Enhancing low-frequency transmission loss in aircraft fuselage sidewalls with a flat array of covered Helmholtz resonators metamaterial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the use of a flat array of covered Helmholtz resonators (CHRs) as a metamaterial for enhancing the acoustic transmission loss (TL) of aircraft fuselage sidewall. The benefits of CHRs are twofold: (i) decreasing the Helmholtz resonance frequency, thereby targeting lower frequencies, and (ii) providing precise control over the resonant frequency of the metamaterial when integrated into a fuselage sidewall. In this paper, we first examine the vibroacoustic behavior of a single CHR, observing a significant decrease in resonant frequency as the covering plate approaches the neck entrance. Subsequently, we evaluate arrays of CHRs, with different filling factors, and their impact on the TL of an aircraft fuselage sidewall. Placing the CHRs metamaterial in the dead space between stringers improves the TL by up to 10 dB at the panel's ring frequency, demonstrating their potential for low-frequency noise reduction in aircraft.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".