MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118443980 · doi:10.1017/s0022112007008798

Three-dimensional Floquet stability analysis of the wake in cylinder arrays

2007· article· en· W2118443980 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Kevlahan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFloquet theoryWakeCylinderInstabilityVortexPhysicsVortex sheddingVorticityKármán vortex streetMechanicsFlow (mathematics)WavelengthClassical mechanicsOpticsTurbulenceGeometryMathematicsReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three-dimensional stability of the periodic wake of tightly packed rotated and inline cylinder arrays is investigated for 60 ≤ Re ≤ 270. Results are compared with existing numerical and experimental studies for an isolated cylinder. Numerical Floquet analysis shows that the two-dimensional wakes of the rotated and inline arrays with spacing P/D = 1.5 become unstable at Rec = 64 ± 0.5 and Rec = 132 ± 1 respectively. Two-dimensional vortex shedding flow is unlikely in practice for such flows. The dominant spanwise wavelength is λ/D = 0.9 ± 0.1 for the rotated array at Re = 100 and λ/D = 3.0 ± 0.1 for the inline array at Re = 200. Three-dimensional simulations show excellent agreement with the Floquet analysis for the rotated case, and reasonable agreement for the inline case. The instability mechanism appears to be similar to Mode A for an isolated cylinder, although the structure of the three-dimensional vorticity is different due to the spatial periodicity of the flow. Unlike the isolated cylinder, both array flows are unstable as λ → ∞ (like a thin shear layer). This is the first investigation of three-dimensional wake instability in cylinder arrays, a problem of significant practical and theoretical interest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207