Emitter clogging in a reclaimed water irrigation scheme with controlled suspended load
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emitter clogging in drip irrigation system is a very common problem when used with reclaimed water.The suspended solids from treated water are the major elements of clogging mechanism.Coupled with bacterial biofi lms, these particulates can reduce the fl ow of emitters by creating barriers in the fl ow path.This experimental study reports the performance of three types of pressure compensated emitters in a drip irrigation system.Reclaimed water with a sediment load of 10 mg/l was supplied in the system throughout the experiment.Four ranges of particle sizes (0-45, 45-90, 90-150, and 150-300 µm) were used during 770 h of intermittent irrigation.Low fl ow emitters (<2 l/h) were found to be clogged quicker than those with higher fl ow rates.Though fl ushing of the system did not help in discharge recovery of the partially clogged emitters, it helped regain the lateral fl ow.The interior geometry of biofi lms was found to be built only by the smaller particles.Larger particles (>50 µm) only appeared around the perimeters of matured biofi lms making the surface topography very coarse and undulating.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".