Influence of Pile-Cap Elevation and Skewness on Clear Water Scour at Complex Bridge Piers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, laboratory tests were used to determine the effects of skewness and pilecap elevation on the local scour of complex bridge piers.The 1:50 scale river models represent the Beta complex bridge piers in Babylon Province and the Ali Al-Gharbi complex bridge piers in Missan Province.The model pier consists of circular columns, rectangular pile-cap, and 2×4 array of circular piles below for the Beta Bridge and 2×3 array of circular piles below for the Missan Bridge.Four different skew-angles (=0° , 30° , 45° , 60° ) and pile-cap elevations corresponding to bed level are used.All experiments are conducted for twenty-four hours.Results suggest that locations of scour start, and maximum scour depth may be different, and that their relationship is dependent on pile-cap elevation and pier skew angle.Maximum equilibrium scour depth for aligned complex piers occurs when bottom of pile cap is above original bed level; for skewed complex piers, maximum equilibrium scour depth is much larger.Increase in depth of scouring is proportional to skew angle.Sensitivity of scour development to pier skew angle increases as pile-cap elevation increases, particularly when it is fully above original bed.
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".