4.5 Article

Lagrangian coherent structures in low Reynolds number swimming

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICS-CONDENSED MATTER
卷 21, 期 20, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0953-8984/21/20/204105

关键词

-

资金

  1. US Department of Education
  2. National Science Foundation [CBET-0645228]
  3. NSF Biological Oceanography Program [OCE-0623475]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work explores the utility of the finite-time Lyapunov exponent (FTLE) field for revealing flow structures in low Reynolds number biological locomotion. Previous studies of high Reynolds number unsteady flows have demonstrated that ridges of the FTLE field coincide with transport barriers within the flow, which are not shown by a more classical quantity such as vorticity. In low Reynolds number locomotion (O(1)-O(100)), in which viscous diffusion rapidly smears the vorticity in the wake, the FTLE field has the potential to add new insight to locomotion mechanics. The target of study is an articulated two-dimensional model for jellyfish-like locomotion, with swimming Reynolds number of order 1. The self-propulsion of the model is numerically simulated with a viscous vortex particle method, using kinematics adapted from previous experimental measurements on a live medusan swimmer. The roles of the ridges of the computed forward- and backward-time FTLE fields are clarified by tracking clusters of particles both backward and forward in time. It is shown that a series of ridges in front of the jellyfish in the forward- time FTLE field transport slender fingers of fluid toward the lip of the bell orifice, which are pulled once per contraction cycle into the wake of the jellyfish, where the fluid remains partitioned. A strong ridge in the backward-time FTLE field reveals a persistent barrier between fluid inside and outside the subumbrellar cavity. The system is also analyzed in a body-fixed frame subject to a steady free stream, and the FTLE field is used to highlight differences in these frames of reference.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据