Modeling of acoustic lined duct with and without grazing air flow by an analytical method
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
An analytical method is proposed to characterize the sound acoustic transmission in a rectangular lined duct with and without grazing air flow. The acoustic wave number in the duct is determined using Taylor series expansion. The proposed method is validated by comparison with a finite element method in grazing air flow environment and experimental measurements at grazing sound incidence for the case with no flow. Excellent agreement is found in both configurations. The proposed method is used for sensitivity analysis of acoustic duct lined with micro perforated panel absorber in order to evaluate the impacts of the inputs parameters on the transmission loss of the duct. It is shown for a constant sound pressure level that the transmission loss of the duct is very sensitive to the cavity depth of the absorber while the resonance of the transmission at high sound pressure level is controlled by the perforation ratio of the panel. The effects of the perforation diameter and the plate thickness are negligible for higher pressure excitation and the impact of the sound pressure level on the transmission is preponderant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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