MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403266604 · doi:10.3397/in_2024_3753

New guidelines for ISO 9053 based on CFD simulations of the static airflow resistivity of a perforated solid

2024· article· en· W4403266604 on OpenAlexaff
Alla Eddine Benchikh Le Hocine, Maël Lopez, Charly Kone TENON, Raymond Panneton, Thomas Dupont, Kévin Verdière

Bibliographic record

VenueNOISE-CON proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirflowComputational fluid dynamicsMechanicsElectrical resistivity and conductivityMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The acoustic absorption coefficient of the acoustic absorbers is directly impacted by the airflow resistivity. The ISO 9053 explains the measurement procedure and specify the size and mounting of specimens, and the flow velocities. The main constraint of the standard is to maintain a stable linear flow so that the resistance is independent of the velocity. Additionally, it suggests a straight cylindrical pores specimen whose airflow resistivity value can be calculated theoretically. Any other specifications about the calibration specimen design are given. As the flow dynamics inside the perforated low porosity solid behave nonlinearly, it is important to integrate further guidelines in the design of the calibration specimens and measurements. This work presents CFD calculations results using OpenFoam, on the flow resistivity of a cylindrical solid containing a single perforation. The airflow velocity was determined based on the Reynolds number at the pore, which was varied between 0.33 to 2000. Different calibration specimens were tested by varying the length and the perforation diameter. An excellent agreement was observed between CFD and experimental data with an error of 5 %. The results show that the second-order extrapolation of specific resistance should be limited to Reynolds numbers equal to 500.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNOISE-CON proceedingsSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207