MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400522165 · doi:10.3390/w16141970

Salinity Intrusion Modeling Using Boundary Conditions on a Laboratory Setup: Experimental Analysis and CFD Simulations

2024· article· en· W4400522165 on OpenAlexaff
Dayana Carolina Chalá, Claudia Castro-Faccetti, Édgar Quiñones-Bolaños, Mehrab Mehrvar

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsMultiphysicsAquiferGeologyBoundary value problemWedge (geometry)FluentMarine engineeringGeotechnical engineeringSaltwater intrusionEnvironmental scienceFinite element methodPetroleum engineeringMechanicsGroundwaterEngineeringStructural engineeringGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salinity intrusion is one of the most pressing threats to unconfined coastal aquifers, and its simulation is of great importance for groundwater research and management. This study compared the performances of two computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software applications, ANSYS Fluent 2022 R2 and COMSOL Multiphysics 5.6, in simulating the transport of saltwater in a pilot-scale experimental setup, which was built to recreate two boundary conditions of unconfined aquifers with homogeneous stratigraphy. The experiments were performed until the saline wedge reached a quasi-steady-state condition. Sequential photographs and image analysis were required to record the movement of the saline toe and the saline wedge location. The maximum toe length was achieved under the head-controlled boundary condition, with a toe length of 1.6 m after 7 h of the experiment, and 1.65 m and 1.79 m for the COMSOL and ANSYS Fluent simulations, respectively. The findings evidence that the flux-controlled condition produced a better representation of the saline wedge than the head-controlled condition, indicating good agreement between the CFD simulations and the experimental data. Recommendations for future research include CFD simulations of real coastal aquifers and coupling fluid dynamics with other processes such as land subsidence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207