4.5 Article

Experimental study of vortex-induced vibrations of a cylinder near a rigid plane boundary in steady flow

期刊

ACTA MECHANICA SINICA
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 51-63

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10409-008-0221-7

关键词

Vortex-induced vibration; Cylinder near a plane boundary; Steady flow; Vortex shedding

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50509022, 10532070]
  2. Knowledge Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [KJCX2-YW-L02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the vortex-induced vibrations of a cylinder near a rigid plane boundary in a steady flow are studied experimentally. The phenomenon of vortex-induced vibrations of the cylinder near the rigid plane boundary is reproduced in the flume. The vortex shedding frequency and mode are also measured by the methods of hot film velocimeter and hydrogen bubbles. A parametric study is carried out to investigate the influences of reduced velocity, gap-to-diameter ratio, stability parameter and mass ratio on the amplitude and frequency responses of the cylinder. Experimental results indicate: (1) the Strouhal number (St) is around 0.2 for the stationary cylinder near a plane boundary in the sub-critical flow regime; (2) with increasing gap-to-diameter ratio (e (0)/D), the amplitude ratio (A/D) gets larger but frequency ratio (f/f (n) ) has a slight variation for the case of larger values of e (0)/D (e (0)/D > 0.66 in this study); (3) there is a clear difference of amplitude and frequency responses of the cylinder between the larger gap-to-diameter ratios (e (0)/D > 0.66) and the smaller ones (e (0)/D < 0.3); (4) the vibration of the cylinder is easier to occur and the range of vibration in terms of V (r) number becomes more extensive with decrease of the stability parameter, but the frequency response is affected slightly by the stability parameter; (5) with decreasing mass ratio, the width of the lock-in ranges in terms of V (r) and the frequency ratio (f/f (n) ) become larger.

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