Flow-Acoustic Coupling in Quarter-Wave Resonators Using Computational Fluid Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quarter-wave resonators are commonly used as acoustic silencers in automotive air induction systems. Similar closed side branches can also be formed in the idle air bypass, exhaust gas recirculation, and positive crankcase ventilation systems of engines. The presence of a mean flow across these side branches can lead to an interaction between the mean flow and the acoustic resonances of the side branch. At discrete flow conditions, this coupling between the flow and acoustic fields may produce high amplitude acoustic pressure pulsations. For the quarter-wave resonator, this interaction can turn the silencer into a noise generator, while for systems where a valve is located at the closed end of the side branch the large pressure pulsations can cause the valve to fail. This phenomenon is not limited to automotive applications, and also occurs in natural gas pipelines, aircraft, and numerous other internal and external flows. The present approach solves the interaction between the mean flow and the acoustic field by employing the unsteady, turbulent, and compressible Navier-Stokes equations computationally. Experimental comparisons reveal that this method is capable of determining when flow-acoustic coupling occurs and how variations in the geometry and flow conditions influence the acoustic pressure amplitudes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".