Flutter of long flexible cylinders in axial flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the stability of a thin flexible cylinder considered as a beam, when subjected to axial flow and fixed at the upstream end only. A linear stability analysis of transverse motion aims at determining the risk of flutter as a function of the governing control parameters such as the flow velocity or the length of the cylinder. Stability is analysed applying a finite-difference scheme in space to the equation of motion expressed in the frequency domain. It is found that, contrary to previous predictions based on simplified theories, flutter may exist for very long cylinders, provided that the free downstream end of the cylinder is well-streamlined. More generally, a limit regime is found where the length of the cylinder does not affect the characteristics of the instability, and the deformation is confined to a finite region close to the downstream end. These results are found complementary to solutions derived for shorter cylinders and are confirmed by linear and nonlinear computations using a Galerkin method. A link is established to similar results on long hanging cantilevered systems with internal or external flow. The limit case of vanishing bending stiffness, where the cylinder is modelled as a string, is analysed and related to previous results. Comparison is also made to existing experimental data, and a simple model for the behaviour of long cylinders is proposed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".