Dam-break flows with resistance as agents of sediment transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a semi-infinite body of fluid initially at rest behind a vertical retaining wall is suddenly released by the removal of the barrier, the resulting flow over either a horizontal or a sloping bed is referred to as a dam-break flow. When resistance to the flow is neglected, the exact solution in the case of a horizontal bed with or without “tail water” may be obtained on the basis of shallow-water theory via the method of characteristics, and the results are well known. The inclusion of the effects of resistance in the form of basal friction that are needed in order to bring the mathematical solutions into closer harmony with the experimental results modifies the wave speed and flow profile near the head of the wave significantly and the simple exact solution of the shallow-water equations can no longer be employed as a reasonable description of the flow field. It is our intention here to study dam-break flows as agents of sediment transport taking into account basal friction and the attendant changes in depth profiles near the head, as well as the effects of particle concentrations on the flow dynamics including both erosion and deposition of particles arising through the interaction of the flow with the bed material. We shall consider shallow flows over dry beds and investigate the effects of changes in the depositional and erosional models employed as well as in the nature of the drag acting on the flow. These models offer some insight into the transport of sediment in the worst case scenario of complete and instantaneous collapse of a dam. They are also anticipated to provide information on other sheet flow events where particle transport plays a significant role in the flow dynamics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".