4.5 Article

Experimental investigation on wake characteristics behind a yawed square cylinder

期刊

JOURNAL OF FLUIDS AND STRUCTURES
卷 61, 期 -, 页码 274-294

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2015.11.017

关键词

Yawed square cylinder; Vortex shedding; Phase-average method

资金

  1. Australian Research Council, Australia [DP110105171]
  2. China Scholarship Council
  3. University of Western Australia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The wake vortical structures of a square cylinder at different yaw angles to the incoming flow (alpha = 0 degrees, 15 degrees, 30 degrees and 45 degrees) are studied using a one-dimensional (1D) hot-wire vorticity probe at a Reynolds number (Re) of about 3600. The results are compared with those obtained in a yawed circular cylinder wake. The Strouhal number (St(N)) as well as the mean drag coefficient (C-DN), normalized by the velocity component normal to the cylinder axis, follow the independent principle (IP) satisfactorily up to alpha = 40 degrees. Using the phase averaging analysis, both the coherent and the remaining contributions of velocity and vorticity are quantified. The flow patterns of the coherent spanwise vorticity (omega(z))display obvious Karman vortex streets and their maximum concentrations decrease as a increases. Similar phenomena are also shown in the coherent contours of the streamwise (u) and transverse (v) velocities as well as the Reynolds shear stress (uv). The contours of the spanwise velocity (w) and Reynolds shear stress (uw), however, experience an increasing trend for the maximum concentrations with increasing yaw angle. These results indicate an enhancement of the three-dimensionality of the wake and the reduction of vortex shedding strength as a increases. While general similarities to the wake behind a yawed circular cylinder are found in terms of flow features, some differences between the two wakes at different yaw angles are highlighted. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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