Experimental and numerical studies on the hydraulics of stepped spillways with baffle walls and blocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present experimental study investigates the effect of baffle walls and baffle blocks with different heights on the hydraulics and energy dissipation of stepped spillways. Image processing technique was employed to detect internal flow motion, and experiments were simulated to extract detailed information to examine the effect of baffles on flow motion and energy dissipation. The results indicated that placing baffle blocks initiated transverse flows in the spillway, leading to an increase in energy dissipation rate. It was found that the energy dissipation rate increased with increasing the baffle block’s height and reducing the baffle’s width. The optimum baffle’s geometry was achieved when the baffle’s width was 5% of the spillway width and the baffle’s height was 76% of the step height. At the maximum discharge, the optimum baffle geometry was able to dissipate 39% more energy than that of a spillway without baffles. Three zones of Redirected Flow (RF), Mixing Zone (MZ), and Recirculation Zone (RZ) were identified under the pseudo-bottom line, and the size of defined zones plays an important role in energy dissipation rate. Furthermore, the results showed the formation of four complete cycles with approximately 25% of the spillway’s width on each step of the spillway.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".