MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conservative Formulation for Natural Open Channels and Finite-Element Implementation

2007· article· en· W2145977043 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jie Chen, P. M. Steffler, Faye Hicks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite element methodChannel (broadcasting)Hydraulic jumpShallow water equationsDissipative systemMathematicsOpen-channel flowHydraulicsBoundary (topology)Applied mathematicsFlow (mathematics)Mathematical analysisGeometryComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This investigation considers an approximate formulation of the St. Venant equations for natural channels, in which the fully conservative form is developed by revising the boundary pressure term accounting for the topographic variation in the momentum equation. As such a formulation has the potential to enhance the performance of existing models used in practice, the accuracy implications for this approximate formulation are examined using an error analysis for a simplified case. Further, an energy calculation is performed which illustrates that an earlier formulation actually results in energy gain for some cases. A more general formula for the constant water surface elevation that corrects this is introduced and tested. It is found that the refined formulation presented here is accurate for hydraulic jumps, steep surge waves, and flood wave propagation in natural channels. The shock capturing capability of the approximate formulation is illustrated for both steady- and unsteady-flow situations using the finite-element method, for which this approximate equation formulation adapts naturally. Using the characteristic-dissipative-Galerkin finite-element scheme, good results are obtained for the case of a hydraulic jump in a diverging rectangular channel, with the maximum percent error associated with the approximate formulation determined to be only 0.34%. For the case of dam break wave propagation in a converging and diverging rectangular channel, the model performs similarly well, with the maximum error only 0.0064%. Further, the approximate formulation is used to simulate the flood routing in a natural channel, the Oldman River in southern Alberta. The computational results are in good agreement with the observed data. The arrival time of peak flow is 5h earlier and the magnitude of peak discharge is only 3.8% lower than the observed value.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207