Experimental abatement data of underflow baffles for removal of floatables in the CSOs of the Greater Montréal (Canada) area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Underflow baffles have gained in popularity over the years as a viable mean to intercept floatables in Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs). This choice was mainly justified by the extremely low capital cost (CAPEX) and operational cost (OPEX) of this solution, although the efficiency of underflow baffles has never been clearly proven. The only similar application to underflow baffles are scum boards in grit chambers and clarifier. However, the flow conditions at CSOs vary considerably from those in grit chambers and clarifier. For this reason, review of the behavior of floatables in a rapid flow is paramount. Only then can comprehensive design criteria for underflow baffles and overflow chambers be suggested. Pilot scale tests, performed in a 17 metres long basin at various flowrates, had already shown that a critical horizontal velocity for floatables (Vcr) may develop in the overflow chambers. In this follow up study, the fate of intercepted floatables was investigated. It appears from this latest data that permanent capture of floatables decreases rapidly with an increase in the horizontal velocity of the flow, no matter what the baffle depth. Baffle depth increases capture at lower velocities (0.17 m/s) but become irrelevant at higher velocities (0.61 m/s). This data suggests that capture efficiency of existing underflow baffles in overflow chambers can be, at best, very low whenever the horizontal velocity increases above 0.30 m/s or 1 ft/s.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".