Why you shouldn't expect a hoverboard any time soon

Researchers at NYU say they have made a breakthrough in understanding how insects manage to remain in one place in the air. But building vehicles that can do the same is a tall order.  

|
Youtube screenshot
Researchers at NYU say they now understand how some flying insects can hover in the air, but that doesn't mean that we should expect hoverboards any time soon, much less ones that work on water.

Technology has made hovering possible for years. Yet despite its widespread use – in the military, competitive racing, and mass-transit – there is still something wholly surreal about a still object that floats, somehow, in midair.

New research published in the Physical Review of Letters by a team of scientists at New York University now makes hovering seem even more counterintuitive. Inspired by hovering insects, their study suggests that objects tend to hover better when they are top-heavy.

Needless to say, these findings are wildly counterintuitive. Most modern vehicles are designed with the opposite idea in mind. After all, it would be strange, not to mention frightening, to be near, say, a top-heavy eighteen-wheeler. That the opposite is true for hovering, the research suggests, has to do with how insects and birds move their wings.

In fact, these animals tend to perplex engineers. Historical attempts at airplanes with flapping wings were laughably unsuccessful. The NYU team designed a simple experiment to figure out how various fauna manage to hover so well. They placed a series of paper pyramids in a wind tunnel that vented an oscillating column of air to mimic the flapping of wings. They changed the weight distribution – from bottom-heavy to top-heavy – by affixing weights to the bottom or top of the pyramids and captured this process on high-speed video to analyze the airflow.

It is perhaps not surprising that these results demonstrated the complex yet effective way bugs and birds hover. People have had only a few decades to develop and hone hovering technology. Nature has had millions.

Some news outlets have taken this research to suggest that we'll all be hovering to and fro, like Marty McFly on his hoverboard. For instance, the French Tribune's headline read, "Hovercraft to Be Made Reality" and the State Column's read "Study: Hovering aircraft could become commonplace."

Of course, hovering vehicles are already pervasive, from helicopters to hovercraft, both of which can support tons of weight. There's also the Harrier jump jet, which hovers by using its hot exhaust to lift itself vertically off the ground. And there are even more exotic – yet still widely used – hovering vehicles, such as the maglev train, which uses magnets to float the train cars a few inches above the rails.

If technology were ever developed from the new discovery at NYU, it would probably be unlike any of these, as this study is a result of biomimetics – a branch of science that looks directly to nature for its cues on engineering and design. Biomimetic research has been fruitful before. Scientists have studied the sonic navigation of fruit bats to enhance night-vision technology. Others have modeled versatile climbing robots after the gecko. On a more domestic level, the Swiss engineer George de Mestral was inspired by the ever-stubborn bur to design a material nearly all of us have used: velcro. These ideas, as well as this new study at NYU, express the humbling and awe-inspiring idea that human technology is still no match for the designs of nature.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why you shouldn't expect a hoverboard any time soon
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/0213/Why-you-shouldn-t-expect-a-hoverboard-any-time-soon
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe