Software for the Hydraulic Design of Underground Stormwater Detention Tanks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quantitative and qualitative impacts of storm water runoff have become a key issue in urban development design.Traditional methods of addressing the quantitative impacts of increased peak flows and increased runoff volumes, through stormwater detentioniretention, have used above ground structures such as stormwater management ponds.Insufficient space, high land values, topography, maintenance, aesthetics and liability issues are reasons why underground detention is being considered more frequently.This chapter presents the development of a computer program for designing underground stormwater detention tanks.The program was developed by the Corrugated Steel Pipe Institute (CSPI) as a tool to simplify the hydraulic design of corrugated steel pipe (CSP) detention tanks.The program has four main functions: '" develop or allow the direct input of an inflow hydrograph, ' " size the structure and develop a stage-storage relationship, • design the release structure and develop the stage-discharge relationship, and ' " route the inflow hydrograph through the structureThe design methodology is the same as that used to design above ground systems, tailored to underground tanks.Two design examples are presented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.011 |
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".