Assessment of Pressure Transients Due to Trapped Air Compression in Rapidly Filling Combined Sewer Overflow Tunnels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerical modeling indicates that high pressures can be expected when trapped air at the end of a pipeline is compressed as it stops a moving water column. In particular, the model results show that larger pressures are to be expected when compressed air volumes are small. Laboratory experiments where a trapped air pocket is compressed by an advancing filling front also confirm that small air volumes lead to the highest pressure rises. However, the model formulation essentially treats the moving water column as a vertical front with a trapped volume of air in front of it, an assumption that cannot be expected to hold for large diameter stormwater tunnels. The authors have been involved in the numerical modeling of rapidly filling flows in CSO storage tunnel systems. The Two-component Pressure Approach can predict the location where air can become entrapped and the associated volume, but the model framework is a single phase flow simulation and the air is not explicitly modeled. This leads to conceptual errors in the modeling of flow processes once the air becomes entrapped. The numerical model was reformulated to allowed the inclusion of the trapped air volume in the simulation in a simplified fashion. Simulations with the modified model for a specific application suggest that there are two types of flow conditions that can lead to trapped air pockets that are subsequently compressed although future investigations may define additional conditions. The simulation results suggest that only modest pressure rises should be expected in the particular application investigated and the physical explanations for this outcome are described.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".