MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020314642 · doi:10.1080/15730620412331290038

Modelling the advection equation under water hammer conditions

2004· article· en· W2020314642 on OpenAlexafffund
Cristóvão Vicente Scapulatempo Fernandes, Bryan Karney

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Water Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Water NetworkNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsAdvectionWater hammerCompressibilityMechanicsTransient (computer programming)Environmental scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Geotechnical engineeringFinite differenceWater qualityConvergence (economics)EngineeringComputer scienceMathematicsThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quality of water delivered by a distribution network may degrade for many reasons. This research considers one of these, focusing attention on the connection between water quality and the hydraulic events in a pipe system. More specifically, pressure and velocity variations associated with hydraulic transients or water hammer conditions, particularly through leaks and rapid device adjustments, have the potential to degrade water quality. In most previous applications, numerical transport schemes have been coupled to quasi-steady hydraulic models. By contrast, the current contribution couples a finite difference solution of the advection-reaction equation to a fully unsteady, method of characteristics (MOC) based, hydraulic solution. Depending on system properties, the effects of advection, compressibility and reaction may be evident in the modelled response. The numerical properties of consistency, stability and convergence of the proposed model are investigated both analytically and numerically. Although some case studies have revealed important water quality implications associated with dynamic conditions, particularly in cases of contaminated water intrusion, it should be admitted that many transient simulations exhibit few differences compared with quasi-steady results.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban Water JournalSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207