Effect of Distance on Hydraulic Efficiencies of Successively Located Grate Inlets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory experiments were conducted at a recirculating rectangular channel of 12 m long and 0.9 m wide with a longitudinal slope of 1/300.Accordingly, two-grated inlet systems were tested under varying approach flow rates, and the corresponding capturing efficiencies were determined.To do so, two cases were considered where the side grates were successively positioned on the main channel with a distance of 0.2 m and 0.4 m, respectively.The ranges of total flow rate and Froude number were 0.33 < 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 < 0.52 and 1 𝐿𝐿/𝑠𝑠 < 𝑄𝑄 𝑡𝑡 < 5.2 𝐿𝐿/𝑠𝑠, respectively.The results revealed that the hydraulic performance of a two-grated inlet system is strongly linked to the longitudinal distance between the grates and it was observed that positioning the grate inlets at a lesser distance was hydraulically more efficient in capturing the total approach flow rate.Moreover, the experimental results have also shown that the total hydraulic efficiency of successively located grate inlets displayed an increased tendency for higher values of upcoming flow rates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".