Inertial effects on single-perforation plates resistivity at high flow rates: Computational fluid dynamics and experimental studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is focused on the viscous and inertial effects on airflow resistivity of periodic arrays of single-perforation plates spaced by thin air cavities. Analyzing this effect would provide better insight into losses within the material, including additional losses due to increasing sound excitation levels. In this way, the material pressure drop is predicted by computational fluid dynamics function (CFD) of the flow rate for corresponding pore Reynolds numbers between 0.3 and 1500. The static airflow resistivity coefficient is determined by the linear part of the pressure drop (viscous effect) and the Forchheimer coefficient from the nonlinear part of the pressure drop (inertial effect). Both coefficients are determined on the entirety of the material (globally) and at the plate levels (locally). Good agreement is observed between CFD predictions and experimental measurements on the whole range of studied Reynolds numbers. By locally investigating the pressure drops, the observations show that the viscous effects are constant through the material. With increasing pore Reynolds number, inertial effects of the first plate dominate over those of the other plates. The consideration of the local inertial effect will be a key component in the acoustic modeling of this type of material under high sound excitation levels.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".