An improved small-scale test setup for assessing backward erosion piping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Backward erosion piping is one of the erosion mechanisms that lead to embankment dam incidents, whereby foundation granular materials are transported to the downstream toe leaving a shallow pipe in place. Most previous studies have focused on secondary erosion as the responsible process for the pipe progression. On the other hand, a few experimental investigations have considered primary erosion by restricting the pipe pathway within a confined channel for easier monitoring of local gradients. This paper presents a modified small-scale setup with the hole-type exit configuration to capture local hydraulic conditions associated with the progression of the pipe in a realistic and unconstrained pathway. Horizontal compaction and a more accurate measurement and acquisition system are other improvements added to this setup. The test outcomes of the two fine sands have revealed that the scale factor of Sellmeijer’s model can be used to predict the critical global hydraulic gradient for the specific geometry of the small-scale setup with the hole-type exit. Moreover, the progression of the pipe remains unaffected by loading history. Results also confirm the previous findings regarding the mutual influence of local gradient and pipe tip progression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".