Hydraulic Modeling and Evaluation Equations for the Incipient Motion of Sandbags for Levee Breach Closure Operations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open channel levees are used extensively in hydraulic and environmental engineering applications to protect the surrounding area from inundation. However, levees may fail to produce an unsteady flow that is inherently three dimensional. Such a failure may lead to a destructive change in morphology of the river channel and valley. To avoid such a situation arising, hydraulic laboratory modeling was performed on an open channel levee breach model capturing velocity, in x, y and z plans, at selected locations in the breach. Sandbags of various shapes and sizes are tested for incipient motion by the breach flow. We found that a prism sandbag has a better hydrodynamic characteristic and more stability than spherical bags with the same weight. Experimental results are then used to evaluate existing empirical equations and to develop more accurate equations for predicting critical flow velocity at the initial stage of sandbag motion. Results showed the superior predictions a few of the equations could be considered with an uncertainty range of ±10%. These equations explained the initial failed attempts of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for breach closure of the case study, and confirmed the experimental results are simulating the case study of breach closure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".