MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Numerical Modeling of Type I Circular Sedimentation Tank

2010· article· en· W2141034839 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCyclone Separators and Fluid Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSedimentationInflowFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceComputer simulationSedimentEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringMechanicsSimulationGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical model for Type I circular sedimentation tanks (center feed) has been developed to provide useful information for circular tank operation. The unsteady flow process in circular sedimentation tanks is divided by numerous time intervals in which flow and sediment transport are considered to be steady. The other feature for this model is that particle size distribution of raw water is nonuniform. A numerical experiment based on the proposed model is carried out, and the results were compared with results from other models. The comparison shows that this model can provide more information, such as variations of water elevation, overall removal efficiency, bottom sludge thickness, and particle size distribution at outlet. In addition, this model had the advantage of optimizing the tank dimensions based on the sludge raking frequency and preferred removal efficiency. After simplification of the model, this model is practical in determining the overall removal efficiency and dimension of the tank based on different inflow situations for tank design.

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.

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 score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.174 · 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