4.7 Article

Flow induced vibration of two rigidly connected circular cylinders in different arrangements at a low Reynolds number

Journal

OCEAN ENGINEERING
Volume 217, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107741

Keywords

Flow induced vibration; Rigidly connected cylinders; Galloping; Hydrodynamic force coefficient; Flow pattern

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation of China [51609206]
  2. Open Fund Project of the State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering in Dalian University of Technology [LP2002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The flow induced vibration (FIV) responses of two rigidly connected cylinders in various arrangements have been studied numerically using the two-dimensional incompressible Navier-Stokes equations coupling with a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method. Four different values of the angle of incidence (a) and two different values of center-to-center pitch (P) between the two cylinders have been selected for the study. The FIV response amplitudes, lock-in regions, hydrodynamic force coefficients, phase portraits, and flow fields have been systematically compared. The numerical results demonstrate that for P = 4D and increasing a, the maximum value of the total mean drag coefficient tentatively increases, however, the maximum response amplitude shows a decreasing tendency. Furthermore, the maximum amplitude for P = 4D occurs when alpha = 0 degrees at V-r = 7. For P = 4D and alpha = 0 degrees, the response amplitude remains a certain value during the large V-r range, which is caused by the participation of the wake induced vibration. For P = 2D, the maximum amplitude happens when alpha = 30 degrees at V-r = 12. For P = 2D when alpha = 90 degrees, owing to the proximity-induced galloping, during the large V-r range, the response amplitude increases slightly with increased V-r, displaying no desynchronization characteristics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available