Gmail - Airfoil comments

1 of 2

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=f66ed07158&view=pt&sear...

ebrahem khalid <mebrahemkhalid@gmail.com>

Airfoil comments
1 message
Muhammad Shehryar <m.shehryar@uettaxila.edu.pk>
To: ebrahem khalid <mebrahemkhalid@gmail.com>

Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:49 PM

Comments:
1. I think the abstract needs further elaboration of the results. For instance, simulated results for
energy amplification match well with experimental findings etc.
2. Page 2, second para, we have a lot of discussion regarding bridge deck. Please include
references pertaining to the topic of paper, i.e, airfoil.
3. Please include reference for Space Time Mapping Analysis (STMA), on page 3 second para.
4. Please include a reference for turbulence model. Section related to turbulence models seems out of
place. I think this detail is not required as long as one uses appropriate reference(s). I would suggest to
skip this section and mention the reference for standard wilcox model under the heading of numerical
details.
5. Eq 10 gives an impression that only one value of U = 1 is used. Is that the case?
6. I guess results won't change much if you increase convergence criteria to 10-6. Please use that number
instead of 10-4.
7. Under discussion, first para last lines, you may want to elaborate what choices you made? For instance
constant damping and fixed stiffness etc. Can you also include the % of difference between simulated
results and measurements? It seems that your predictions lie outside the experimental scatter, whether
each experimental point represents a mean value or the max-min value, it will be important to mention the
reasons. Review may ask that why non-dimensional energy is over predicted in the case of mechanical
excitation while it matches well for gust. Probably the right answer is the maximum values of amplitudes
and rotations in mechanical excitation are almost double compared to gust (ref figure 5 and 8). For
instance the max value of pitch angle for mechanical excitation is around 4.5 degree compared to 1.5
degree for gust. For higher amplitudes, the variations of spring stiffnesses, damping values and mass
coupling are unexpectedly important. And one may also include this argument in the discussion.
Also please verify that you have selected correct Eo for figure 7.
8. Regarding selection of Eo for gust! As the gust is introduced at the inlet boundary and it shall take time
before it travels to aerofoil. Depending on the mean speed of the gust, the time to travel a fixed distance
shall vary (although in micro/milli seconds) and that my explain the shifting of initial kinks that you use
in your reference.

5/28/2015 9:34 AM

Gmail - Airfoil comments

2 of 2

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=f66ed07158&view=pt&sear...

5/28/2015 9:34 AM