Numerical simulations demonstrate that the double tapering of the spatualae of lizards and insects maximize both detachment resistance and stability
Source abstract
Abstract
Many biological attachment devices of insects, spiders and geckos consist of arrays of hairs (setae), which are terminated by contact elements of different shapes. However, the most frequently observed shape is a thin plate-like spatula. In spite of a rather wide range of sizes, most spatulae of different animals are not uniform, but rather possess a gradient in thickness and width. Here we show that the spatulae of insects and geckos become gradually thinner and wider approaching the end. This geometrical effect is explained in the present paper, by using a numerical approach for the modelling of the van der Waals adhesion and friction between the contact elements and the substrate. The approach suggests that the observed negative thickness gradient contributes to the improvement of the adhesion resistance, whereas the positive width gradient increases the stability of the detachment, probably a key factor in controlling the animal walking.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions · Force Microscopy Techniques and Applications · Gear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. Aristotle (343 B.C.) Historia animalium, http://etext.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/AriHian.html
2. Arzt E, Gorb S, Spolenak R (2003) From micro to nano contacts in biological attachment devices. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 10603–1060610.1073/pnas.1534701100 ↗
3. Autumn K (2007) Gecko adhesion: structure, function, and applications. MRS Bull 32: 473–47810.1557/mrs2007.80 ↗
4. Autumn K, Dittmore A, Santos D, Spenko M, Cutkosky M. (2006) Frictional adhesion: a new angle on gecko attachment. J Exp Biol 209: 3569–357910.1242/jeb.02486 ↗
5. Autumn K, Gravish N (2008) Gecko adhesion: evolutionary nanotechnology. Phil Trans Roy Soc A 366:1575–1590. http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/10.1098/rsta.2007.2173 ↗
6. Autumn K, Hsieh ST, Dudek DM, Chen J, Chitaphan C, Full JR (2007) Dynamics of geckos running vertically. J Exp Biol 209: 260–27210.1242/jeb.01980 ↗
7. Autumn K, Liang YA, Hsieh ST, Zesch W, Chan WP, Kenny TW, Fearing R, Full RJ (2000) Adhesive force of a single gecko foot-hair. Nature 405: 681–68510.1038/35015073 ↗
8. Autumn K, Peattie AM (2002) Mechanisms of adhesion in geckos. Int Comp Biol 42: 1081–109010.1093/icb/42.6.1081 ↗
9. Bergmann PJ, Irschick DJ (2005) Effects of temperature on maximum clinging ability in a diurnal gecko: evidence for a passive clinging mechanism?. J Exp Zool 303A: 785–79110.1002/jez.a.210 ↗
10. Boettger J (1997) All-electron full-potential calculation of the electronic band structure, elastic constants, and equation of state for graphite. Phys Rev B 55(17): 11202–1121110.1103/PhysRevB.55.11202 ↗
11. Dellit WD (1934) Zur anatomie und physiologie der geckozehe. Z Naturwiss 68: 613–656
12. Gao H, Wang X, Yao H, Gorb S, Arzt E (2005) Mechanics of hierarchical adhesion structures of geckos. Mech Mater 37: 275–28510.1016/j.mechmat.2004.03.008 ↗
13. Gennaro JGJ (1969) The gecko grip. Nat Hist 78: 36–43
14. Girifalco LA, Hodak M, Lee RS (2000) Carbon nanotubes, buckyballs, ropes, and a universal graphitic potential. Phys Rev B 62(19):13104–13110. http://prb.aps.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.62.13104 ↗
15. Girifalco LA, Lad RA (1956) Energy of cohesion, compressibility, and the potential energy functions of graphite system. J Chem Phys 25(4):693–697. http://jcp.aip.org/10.1063/1.1743030 ↗
16. Gorb SN (2001) Attachment devices of insect cuticle. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht
17. Haeshin L, Bruce PL, Phillip BM (2007) A reversible wet/dry adhesive inspired by mussels and geckos. Nature 448: 338–34110.1038/nature05968 ↗
18. Hanfland M, Beister H, Syassen K (1989) Graphite under pressure: equation of state and first-order Raman modes. Phys Rev B 39(17): 12598–1260310.1103/PhysRevB.39.12598 ↗
19. Hiller U (1968) Untersuchungen zum feinbau und zur funktion der haftborsten von reptilien. Z Morphol Tiere 62: 307–36210.1007/BF00401561 ↗
20. Huber G, Gorb SN, Spolenak R, Arzt E (2005a) Resolving the nanoscale adhesion of individual gecko spatulae by atomic force microscopy. Biol Lett 1: 2–410.1098/rsbl.2004.0254 ↗
21. Huber G, Mantz H, Spolenak R, Mecke K, Jacobs K, Gorb SN, Arzt E (2005b) Evidence for capillarity contributions to gecko adhesion from single spatula nanomechanical measurements. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 16293–1629610.1073/pnas.0506328102 ↗
22. Kendall K (1975) Thin-film peeling-the elastic term. J Phys D Appl Phys 8:1449–1452. http://iopscience.iop.org/0022-372710.1088/0022-3727/8/13/005 ↗
23. Pugno NM (2007) Towards a spiderman suit: large invisible cables and self-cleaning releasable super-adhesive materials. J Phys: Condens Matter 19: 39500110.1088/0953-8984/19/39/395001 ↗
24. Pugno NM (2008) Spiderman gloves. Nano Today 3: 36–4210.1016/S1748-0132(08)70063-X ↗
25. Pugno N, Lepore E (2008) Observation of optimal gecko’s adhesion on nanorough surfaces. Biosystems 94: 218–22210.1016/j.biosystems.2008.06.009 ↗
26. Pugno N, Lepore E (2008) Living tokay geckos display adhesion times following the Weibull statistics. J Adhesion 84: 949–962
27. Qian D, Liu WK, Ruoff RS (2001) Mechanics of C60 in nanotubes. J Phys Chem B 105: 10753–1075810.1021/jp0120108 ↗
28. Ruoff RS, Ruoff AL (1991) The bulk modulus of Ceo molecules and crystals: a molecular mechanical approach. Appl Phys Lett 59(13): 1553–155510.1063/1.106280 ↗
29. Russell AP (1975) A contribution to the functional analysis of the foot of the Tokay, Gekko gecko (Reptilia: Gekkonidae). J Zool Lond 176: 437–47610.1111/j.1469-7998.1975.tb03215.x ↗
30. Russell AP (1986) The morphological basis of weight-bearing in the scansors of the tokay gecko (Repitilia: Sautia). Can J Zool 64: 948–95510.1139/z86-144 ↗
31. Ruibal R, Ernst V (1965) The structure of the digital setae of lizards. J Morphol 117:271–294. http://onlinelbrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1097-468710.1002/jmor.1051170302 ↗
32. Schleich HH, Kästle W (1986) Ultrastrukturen an gecko-zehen (Reptilia: Sauria: Gekkonidae). Amphib Reptil 7: 141–16610.1163/156853886X00361 ↗
33. Schmidt HR (1904) Zur anatomie und physiologie der geckopfote. Z Naturwiss 39: 551–563
34. Simmermacher G (1884) Untersuchungen über haftapparate an tarsalgliedern von insekten . Zeitschr Wiss Zool 40: 481–556
35. Spurr AR (1969) A low-viscosity epoxy resin embedding medium for electron microscopy. J Ultrastruct Res 26: 31–4310.1016/S0022-5320(69)90033-1 ↗
36. Stork NE (1980) Experimental analysis of adhesion of Chrysopolina polita (Chrysomelidae: Coleoptera) on a variety of surfaces. J Exp Biol 88: 91–10710.1242/jeb.88.1.91 ↗
37. Yurdumakan B, Raravikar NR, Ajayanm PM, Dhinojwala A (2005) Synthetic gecko foot-hairs from multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Chem Commun 30: 3799–380110.1039/b506047h ↗
38. Zhao YX, Spain IL (1989) X-ray diffraction data for graphite to 20 GPa. Phys Rev B 40(2):993–997. http://prb.aps.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.40.993 ↗