4.6 Article

Keels of boxfish carapaces strongly improve stabilization against roll

期刊

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2021.0942

关键词

swimming; manoeuvrability; hydrodynamics; carapace; stabilization; drag

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Computational fluid dynamics simulations were used to test the hydrodynamic roles of keels in the carapaces of boxfish. The results showed that the shape of the carapace played a crucial role in reducing roll drag and increasing roll damping, while it did not significantly affect drag reduction or passive stability. This finding has important implications for understanding the swimming behavior and maneuver control of boxfish.
Boxfish (Ostraciidae) have peculiar body shapes, with conspicuous keels formed by their bony carapaces. Previous studies have proposed various hydrodynamic roles for these keels, including reducing drag during swimming, contributing to passive stabilization of the swimming course, or providing resistance against roll rotations. Here, we tested these hypotheses using computational fluid dynamics simulations of five species of Ostraciidae with a range of carapace shapes. The hydrodynamic performance of the original carapace surface models, obtained from laser scanning of museum specimens, was compared with models where the keels had been digitally reduced. The original carapaces showed no reduced drag or increased passive stability against pitch and yaw compared to the reduced-keel carapaces. However, consistently for all studied species, a strong increase in roll drag and roll-added mass was observed for the original carapaces compared to the reduced-keel carapaces, despite the relatively small differences in keel height. In particular, the damping of roll movement by resistive drag torques increased considerably by the presence of keels. Our results suggest that the shape of the boxfish carapace is important in enabling the observed roll-free forward swimming of boxfish and may facilitate the control of manoeuvres.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据