Reynold number scaling of circulation growth on flapping wings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insect scale flight is characterized by large amplitude motions and high frequencies, often described by the Strouhal number and reduced frequency. Previous studies have scaled force coefficients with Strouhal number using classical potential flow theories. However, these often include a Reynolds number term, despite the implicit inviscid assumptions in classical theory. In this study, we derive a scaling relationship between force coefficients and wing kinematics in order to investigate this apparent contradiction. The model is based on the work of von Kàrmàn and Sears and, as a consequence of this choice, also provides an estimate of circulation in the wake. We consider a Blasius-like stream function to model the circulation transported into the leading-edge vortex from the shear layer in two cases: one that scaled circulation flux by the Reynolds number and one that did not. This model was applied to an existing insect flight data set, consisting of 168 individual flights of 38 individual mountain pine beetles. The model accurately captures the relationship between force coefficient and wing kinematics, regardless of the stream function scaling with or without the Reynolds number. However, only the model that was allowed to scale with the Reynolds number was also able to predict the circulation in the wake.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".