Abstr:UFR 2-14: Difference between revisions
Rapp.munchen (talk | contribs) |
Rapp.munchen (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
* (ii) Kinematically, the rotation of the front cylinder is avoided; | * (ii) Kinematically, the rotation of the front cylinder is avoided; | ||
* (iii) The boundary conditions are well defined; | * (iii) The boundary conditions are well defined; | ||
* (iv) Nevertheless, the resulting flow features and structure displacements are challenging | * (iv) Nevertheless, the resulting flow features and structure displacements are challenging from the computational point of view. | ||
from the computational point of view. | |||
Revision as of 07:24, 17 December 2013
Fluid-structure interaction II
Flows Around Bodies
Underlying Flow Regime 2-14
Abstract
The investigation of the bidirectional coupling between a fluid flow and a structure motion is a growing branch of research in science and industry. Applications of so-called fluid-structure interactions (FSI) are widespread. To improve coupled numerical FSI simulations, generic experimental benchmark studies of the fluid and the structure are necessary. In this work, the coupling of a vortex-induced periodic deformation of a flexible structure mounted behind a rigid cylinder and a fully turbulent water flow performed at a Reynolds number of Re = 30,470 is experimentally investigated with a planar particle image velocimetry (PIV) and a volumetric three-component velocimetry (V3V) system. To determine the structure displacements a multiple-point laser triangulation sensor is used. The three-dimensional fluid velocity results show shedding vortices behind the structure, which reaches the second swiveling mode with a frequency of about 11.2 Hz corresponding to a Strouhal number of St = 0.177. Providing phase-averaged flow and structure measurements precise experimental data for coupled computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and computational structure dynamics (CSD) validations are available for this new benchmark case denoted FSI-PfS-2a. The test case possesses four main advantages:
* (i) The geometry is rather simple; * (ii) Kinematically, the rotation of the front cylinder is avoided; * (iii) The boundary conditions are well defined; * (iv) Nevertheless, the resulting flow features and structure displacements are challenging from the computational point of view.
Contributed by: Andreas Kalmbach, Guillaume De Nayer, Michael Breuer — Helmut-Schmidt Universität Hamburg
© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024