MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283268805 · doi:10.3390/fluids7070213

Tsunami-Induced Bore Propagating over a Canal—Part 1: Laboratory Experiments and Numerical Validation

2022· article· en· W4283268805 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFluids · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEarthquake and Tsunami Effects
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceGeologyDissipationComputer simulationMechanicsMean squared errorJet (fluid)Geotechnical engineeringPhysicsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This companion paper investigates the hydrodynamics of turbulent bores that propagate on a horizontal plane and have a striking resemblance to dam break waves and tsunami-like hydraulic bores. The focus of this paper is on the propagation of a turbulent bore over a mitigation canal using both laboratory experiments and numerical simulations. In the first part of this paper, the effects of canal depth on the time histories of wave height and velocity were experimentally investigated, and the experimental results were used for the validation of the numerical model. The rapid release of water from an impoundment reservoir at depths of do = 0.30 m and 0.40 m generated bores analogous to tsunami-induced inundations. The time histories of the wave heights and velocities were measured at 0.2 m upstream and at 0.2 m and 0.58 m downstream of the canal to study the energy dissipation effect of the mitigation canal. The recorded time series of the water surface levels and velocities were compared with simulation outputs, and good agreement was found between the experimental and numerical water surface profiles, with a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) of less than 6.7% and a relative error of less than 8.4%. Three turbulence models, including the standard k-ε, Realizable k-ε, and RNG k-ε, were tested, and it was found that all these models performed well, with the standard k-ε model providing the highest accuracy. The velocity contour plots of the mitigation canal with different depths showed jet streams of different sizes in the shallow, medium-depth, and deep canals. The energy dissipation and air bubble entrainment of the bore as it plunged downward into the canal increased as the canal depth increased, and the jet stream of the maximum bore velocity decreased as the canal depth increased. It was found that the eye of the vortex created by the bore in the canal moved in the downstream direction and plunged downward in the middle of the canal, where it then began to separate into two smaller vortices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it