Steady and unsteady pressure scour under bridges at clear-water conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bridges are vital components of the transportation network and if they are damaged or destroyed during a flood, they isolate communities and limit movement of supplies and emergency services. Evaluating their constructional stability and structural response after a flood event is critical for bridge safety. Bridge studies are usually designed with an assumption of an open channel flow condition, but the flow regime can switch to pressure flow if the downstream edge of a bridge deck is partially or totally submerged during a large flood. The main goal of this paper is to study the pressurized flow scour under a bridge deck and downstream deposition that results from eroded sediment material governed by both steady and unsteady clear-water flow conditions. Experimental conditions used in this study involve clear-water scour of a sand bed of given median sediment size d50 = 0.90 mm and sediment uniformity σg = 1.29, an approach flow characterized by a flow depth and velocity, a rectangular-shaped bridge deck, and a stepwise flood hydrograph defined by its time to peak and peak discharge. Different flow conditions were considered in confined flow under the bridge deck. Relationship between pressure-flow scour and flow conditions is presented and discussed under the obtained experimental data. Additionally, effects of single-peaked stepwise flow hydrographs (unsteady flow conditions) on bridge pier scour depth are investigated under clear-water pressure-flow conditions, whereas previous researches mainly focused on the equilibrium pressure scour under steady flow conditions.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".