Why haven’t we made blow up wings to fly with them

  • Thread starter kingsbishop
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Wings
In summary, the human-powered aircraft is not feasible because the power to weight ratio is too unfavorable.
  • #1
kingsbishop
0
2
Just wondering because if wings are too heavy for humans to fly couldn’t we just use rip stop nylon (the material we use for hang gliders, paragliders etc) and inflate them and then we would have wings light enough for humans to flap and fly with I don’t know why humans haven’t done this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
kingsbishop said:
Just wondering because if wings are too heavy for humans to fly couldn’t we just use rip stop nylon (the material we use for hang gliders, paragliders etc) and inflate them and then we would have wings light enough for humans to flap and fly with I don’t know why humans haven’t done this?
 
  • #3
kingsbishop said:
Just wondering because if wings are too heavy for humans to fly couldn’t we just use rip stop nylon (the material we use for hang gliders, paragliders etc) and inflate them and then we would have wings light enough for humans to flap and fly with I don’t know why humans haven’t done this?
It isn't the weight of the wings that's the problem it's the weight of the person and the aerodynamic forces that take more muscle then we have.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron and BillTre
  • #4
kingsbishop said:
Just wondering because if wings are too heavy for humans to fly couldn’t we just use rip stop nylon (the material we use for hang gliders, paragliders etc) and inflate them and then we would have wings light enough for humans to flap and fly with I don’t know why humans haven’t done this?
I am not sure what this suit was supposed to do exactly. From memory I thought it was supposed to be a sort of wing suit as you see him flapping but apparently it was more of a proto parachute.
It is in the video Perok posted.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeroK
  • #5
kingsbishop said:
Just wondering because if wings are too heavy for humans to fly couldn’t we just use rip stop nylon (the material we use for hang gliders, paragliders etc) and inflate them and then we would have wings light enough for humans to flap and fly with I don’t know why humans haven’t done this?
Besides the physics our anatomy rules out flapping. Birds have large breasts, very skinny legs and relatively large wings in terms of surface area. An Albatross has an enormous wing span.
We are leg heavy, arm skinny with small breasts relatively speaking.
Best we can do is glide not take off from the ground and these flying suit guys do that at crazy speeds, very dangerous.
Note how similar our Eiffel tower guy looked to these guys suited up?

 
  • Like
Likes Klystron, BillTre, Astronuc and 1 other person
  • #6
russ_watters said:
It isn't the weight of the wings that's the problem it's the weight of the person and the aerodynamic forces that take more muscle then we have.
Cant we just make the wings larger
 
  • Skeptical
Likes BillTre
  • #7
kingsbishop said:
Cant we just make the wings larger
... and heavier!
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and pinball1970
  • #8
kingsbishop said:
Cant we just make the wings larger
Make them longer and the torque gets worse. An acrobat can barely support himself on outstretched arms.
gymnastic-rings-exercises-butterfly.jpg


No problem, you think. We'll just brace the two wings together with a spar and maybe even a spring. Yes, you can do that. It is called an airplane or hang glider. But if you want to make the thing human powered, you have a problem with the power to weight ratio. You need an athletic human and an ultralight craft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human-powered_aircraft
300px-Daedalus_Project%27s_Light_Eagle.jpg


A propellor is vastly more efficient than a spring-loaded wing-flapping arrangement. I imagine that graphite composite beams with a Mylar skin are more effective than inflated rip-stop nylon fabric.

Edit: Looked up some power to weight ratios on wikipedia.

For the engine alone we have figures like 2000 watts per kilogram (B29 engine) or up to 10,000 watts per kilogram (V22 Osprey). Or down as low as 30 watts per kilogram (Diesel engine in the Emma Maersk container ship). Or up as high as 153,000 watts per kilogram (Space Shuttle main engine).

For complete aircraft we have figures like 100-120 watts per kilogram (Spruce Goose, B17, B29), 300-350 watts per kilogram (Spitfire, P38, Bf 109, V22 Osprey). [Many high performance propellor driven craft in the 300's].

For an athletic bicyclist, we have 20 watts per kilogram as a 5 second maximum.

The McReady Gossamer Condor weighed in at 31.5 kg (craft only, no pilot). I seem to recall 300 watts sustained for the pilot of the Gossamer Condor. That would put that particular craft plus pilot around 300 watts on a (completely guessed at) 100 kilograms gross vehicle weight for 3 watts per kilogram sustained.

[Chased the wikipedia reference to https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/power-profiling/ and confirmed a rough factor of 5 difference between 5 second maximum and sustained power. That 3 watts per kilogram figure passes the sniff test]

Let us take the analysis one step further. With 3 watts per kilogram of power, what sink rate can we tolerate in our aircraft so that we can make up for it with applied power? Or, equivalently, what climb rate would we have if the aircraft had zero drag?

The rate at which work must be done to achieve vertical velocity ##v## is given by ##P = mgv## where ##m## is the craft mass, ##g## is the acceleration of gravity and ##P## is the required power. We want to solve for ##v##:$$v=\frac{P}{mg} = \frac{P/m}{g}$$We know ##P/m = 3## watts per kilogram and we know that ##g = 9.8## m/s^2.

I make the result 0.3 meters per second -- a tolerable gliding sink rate of about one foot per second in a human powered craft.

This is a reasonable fit with what Wikipedia has to say:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliding_flight said:
A sink rate of approximately 1.0 m/s is the most that a practical hang glider or paraglider could have before it would limit the occasions that a climb was possible to only when there was strongly rising air. Gliders (sailplanes) have minimum sink rates of between 0.4 and 0.6 m/s depending on the class.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Klystron, russ_watters, Rive and 3 others
  • #9
kingsbishop said:
Just wondering because if wings are too heavy for humans to fly couldn’t we just use rip stop nylon (the material we use for hang gliders, paragliders etc) and inflate them and then we would have wings light enough for humans to flap and fly with I don’t know why humans haven’t done this?
Learn some basic physics and you will understand.

Or, alternatively, lay flat on the floor with your arms outstretched, perpendicular to your body and lift your body up by just pressing your palms onto the floor.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, TeethWhitener, BillTre and 1 other person
  • #10
kingsbishop said:
Cant we just make the wings larger
Put it all together.

Our legs are heavy so the wings would have to compensate for that.
1Kg is heavy for a lot of birds, we weigh in at about 80Kg average for a grown guy, so the wings have to compensate for that
The enormous wings would require huge chest, arm and back muscles to operate them, not necessarily just because they are heavier but because of the amount of air they would have to displace.
The motion if you watched peroks vid is complicated, it's not just up and down it rotates requiring shoulder work.
So...extra large, pecs, arms back and delts = extra weight = slightly larger wings to compensate.
One other thing is that larger birds take advantage of thermals to do the lifting for them. Flying takes a lot of energy and our bodies cannot do it.
 
  • #11
phinds said:
Or, alternatively, lay flat on the floor with your arms outstretched, perpendicular to your body and lift your body up by just pressing your palms onto the floor.
Just to flesh this out, in grad school I had a room mate who was a national champ on the rings.

He did a lot of holding himself up with his arms extended sideways (as ring competitors often do).
His arms and chest muscles were extremely well developed. He did not do non-rings events and didn't run much since he considered his legs to be "dead weight" which he would have to support with his arms.

All that is without any attempts to power flight.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Klystron, russ_watters, Lnewqban and 1 other person
  • #12
pinball1970 said:
Put it all together.

Our legs are heavy so the wings would have to compensate for that.
1Kg is heavy for a lot of birds, we weigh in at about 80Kg average for a grown guy, so the wings have to compensate for that
The enormous wings would require huge chest, arm and back muscles to operate them, not necessarily just because they are heavier but because of the amount of air they would have to displace.
The motion if you watched peroks vid is complicated, it's not just up and down it rotates requiring shoulder work.
So...extra large, pecs, arms back and delts = extra weight = slightly larger wings to compensate.
One other thing is that larger birds take advantage of thermals to do the lifting for them. Flying takes a lot of energy and our bodies cannot do it.
Could you get about a few flaps in before you get tired if you had weightless wings because if humans can do chin-ups surely a human could get a few flaps before they sink down?
 
  • #13
It might work if you fill the wings with He or H2.
If they were big enough they could hold you up and slow flapping might provide some directional thrust.
 
  • #14
kingsbishop said:
Could you get about a few flaps in before you get tired if you had weightless wings
With weightless and infinitely strong wings, many things become possible. You'll still need to figure out what kind of stroke you will use. A sculling pattern like a hovering humming bird, but majestically slow? That could work. Then you need to add some spring loading to deal with the huge torques.

If a rotary ornithopter can work with actual obtainable materials, an oscillating version should be doable with unobtainium.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes Tom.G and BillTre
  • #15
jbriggs444 said:
With weightless and infinitely strong wings, many things become possible. You'll still need to figure out what kind of stroke you will use. A sculling pattern like a hovering humming bird, but majestically slow? That could work. Then you need to add some spring loading to deal with the huge torques.

If a rotary ornithopter can work with actual obtainable materials, an oscillating version should be doable with unobtainium.
What about that spider silk (stronger than steel) and really light material they are talking about what if they made the wings out of that?
 
  • #16
kingsbishop said:
What about that spider silk (stronger than steel) and really light material they are talking about what if they made the wings out of that?
They are already using carbon fiber.
 
  • #17
I'm no aero engineer but surely it can be debunked a lot simpler than all these equivocations, can it not? I think @phinds had the most comprehensive yet succinct experiment with his pushups.

Make the wings zero weight and unlimited in size if you want, that doesn't reduce the effort required for human muscles to lift their own weight against air. The torque would be crazy.

Or am I barking?
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #18
DaveC426913 said:
I'm no aero engineer but surely it can be debunked a lot simpler than all these equivocations, can it not? I think @phinds had the most comprehensive yet succinct experiment with his pushups.

Make the wings zero weight and unlimited in size if you want, that doesn't reduce the effort required for human muscles to lift their own weight against air. The torque would be crazy.

Or am I barking?
Humans can easily lift themselves up with chin-ups, pull-ups and many other ways I don’t see how it is different for wings?
 
  • Haha
  • Skeptical
Likes Wrichik Basu, weirdoguy and PeroK
  • #19
kingsbishop said:
Humans can easily lift themselves up with chin-ups, pull-ups and many other ways I don’t see how it is different for wings?
If you have a long wingspan, the force has a large moment arm. That means that the torque gets very large. The leverage works against you.

Chin-ups, pull-ups, push-ups, etc. They are all done close in to the body where leverage is good. Try to hold up a paint can hanging from the end of an outstretched 10 foot pole and it is more difficult than one at the end of an outstretched arm.
 
  • #20
jbriggs444 said:
If you have a long wingspan, the force has a large moment arm. That means that the torque gets very large. The leverage works against you.

Chin-ups, pull-ups, push-ups, etc. They are all done close in to the body where leverage is good. Try to hold up a paint can hanging from the end of an outstretched 10 foot pole and it is more difficult than one at the end of an outstretched arm.
But if the wings are weightless wouldn’t it be able to fix that?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes russ_watters
  • #21
kingsbishop said:
if wings are too heavy for humans to fly
kingsbishop said:
But if the wings are weightless wouldn’t it be able to fix that?
As others have stressed, the problem is not the weight of the wings.

The problem is that if you want to fly by flapping a pair of wings (even weightless wings), you have to keep a lot of air moving pretty fast in order to get the lift you need. This takes a certain amount of power, and the human physiology can't deliver that amount of power. Plus, in order to keep that air flow going, the wings need to have a large area -- which means your arms have to produce lots of torque. More torque than modern humans can possibly produce.

Imagine this: You have a pair of long, weightless poles, say 3 meters each in length, strapped to your arms. You lie on the ground face down, arms outstretched. You try to raise your body off the ground, say a few centimetres, by levering down on those weightless poles. You are not allowed to press down directly with your palms, elbows etc -- you have to raise yourself on the far ends of the two poles, which are a couple of meters away from your shoulders.
Would you be able to do this?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban
  • #22
kingsbishop said:
Humans can easily lift themselves up with chin-ups, pull-ups and many other ways I don’t see how it is different for wings?
Welcome, @kingsbishop !

It is different for wings because they don't have the solid connection to Earth that your bar for chin-ups has.

Wings need to move through air quick enough to create a semi-solid support from the surrounding air.
That semi-solid cushion of air can't sustain the wings flying at the same horizontal level: they constantly slide downwards.

That is what gliders do, glide from certain altitude (to which a towing airplane took them) all the way down to the ground.
The airplane has an engine that provides enough energy to compensate for that constant fall and climb faster than it and the glider fall.

Can you imagine doing chin-ups with a bar that constantly moves downwards faster than you can pull upwards?
You will not be able to gain or maintain any altitude.
 
  • Like
Likes Wrichik Basu, pinball1970 and PeroK
  • #23
.
Not strictly as per OP's spec, but interesting:
.
 
  • Informative
Likes PeroK
  • #24
kingsbishop said:
Humans can easily lift themselves up with chin-ups, pull-ups and many other ways I don’t see how it is different for wings?
Because you can't do chin ups holding onto the air!
 
  • Like
Likes phinds
  • #25
kingsbishop said:
But if the wings are weightless wouldn’t it be able to fix that?
How can wings be weightless?
 
  • #26
PeroK said:
How can wings be weightless?
Inflating them well they won’t be weightless but they will weigh so little.
 
  • #27
kingsbishop said:
Inflating them well they won’t be weightless but they will weigh so little.
Go and manufacture them, then. Make yourself a billionaire.
 
  • #28
I think it has been made clear that it is not about the weight of potential wings.

There is a reason bird bones are hollow and vultures have trouble taking off if they have eaten too much. And last but not least, a reason why Leonardo da Vinci wasn't successful. And my favorite argument: such wings would have been on the market by now for a long time (cp. the various links above).

This thread has served its goal. Thank you for your participation.
 
  • Like
Likes DaveC426913, Bystander, Klystron and 4 others

1. Why haven't we made blow up wings to fly with them?

There are several reasons why we haven't made blow up wings to fly with them. First, the technology to create such wings does not currently exist. Second, even if we were able to create them, they may not be strong enough to support the weight of a person in flight. Third, there are already more efficient and reliable methods of flight, such as airplanes and helicopters.

2. Can blow up wings be used for human flight?

While it is possible to create blow up wings, it is not currently feasible for human flight. The wings would need to be made of a very strong and lightweight material, which is not currently available. Additionally, the wings would need to be able to withstand the force of wind and the weight of a person, which would require advanced engineering and technology.

3. Are there any animals that have blow up wings?

There are some animals that have wings that can inflate, such as the bladderwort plant and the flying fish. However, these wings are not able to support the weight of the animal in flight. They are used for short bursts of movement, rather than sustained flight.

4. Would blow up wings be more efficient than traditional wings?

It is unlikely that blow up wings would be more efficient than traditional wings. Traditional wings are specifically designed for flight and have been optimized through years of research and development. Blow up wings, on the other hand, would be a new and untested technology, and it is unlikely that they would be able to match the efficiency of traditional wings.

5. Can blow up wings be used for recreational purposes?

While blow up wings may not be feasible for human flight, they could potentially be used for recreational purposes such as kite flying or paragliding. However, these activities already have established and safe methods of flight, so it is unlikely that blow up wings would become a popular option for recreational use.

Similar threads

Replies
81
Views
8K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • Mechanical Engineering
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Aerospace Engineering
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
964
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top