MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080580518 · doi:10.1115/1.4003944

Characteristics of Modal Sound Radiation of Finite Cylindrical Shells

2011· article· en· W2080580518 on OpenAlexaff
Tian Ran Lin, Chris K. Mechefske, Peter O’Shea

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of vibration and acoustics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsWavelengthModalCylinderPhysicsFinite element methodRadiationAcousticsOpticsShell (structure)Modal analysis using FEMModal analysisModal testingMaterials scienceVibrationGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characteristics of modal sound radiation of finite cylindrical shells are studied using finite element and boundary element methods in this paper. In the low frequency range, modal radiation efficiencies of finite cylindrical shells are found to asymptotically approach those of the corresponding infinite cylindrical shell when structural trace wavelengths of the cylindrical shells are greater than the acoustic wavelength. Modal radiation efficiencies for each group of modes having the same circumferential modal index decrease as the axial modal index increases. They converge to each other when the axial trace wavelength is much greater than the circumferential trace wavelength. The mechanism leading to lower radiation efficiency of modes with higher circumferential modal index of short cylinders is explained. Similar to those of flat plate panels, change in slope or waviness is observed in modal radiation efficiency curves of modes with higher order axial modal index at medium frequencies. This is attributed to the interference of sound radiated by neighboring vibrating cells when the distance between nodal lines of a vibrating mode is in the same order or smaller than the acoustic wavelength. The effects of the internal sound field on modal radiation efficiencies of a finite open-end cylinder are discussed.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of vibration and acousticsSame topicAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchFrench-language works237,207