Energy dissipation in a deep tailwater stilling basin with partial flaring gate piers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flaring gate piers (FGPs) have been used to increase energy dissipation in stilling basins downstream of spillways. For projects with a low water head and large unit discharge together with a deep tailwater level, energy dissipation inside a conventional stilling basin is usually insufficient. This paper proposes a new partial flaring gate pier (partial FGP) scheme to intensify the energy dissipation inside the stilling basin. The results for the no FGP scheme, the conventional FGP scheme, and the partial FGP scheme were compared using a physical model study and numerical simulations. It was found that the partial FGP scheme (the alternation of flaring and no flaring gate piers in chambers) can contain the submerged hydraulic jump and high-speed water jet in the upstream region of the stilling basin. Thus, the water jet from the FGP chamber was forced to laterally diffuse, thereby intensifying the shear friction and turbulent kinetic energy and forming a vertical vortex from the bottom to the surface. Compared with the other two schemes, the flow pattern in the partial FGP scheme was improved significantly with much deeper air entrainment depth inside the stilling basin and much lower turbulent kinetic energy in the outgoing flow. The mean velocity of the outgoing flow also decreased by more than 20%. The common problems of secondary hydraulic jump outside the stilling basin were eliminated.
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.
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 it