MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392164407 · doi:10.18280/i2m.230105

Experimental Study of Energy Dissipation in Sudden Contraction of Open Channels

2024· article· en· W4392164407 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Walaa A. Abdulrasul, Wesam S. Mohammed-Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueInstrumentation Mesure Métrologie · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Anbar
KeywordsDissipationContraction (grammar)MechanicsPhysicsMedicineThermodynamicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of energy dissipation in hydraulic structures has an essential role in providing safety to these structures and providing plans to protect them during different releases of flow. The purpose of this research is to determine the impact of sudden constriction that occurs in open channels on the dissipated energy. Therefore, experimental work was conducted on models that were built based on dimensional analysis for the parameters impacting the dissipated energy in an open channel. Eighty experiments were conducted on these models. In each experiment, several readings for water depth were measured along the contraction zone. Through analyzing the laboratory results, several findings were established. First, it was found that the contraction length has an inverse effect on energy dissipation, with the energy dissipation increasing at the smallest contraction length. Second, the results obtained in the laboratory showed that the dissipation of energy increases with the increase in the discharge. Third, the greatest energy dissipation was obtained at the greatest amount of contraction, and the least energy dissipation was obtained at the lowest amount of contraction in all cases of flow and length of contraction. Finally, an empirical equation was built based on the experimental outcomes statically using the non-linear regression analysis in SPSS software. The calculated dissipated energy by the empirical equation showed a great fitting with experimental findings, and this was confirmed by statistical measurement of the Coefficient of Determination (R 2 ) and Nash-Sutcliff Efficiency (NSE), which they found 0.995 and 0.986, respectively.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstrumentation Mesure MétrologieSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207