Numerical determination of permeability of Al–Cu alloys using 3D geometry from X-ray microtomography
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, the permeabilities of Al–15·5 wt-%Cu and Al–19·5 wt-%Cu have been determined numerically by solving the full Navier–Stokes equations on 3D geometries of interdendritic channels obtained by X-ray microtomography. The samples for X-ray microtomography imaging were sectioned from different heights in directionally solidified cylinders in order to obtain a variety of microstructures for each composition. The flow has been solved using a second order accurate finite volume method approach. The effect of employing uniform or unstructured mesh on the calculated permeability has been studied. The Marching–Cube triangulation method was used to extract accurate surfaces for unstructured volume meshing. Calculated values of permeability for this range of solid fractions show partial agreement with previous experiments. Observed deviations are analysed and ultimately attributed to experimental error associated with the difficulties of measuring permeability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it