Optimal sound absorbing and manufacturable two-dimensional, hexagonal-like porous structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Results from a numerical study examining micro-macro relations linking local geometry parameters to sound absorption properties are presented. For an hexagonal structure of solid fibers, the porosity Phi, the thermal characteristic length Λ', the static viscous permeability k0, the tortuosity α∞, the viscous characteristic length Λ, and the sound absorption coefficient are computed. Numerical solutions of the steady Stokes and electrical equations are employed to provide k0, α∞, and Λ. Hybrid estimates based on direct numerical evaluation of Phi, Λ', k0, α∞, Λ and the analytical model derived by Johnson, Allard, and Champoux are used to relate varying (i) throat size, (ii) pore size, and (iii) fibers cross-section shapes to the sound absorption spectrum. The result of this paper tends to demonstrate the important effect of throat size in the sound absorption level, cell size in the sound absorption frequency selectivity, fibers cross-section shape in the porous material weight reduction. In a hexagonal porous structure with solid fibers, the sound absorption level will tend to be maximized with a 48 +/- 10 micrometers throat size corresponding to an intermediate resistivity, a 13 +/- 8 micrometers fiber radius associated with relatively small inter-fiber distances, and convex triangular cross-section shape fibers allowing weight reduction.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".