MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971742200 · doi:10.1139/l04-067

Pressure transients in a Canadian sewage force main

2004· article· en· W1971742200 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David H. Axworthy, Normand Chabot

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater hammerHead (geology)Marine engineeringCavitationSurge tankEngineeringHydraulic headEnvironmental scienceSurgeHydraulicsHammerGeotechnical engineeringMechanical engineeringMechanicsGeologyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe water hammer following pump shutdown was suspected to be the cause of pipe displacement at a pump station in Saguenay, Quebec, because it appeared that insufficient surge protection was installed on the force main. To confirm this assertion and prevent further pipe displacement, data logging of a field test of the sewage pump station undergoing power failure was conducted in combination with the development of a water-hammer computer model for the design of additional surge protection measures. This paper describes the results of field testing, both before and after the installation of additional surge protection, and the calibration of a method of characteristics water-hammer model that accounts for vaporous cavitation and unsteady friction effects within the force main. Good agreement is shown between measured and computed pressure head histories at the pump station and at a vacuum relief valve following loss of power to a pump. To the authors' knowledge, this paper presents one of the first applications of the unsteady friction model referenced in this paper to a real system.Key words: sewage, force main, pump, water hammer, unsteady friction, data logging.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.145
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207