Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 42 references

Effect of Chordwise Flexibility Distribution on Wave-Assisted Flapping Foil Performance

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that moving the flexure point along a flapping foil's tail changes the balance between thrust and propulsive efficiency, with a fully flexible tail maximizing efficiency and a mid-flexible tail maximizing thrust under…

desk verdict Solid experiments, but flexure location is confounded with flexible length, so the central 'distribution' claim overreaches. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06561 v1 pith:YGEKMJ3P submitted 2026-08-06 physics.flu-dyn

Lokesh Silwal , Neel Karani , Anchal Sareen This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyn
keywords Wave-assistedpropulsionFlappingfoilChordwiseflexibilityFlexibletailVortexdynamicsPropulsiveefficiencyParticleimagevelocimetryQuiescentflow
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 tries to establish that the chordwise placement of flexibility in a flapping foil is an independent design lever that governs the trade-off between thrust and propulsive efficiency. By moving the flexure along a fixed-length flexible tail while holding flexural rigidity constant, the authors compare rigid, mid-flexible, and fully flexible propulsors in still water. They find that the fully flexible tail consistently achieves the highest propulsive efficiency, up to about 164% higher, because it delays vortex shedding and lets the momentum jet persist farther downstream. The mid-flexible tail, in contrast, produces the highest thrust, up to about 66% higher at the largest heave amplitude and frequency, because it injects a stronger near-wake jet. If right, these results give wave-driven unmanned surface vehicles a physics-based way to choose where to put compliance, not just how much.

What carries the argument

The mechanism carrying the argument is the spacing and persistence of vortices in the wake, quantified from phase-averaged vorticity fields and from the downstream decay of the peak streamwise jet velocity $u_{\max}$. A fully flexible tail introduces a phase lag in trailing-edge motion that approaches 90°, which delays vortex shedding, increases the streamwise spacing between successive vortices, and sustains a coherent jet; the paper links that persistence to higher propulsive efficiency, defined as thrust-to-power-input ratio $\varepsilon$. A mid-flexible tail keeps vortex shedding timing close to the rigid case but produces a stronger near-wake jet with higher momentum flux, which is linked to thrust. The paper also shows that time-averaged thrust collapses linearly with the square of the maximum trailing-edge velocity, $V_{\mathrm{TE,max}}^2$, suggesting that trailing-edge kinematics, rather than a freestream-based rigidity parameter, is the governing scaling variable in still water.

What would settle it

Repeat the same foil configurations with end plates at both ends and at a larger span, and compare midspan vortex spacing and jet persistence; if the fully-flexible efficiency advantage disappears or reverses, the midspan wake metrics are not the causal mechanism claimed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the location of the flexure, not just the amount of flexibility, determines how a heaving foil's wake converts motion into thrust. In quiescent flow, the fully flexible configuration produces trailing-edge deflections with a phase lag approaching 90°, delaying the shedding of trailing-edge vortices and increasing the streamwise spacing between them; the resulting reverse von Kármán-like jet remains coherent farther downstream, and this jet persistence is what the authors associate with the consistently higher thrust-to-power ratio. The mid-flexible configuration sheds vortices at nearly the same timing as the rigid foil, but its smaller, more streamwise-aligned deflections concentrate momentum flux into a stronger near-wake jet, which explains its higher thrust at the most demanding condition. The fully flexible tail's larger negative streamwise deflections diffuse that streamwise momentum, capping its thrust despite its more coherent wake. These observations are made through simultaneous force, particle image velocimetry, and optical kinematic measurements.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the surface plate at the free surface doubles the effective aspect ratio and keeps the midspan flow two-dimensional enough that the wake metrics measured there, rather than spanwise tip effects, are what cause the thrust and efficiency differences.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At equal flexural rigidity and total chord, moving the flexure from the tail root to mid-tail is enough to switch the propulsor between an efficiency-optimized and a thrust-optimized regime.
  • Fully flexible tails (flexure at the root) should be preferred for endurance-oriented wave-driven vehicles because they sustain a coherent momentum jet and achieve the highest thrust-to-power ratio under all tested conditions.
  • Mid-flexible tails become the thrust-maximizing choice at high heave frequency and amplitude, which is the operating regime relevant to demanding maneuvers or faster transit.
  • Because thrust scales with the square of the maximum trailing-edge velocity, trailing-edge deflection measurements can be used to estimate thrust performance of flexible heaving foils in still water at lower forcing conditions.
  • Excessive compliance can reduce thrust: large streamwise tail deflections diffuse the streamwise momentum that would otherwise contribute to forward thrust.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's stated results, the same vortex-timing mechanism suggests that in a weak freestream or with combined heave-pitch kinematics, the optimal flexure location should shift with reduced frequency; the paper only tests pure heave in still water, so this is an extrapolation.
  • The near-identical jet decay of the rigid and mid-flexible cases implies that thrust and efficiency gains can be decoupled: a designer could combine a root-flexible tail for jet persistence with a stiffer aft section for momentum injection to seek both metrics at once, but the paper tests only uniform compliance along each flexible section.
  • The observed scaling of thrust with the square of trailing-edge velocity hints at a simple control rule for autonomous vehicles: measure trailing-edge velocity and adjust effective flexure location to trade between efficiency and thrust in real time; the paper only proposes adaptive-stiffness work as future development.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports water-channel experiments on a purely heaving NACA0030 foil with an appended tail in quiescent flow. Three tail configurations are compared: a rigid tail, a 'mid-flexible' tail with a 0.022 m flexible segment at its aft end, and a 'fully flexible' tail with a 0.044 m flexible segment. Simultaneous force, PIV, and trailing-edge kinematics measurements are made at two heave frequencies and two non-dimensional amplitudes. The authors find that the fully flexible configuration achieves higher thrust-to-power ratio (reported as up to approximately 164% higher), attributed to increased vortex spacing and jet persistence, while the mid-flexible configuration produces higher thrust at the largest frequency and amplitude (reported as up to approximately 66%), attributed to a stronger near-wake jet. The paper concludes that the chordwise distribution of flexibility governs the trade-off between thrust and efficiency.

Significance. The experimental work is carefully executed: each condition is repeated four times, PIV uncertainty is quantified with correlation statistics, the rigid case is compared against Heathcote and Gursul's dataset, and force, flow, and kinematic data are acquired simultaneously. If the causal claim about flexibility placement were supported, the results would provide a practically useful design rule for wave-assisted marine propulsors. However, the central claim is currently underdetermined by the two-configuration design, because flexible length and flexure location change simultaneously. The paper is best read as a characterization of flexible-tail-length effects, not yet as an isolation of chordwise placement as the governing parameter.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2 and §5] The experimental design does not isolate chordwise placement of flexibility from the amount of compliance. In §2, the fully flexible case uses a 0.044 m neoprene sheet attached directly to the airfoil trailing edge, while the mid-flexible case uses a 0.022 m rigid plate followed by a 0.022 m neoprene sheet. Thus the flexible segment length changes from 0.044 m to 0.022 m and its upstream boundary moves from x/c_t ≈ 0.43 to x/c_t ≈ 0.71. A cantilever tip deflection scales as L^3/EI, so the global structural compliance of the two tails is not the same even though the material EI is fixed. The conclusion in §5 that 'the spatial distribution of flexibility governs the trade-off' is therefore underdetermined: with only two configurations, the data demonstrate a longer flexible aft tail improves efficiency and a shorter compliant segment can increase thrust at high forcing, but they do not show that placement per se is causal. An additional configuration with the same flexible segment length but a different flexure location (e.g., a 0.022 m flexible tail attached directly to the airfoil TE) would be needed to support the placement claim.
  2. [§2 vs §5] The flexural rigidity value is inconsistent between sections. Section 2 reports EI = (2.14 ± 0.05) × 10^-5 Nm^2, while Section 5 states EI = 1.57 × 10^-5 Nm^2. Since 'constant flexural rigidity' is a central control variable in the study, this discrepancy must be resolved; it may be a typographical error, but as written it undermines the reproducibility of the reported conditions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption reads '(d-e)' for the second row, but three configurations are shown for h* = 0.22; the label should be '(d-f)'.
  2. [Abstract and §3.2] The percentages '~164%' and '~66%' are not anchored to a baseline in the text; please state the reference configuration, the operating condition, and ideally the confidence interval for each percentage.
  3. [§3.1] The validation paragraph defines the Reynolds number as Re = f c_t^2 / ν, whereas §2 defines Re based on peak heave velocity v_h = 2πhf and the total chord. Please unify the definitions or explain the different conventions.
  4. [§2 and Appendix] The surface plate is stated to impose an effective symmetry condition that doubles the aspect ratio, and the appendix checks that integrated thrust is largely unchanged under end-plate conditions. However, the appendix does not verify that the midspan PIV flowfield itself is insensitive to end conditions; a sentence acknowledging this distinction would strengthen the interpretation.
  5. [§4 discussion of Fig. 9] The scaling argument in Fig. 9 uses a linear fit to combined data from the present study and Heathcote [24], but the text does not report the fit quality, the number of points, or residuals; please add these details or present the fit as illustrative only.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central results are direct measurements with external validation, and no load-bearing claim reduces to a self-citation or fitted parameter.

full rationale

The paper's core findings are based on direct experimental measurements: six-axis force data, PIV flow fields, and optically tracked tail kinematics for rigid, mid-flexible, and fully-flexible configurations. No load-bearing result is derived from a fitted parameter or from a self-citation chain. The rigid-foil baseline is validated against the independent Heathcote and Gursul dataset, and the flexible-tail trends are compared with published external studies by Shinde, David, Cleaver, and others. The secondary scaling in Fig. 9, relating thrust per unit area to the square of maximum trailing-edge velocity, is an empirical fit to the present data combined with Heathcote's data; it is presented as an observed correlation and is not used to generate or justify the thrust/efficiency comparisons in Figs. 3–8. Self-citations [12–14] serve only as supporting analogies about vortex spacing and jet persistence; the thrust and efficiency differences are established by the measurements themselves, and the wake interpretations are independently corroborated by prior external literature. The main experimental-design limitation—that the two flexible cases vary both flexible length and flexure location—is a potential confound for the causal claim about placement, but this is an experimental control issue, not a circular derivation. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claims are experimental. The ledger records the measurement assumptions that underpin the interpretation of the results, including the efficiency metric and the two-dimensionality assumption for midspan PIV.

free parameters (1)
  • Linear scaling slope for thrust per unit area vs square of trailing-edge velocity = Not reported (from linear fit in Fig. 9)
    Fig. 9 fits a linear trend to combined present and Heathcote data to support the claim that maximum trailing-edge velocity scales thrust. The slope is a fitted parameter, though not used to derive the central thrust/efficiency trade-off.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Quiescent flow conditions (zero freestream) are representative for wave-assisted propulsion performance.
    The study measures foils in still water, but wave-driven USVs operate with forward motion; the relevance is asserted in the Introduction and Discussion.
  • domain assumption The surface plate at the free surface doubles the effective aspect ratio and confines three-dimensional effects to the tip, leaving the midspan flow quasi-two-dimensional.
    Section 2 states this to justify interpreting midspan PIV as the primary flow physics; the Appendix shows limited integrated differences between finite and infinite span, but local wake structure could still differ.
  • domain assumption The neoprene tail behaves as a linear elastic beam with a single, constant flexural rigidity EI.
    Section 2 estimates EI from material modulus and geometry. Nonlinear or viscoelastic effects are not considered, though they could affect tail kinematics at large deflections.
  • domain assumption The thrust-to-power-input ratio epsilon = T / F_v is an appropriate measure of propulsive efficiency in the absence of freestream velocity.
    Defined in Section 3.1 following Frampton et al.; it is used to rank configurations, but it is not a dimensionless propulsive efficiency.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Effect of Chordwise Flexibility Distribution on Wave-Assisted Flapping Foil Performance." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YGEKMJ3P

@misc{pith2026260806561,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Effect of Chordwise Flexibility Distribution on Wave-Assisted Flapping Foil Performance},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YGEKMJ3P}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06561}
}
read the original abstract

This study investigates the influence of the spatial distribution of flexibility along a propulsor on thrust generation and propulsive efficiency in wave-assisted flapping foils. While flexibility is known to enhance propulsive performance, the role of its chordwise placement remains poorly understood. Here, the effective flexible length is systematically varied by shifting the flexure location along the tail while maintaining constant flexural rigidity and total chord length. Experiments are conducted in quiescent flow at heave frequencies of 0.8 Hz and 1.25 Hz, and non-dimensional heave amplitudes of h* = 0.13 and 0.22. Simultaneous measurements of hydrodynamic forces, flow fields, and tail kinematics are used to quantify performance and elucidate the underlying fluid-structure and fluid-particle interactions. The fully flexible configuration consistently achieves higher propulsive efficiency (up to approximately 164%) across all conditions, which is attributed to enhanced jet persistence and increased streamwise vortex spacing, indicative of a more coherent and sustained momentum jet. In contrast, the mid-flexible configuration yields substantially higher thrust (up to approximately 66%) at the largest heave frequency and amplitude, driven by a pronounced increase in near-wake jet velocity and momentum flux. These results demonstrate that the chordwise distribution of flexibility governs the trade-off between thrust and propulsive efficiency by modulating wake coherence and momentum transfer. The findings establish flexibility placement as a key design parameter in flapping propulsion and provide physics-based guidelines for enhancing the performance and endurance of wave-driven unmanned surface vehicles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06561 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A brief schematic of the experimental setup used in the current study. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Comparison of thrust coefficient (CT ) and thrust-to-power input ratio (ε) between the current measure￾ments and that by Heathcote et al. [24]. (b) Time-averaged vorticity field overlaid with time-averaged streamlines for the rigid case at heave frequency and amplitude of 1.25 Hz and h ∗ = 0.22, respectively. where T is the time-averaged thrust force in Newtons and Fv represents power consumed in prescribing hea… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of (a) thrust, and (b) thrust-to-power input ratio ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Time-averaged vorticity field overlaid with time-averaged streamlines for rigid, mid-flexible and fully [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the peak streamwise jet velocity ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of the phase-averaged vorticity fields between rigid, mid-flexible and fully-flexible cases [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of trailing edge deflection ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of peak streamwise jet velocity between rigid, mid-flexible and fully-flexible cases. The labels [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Thrust per unit area as a function of the square of the maximum trailing-edge velocity. The solid line [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Paraz, L

    F. Paraz, L. Schouveiler, C. Eloy, Thrust generation by a heaving flexible foil: Resonance, nonlinearities, and optimality, Physics of Fluids 28 (1) (2016) 011903

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Thaweewat, S

    N. Thaweewat, S. Phoemsapthawee, V . Juntasaro, Semi-active flapping foil for marine propulsion, Ocean Engineering 147 (2018) 556–564

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Bøckmann, S

    E. Bøckmann, S. Steen, Experiments with actively pitch-controlled and spring-loaded os- cillating foils, Applied Ocean Research 48 (2014) 227–235. 19 (a) (b) Figure .11: (a) Maximum trailing edge amplitude (normalized by chord) of the infinite and finite foil at different operating conditions, where 1, 2, 3, and 4 corresponds to (h ∗ =0.13,f=0.8 Hz), (h ∗...

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Z. Qi, B. Zou, H. Lu, J. Shi, G. Li, Y . Qin, J. Zhai, Numerical investigation of the semi- active flapping foil of the wave glider, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 8 (1) (2019) 13

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Z. Qi, M. Jiang, L. Jia, B. Zou, J. Zhai, The effect of mass ratio and damping coefficient on the propulsion performance of the semi-active flapping foil of the wave glider, Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 8 (5) (2020) 303

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    F. Yang, W. Shi, X. Zhou, B. Guo, D. Wang, Numerical investigation of a wave glider in head seas, Ocean engineering 164 (2018) 127–138

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    F. Yang, W. Shi, D. Wang, Systematic study on propulsive performance of tandem hydro- foils for a wave glider, Ocean Engineering 179 (2019) 361–370

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    H. S. Raut, J.-H. Seo, R. Mittal, Hydrodynamic performance and scaling laws for a mod- elled wave-induced flapping-foil propulsor, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 999 (2024) A1

    work page 2024

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    H. S. Raut, J.-H. Seo, R. Mittal, Dynamics and thrust performance of a modeled multifoil wave-induced flapping foil propulsor, Ocean Engineering 317 (2025) 119930

    2025

  2. [10]

    H. S. Raut, J.-H. Seo, R. Mittal, Harnessing leading-edge vortices for improved thrust per- formance of wave-induced flapping foil propulsors, Phys. Rev. Fluids 10 (2025) 084705

    2025

  3. [11]

    P. B. Sudarsana, J. Singh, A. Sareen, Wake stabilization and force modulation via surface dimples on an airfoil at low Reynolds numbers, Physics of Fluids 37 (12) (2025)

    2025

  4. [12]

    Silwal, R

    L. Silwal, R. Vilumbrales-Garcia, A. Sareen, Surface roughness influences vortex interac- tions and jet stability in pitching foils in quiescent flow, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow 117 (2026) 110071. 20

    2026

  5. [13]

    Vilumbrales-Garcia, P

    R. Vilumbrales-Garcia, P. B. Sudarsana, A. Sareen, Adaptive drag reduction of a sphere using smart morphable skin, Flow 5 (2025) E17

    2025

  6. [14]

    P. B. Sudarsana, R. Vilumbrales-Garcia, A. Sareen, On the lift generation over a sphere using asymmetric roughness, Physics of Fluids 36 (12) (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    J. M. Kelly, M. S. U. Khalid, P. Han, H. Dong, Geometric characteristics of flapping foils for enhanced propulsive efficiency, Journal of Fluids Engineering 145 (6) (2023) 061104

    2023

  8. [16]

    Marais, B

    C. Marais, B. Thiria, J. E. Wesfreid, R. Godoy-Diana, Stabilizing effect of flexibility in the wake of a flapping foil, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 710 (2012) 659–669

    2012

  9. [17]

    J. M. Anderson, K. Streitlien, D. Barrett, M. S. Triantafyllou, Oscillating foils of high propulsive efficiency, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 360 (1998) 41–72

    1998

  10. [18]

    Godoy-Diana, J.-L

    R. Godoy-Diana, J.-L. Aider, J. E. Wesfreid, Transitions in the wake of a flapping foil, Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 77 (1) (2008) 016308

    2008

  11. [19]

    Godoy-Diana, C

    R. Godoy-Diana, C. Marais, J.-L. Aider, J. E. Wesfreid, A model for the symmetry breaking of the reverse Bénard–von Kármán vortex street produced by a flapping foil, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 622 (2009) 23–32

    2009

  12. [20]

    Zhong, D

    Q. Zhong, D. B. Quinn, Predicting the slowly converging dynamics of asymmetric vortex wakes, Physical Review Fluids 9 (6) (2024) 064702

    2024

  13. [21]

    C. L. Shah, D. Majumdar, C. Bose, S. Sarkar, Controlling the chaotic wake of a flapping foil by tuning its chordwise flexibility, Journal of Fluids and Structures 127 (2024) 104134

    2024

  14. [22]

    S. Y . Shinde, J. H. Arakeri, Flexibility in flapping foil suppresses meandering of induced jet in absence of free stream, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 757 (2014) 231–250

    2014

  15. [23]

    S. Y . Shinde, J. H. Arakeri, Physics of unsteady thrust and flow generation by a flexible surface flapping in the absence of a free stream, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Math- ematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 474 (2218) (2018) 20180519

    2018

  16. [24]

    Heathcote, D

    S. Heathcote, D. Martin, I. Gursul, Flexible flapping airfoil propulsion at zero freestream velocity, AIAA Journal 42 (11) (2004) 2196–2204

    2004

  17. [25]

    Heathcote, I

    S. Heathcote, I. Gursul, Flexible Flapping Airfoil Propulsion at Low Reynolds Numbers, AIAA Journal 45 (5) (2007) 1066–1079

    2007

  18. [26]

    Cleaver, I

    D. Cleaver, I. Gursul, D. Calderon, Z. Wang, Thrust enhancement due to flexible trailing- edge of plunging foils, Journal of Fluids and Structures 51 (2014) 401–412

    2014

  19. [27]

    M. J. David, R. Govardhan, J. Arakeri, Thrust generation from pitching foils with flexible trailing edge flaps, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 828 (2017) 70–103. 21

    2017

  20. [28]

    Zeyghami, K

    S. Zeyghami, K. W. Moored, Effect of nonuniform flexibility on hydrodynamic perfor- mance of pitching propulsors, Journal of Fluids Engineering 141 (4) (2019) 041108

    2019

  21. [29]

    J. You, J. Lee, S. Hong, D. You, Optimization of biomimetic propulsive kinematics of a flex- ible foil using integrated computational fluid dynamics–computational structural dynamics simulations, Journal of Fluids Engineering 141 (6) (2019) 061106

    2019

  22. [30]

    F. F. Siala, A. D. Totpal, J. A. Liburdy, Characterization of V ortex Dynamics in the Near Wake of an Oscillating Flexible Foil, Journal of Fluids Engineering 138 (10) (2016) 101202

    2016

  23. [31]

    S. Y . Shinde, J. H. Arakeri, Jet meandering by a foil pitching in quiescent fluid, Physics of Fluids 25 (4) (2013)

    2013

  24. [32]

    Bianchi, S

    G. Bianchi, S. Cinquemani, P. Schito, F. Resta, A numerical model for the analysis of the locomotion of a cownose ray, Journal of Fluids Engineering 144 (3) (2022) 031203

    2022

  25. [33]

    Y . Zhu, K. Breuer, Flow-induced oscillations of pitching swept wings: stability boundary, vortex dynamics and force partitioning, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 977 (2023) A1

    2023

  26. [34]

    Samimy, S

    M. Samimy, S. Lele, Motion of particles with inertia in a compressible free shear layer, Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics 3 (8) (1991) 1915–1923

    1991

  27. [35]

    Wieneke, PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics, Measurement Sci- ence and Technology 26 (7) (2015) 074002

    B. Wieneke, PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics, Measurement Sci- ence and Technology 26 (7) (2015) 074002

    2015

  28. [36]

    Sciacchitano, Uncertainty quantification in particle image velocimetry, Measurement Science and Technology 30 (9) (2019) 092001

    A. Sciacchitano, Uncertainty quantification in particle image velocimetry, Measurement Science and Technology 30 (9) (2019) 092001

    2019

  29. [37]

    K. D. Frampton, M. Goldfarb, D. Monopoli, D. Cveticanin, Passive aeroelastic tailoring for optimal flapping wings., Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics 195 (2001) 473–482

    2001

  30. [38]

    Heathcote, I

    S. Heathcote, I. Gursul, Jet switching phenomenon for a periodically plunging airfoil, Physics of Fluids 19 (2) (2007)

    2007

  31. [39]

    H. Dong, R. Mittal, F. Najjar, Wake topology and hydrodynamic performance of low- aspect-ratio flapping foils, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 566 (2006) 309–343

    2006

  32. [40]

    J. H. Buchholz, A. J. Smits, The wake structure and thrust performance of a rigid low- aspect-ratio pitching panel, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 603 (2008) 331–365

    2008

  33. [41]

    Calderon, D

    D. Calderon, D. Cleaver, I. Gursul, Z. Wang, On the absence of asymmetric wakes for periodically plunging finite wings, Physics of Fluids 26 (7) (2014)

    2014

  34. [42]

    Floryan, T

    D. Floryan, T. Van Buren, A. J. Smits, Swimmers’ wake structures are not reliable indicators of swimming performance, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics 15 (2) (2020) 024001. 22

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.