Experimental Analysis of Incipient Motion for Uniform and Graded Sediments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
So far, few studies have focused on the concept of critical flow velocity rather than bed shear stress for incipient sediment motion. Moreover, few studies have focused on sediment mixtures (graded sediment) and shape rather than uniform sediment for incipient motion condition. Different experiments were conducted at a hydraulic laboratory at the University of Guilan in 2015 to determine hydraulic parameters on the incipient motion condition. The aim of this study is to conduct a comparison between uniform and graded sediments, and a comparison between round and angular sediments. Experiments included rounded uniform bed sediments of 5.17, 10.35, 14 and 20.7 mm, angular uniform sediment of 10.35 mm, and graded sediment. Results demonstrated that angular sediment has a higher critical shear velocity than rounded sediment for incipient motion. Results also showed that for a given bed sediment, although critical shield stress and relative roughness increased with the bed slope, the particle Froude number (based on critical velocity) decreased. In terms of the sediment mixture, the critical shear stress (Vc*) was higher for the graded sediment than for the three finer uniform sediment sizes. The finer fractions of the mixture have a higher particle Froude number than their corresponding uniform sediment value, while the coarser fractions of the mixture showed a lower stability than their corresponding uniform sediment value. Results demonstrated that the reduction in the particle Froude number was more evident in lower relative roughness conditions. The current study provides a clearer insight into the interaction between initial sediment transport and flow characteristic, especially particle Froude number for incipient motion in natural rivers where stream beds have different gravel size distribution.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".