Relieving Pressure and Improving Permeability of Soft Coal at Top and Bottom by Hydraulic Cavitation
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
For enhancing the effect of gas extraction, applying Wuyang Coal Mine in China as the engineering background, the technology of hydraulic cavitation at the top and bottom of soft coal (HCTBSC) with low permeability was put forward. FLAC3D was utilized to build the calculation model, and Tecplot was employed to process data of the results, revealing the characteristics of stress variation in coal seam for different cavitation radius and different distribution forms of cavitation. The field test scheme of HCTBSC was determined to verify the simulation results. Results show that the effectiveness of stress relief (ESR) is controlled by the cavitation radius and cavitation distribution forms. The dimension of pressure relief emanates via the cavitation elongating outward with the cavitation radius, and the stress changes in the coal are different due to different cavitation distribution forms. The field test proves that the technology of HCTBSC is more effective in relieving pressure, increasing the productiveness of gas extraction, and decreasing the scourge of coal and gas protrusion. The obtained conclusions in this study provide guidance for the hydraulic cavitation application in soft coal.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it