MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403192799 · doi:10.3390/w16192831

Analysis of Local Scour around Double Piers in Tandem Arrangement in an S-Shaped Channel under Ice-Jammed Flow Conditions

2024· article· en· W4403192799 on OpenAlexaff
Shihao Dong, Zhenhua Zhang, Zhicong Li, Pang-pang Chen, Jun Wang, Guowei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFroude numberPierGeotechnical engineeringGeologyFlow (mathematics)Channel (broadcasting)Flow conditionsMechanicsEngineeringStructural engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stability of bridge foundations is affected by local scour, and the formation of ice jams exacerbates local scour around bridge piers. These processes, particularly the evolution of ice jams and local scour around piers, are more complex in curved sections than in straight sections. This study, based on experiments in an S-shaped channel, investigates how various factors—the flow Froude number, ice–water discharge rate, median particle diameter, pier spacing, and pier diameter—affect the maximum local scour depth around double piers in tandem and the distribution of ice jam thickness. The results indicate that under ice-jammed flow conditions, the maximum local scour depth around double piers in tandem is positively correlated with the ice–water discharge rate, pier spacing, and pier diameter and negatively correlated with median particle diameter. The maximum local scour depth is positively correlated with the flow Froude number when it ranges from 0.1 to 0.114, peaking at 0.114. Above this value, the correlation becomes negative. In curved channels, the arrangement of double piers in tandem substantially influences ice jam thickness distribution, with increases in pier diameter and spacing directly correlating with greater ice jam thickness at each cross-section. Furthermore, ice jam thickness is responsive to flow conditions, escalating with higher ice–water discharge rates and decreasing flow Froude numbers.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207