The epsilon method: analysis of seepage beneath an impervious dam with sheet pile on a layered soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An approximate solution method, referred to as the epsilon method, allows flow characteristics such as flow rate and exit gradient to be determined for seepage through a two-layer soil system. The finite element program SEEP was employed to analyze flow characteristics of an impervious dam with sheet pile on a layered soil. Extensive analyses were performed for different conditions, including soil layer thickness, soil hydraulic conductivity, dam width, and sheet pile depth. The flow rate and exit gradient were determined for each condition analyzed. The results were reduced to simple charts, called the epsilon curves. The epsilon curves allow a designer to obtain solutions to the seepage problem without a computer code and to verify solutions obtained from a computer code. They are especially useful when searching for an optimum design of a masonry dam. The epsilon curves can be extended to a soil system comprising more than two layers. An example of a single-row sheet pile structure in a three-layer system is given to illustrate how to use the method for multiple-layer systems. The method was verified by comparing the results with those obtained from the SEEP program, and excellent agreement was noted.Key words: seepage, dam, sheet pile, layered soil, hydraulic conductivity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".