Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

On bifurcations and traction forces on an obstacle in incompressible flow

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that in two-dimensional flow past a confined cylinder, the pointwise force profile on the cylinder surface, computed from steady solutions alone, develops sharp folds at exactly the Reynolds numbers where the unsteady flow

desk verdict Careful, honest numerical study reporting a new empirical correspondence between steady traction folds and unsteady regime transitions in the Schäfer–Turek benchmark; the diagnostic is intriguing but only post hoc and not fully mesh-converged, so it should go to peer review with requests for a convergence study and a prospective test. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.15424 v2 pith:WSPHFWAS submitted 2025-12-17 physics.flu-dyn cs.NAmath.NA

Jakub Cach , Karel Tůma , Jan Blechta , Sebastian Schwarzacher This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyncs.NAmath.NA MSC 35B3276D0565N30 PACS 47.20.-k47.32.-y47.11.-j
keywords Navier-StokesflowaroundacylinderpointwisetractionbifurcationvortexsheddingcriticalReynoldsnumbermultiplesteadystateslinearstability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that in two-dimensional incompressible flow past a slightly off-center cylinder inside a narrow channel, the pattern of local force per area on the cylinder surface—the traction profile of the steady solution—changes shape in a sharp, fold-like way exactly at the Reynolds numbers where the long-time unsteady flow changes regime. The paper documents five such coincidences: vortex-pair onset at Re≈7, the Hopf bifurcation to periodic vortex shedding at Re≈48, wake-width saturation with wall-attached vortices at Re≈78, symmetry breaking with multiple steady states at Re≈315, and the fully developed Karman vortex street at Re≈950. The folds appear preferentially on the upstream face of the cylinder, which the authors read as evidence that these transitions are initiated at the obstacle rather than in the downstream wake. If the correspondence holds, a single steady-state computation per Reynolds number becomes a sensitive and cheap diagnostic for locating critical Reynolds numbers, complementing time integration and linear stability analysis.

What carries the argument

The central object is the pointwise traction profile t_c(θ, Re) = t·e_x or t·e_y along the obstacle boundary—the local force density the fluid exerts on the cylinder—computed from steady-state solutions via a duality-based variational method that converges faster than direct stress evaluation. The work is carried by the implicit curves ∂Re t_c = 0 and their folds: a 'turning point' is where the curve first appears on the cylinder or reverses its direction in Re, defined formally by conditions ∂θ∂Re t_c = 0 (horizontal fold) or ∂²Re t_c = 0 (vertical fold). These folds are what align with the observed transitions, and their angular location on the upstream face is what supports the paper's up

What would settle it

Recompute the steady traction profiles in the same geometry on a sequence of meshes with increasing cylinder boundary resolution (e.g., 300, 600, and 1200 boundary nodes) and locate the folds of ∂Re t_c = 0 near Re = 7, 48, 78, 315, and 950; if any fold shifts, splits, or disappears under refinement, or moves away from the corresponding transition of the unsteady flow, the claimed correspondence breaks down.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms: the pointwise traction t(θ, Re) on the cylinder boundary—the Cauchy stress evaluated from the steady Navier–Stokes solution—contains lines of stationary points with respect to Reynolds number, ∂Re t_c = 0, for both the drag and lift components. At the critical values Re≈7, 48, 78, 315, and 950 these lines develop 'turning points,' defined as folds where the curve either first appears on the cylinder (∂θ∂Re t_c = 0) or reverses its Re-direction (∂²Re t_c = 0). Each fold coincides with a qualitative change in the global-in-time behavior of the unsteady equations: appearance of a recirculating wake, onset of time-periodic shedding, saturation of wake width with wall vo

Load-bearing premise

The folds in the numerically computed traction curves are genuine features of the true steady solutions, not artifacts of the finite-element mesh—the paper itself notes the Re≈950 fold weakens with refinement, so the same must be verified for the other four.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At least in this benchmark geometry, a steady-state traction scan over Reynolds number can flag the onset of time-periodic shedding (Re≈48) and later regime changes without running long unsteady simulations.
  • The diagnostic is not limited to the Hopf bifurcation: it also detects the emergence of the recirculating wake (Re≈7), wake-width saturation with wall vortices (Re≈78), symmetry breaking and multiple steady states (Re≈315), and the fully developed Karman street (Re≈950).
  • The upstream location of the folds indicates that the origin of these instabilities is at the obstacle boundary itself, not in the downstream vortex wake, challenging the usual wake-centric reading.
  • Linear perturbation theory captures only the first Hopf bifurcation in this flow; traction folds provide the missing information about later transitions and are insensitive to the eigenvalue-approximation errors that accumulate at higher Reynolds numbers.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the correspondence is a general property of bluff-body flows, steady traction scans could be used to pre-locate bifurcation boundaries in parameter sweeps for other geometries, with full unsteady or spectral verification reserved only for the flagged Reynolds numbers.
  • The known mesh sensitivity of the Re≈950 fold is a caution: the same mesh-convergence test should be applied to the Re=7, 48, 78, and 315 folds to confirm they are features of the continuous equations rather than of the discretization.
  • The fact that total drag and lift barely distinguish the multiple steady branches while the pointwise profiles do suggests that integral force coefficients discard precisely the information that carries the bifurcation signature; future diagnostics should use local, not integrated, force data.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a numerical study of two-dimensional incompressible Navier–Stokes flow past a circular cylinder in the confined Schäfer–Turek geometry for Reynolds numbers up to 1000. The central claim is that folds of the implicit curve ∂_Re t_c(θ,Re)=0, where t_c is the pointwise steady drag or lift traction on the cylinder, occur at approximately Re=7, 48, 78, 315, and 950, and that these Reynolds numbers coincide with qualitative changes in the long-time unsteady flow: vortex-pair onset, Hopf bifurcation to periodic shedding, wake-width saturation with wall-attached vortices, symmetry breaking/multiplicity of steady states, and the onset of a Kármán vortex street. The authors propose steady traction profiles as a cheap diagnostic for detecting flow-regime transitions. The paper combines direct time integration, deflated continuation to detect multiple steady solutions, linear stability analysis, and a detailed variational method for computing pointwise traction with convergence studies.

Significance. If the claimed correspondence is robust, the paper would provide a practically useful and computationally inexpensive diagnostic for critical Reynolds numbers in this benchmark, and an interesting physical observation that transitions are imprinted on the upstream face of the obstacle. The paper's strengths include the explicit treatment of traction evaluation with convergence-rate documentation (Appendix B), the use of multiple independent numerical methods (unsteady DNS, deflation, LPT), and the public availability of supporting code. However, the central claim is substantially weakened by the authors' own report that the Re≈950 fold disappears under mesh refinement, and by the explicitly a posteriori identification sequence: transitions are found first in unsteady simulations, and traction folds are then inspected at those same Reynolds numbers. The paper is therefore best read as a detailed numerical observation with a promising hypothesis, not yet a validated predictive diagnostic.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.5 and Fig. 22 vs Fig. 24] The Re≈950 turning point is described as 'not robust' and as 'tend[ing] to disappear with mesh refinement', with the fine-mesh curve flattening near Re=950. This removes one of the five claimed correspondences between traction folds and unsteady transitions. Since conditions (4a)–(4b) require first and second derivatives of discrete traction data on a 300-node boundary discretization, the same numerical-differentiation amplification affects all reported folds. No mesh-convergence study is provided for the folds at Re=7, 48, 78, and 315. The explanation that this transition originates from wake oscillations downstream does not establish convergence of the remaining folds. Please provide a systematic h-refinement study of the turning-point coordinates and fold structure, and state explicitly whether Re=950 is retained as a claimed marker or rejected.
  2. [Section 2.4 and Section 4.6] The paper states that 'the observed bifurcations in the unsteady flow precede and motivate the inspection of the traction profile.' Thus the matching Reynolds numbers are selected from known transitions, and the correspondences are not tested out-of-sample. The conclusion that traction profiles are 'a sensitive diagnostic' and 'a computationally inexpensive strategy to detect critical Reynolds numbers' requires either a predictive test (e.g., blind application to a different geometry or Reynolds range) or a principled treatment of false positives. Figure 24 contains additional folds, e.g., near Re=177, 750, and 900, that are not associated with unsteady transitions; the paper dismisses these as wake-related. This asymmetry in interpretation should be addressed quantitatively, or the claims should be moderated from 'diagnostic' to 'a posteriori correlation'.
  3. [Section 4.4] The conclusion that all initial conditions converge to the same time-periodic attractor relies in part on simulations using a directional free-outflow boundary condition during an initial transient. The paper itself notes: 'if multiple attractors exist, this intervention could potentially suppress necessary transient behavior required to reach an alternative attractor.' This limitation directly affects the claimed uniqueness of the long-time attractor across the investigated Reynolds range. Please either repeat the key initial-condition tests without the directional outflow condition, or explicitly mark the uniqueness conclusion as provisional.
  4. [Section 4.6] Only one turning point, Re=(177±60), is reported with an uncertainty estimate. All other turning points (Re=7, 48, 78, 315, 950) are given as point values, although they are extracted from numerical differentiation of discrete traction profiles under conditions (4a)–(4b). Given the acknowledged mesh sensitivity of the Re=950 fold, confidence intervals or resolution-based error bars should be provided for every claimed turning point.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract vs full text] The abstract states Reynolds numbers 'up to 500' while the full text and figures go to 1000; please correct the inconsistency.
  2. [Throughout] Several typos and awkward phrases: 'sligtly', 'eingenvalue', 'unappropriated', 'follows a logistic pattern' with no supporting reference or analysis, and the equation for Strouhal–wavelength relation in Section 4.3 uses symbols not fully defined before use. A careful proofreading pass is recommended.
  3. [Appendix B, Eq. (B.5)] The domain integral on the right-hand side of (B.5) is missing the volume measure; please add the appropriate differential.
  4. [Remark on generality] The 'Remark on generality' at the end of Section 1 is important for framing the results, but it would be more helpful at the beginning of Section 1 or immediately after the first mention of the 'sensitive diagnostic' claim in Section 5.
  5. [Fig. 24 caption] The notation '∂Re t_lift,drag' in the caption is ambiguous; please use separate captions or explicit subscripts for lift and drag, matching conditions (4a)–(4b).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No definitional or self-citation circularity; the traction-fold correspondence is an empirical, post-hoc observation rather than a reduction, and the main weakness is numerical robustness, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central correspondence is an empirical numerical observation rather than a derivation, and no equation or fitted parameter ties the traction folds to the unsteady bifurcation Reynolds numbers. Conditions (4a)-(4b) depend only on steady traction tc(theta,Re), computed from steady Navier-Stokes solutions by a variational method detailed in Appendices A-B; the critical Reynolds numbers (7,48,78,315,950) are determined by separate observations: vortex-pair onset in the steady field, LPT eigenvalue crossing at Re~48 (Fig. 10), deflation multiplicity at Re~315 (Figs. 15-19), and unsteady DNS. The Re=48 fold is independently corroborated by an eigenvalue crossing, so that match is not forced by construction. The paper explicitly discloses the post-hoc identification order in Section 2.4 ('the observed bifurcations in the unsteady flow precede and motivate the inspection of the traction profile') and in Section 4.6 ('identified a posteriori'); this weakens the 'anticipate' language in the Conclusion but does not make the fold locations equal to the target Re values. Additional non-matching folds (back-side folds near Re~750 and 900; drag fold at Re=177+/-60) are acknowledged, confirming the folds are not manufactured to hit the target list. The Re=950 fold's documented mesh sensitivity (Section 4.5: 'this turning point is not robust and tends to disappear with mesh refinement') is a numerical robustness limitation, not circularity. No load-bearing self-citation appears; the only self-reference is the Zenodo reproducibility code [36]. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted: the paper varies only Re and keeps physical parameters fixed; the turning points are data features, not fitted constants. The main assumptions are standard PDE/FEM background plus two paper-specific choices: the transient outflow modification and the post-hoc selection of which folds count as transitions. No new entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Schäfer–Turek benchmark flow is governed by the 2D incompressible Navier–Stokes equations with the stated boundary conditions, and the chosen finite-element discretizations converge to the true solutions across Re∈(0,1000).
    All turning points are extracted from discrete steady solutions on a 300-node cylinder mesh (~200k DoF); the central empirical claim depends on these solutions approximating the continuum ones.
  • standard math Classical Hopf bifurcation theory applies to the linearized operator (3): a simple purely imaginary eigenvalue with one-dimensional invariant subspace implies branching (§2.2).
    Used to interpret the Re=48 transition and the purely real eigenvalue approaching zero near Re=315.
  • domain assumption Deflated continuation finds all steady branches, and failed deflated solves indicate the absence of further solutions (§3).
    The existence of multiple steady states at Re≥315 is inferred from deflation on a coarser ~100k-DoF mesh.
  • ad hoc to paper The directional free-outflow boundary condition applied during the initial transient does not bias the long-time attractor; the paper itself flags that it could suppress alternative attractors (§4.4).
    This intervention is load-bearing for the claim of a unique global time-periodic attractor at Re>650.
  • ad hoc to paper Turning points defined by conditions (4a)-(4b) of ∂Ret_c=0 curves encode physically meaningful transitions, and folds on the back side near Re=750 and Re=900 are assumed not to correspond to unsteady transitions (§4.6).
    The classification of which folds are 'significant' is guided by the already-known transitions, introducing a post-hoc element into the central claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On bifurcations and traction forces on an obstacle in incompressible flow." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WSPHFWAS

@misc{pith2026251215424,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On bifurcations and traction forces on an obstacle in incompressible flow},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WSPHFWAS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.15424}
}
read the original abstract

A systematic numerical investigation of flow-regime transitions in the two-dimensional incompressible Navier-Stokes flow past a confined circular cylinder is presented. For a fixed benchmark geometry, we observe a clear empirical correspondence between qualitative changes in steady traction profiles, understood here as the pointwise force density given by the Cauchy stress tensor on the obstacle boundary, and bifurcations in the long-time behavior of the unsteady Navier-Stokes equations. The observed transitions include onset of time-periodic oscillations, the appearance of multiple steady solutions and loss of effective symmetry. The well-known planar Sch\"afer-Turek benchmark is considered for Reynolds numbers up to 500. Several numerical techniques are employed to compute steady solutions, boundary traction profiles, and linear stability spectra such as duality-based approach for traction evaluation, deflation methods for detecting multiple steady states, and both two- and three- dimensional linear stability analyzes. The results suggest that steady boundary traction profiles can serve as a sensitive diagnostic indicator of critical Reynolds numbers at which qualitative changes in flow dynamics occur. This suggests a computationally inexpensive, complementary approach for detecting flow-regime transitions within this benchmark configuration.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.15424 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Schäfer–Turek benchmark. The lower left corner is at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The upper row illustrates the evolution of long-time flow regimes in the Schäfer–Turek benchmark as the Reynolds number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Traction profiles across the range of Reynolds numbers where the transition from low Reynolds number flow to flow with a vortex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (24 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Velocity field at Re = 9. Lift profiles (shown using warp-by-scalar plot, with reversed sign for plotting convenience) at the transition from stationary vortex-free flow (Re = 7, in shades of green) to stationary flow with a vortex wake (Re = 9, in shades of gray); min…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Velocity field on the downstream side of the cylinder in line integral convolution plot. A pair of stationary vortices appears at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Turning point at (θ = 85◦, Re = 7) in the lift profile corresponding to the bifurcation from low-Reynolds-number vortex-free flow to steady flow with a vortex wake 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Traction profiles across the range of Reynolds numbers where the steady flow with a vortex wake transitions to a regime in which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Results from direct numerical time integration of the unsteady equations at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Eigenmode reconstruction for Re = 50 −7 −6 −5 −4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 real part −10 −5 0 5 10 imaginary part Re = 24 Re = 27 Re = 32 Re = 36 Re = 44 Re = 48 Re = 52 Re = 55 Re = 64 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Plot of eigenvalues in the complex plane of the LPT operator around critical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Comparison of snapshot of unsteady solution (with plotted streamlines over half of the domain) with reconstruction of unsteady [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Traction profiles throughout the time period [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Traction profiles across the range of Reynolds numbers where the long-time solution differs from steady solution and transition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Plot of flow pattern of multiple steady states at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Bifurcation diagram based on (signed) symmetry deviation metric, defined as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Schäfer–Turek benchmark bifurcation point viewed by different quantities: Drag, lift, dissipation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Comparison of drag profiles for different branches of the multiple steady solution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Comparison of lift profiles for different branches of the multiple steady solution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Evolution of the most right-hand-side purely real eigenvalue in the vicinity of bifurcation point [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_19.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: For the traction profiles on the fine mesh within the range [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_24.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Snapshot of the time-periodic attractor corresponding to decaying vortex street at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Snapshot of the vortex street at Re = 1000 in a line integral convolution plot 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Re 5 10 15 20 point drag point lift turning point, Re = 953 −1.5 −1.0 −0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Cylinder point lift [Pa] point drag [Pa] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figure…
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Turning point in the lift profile on a coarse mesh, corresponding to the transition from non-symmetric decaying vortex street [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Traction profiles across the range of Reynolds numbers where the non-symmetric vortex street takes place and transitions to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Implicit curves defined by ∂Retdrag,lift(θ, Re) = 0 (black) along the cylinder boundary θ ∈ (−π, π), computed from the traction profiles of steady solutions of the baseline branch over the interval Re ∈ (0, 1000). The folds of the black curve, highlighted by short ora…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: Schäfer–Turek benchmark. Sketch of the evolution of the unique time-periodic global-in-time attractor with increasing Reynolds [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_25.png]
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: The upper row illustrates the flow behavior governed by the time-dependent Navier–Stokes equations in the Schäfer–Turek [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_26.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A thermodynamically consistent Johnson-Segalman-Giesekus model: numerical simulation of the rod climbing effect

    physics.flu-dyn 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A thermodynamically consistent Johnson–Segalman–Giesekus model matches rod-climbing experiments better than the standard Johnson–Segalman model, provided its slip parameter is fitted separately at each rotation speed.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Jiang, L

    H. Jiang, L. Cheng, Strouhal–Reynolds number relationship for flow past a circular cylinder, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 832 (2017) 170–188. doi:10.1017/jfm.2017.685

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2017.685 2017

  2. [2]

    Kumar, S

    B. Kumar, S. Mittal, Effect of blockage on critical parameters for flow past a circular cylinder at low Reynolds number, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 50 (2006) 987 – 1001. doi:10.1002/fld.1098

    work page doi:10.1002/fld.1098 2006

  3. [3]

    C. H. K. Williamson, Vortex dynamics in the cylinder wake, in: Annual review of fluid mechanics, Vol. 28, Annual Reviews, Palo Alto, CA, 1996, pp. 477–539. doi:10.1146/annurev.fl.28.010196.002401

    arXiv 1996

  4. [4]

    Schäfer, S

    M. Schäfer, S. Turek, F. Durst, E. Krause, R. Rannacher, Benchmark Computations of Laminar Flow Around a Cylinder, Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, Wiesbaden, 1996, pp. 547–566. doi:10.1007/978-3-322-89849-4_39

    doi:10.1007/978-3-322-89849-4_39 1996

  5. [5]

    K. I. Babenko, On properties of steady viscous incompressible fluid flows, in: R. Rautmann (Ed.), Approximation Methods for Navier–Stokes Problems, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1980, pp. 12–42

    1980

  6. [6]

    G. P. Galdi, On bifurcating time-periodic flow of a Navier–Stokes liquid past a cylinder, Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 222 (2016) 285–315. doi:10.1007/s00205-016-1001-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s00205-016-1001-3 2016

  7. [7]

    Ladyzhenskaya, Global solvability of a boundary value problem for the Navier–Stokes equations in the case of two spatial variables, Doklady of the USSR 123 (1958) 427–429

    O. Ladyzhenskaya, Global solvability of a boundary value problem for the Navier–Stokes equations in the case of two spatial variables, Doklady of the USSR 123 (1958) 427–429

    1958

  8. [8]

    H. Jia, V. Šverák, Local-in-space estimates near initial time for weak solutions of the Navier–Stokes equations and forward self-similar solutions, Inventiones mathematicae 196 (2014) 233–265. doi:10.1007/s00222-013-0468-x

    doi:10.1007/s00222-013-0468-x 2014

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    H. Jia, V. Šverák, Are the incompressible 3d Navier–Stokes equations locally ill-posed in the natural energy space?, Journal of Functional Analysis 268 (2015) 3734–3766. doi:10.1016/j.jfa.2015.04.006

    2015 doi

  2. [10]

    Buckmaster, V

    T. Buckmaster, V. Vicol, Nonuniqueness of weak solutions to the Navier–Stokes equation, Annals of Mathematics 189 (2019) 101–144. doi:10.4007/ANNALS.2019.189.1.3

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    Albritton, E

    D. Albritton, E. Brué, M. Colombo, Non-uniqueness of Leray solutions of the forced Navier-Stokes equations, Annals of Mathematics 196 (2022) 415–455. doi:10.4007/annals.2022.196.1.3

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    Bonheure, G

    D. Bonheure, G. P. Galdi, F. Gazzola, Stability of equilibria and bifurcations for a fluid-solid interaction problem, Journal of Differential Equations 408 (2024) 324–367. doi:10.1016/j.jde.2024.07.007

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    J. H. Gerrard, The mechanics of the formation region of vortices behind bluff bodies, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 25 (1966) 401–413. doi:10.1017/S0022112066001721

    1966 doi

  6. [14]

    P. W. Bearman, M. M. Zdravkovich, Flow around a circular cylinder near a plane boundary, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 89 (1978) 33–47. doi:10.1017/S002211207800244X

    1978 doi

  7. [15]

    Schewe, On the force fluctuations acting on a circular cylinder in crossflow from subcritical up to transcritical Reynolds numbers, Journal of fluid mechanics 133 (1983) 265–285

    G. Schewe, On the force fluctuations acting on a circular cylinder in crossflow from subcritical up to transcritical Reynolds numbers, Journal of fluid mechanics 133 (1983) 265–285. doi:10.1017/S0022112083001913

    1983 doi

  8. [16]

    Zdravkovich, Conceptual overview of laminar and turbulent flows past smooth and rough circular cylin- ders, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 33 (1990) 53–62

    M. Zdravkovich, Conceptual overview of laminar and turbulent flows past smooth and rough circular cylin- ders, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 33 (1990) 53–62. doi:10.1016/0167-6105(90) 90020-D. 22

    1990 doi

  9. [17]

    Michálek, P

    P. Michálek, P. Procházka, V. Uruba, S. Pospíšil, Influence of surface roughness on the wake structure of a circular cylinder at Reynolds number5×10 3 to12×10 3, European Journal of Mechanics-B/Fluids 96 (2022) 15–25. doi:10.1016/j.euromechflu.2022.06.003

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    Mittal, Stability of flow past a cylinder: Energy budget of eigenmodes, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 63 (2010) 533–547

    S. Mittal, Stability of flow past a cylinder: Energy budget of eigenmodes, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids 63 (2010) 533–547. doi:10.1002/fld.2084

    2010 doi

  11. [19]

    Amestoy, I

    P. Amestoy, I. S. Duff, J. Koster, J.-Y. L’Excellent, A fully asynchronous multifrontal solver using dis- tributed dynamic scheduling, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications 23 (2001) 15–41. doi:10. 1137/S0895479899358194

    2001

  12. [20]

    P. W. Schroeder, G. Lube, Pressure-robust analysis of divergence-free and conforming FEM for evolution- ary incompressible Navier–Stokes flows, Journal of Numerical Mathematics 25 (2017) 249–276. doi:10.1515/ jnma-2016-1101

    2017

  13. [21]

    G. W. Stewart, A Krylov–Schur algorithm for large eigenproblems, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 23 (2001/02) 601–614. doi:10.1137/S0895479800371529

    2001 doi

  14. [22]

    Hernandez, J

    V. Hernandez, J. E. Roman, V. Vidal, SLEPc: A scalable and flexible toolkit for the solution of eigenvalue problems, ACM Trans. Math. Software 31 (2005) 351–362. doi:10.1145/1089014.1089019

    2005

  15. [23]

    P. E. Farrell, A. Birkisson, S. W. Funke, Deflation techniques for finding distinct solutions of nonlinear partial differential equations, SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 37 (2015) A2026–A2045. doi:10.1137/140984798

    2015 doi

  16. [24]

    Farrell, C

    P. Farrell, C. Beentjes, A. Birkisson, The computation of disconnected bifurcation diagrams, 2016. arXiv:1603.00809

    2016 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Bénard, Formation de centres de giration à l’arrière d’un obstacle en mouvement, Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, Paris 147 (1908) 839–842

    H. Bénard, Formation de centres de giration à l’arrière d’un obstacle en mouvement, Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, Paris 147 (1908) 839–842

    1908

  18. [26]

    von Kármán, Über den Mechanismus des Widerstandes, den ein bewegter Körper in einer Flüssigkeit erfährt, Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen

    T. von Kármán, Über den Mechanismus des Widerstandes, den ein bewegter Körper in einer Flüssigkeit erfährt, Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen. II. Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse 12 (1911) 509–519. URL:https://eudml.org/doc/58812

    1911

  19. [27]

    Zebib, Stability of viscous flow past a circular cylinder, Journal of Engineering Mathematics 21 (1987) 155–165

    A. Zebib, Stability of viscous flow past a circular cylinder, Journal of Engineering Mathematics 21 (1987) 155–165. doi:10.1007/BF00127673

    1987 doi

  20. [28]

    Morzynski, F

    M. Morzynski, F. Thiele, Numerical stability analysis of a flow about a cylinder, Zeitschrift Angewandte Mathe- matik und Mechanik 71 (1991) T424–T428. doi:10.1002/zamm.19910710502

    1991 doi

  21. [29]

    C. P. Jackson, A finite-element study of the onset of vortex shedding in flow past variously shaped bodies, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 182 (1987) 23–45. doi:10.1017/S0022112087002234

    1987 doi

  22. [30]

    Provansal, C

    M. Provansal, C. Mathis, L. Boyer, Bénard-von Kármán instability: transient and forced regimes, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 182 (1987) 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0022112087002222

    1987 doi

  23. [31]

    Jiang, L

    H. Jiang, L. Cheng, Transition to the secondary vortex street in the wake of a circular cylinder, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 867 (2019) 691–722. doi:10.1017/jfm.2019.167

    2019 doi

  24. [32]

    von Wahl, L

    H. von Wahl, L. R. Scott, Reliable chaotic transition in incompressible fluid simulations, 2024. doi:10.3934/acse. 2024011

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    U. Fey, M. König, H. Eckelmann, A new Strouhal-Reynolds-number relationship for the circular cylinder in the range 47<Re<2×105, Physics of Fluids 10 (1998) 1547–1549. doi:10.1063/1.869675

    1998 doi

  26. [34]

    C. H. K. Williamson, Mode A secondary instability in wake transition, Physics of Fluids 8 (1996) 1680–1682. doi:10.1063/1.868949

    1996 doi

  27. [35]

    Jiang, L

    H. Jiang, L. Cheng, F. Tong, S. Draper, H. An, Stable state of Mode A for flow past a circular cylinder, Physics of Fluids 28 (2016). doi:10.1063/1.4964379

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    On bifurcations and traction forces on an obstacle in incom- pressible flow

    J. Cach, J. Blechta, K. Tůma, Supporting code for “On bifurcations and traction forces on an obstacle in incom- pressible flow”, Zenodo, 2025. doi:10.5281/zenodo.16919527

    2025 doi

  29. [37]

    Horger, J

    T. Horger, J. M. Melenk, B. Wohlmuth, On optimalL2- and surface flux convergence in FEM, Comput. Vis. Sci. 16 (2013) 231–246. doi:10.1007/s00791-015-0237-z

    2013 doi

  30. [38]

    T. Apel, M. Mateos, J. Pfefferer, A. Rösch, Error estimates for Dirichlet control problems in polygonal domains: quasi-uniform meshes, Math. Control Relat. Fields 8 (2018) 217–245. doi:10.3934/mcrf.2018010. 23

    2018 doi

  31. [39]

    R. E. Bank, J. Xu, Asymptotically exact a posteriori error estimators. I. Grids with superconvergence, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 41 (2003) 2294–2312. doi:10.1137/S003614290139874X

    2003 doi

  32. [40]

    Pfefferer, M

    J. Pfefferer, M. Winkler, Finite element error estimates for normal derivatives on boundary concentrated meshes, SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 57 (2019) 2043–2073. doi:10.1137/18M1181341

    2019 doi

  33. [41]

    Giles, M

    M. Giles, M. G. Larson, J. M. Levenstam, E. Süli, Adaptive error control for finite element approximations of the lift and drag coefficients in viscous flow, Oxford University Research Archive, 1997. URL:https://ora.ox.ac. uk/objects/uuid:402c45e6-a868-4977-ba3f-fb59d9fa8af3

    1997

  34. [42]

    John, Parallele Lösung der inkompressiblen Navier–Stokes Gleichungen auf adaptiv verfeinerten Gittern, Ph.D

    V. John, Parallele Lösung der inkompressiblen Navier–Stokes Gleichungen auf adaptiv verfeinerten Gittern, Ph.D. thesis, Otto–von–Guericke–Universität Magdeburg, 1997

    1997

  35. [43]

    Becker, Weighted error estimators for the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations, HAL Inria, 1998

    R. Becker, Weighted error estimators for the incompressible Navier–Stokes equations, HAL Inria, 1998. URL: https://inria.hal.science/inria-00073232v1

    1998

  36. [44]

    Babuška, A

    I. Babuška, A. Miller, The post-processing approach in the finite element method—part 1: Calculation of displacements, stresses and other higher derivatives of the displacements, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 20 (1984) 1085–1109. doi:10.1002/nme.1620200610

    1984 doi

  37. [45]

    Babuška, A

    I. Babuška, A. Miller, The post-processing approach in the finite element method—part 2: The calculation of stress intensity factors, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 20 (1984) 1111–1129. doi:10.1002/nme.1620200611

    1984 doi

  38. [46]

    Bangerth, R

    W. Bangerth, R. Rannacher, Adaptive finite element methods for differential equations, Lectures in Mathematics ETH Zürich, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2003. doi:10.1007/978-3-0348-7605-6

    2003 doi

  39. [47]

    M. B. Giles, E. Süli, Adjoint methods for PDEs: a posteriori error analysis and postprocessing by duality, Acta Numer. 11 (2002) 145–236. doi:10.1017/S096249290200003X

    2002 doi

  40. [48]

    Nabh, On high order methods for the stationary incompressible Navier–Stokes equations, Ph.D

    G. Nabh, On high order methods for the stationary incompressible Navier–Stokes equations, Ph.D. thesis, University of Heidelberg, 1998. URL:https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?doi= 7a167d0c7e7e9c10ef52752bd8366a1298867a6b

    1998

  41. [49]

    Gjerde, L

    I. Gjerde, L. R. Scott, Verification and validation of cylinder drag: Pressure and stress approximations on curved boundaries, Advances in Computational Science and Engineering 2 (2024) 295–319. doi:10.3934/acse.2024015

    2024 doi

  42. [50]

    L. R. Scott, T. Tscherpel, Derivative constraints on finite element functions due to boundary approximation, In preparation, 2025. 24

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.