We compare an inviscid vortex sheet model with continuous leading-edge shedding with direct Navier–Stokes simulations over a wide range of unsteady plate motions at moderate Reynolds number ( italic Re almost equals 1000 Re ≈ 1000 Re ≈ 1000 ). Approximately 70 70 $70$ distinct kinematic configurations are examined, spanning both body-dominated and flow-dominated regimes. In body-dominated motions, where the fluid dynamics are primarily driven by prescribed plate accelerations, the inviscid model accurately reproduces normal force histories and the qualitative structure of the induced vorticity field. In flow-dominated configurations, with quasi-periodic vortex shedding, agreement with force predictions is good but reduced at low angles of attack, reflecting the greater sensitivity of vortex shedding dynamics to physical and computational parameters. The ability of the present formulation to accommodate stable, continuous leading-edge vortex shedding enables uniform comparisons across diverse motions and clarifies the regimes in which inviscid vortex sheet models can be used reliably for force prediction and physical interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Loo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: