MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental Study of Surcharged Flow at Combining Sewer Junctions

2006· article· en· W1964225447 on OpenAlexaff
Can-Hua Zhao, David Z. Zhu, N. Rajaratnam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlow (mathematics)MechanicsBody orificeOpen-channel flowPipe flowOrifice plateInletMomentum (technical analysis)Flow conditioningFlow conditionsIsothermal flowPhysicsGeologyEngineeringTurbulenceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of a laboratory investigation on surcharged flow in combining sewer junctions are presented in this paper. Experiments were conducted in a 90° model junction and the 25.8° Edworthy model junction. The study confirmed the existence of three flow regimes in sewer junctions with a steep outgoing pipe: Regime I denotes the open-channel flow through the junction chamber; Regime II flow is partially surcharged flow featured by orifice flow into the outlet pipe; and Regime III flow is fully surcharged flow with all connecting pipes running full. The transition flow from Regimes II to III was investigated, and it may be related to the inlet waves at the entrance of the outlet pipe. Criteria for the transition were provided. Theoretical analyses were conducted based on one-dimensional momentum equation. The derived equations are able to estimate the water depth in the junction chamber. Energy loss in Regime III flow was studied and predictions based on the momentum equation were evaluated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicHydraulic flow and structuresFrench-language works237,207