Reduction of injection flow rate with an underground buffer tank coupled with a standing column well
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study proposes a new solution for disposing of bleed water in standing column well systems. A perforated septic tank is used simultaneously as a storage tank for storing large water volumes and as an infiltration basin. By integrating a storage tank with a standing column well, bleed water is stored in the tank and is then drained rather than being returned to an injection well. A 3D coupled thermohydraulic finite element model supports this new bleed method. For this reason, a 30-day simulation examined a case study of a 20 m³ storage tank associated with a standing column well operating in heating mode at an experimental site located in Varennes, Canada. The model considers realistic bleed operation flow rate, temperature, and the geological properties and weather conditions observed at the experimental site. Additionally, the drainage process at the base of the tank was modeled by pairing Navier-Stokes flow with unsaturated and saturated porous media flow. Despite the unfavorable geological conditions of the experimental site, numerical results indicate that infiltration was sufficient for draining the bleed water that accumulated in the storage tank. The latter managed to dispose 121.5 m³ of water throughout the simulation period. Finally, infiltration proved to be a promising alternative to injection wells.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".