Model testing of submerged vanes in strongly curved narrow channel bends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports on a laboratory study that examines the effectiveness of submerged vanes for the control of erosion in strongly curved narrow channel bends. All previous researches on submerged vanes were performed in either straight or weakly curved channels that were hydraulically "wide". Submerged vanes are thin rectangular-shaped low-profile foils, typically set at small angles to the main current and arranged in either single or multiple parallel arrays in the longitudinal direction. When installed in a channel bend they induce a helicoidal vortex that interacts with and weakens the centrifugally induced secondary current. The latter effect leads to reduced local erosion near the bend's outer bank. Physical model testing was performed to determine the effects of several parameters affecting submerged vane performance, including submerged vane height H, length L, angle to main flow direction α, vane streamwise spacing δs, vane transverse spacing from outer bank δn, and bend angle φ. Submerged vanes effectively stabilize channel bend erosion by reducing the scour depth at the outer bank, generating positive transverse bed slope at the outer bank, and by reducing the net sediment loss through the channel. In general, an increase in vane height tends to shift the thalweg away from the outer bank; an increase in vane length tends to reduce the general erosion through the channel.Key words: submerged vanes, riverbank stabilization, bottom vanes, narrow channels, bank protection, bank stabilization, channel bends.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".