Flume investigation of the influence of rigid barrier deflector angle on dry granular overflow mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mass-wasting processes are often intercepted using rigid barriers, which are sometimes equipped with deflectors to prevent overspilling. Despite the engineering value of deflectors, they are currently only installed using empirical and prescriptive approaches because flow interaction mechanisms are not well understood. A 5 m flume was used to study dry granular flow deposition and overflow processes with and without deflectors of varying angles. The deflector angle was varied as 0°, 30°, 45°, and 60° with respect to the horizontal plane. For the geometric and material parameters adopted in this study, experimental results reveal that deflector angles greater than 45° develop steep ramp-like deadzones that result in effective energy dissipation as approaching flow impacts the deflector, whereas deflectors less than 45° rapidly develop shallow ramp-like deadzones, which promote high-energy overflow. Deflectors of at least 45° are required to develop upward overflow launch angles, whilst deflectors of 30° or less result in downward overflow launch angles. Upward launch angles indicate that a steep deadzone develops and effectively dissipates flow energy. An orthogonal deflector increases launch lengths by 40% compared to a bare rigid barrier.
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".