Development of a Novel Laboratory Rotating Surface Erosion Apparatus for Cohesive or Stabilized Soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Soil surface erosion has been recognized as a major threat to the sustainability of infrastructure, particularly in the context of climate change that can accelerate changes in physicochemical properties of eroding fluids. This study proposes a rotating surface erosion apparatus (RSEA) for soil erosion tests on cohesive/stabilized soils. Compared to other erosion test apparatuses, RSEA possesses some unique features: (1) it enables testing both disturbed and undisturbed in situ soil specimens while imposing uniform hydraulic shear stress on the specimens, (2) it produces negligible temperature changes in the eroding fluid during the erosion testing, and (3) it accommodates fluids with different physicochemical properties. The computational fluid dynamics analysis was conducted to guide the design of the apparatus. The details of the design and fabrication of this apparatus are presented, followed by the discussions of the calibration and test procedure. In the end, effect of suspension on erosion testing using the proposed RSEA was discussed. Preliminary tests on cemented sands considering different temperature and acidity in eroding fluids were also performed and the results are discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".