Sei sulla pagina 1di 16

Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 91 (2003) 139–154Fluctuating fluid forces acting on two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement at a subcritical

Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 91 (2003) 139–154 Fluctuating fluid forces acting on two circular cylinders

Fluctuating fluid forces acting on two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement at a subcritical Reynolds number

Md. Mahbub Alam*, M. Moriya, K. Takai, H. Sakamoto

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kitami Institute of Technology, Kitami 090, Japan

Abstract

Aerodynamic characteristics of two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement were investigated experimentally in a uniform flow at a Reynolds number of 6.5 10 4 . This Reynolds number is within the range in which fluid forces acting on a single cylinder are comparatively insensitive to change in the Reynolds number. Mutual interference between the two cylinders at close proximity, however, caused significant change in parameters of the aerodynamic characteristics, such as fluctuating lift and drag forces, time-averaged and fluctuating pressure distributions, Strouhal number, and vortex-shedding patterns, when the spacing between the cylinders was changed. The changes in these aerodynamic characteristics were systematically analyzed in this study. r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Aerodynamic characteristics; Tandem arrangement; Reattachment position

1. Introduction

Most structures on land and in the ocean are in multiple forms and are confronted by a fluid flow. Vibrations of these structures due to fluid flows reduce the life of the respective installations and must therefore be taken into account in the design of the structure. For assessment of this vibration, it is important to understand the interaction of multiple structures in a flow. An elementary shape of a structure or a component of a structure is a circular cross-section, and a tandem arrangement of two circular cylinders is a basic example of an array of multiple structures. The common use of the cylindrical-shaped body in various fields of engineering

*Corresponding author.

0167-6105/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 1 6 7 - 6105(02)00341-0

140 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

stimulated the investigation on flow around two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement. Previous investigations of tandem configurations by Biermann and Herrnstein [1], Kostic and Oka [2], Zdravkovich and Pridden [3,4], Novak [5], Okajima [6], Hiwada et al. [7], Igarashi [8,9], Arie et al. [10], and Jendrxejczk and Chen [11] have revealed considerable complexity in fluid dynamics as the spacing between the cylinders is changed. There are many discrepant points in previous studies on two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement. For example, Arie et al. [10] pointed out that fluctuation in drag force acting on both cylinders is weakly dependent on spacing. On the other hand, Igarashi [8] reported that the fluctuation in pressure associated with fluctuation in lift and drag forces acting on a downstream cylinder is strongly dependent on spacing between the cylinders. Moreover, some discrepant points among various studies can be found in [8]. Despite the large number of studies on two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement, there have been very few studies in which fluctuating lift and drag forces acting on the cylinders have been measured, and many unknown and discrepant points remain. Hence, the aim of this study was to examine the characteristics of fluctuating aerodynamic forces acting on two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement, to elucidate the discrepant points and to clarify the flow patterns over the cylinders. The present study, on the relatively simple case of two stationary circular cylinders of equal diameters in a tandem arrangement subjected to a steady cross flow, was motivated by both fundamental and practical considerations.

2. Experimental arrangement and procedures

Experiments were conducted in a low-speed, closed-circuit wind tunnel with a test section of 0.6 m height, 0.4 m width, and 5.4 m length. The level of turbulence in the working section was 0.19%. The cylinders used as test models were made of brass and were each 49 mm in diameter. The geometric blockage ratio and aspect ratio at the test section were 8.1% and 8.2, respectively. None of the results presented were corrected for the effects of wind-tunnel blockage. Fluid forces acting on the cylinders were measured by using two load cells installed inside a cylinder. The details of the load cells and measurement procedure of fluid forces have been described by Sakamoto et al. [12]. The sensitivity of each load cells was 11.311 mV/g. To measure the surface pressure during experiments, a semiconductor pressure transducer (TOYODA PD104 K) with a range of 710 kPa was used, and the transducer output was calibrated to give a reading of 6.22 V for 1 kPa of applied pressure. The pressure transducer responded to pressure fluctuation up to 500 Hz with a gain factor of 1 70.06, the phase lag being negligible. Surface oil-film techniques were used to investigate the flow patterns on the cylinders. A mixture composed of silicone oil, titanium dioxide, oleic acid and kerosene with a ratio of 45:3:2:2 in weight was used for surface oil-flow visualization. A cylinder wrapped in a black film of 0.03 mm in thickness was uniformly smeared with the mixture, and then the cylinder was placed inside the wind tunnel to obtain a

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

141

surface oil-flow pattern. Finally, the film was carefully unwrapped from the cylinder, and a photograph was taken with a digital camera.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Time-averaged drag force

The placement of the two circular cylinders in a tandem arrangement, the coordinate system, and the definition of the symbols are shown in Fig. 1. Fig. 2 shows the effect of the tandem spacing on the time-averaged drag coefficient, C D ; of the upstream cylinder and that of the downstream cylinder. The results obtained by Biermann and Herrnstein [1] and Zdravkovich and Pridden [4] are also included in the same figure for comparison. First, for L=Do 3; C D of the upstream cylinder decreases gradually with increase in spacing between the cylinders, because the existence of the downstream cylinder behind the upstream one increases the after body length of the upstream cylinder. On the other hand, C D of the downstream cylinder is negative (forward thrust) for L=D o 3:0 and forms a peak at L=D ¼ 1:40:

This type of peak was also found in previous studies [3,7,8]. The well-known bistable flow occurs at L=D ¼ 3:0 (critical spacing), where two values of C D are seen for two different flow patterns; namely, reattachments flow and jump flow.

3.2. Time-averaged pressure

Fig. 3 shows the distribution of pressure coefficient, C p ; along the surface of the upstream cylinder for various spacings, including the results for a single cylinder. The magnitude of pressure becomes zero at y ¼ 34 1 and becomes maximum negative at y ¼ 69 1 for the single cylinder. The surface oil-flow pattern shows that laminar separation occurs at y ¼ 75 1 in the case of the single cylinder. This angular position of the separation point obtained from the surface oil-flow pattern agrees well with the position of the separation point estimated by Achenbach [13], and by Son and Hanratty [14]. The rear parts of all of the curves are flat except for L=D ¼ 0:10 and 0.30. There are peaks at y ¼ 160 1 for L=D ¼ 0:10 and at y ¼ 179 1 for L=D ¼ 0:30:

¼ 0 : 10 and at y ¼ 179 1 for L = D ¼ 0

Fig. 1. Two cylinders in a tandem arrangement, the coordinate system, and definitions of the symbols.

142 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 Fig. 2. Effects of

Fig. 2. Effects of tandem spacing on time-averaged drags of two cylinders.

of tandem spacing on time-averaged drags of two cylinders. Fig. 3. Time-averaged pressure distribution along the

Fig. 3. Time-averaged pressure distribution along the surface of the upstream cylinder.

For L=Do 3:0; the shear layer separated from the upstream cylinder reattaches to the surface of the downstream cylinder and bifurcates into two shear layers at the reattachment point, as shown in Fig. 4. One shear layer continues in the downstream direction (hereafter referred to as the backward shear layer), and the other shear layer flows in the upstream direction (hereafter referred to as the forward shear layer). The peaks indicated above are due to reattachment of the forward shear layer.

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

143

et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 143 Fig. 4. Sketch and

Fig. 4. Sketch and photographs of surface oil-flow patterns for L=D ¼ 0:10:

of surface oil-flow patterns for L = D ¼ 0 : 10 : Fig. 5. Time-averaged

Fig. 5. Time-averaged pressure distribution along the surface of the downstream cylinder.

For L=D ¼ 0:10; the shear layer separates from the upstream cylinder at y ¼ 74 1 and attaches to the downstream cylinder at y ¼ 75 1 : The backward shear layer separates at y ¼ 109 1 and the forward shear layer separates at y ¼ 35 1 : The forward shear layer separating from the downstream cylinder reattaches again to the rear surface of the upstream cylinder at y ¼ 159 1 and bifurcates. One part of the bifurcated shear layer separates at y ¼ 136 1 and the other part separates at y ¼ 174 1 : Reattachment of the forward shear layer behind the upstream cylinder occurs up to a spacing ratio of L=D ¼ 0:50:

The distributions of pressure coefficients along the surface of the downstream cylinder are shown in Fig. 5. For L=D p3:50; the pressure on the whole surface of the

144 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

downstream cylinder is negative, and for L=Do 3:0; a peak on the front side of the cylinder is apparent in each of the pressure distributions. This peak represents the reattachment of the shear layer that separates from the upstream cylinder.

3.3. Fluctuating pressure

In order to obtain a clearer understanding of the flow patterns around the cylinders, rms pressure coefficient, C pf ; on the surface of each cylinder was measured for certain spacings, and the results are shown in Fig. 6. In the case of a single cylinder, there is a sharp peak at y ¼ 75 1 : As has already been presented in the

at y ¼ 75 1 : As has already been presented in the Fig. 6. Distribution

Fig. 6. Distribution of fluctuating pressure along the surface of the cylinders: (a) upstream cylinder, (b) downstream cylinder.

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

145

previous section that the separation of the shear layer on a single cylinder occurs at y ¼ 75 1 : Therefore, the peak in the C pf distribution occurs at or very near the separation point of the shear layer in the case of a laminar separation. The results for other spacings also concur well with the above conclusion. Batham [15] also compared the separation position measured by Son and Hanratty [14] with the position of the peak in the fluctuating pressure distribution and noted that the separation position coincides within experimental accuracy with the position of the peak in the fluctuating pressure distribution. For L=D ¼ 2:50; where the shear layers separated from the upstream cylinder reattach steadily to the surface of the downstream cylinder, the peaks disappear and the profile becomes flat. The pressure fluctuation on the surface of the downstream cylinder is very large compared with that for a single cylinder or corresponding upstream cylinder. In the case of L=D ¼ 0:30; three peaks are self-evident in the fluctuating pressure distribution. The middle peak is near the reattachment of the shear layer that separates from the upstream cylinder, and the first peak is due to the separation of the forward shear layer. The backward shear layer separation causes the third peak on the rear surface. The fluctuating pressure on the whole surface of the cylinder increases with increase in spacing up to L=D ¼ 1:40: At this spacing, C pf on the whole surface becomes large (compared with that at L=D o3) and decreases again with increase in spacing. Beyond the critical spacing where two vortex streets are developed, say, at L=D ¼ 3:50 and 6.0, the pressure fluctuation has fairly large values in the range of y ¼ 20 1B 60 1 and even exceeds that of the rear surface on which pressure fluctuation is usually larger than that of the front surface due to periodic vortices. On seeing C pf distribution for other spacing also (not shown), it can be decided that the buffet of the incoming periodic vortex from the upstream cylinder to the downstream cylinder causes a higher C pf value in the range of y ¼ 20 1 B 60 1 :

The peaks in the C pf distribution are sharp for L=D in the range of 0 o L=D o2:0; but not so sharp for L=D in the range of 2:0 o L=D o3:0 (not shown in all of the C pf distributions). This is due to the fact that the shear layer separated from the upstream cylinder reattaches alternately for L=D in the range of 0 oL=Do 2:0 and steadily for L=D in the range of 2:0 oL=D o 3:0: Sketches for L=D ¼ 1:40 and L=D ¼ 2:50 are shown in Fig. 7 as representative sketches of the ranges of 0 o L=D o2:0 and 2:0 oL=D o3:0; respectively. Photographs of flow visualization performed by Lakshmana and Prabhu [16] also support the existence of the alternate reattachment and steady reattachment flows in those ranges of spacing. The alternate and steady reattachments of the shear layers can also be corroborated from the power spectrum distribution of fluctuating pressure on the surface of the downstream cylinder (Fig. 8). In the case of alternate reattachment, a superharmonic frequency of twice the Strouhal frequency is observed on the side surface. In the case of steady reattachment, only Strouhal frequency appears.

3.4. Fluctuating lift and drag forces

Variations in the fluctuating lift coefficient, C Lf ; and the fluctuating drag coefficient, C Df ; plotted against the spacing ratio, L=D; are shown in Fig. 9, together

146 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 Fig. 7. Photographs of

Fig. 7. Photographs of the surface oil-flow and sketch of flow pattern: (a) L=D ¼ 1:40; (b) L=D ¼ 2:50:

with the values measured by Arie et al. [10]. Before the critical spacing, C Lf and C Df of the upstream cylinder are very small compared with those for the downstream cylinder or those for a single cylinder. As the shear layer that separates from the upstream cylinder reattaches to the surface of the downstream cylinder and finally, a Karman-type vortex is formed only behind the downstream cylinder, C Lf and C Df of the upstream cylinder are very small. The figures show that C Lf and C Df of the downstream cylinder are very sensitive to the spacing between the cylinders, especially before the critical spacing. The figures also show that there exist two noteworthy peaks in each of the figures, at L=D ¼ 0:4 and 1.40. In this regard, it should be mentioned that Zdravkovich and Pridden [3] performed an experiment on two flexible cylinders arranged in tandem and observed that both cylinders vibrated with a large amplitude in the transverse direction when they were placed at L=D ¼ 0:25: They also found that there was a mode of large amplitude vibrations for L=D in the range of 1 B 2. Comparison of the present results with the results of Arie et al. [10] shows that there is a basic agreement, but, unfortunately, the data of Arie et al. are too sparse to show the actual characteristics of C Lf and C Df variations. It is interesting that at and near L=D of 1.40, the values of C Lf and C Df are very large, and in the case of C Df ; the value even exceeds that of the jump flow that occurs at the critical spacing. The values of C Lf and C Df of the downstream cylinder at

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

147

et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 147 Fig. 8. Power spectrum

Fig. 8. Power spectrum distribution obtained from fluctuation in pressure on the surface of the downstream cylinder: (a) L=D ¼ 0:40; (b) L=D ¼ 2:50:

L=D ¼ 1:40; where the second peak occurs, are 2 and 2.8 times larger, respectively, than those for the single cylinder. The value of C Lf of the single cylinder for the pre- sent case is 0.45, which is equal to the value obtained by Lesage and Gartshore [17]

148 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 Fig. 9. Variation in

Fig. 9. Variation in fluctuating fluid forces with increase in spacing ratio L=D: (a) fluctuating lift coefficient, C Lf ; (b) fluctuating drag coefficient, C Df :

at the same Reynolds number. However, the values obtained by Arie et al. [10] and Batham [15] are different from the value of the present case. This may be due to the fact that the fluctuating fluid force acting on a circular cylinder strongly depends on the Reynolds number [18] and on turbulent intensity. Beyond the critical spacing where two cylinders form vortices individually, C Lf and C Df of the downstream cylinder decrease as the spacing increases. However, in the case of the upstream cylinder, the variation in the C Lf distribution is undulating, and the amplitude of the undulated distribution is in both sides of the value of fluctuating lift coefficient of the single cylinder. C Lf reaches maximum at L=D ¼ 3:0 and 6.25, and reaches minimum

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

149

at L=D ¼ 4:5 and 8.0. The occurrence of the maximum and minimum values of C Lf at these spacings must be, as will be discussed later, due to synchronization of the wakes behind the cylinders with ‘in-phase’ and ‘out-of-phase’ conditions, respec- tively. It should be mentioned that Sakamoto et al. [19] noted that, in the case of two square cylinders, C Lf becomes maximum at the critical spacing due to synchroniza- tion of the cylinders with phase a lag of 2 p (in phase).

3.5. Reattachment position

As stated above, before the bistable flow spacing, the shear layer that separates from the upstream cylinder reattaches somewhere to the surface of the downstream cylinder. The reattachment position, y R ; obtained from surface oil-flow patterns in which a clear reattachment line was found, is shown in Fig. 10. The figure also shows the positions of maximum pressure (peak) due to reattachment in the time-averaged pressure distribution, and the peak due to reattachment in the fluctuating pressure distributions. The results of Hiwada et al. [7] included in the figure were also taken from the peak of the time-averaged pressure distribution. From the figure, it is clear that the maximum pressure due to reattachment of a shear layer in the time-averaged pressure distribution occurs at the reattachment position or slightly (0 B 2 1 ) upstream. However, the peak in the fluctuating pressure distribution due to reattachment does not maintain constant remoteness from the reattachment position. Also, it is notable that when the shear layers reattach steadily to the downstream cylinder (i.e., at L=D ¼ 2:0 B 3:0), the position of maximum pressure and the position of the peak due to reattachment in the fluctuating pressure distribution coincide with the reattachment position. By comparing Figs. 9(a), (b) and 10, it is evident that there is a dormant relation of the values of C Lf and C Df of the downstream cylinder to the reattachment position of the shear layer. For

to the reattachment position of the shear layer. For Fig. 10. Variation in reattachment position with

Fig. 10. Variation in reattachment position with increase in L=D:

150 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

L=D ¼ 0:10; the reattachment position of the shear layers is 75 1 . As the spacing increases, y R precedes forward sharply and C Lf and C Df increase sharply. When the distribution of y R generates a valley at L=D ¼ 0:4; the C Lf and C Df distributions generate peaks at the same spacings. Again, when y R recedes backward for the spacings 0:4 o L=D o0:8; C Lf and C Df decrease, and when y R again precedes forward for the spacings 0:8 oL=Do 1:40; C Lf and C Df greatly increase. At L=D ¼ 1:40; C Lf and C Df reach maximum values of 0.86 and 0.28, respectively, and the y R reaches a minimum value of 55 1 . Beyond L=D ¼ 1:40; the reattachment position recedes backward again. Therefore, it can be concluded that the fluctuating fluid forces acting on the downstream cylinder strictly depend on the reattachment position and increase when the reattachment position of the shear layer precedes forward and vice versa.

3.6. Time-averaged pressure at the reattachment point

Fig. 11 shows the relationship between the magnitude of time-averaged pressure, C PR ; at the reattachment position and the reattachment position, y R ; of the shear layers when the spacing between the cylinders is changed. The figure shows that C PR has an inverse relationship with the position of reattachment; i.e., C PR increases when y R precedes forward and decreases when y R recedes backward. At L=D ¼ 0:4 and 1.40, where the y R reaches a minimum value, C PR reaches a maximum value. It is understandable that when a shear layer attaches to a surface with a smaller incidence angle (the angle between the approaching shear layer and a normal to the surface at the reattachment point), the pressure at the reattachment point becomes higher. Thus, when the reattachment position precedes forward, the incidence angle of the shear layers becomes smaller and vice versa. Also, when a flow approaches a body with a smaller angle of incidence, the flow experiences the body as a more bluff one,

the flow experiences the body as a more bluff one, Fig. 11. Relationship between time-averaged pressure

Fig. 11. Relationship between time-averaged pressure at the reattachment point and position of reattachment.

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

151

et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 151 Fig. 12. Variation in

Fig. 12. Variation in phase lag of fluctuating lift forces between the cylinders.

and then the flow behind the body rolls strongly. As C PR reaches a maximum value at L=D ¼ 1:40; the incidence angle of the shear layers on the surface seems to be a minimum. Therefore, at and near L=D ¼ 1:40; the alternate buffet of the shear layers with a smaller angle of incidence and strong rolling of the shear layers cause higher fluctuating fluid forces.

3.7. Phase lag of the fluctuating lift between two cylinders

Fig. 12 shows the trend in variation of the phase lag of the fluctuating lift between two cylinders with variation in L=D: The phase lag is calculated from the cross correlation between the fluctuating lift forces of the upstream and the downstream cylinders. Though the data are somewhat staggered, a straight line is drawn. The equation given below fits the experimental results:

f ðradÞ ¼ 0:508 pðL=DÞ þ 0:85 p

ðL=D X3Þ:

From the figure, it can be seen that the two cylinders are ‘in phase’ (f ¼ 2n p ; n ¼ 1; 2 y) with phase lags of 2 p and 4 p near L=D ¼ 3:0 and 6.25, where the fluctuating lift force acting on the upstream cylinder is maximum, and the cylinders are ‘out-of-phase’ ff ¼ ð2n þ 1Þ p g with phase lags 3 p and 5 p at L=D ¼ 4:5 and 8.0, where the fluctuating lift force is minimum (Section 3.4). Therefore, the phase of the flow pattern of the downstream cylinder strongly influences the fluctuating lift force acting on the upstream cylinder, and fluctuating lift force of the upstream cylinder becomes maximum when the flow patterns of the two cylinders are in phase and becomes minimum when the flow patterns of the two cylinders are out-of-phase.

3.8. Vortex-shedding frequency from two cylinders

Strouhal numbers of the two cylinders were calculated from a spectral analysis of the fluctuating lift force acting on the cylinders, and the results are shown in Fig. 13.

152 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154 Fig. 13. Variation in

Fig. 13. Variation in Strouhal number with increase in spacing ratio L=D:

Though there was no distinct vortex shedding detectable behind the upstream cylinder up to L=D ¼ 3; the lift forces acting on the upstream cylinder fluctuate with the frequency of the alternate shear layer that separates from the upstream cylinder and reattaches to the downstream cylinder. As has already been stated, the shear layer reattaches alternately to the downstream cylinder at L=D o2 and reattaches steadily to the downstream cylinder at 2 o L=D o3: Therefore, at 2 o L=D o3; there is no distinct frequency of the oscillating lift of the upstream cylinder.

4. Conclusions

The main results of this investigation may be summarized as follows:

(1) The fluctuating lift and drag forces acting on a downstream cylinder are very sensitive to the spacing between the cylinders, especially before the critical spacing. Each of the fluctuating lift and drag coefficient distributions of the downstream cylinder shows two peaks: one is at L=D ¼ 0:4 and the other is at L=D ¼ 1:40: The values of C Lf and C Df at L=D ¼ 1:40 are remarkable and are about 2 and 2.8 times higher, respectively, than those for a single cylinder. (2) The well-known bistable flow occurs at L=D ¼ 3:0 (critical spacing). Before the critical spacing, the shear layer that seperates from the upstream cylinder reattaches to the surface of the downstream cylinder. For the present case, the shear layer reattaches alternately for L=D o2:0 and steadily for 2:0 o L=D o3:0:

In the case of alternate reattachment, a superharmonic frequency of twice the Strouhal frequency can be observed in the power spectrum distribution obtained from the fluctuating pressure on the side surface. (3) There exists a clear relationship between the fluctuating fluid forces acting on the downstream cylinder and the reattachment position, y R ; of the shear layer. The fluctuating lift and drag forces acting on the downstream cylinder increase when the reattachment position of shear layer precedes forward and vice versa.

Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

153

(4) Beyond the critical spacing, the fluctuating lift force acting on the upstream cylinder is strictly influenced by the phase of the flow pattern of the downstream cylinder. When the phase of the flow pattern of the downstream cylinder coincides with the phase of the flow pattern of the upstream cylinder, the fluctuating lift force acting on the upstream cylinder becomes maximum, and when the phase of the flow pattern of the downstream is out-of-phase with the downstream cylinder’s flow pattern, the fluctuating lift force becomes minimum.

Acknowledgements

The authors are indebted to Mr. Y. Obata, a technical officer, for his expertise in precise fabrication of the experimental apparatus.

References

[1] D. Biermann, Herrnstein Jr., The interference between struts in various combinations, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Technical Report 468, 1933.

[2] Z.G. Kostic, S.N. Oka, Fluid flow and heat transfer with two circular cylinders in cross flow, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 15 (1972) 279–299. [3] M.M. Zdravkovich, D.L. Pridden, Flow around two circular cylinders, Research Report, Proceedings of the Second US National Conference on Wind Engineering Research, Fort Collins, IV (18), 1975. [4] M.M. Zdravkovich, D.L. Pridden, Interference between two circular cylinders; series of unexpected discontinuities, J. Ind. Aerodyn. 2 (1977) 255–270. [5] J. Novak, Strouhal number of a quadrangular prism, angle iron and two circular cylinders arranged in tandem, Acta Tech. CSAV 19 (3) (1974) 361–373. [6] A. Okajima, Flow around two tandem circular cylinders at very high Reynolds numbers, Bull. JSME

22 (166) (1979) 504–511.

[7] M. Hiwada, I. Mabuchi, H. Yanagihara, Flow and heat transfer from two same size circular cylinders in tandem arrangement, Trans. JSME 48 (1982) 499–508 (in Japanese). [8] T. Igarashi, Characteristics of the flow around two circular cylinders arranged in tandem (first report), Bull. JSME 24 (188) (1981) 323–331. [9] T. Igarashi, Characteristics of the flow around two circular cylinders arranged in tandem (second report), Bull. JSME 27 (233) (1984) 2380–2387. [10] M. Arie, M. Kiya, M. Moriya, H. Mori, Pressure fluctuations on the surface of two circular cylinders in tandem arrangement, ASME J. Fluids Eng. 105 (1983) 161–167. [11] J.A. Jendrzejczk, S.S. Chen, Fluid forces on two circular cylinders in crossflow, ASME, PVP 14 (1986) 141–143. [12] H. Sakamoto, H. Haniu, Y. Obata, S. Matubara, Optimum suppression of fluid forces acting on a circular cylinder and its effectiveness, JSME Int. J. Ser. B 37 (2) (1994) 369–376. [13] E. Achenbach, Distribution of local pressure and skin friction around a circular cylinder in cross-flow

up to Re=5 10 6 , J. Fluid Mech. 34 (Part 4) (1968) 625–639. [14] J.S. Son, T.J. Hanratty, Velocity gradient at the wall for flow around a cylinder at Reynolds number from 5 10 3 to 10 5 , J. Fluid Mech. 35 (1969) 353–368.

[15] J.P. Batham, Pressure distribution on circular cylinders at critical reynolds numbers, J. Fluid Mech.

57 (1973) 209–228.

[16] B.H. Lakshmana Gowda, D.R. Prabhu, Interference effects on the flow-induced vibrations of a circular cylinder, J. Sound Vib. 112 (3) (1987) 487–502.

154 Md.M. Alam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 91 (2003) 139–154

[17] F. Lesage, I.S. Gartshore, A method of reducing drag and fluctuating side force on bluff bodies, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 25 (1987) 229–245. [18] I.S. Gartshore, Some effects of upstream turbulence on the unsteady lift forces imposed on prismatic two dimensional bodies, ASME J. Fluids Eng. 106 (1984) 418–424. [19] H. Sakamoto, H. Haniu, Y. Obata, Fluctuating forces acting on two square prisms in a tandem arrangement, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 26 (1987) 85–103.