MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026941264 · doi:10.1115/imece2002-32179

A Closer Investigation of the Mean Aerodynamic Forces for Two Staggered Circular Cylinders in Cross-Flow

2002· article· en· W2026941264 on OpenAlexaff
David S. Sumner, Marc Richards

Bibliographic record

Venue5th International Symposium on Fluid Structure Interaction, Aeroelasticity, and Flow Induced Vibration and Noise · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReynolds numberLift (data mining)Vortex sheddingMechanicsDragAerodynamic forcePhysicsCylinderAerodynamicsLift-to-drag ratioLift coefficientVortex liftVortexTurbulenceOpticsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two circular cylinders of equal diameter in a staggered configuration, with centre-to-centre pitch ratios of P/D = 1.125 – 4.0, were tested in the subcritical Reynolds number regime, at Re = 3.0×104 – 8.0×104. The incidence angle of the cylinder configuration was varied in small increments from α = 0° – 90° and the mean aerodynamic forces were measured on both the upstream and downstream cylinders. Based on the force measurements, the behaviour of the cylinders was broadly grouped into three categories, depending on P/D. For closely spaced staggered configurations, P/D = 1.125 – 1.25, the aerodynamic forces on both the upstream and downstream cylinders varied significantly with α. Several critical incidence angles were identified for each cylinder that corresponded to local maximum, minimum, or discontinuous behaviour in the forces, which were related to shear layer reattachment and the influence of the gap flow. For moderately spaced staggered configurations, P/D = 1.5 – 2.5, shear layer reattachment and the subsequent transition to gap flow at small α were responsible for the inner lift peak, a corresponding minimum drag, and a loss of lift with increasing α, which becomes more abrupt as P/D is increased. For widely spaced staggered configurations, P/D = 3.0 – 4.0, the two cylinders undergo Ka´rma´n vortex shedding for the entire range of α. At small α, the forces on the downstream cylinder are affected by vortex impingement, and the outer lift peak replaces the inner lift peak. This outer lift peak exhibits some sensitivity to the Reynolds number.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue5th International Symposium on Fluid Structure Interaction, Aeroelasticity, and Flow Induced Vibration and NoiseSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207