An Experimental Study of Flow Past a Dual Step Cylinder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flow past a dual step cylinder has been investigated using experimental flow visualization methods. The dual step cylinder model is comprised of a small diameter cylinder (d) and a large diameter cylinder (D) mounted at the mid-span of the small cylinder. The experiments have been performed for ReD = 1050, D/d = 2, and a range of large cylinder aspect ratios (L/D). The focus of the study is on vortex shedding and vortex interactions occurring in the large and small cylinder wakes. A flow visualization study completed using hydrogen bubble technique and planar laser induced fluorescence has shown that the flow development is highly dependent on the aspect ratio of the large cylinder, L/D. The results identify four distinct flow regimes: (i) for L/D ≥ 17, three vortex shedding cells form in the wake of the large cylinder, one central cell and two cells of lower frequency extending over about 4.5D from the large cylinder ends, (ii) for 7 < L/D ≤ 14, a single vortex shedding cell forms in the wake of the large cylinder, whose shedding frequency decreases with decreasing L/D, (iii) for 2 ≤ L/D ≤ 7, vortex shedding in the wake of the large cylinder is highly three-dimensional, such that each vortex deforms while it is shed into the wake, (iv) for 0.2 ≤ L/D ≤ 1, only small cylinder vortices are shed in the wake and often form vortex connections across the wake of the large cylinder.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".