Proposta de norma técnica de ensaio para tubogotejadores de irrigação: resistência ao entupimento por particulados sólidos em suspensão
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proposed Technical Standard Testing dripline (Irrigation): Resistance to clogging by particulates in Suspension "In the market for drip irrigation, drip provides a wide range of issuers, whose technologies are coming from different countries: Israel, Spain, USA, Greece, India, etc.. To designers, technicians and farmers irrigators operating in Brazil, fit the arduous task of selecting the appropriate type of transmitter in deployment projects.The study aimed to propose a Technical Standard for testing large, due to the presence of suspended solids in the irrigation water conducted from August 2010 to June 2012.Evaluate performance of the tubes emitters is quite desired, as it makes the choice of emitters safer and should focus on the large test -analyzing large amounts of both issuers / initial phase of creating the database.We studied also the positioning of the emitters type wafer with holes directed upwards and downwards.The main detail analysis was performed for the distribution of water flow through "mainfold" Feed the dripline on the bench and their influence on selective traversal of solid particles in the test large.The experiment was conducted in three distinct stages, using two particle sizes of silicon dioxide (SiO2) in water pumped from very fine sand and medium sand, described below: a) particles with diameters of 0.053 to 0.103 mm in the first 80 hours, b) particles with diameters from .103 to .250mm 80 to 160 hours and c) Particle diameter 0.250 to 0.500 mm between 160 to 240 hours of testing.The phases are performed in two concentrations of particles in suspension with 125 ppm, and then with 500 ppm of the total time test at 480 hours.To test the hypothesis that the same behavior tubogotejador could present different resistance to clogging as a function of input position with the tubogotejador "mainfold", used a non-randomized block design, and the Scott test, with significance of Knott 5% in the analysis of variance to compare the means.Differences were found in the treatments of the emitters position lozenges, flow variations between types of emitters, between blocks (positions of the mainfold) and particle sizes and concentrations of silicon dioxide, confirming the hypothesis initial work.Depending on the results obtained, some models have produced significant effects, and also the different installation positions pad (up, down) and suggest a proposed technical standard for this type of test for resistance to clogging of emitters.
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 | 0.019 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".