Hydraulic considerations in designing an oil spill control system for a stormwater outfall
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil spills have been identified to be a serious problem in the Humber Creek subwatershed in Toronto. To capture spilled oil at the storm water outfall, an oil spill control system was designed to perform under different flow conditions. The spill control system consists of an on-line triangular lateral diversion channel (1.7 m by 0.6 m) and an off-line tilted-plate oil–water separator (7 m by 5.4 m by 5.9 m). To investigate the hydraulic behaviour of the spill control system under different flow conditions, a physical model study was conducted at the National Water Research Institute's Hydraulics Laboratory in Burlington, Ontario. The model results confirmed the design conveyance capacity of the lateral diversion channel and indicated that floating objects and settleable solids could be trapped inside the oil–water separator under various flow conditions. A vortex was also observed inside the oil–water separator and was likely caused by the lateral diversion channel. During high flows, the flow through the oil–water separator was controlled by the flow backup from the storm water outfall. Key words: oil spills, lateral channel, oil–water separator, hydraulic models, storm conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 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".