MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113081179 · doi:10.1139/l08-055

Hydraulic performance of damaged-end corrugated steel pipe culverts

2008· article· en· W2113081179 on OpenAlexaffvenue
James A. Kells

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCulvertPondingInletGeotechnical engineeringHydraulic headStructural engineeringEnvironmental scienceGeologyEngineeringDrainageMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Culverts are a common and physically simple type of hydraulic structure, which are often fabricated as circular, corrugated steel pipe (CSP) sections. Because of the relatively thin wall of CSP, the ends of such pipe are frequently in a damaged condition. It is hypothesized that the hydraulic impact of the damage is often quite significant, resulting in reduced discharge capacity and (or) increased headwater ponding. The study reported in this paper was focused on an evaluation of the hydraulic impact of various levels of damage to the end sections of a culvert operating under either inlet or outlet control. In general, it was found that, for end damage deformations up to 1/4 of the pipe diameter, the discharge coefficient is reduced by approximately 10%, while the loss coefficients are increased by about 48% and 35% for inlet and outlet control modes of operation, respectively. For greater degrees of damage, the hydraulic performance is considerably worse.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.159
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicGeotechnical Engineering and Underground StructuresFrench-language works237,207