Estimating of Non-Darcy Flow Coefficient in Artificial Porous Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study conducted a radial flow experiment to investigate the existence of non-Darcy flow and calculate the non-Darcy “inertia” coefficient; the experiment was performed on seven cylindrical perforated artificial porous media samples. Two hundred thirty-one runs were performed, and the pressure drop was reported. The non-Darcy coefficient β was calculated and compared with available in the literature. The results showed that the non-Darcy coefficient decreased nonlinearly and converged on a value within a specific range as the permeability increased. Nonetheless, it was found that the non-Darcy flow exists even in the very low flow rate deployed in this study. In addition, it has been found that the non-Darcy effect is not due to turbulence but also the inertial effect. The existence of a non-Darcy flow was confirmed for all the investigated samples. The Forchheimer numbers for airflow at varied flow rates are determined using experimentally measured superficial velocity, permeability, and non-Darcy coefficient.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".