Influence of Dynamic Woody Debris Jam on Single Bridge Pier Scour and Induced Hydraulic Head
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A woody debris jam around a bridge pier causes a change in flow structure and results in additional scour and an increase in the hydraulic head upstream of the pier, threatening its stability and safety. In the present paper, the spatio-temporal formation of a dynamic woody debris jam formed piece by piece of debris wood was used to investigate the influence of woody debris jams from a life-cycle perspective which included the processes of its formation, growth, failure, and rebirth. Several debris jams were formed in sequence during each experimental test. The results showed that the additional scour generated by the first woody debris jam compared with the scour depth without debris was a function of blockage ratio of the first debris jam, while the influence of the subsequent woody debris jams depended on their dimensions compared with the previous jam. When the subsequent debris jam’s dimensions were larger than the previous one, the scour further increased; otherwise, the scour remained constant and equal to the previous one. In addition, the debris-induced hydraulic head was analyzed and found to be correlated with the Froude number and the debris jam dimensions.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".