Impacts of some parameters affecting the hydraulic performance of U-shaped side spillways
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Side channel spillways are one type of outlet works at dams with wide applications in irrigation and drainage systems and in water and wastewater facilities. When the flow enters the side channel through the end and two side weirs of the spillway, it is called a three-sided spillway. Based on the results of laboratory experiments, the present study investigates the impacts of variation in end-sill elevation and location and the bed slope of the side channel for different inflow rates into a spillway. In these evaluations, variation in flow regime is taken as a qualitative index and the flow turbulence index is taken as a quantitative index. The values for the latter index were calculated from readings of momentary pressures using a datalogger system. The results showed that the sill elevation had the greatest effect on pressure fluctuations and on the hydraulic performance of the side channel in these spillways. Increasing the sill height decreased the quantitative value of the water turbulence index in the side channel. According to the findings of the present study, the location of the sill in relation to the side channel does not have a considerable effect on pressure fluctuations. It was also found that increasing the channel bed slope reduces pressure fluctuations by about 3%. Greater increases in the bed slope cause increased flow turbulence. Increasing the channel bed slope in the reverse (negative) direction had considerable effects on reducing the channel flow turbulence.Key words: hydraulic performance, pressure fluctuations, spatially varied flow, three-sided channel spillway, U-shaped spillway.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".