. The composition is also evry different, but the point is: it's _very_ thin. OTOH, the gravity on Mars is about 38% of Earth's gravity.

    So if you have something that flies on Earth, it's still a long way to go until you get it to fly on Mars.

    --
    but what do i know, i'm just a model.
    1. Re:mars mission? by kramer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, first bear in mind that the Martian atmosphere is MUCH less dense than even the air at several km elevation. Standard pressure on earth at sea level is defined as one atmosphere. Standard martian ground level pressure is about 0.01 atm. Even at 20 km elevation (far higher than any insect could fly) earth's atmospheric pressure is still 0.05 atm, or still 5 times that of Mars.

      The weight of the wings will increase with the cube of the size of the wings, meanwhile the lifting power of the wings will increase with the square of the size of the wings. It is quite concievable that by the time you get the wings large enough to lift the body in a Martian atomsphere the wings will weigh too much to lift themselves and the body as well.

      Plus, just scaling the wings won't work. Any serious increase in the size of the wings will require you to increase the size of the motor, solenoid, dielectric fiber, or whatever is moving the wing.

      This is not to say it can't be done. I really have no clue if it's feasable on a Mars. It's just that just scaling the wings won't work.

    2. Re:mars mission? by ruzel · · Score: 4, Funny

      I would just like to thank kramer for pointing out the low liklihood that this development would work on Mars -- revealing the ridiculous tendency that tech writers have to send *everything*, possibly, to Mars. When I release my plans for a super effcient juicer or an internet-enabled Easy-bake oven I definitely intend to put in the press release that these things would be useful on Mars.

      Yeesh.
      ______________

  8. Re:Not for a long time. by n3k5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > The butterfly has had hundreds of
    > millions of years to develop it's
    > flight model.

    So what? The lotus flower had at least as much time to develop its self-cleaning petals, but it took human scientists just a few years to develop an agent that gives any glass surface the same property just by spraying it on. It forms the same nano structures that make water drops, which take every trace of dust and dirt with them, flow off completely, or even drops of super glue.

    > It's about the finely tuned control
    > mechanisim (in this case, butterfly brain)

    Oh look, behold the mighty powers of the butterfly brain, which is about as intelligent as my cheapo Casio watch. I don't see much problems with emulating this. By the way, most of the 'knowledge' about flying isn't in that tiny butterfly brain anyway, it's hardwired into the nervous system. The wings flap so fast that the delay of sending impulses all the way to the brain and back all the time would be too big.

    --
    but what do i know, i'm just a model.
  9. Re:mechanical birds = ornithopters by Richard+Kirk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Scale is important. Turbulence happens more readily at large scales. Viscous drag is more significant at smaller scales. Gravity is more significant at larger scales. A very small insect is effectively rowing through the air, using most if its effort to propel itself along. An aircraft spends most of its effort creating lift - and drag, because the two always go together - to keep itself up. So, we're not going to have 747's with butterfly-shaped wings flitting from building to building. Which is a shame....

  10. What's so good about evolution? by LondonLawyer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When things develop through evolution it tends to be by a series of small changes, each representing no improvement or a small improvement. This means that although evolution over a long time tends towards a working solution, it doesn't always tend to the best (most efficient) solution. The structure of your eye is a case in point - the blood supply lies in front of the light sensitive cells of the retina.

    What may be useful is that the process can find non-intuitive solutions to problems and there is a built in robustness to what emerges. Random variation has to have a wider tightrope to walk or any deviation from the norm would be fatal. Complex evolved systems also tend to have a built in redundancy as they grow out of similar and simpler systems which become interrelated.

    Slashdotters may remember a report a year or so old about an evolving robot which developed dragonfly-like flight. Why take a pattern found in nature (photographic the butterfly) and try to work out how it works when you can evolve it directly with a learning system? If you're going to ape evolved systems it seems much more sensible (and easier) to me to ape the process rather than the result.

  11. Re:What about fuel by Maddog+Batty · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We can produce land vehicles than can travel across continents without refuelling. No animal can do this.

    We can produce aeroplanes that will fly around the world without refuelling. No bird can do this.

    I see no fundamental reason why we can't produce a mechanical butterfly that can operate for days without refuelling as real butterflies can achieve this. If you are really small then the energy required to keep you aloft is really small also. I've absolutely no idea how much energy a butterfly requires to keep it in the air for a day but my guess would be that it is considerably less than that contained in one drop of petrol.

    --
    wot no sig