Numerical study of flow characteristics around a 30° yawed circular cylinder at Re=104
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unstable motions of bridge stay cables have been observed on site and in wind tunnel tests when a cable is yawed at certain orientations to wind. To uncover the underlying mechanisms, flow around a circular cylinder at a yaw angle of 30° has been numerically analyzed in the current study using delayed detached eddy simulation (DDES) at Re=104. A comparison with the reference normal flow case indicates the presence of a more coherent span-wise flow structure when the cylinder is yawed at 30°. The application of proper orthogonal decomposition further reveals that at this orientation, a synchronized flow structure exists, which is characterized by continuous anti-symmetric pressure blocks. In addition, a low-frequency flow fluctuation has been identified, the Strouhal number of which is roughly a quarter of that of the conventional Kármán vortex shedding. The pivotal role of axial flow in the intermittent amplification of cylinder sectional lift and the subsequent span-wise propagation of this enhanced local lift event has been revealed. The former is evident from the low-frequency sectional lift peaks occurred during vortex shedding, whereas the propagation speed associated with the latter is in good agreement with the span-wise component of the incoming flow speed. The temporal and spatial impact of axial flow on the surrounding flow structure of the cylinder may serve as a periodic excitation source, which could trigger an unstable response of a cylinder. This, in the context of bridge stay cables, could possibly contribute to the onset mechanism of dry cable galloping.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".