Characteristics of groundwater seepage with cut-off wall in gravel aquifer. II: Numerical analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a numerical investigation into the leakage behavior of cut-off walls in gravel strata due to dewatering in a deep excavation pit. The calculated values of the groundwater head and surface settlement using a model agree well with the measured values. Values of the hydraulic conductivity (k) and storage coefficient (S s ) of each soil layer are obtained from the test results when the cut-off wall is 43 m deep. The leakage through the cut-off wall in gravel is analyzed by considering a variation in hydraulic conductivity in different sections of the cut-off wall. The simulated results show that a significant leakage occurred in the 54 m deep cut-off wall. Although leakage did occur in the full cut-off wall in the confined aquifer, the full cut-off wall is still more efficient in preventing groundwater seepage than the partial cut-off wall. The relative depths of the cut-off wall and of the wells have a significant effect on ground surface settlement during the withdrawal of groundwater. Therefore, the appropriate selection of relative depth of both cut-off wall and pumping well is an effective way of controlling surface settlement outside the pit.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".