Reply to discussions by E.F.R. Bollaert and A.J. Schleiss on “Jet impact geometry and plunge pool dimensions effects on dynamic pressures at pool sidewalls”Appear in the Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, <b>35</b>(11): 1347–1350.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The authors appreciate the interesting comments by the discussers. As mentioned in the paper and emphasized by the discussers, low jet velocity cannot show high frequencies above 20 Hz, which occur in the prototype case. Therefore, a scale-up factor would be needed to use the present results for a prototype situation. However, as the present results are the first of their kind, more experimental and prototype results would be needed for a precise scale-up factor. The problem of the air–water mixture at an impact point in high-speed jets and its effect on pressure variation at floor joints is correctly pointed out and discussed by Dr. Bollaert and Professor Schliess in their published papers mentioned in their discussions. Again, the conditions in which air in water has the same effect on the sidewalls as on the pool bottom requires more study. However, this study was intended to show the effect of width dimensions on the sidewall pressure under laboratory conditions. The location of the dynamic pressure measurements in our tests was 10 cm from the bottom, or 1.5 to 3 times the jet width, with more than half of these being less than 2 times the jet width [as suggested by Toso and Bowers (1988)]. As mentioned in the paper, the first series of tests was for the pressure variations on the pool bottom to confirm that the results were compatible with the previous works. The results show that the trend of pressure variations on the plunge floor are acceptable and the differences in peaks are mainly because of the low jet velocities, which in our case is comparable to a high velocity in previous works. Therefore, the authors are confident about the presented results for walls within the test limits as explained in the paper. Another important point with respect to pressure transducer records is the vibration of the apparatus, as correctly pointed out by Professor Schliess. For the presented tests, the Plexiglas plunge pool had metal bracing to minimize vibrations, although no tests were done directly to examine this effect. However, no unusual pressure record was noticed. For higher velocities with a larger impact force to the pool, the possibility of this kind of vibration is probably higher. A test time of 2 min is suggested by many investigators, such as Ervine et al. (1997). Also, for some tests the authors have checked records of up to 10 min, and the 2 min recorded data was found to be a good representation of the extreme pressures. Again, with a higher jet velocity a longer recording time could possibly give better realistic variations of dynamic pressures. The authors would like to emphasize that the present paper consists of the first published results showing the effect of pool and jet dimensions on plunge pool sidewalls. Also, as mentioned in the paper, these results are strictly for primary estimates or a pilot study and cannot be used for design purposes before more laboratory and prototype data are analyzed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,031 | 0,037 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,010 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».