Measurement of pressure in viewable hole erosion test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hole erosion test (HET) is commonly used to study the occurrence of internal soil erosion when water concentrated leaks occur. This erosion is known as “piping” in soil mechanics. Piping erosion is invisible and occurs randomly within the soil body. Therefore, to gain a better understanding of how piping erosion develops, it would be helpful to utilize a viewable HET design in which the dynamics of the piping hole can be observed directly. In this note, a new HET apparatus is presented that can be used to observe the development of piping erosion and to monitor the dynamic pressure condition during the hole erosion process. A preliminary model test was carried out based on the new viewable HET apparatus and “pressure heads” monitoring technique. The results successfully verified the performance of the proposed apparatus and experimental methods during the process of hole erosion, indicating that the hole shape changes during continuous erosion and is not fully symmetrical because of the initial profile of the hole. The internal hole becomes increasingly curved when subjected to continuous piping flow. Test results agree with the numerical simulation reported in 2015 by Riha and Jandora, who considered the effect of the hole entrance shape.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".