Catch basin rating curves: guidance document
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of 1659 tests were performed measuring the conveyance of twelve (12) different catch basin inlet configurations for various road orientations. The catch inlet combinations include single and double round herringbone grates (OPSD 400.070 and DWG. No. S19), single and double square herringbone grates (OPSD 400.020), square grate with square bars (MT-310), high capacity inlet (Stepcon 5103), circular open cover (type B) (OPSD 401.010), circular closed cover (type A) (OPSD 401.010) and single and double curb mounted inlets (DWG. No. S22 and DWG. No. S28). These tests resulted in 116 catch basin inlet rating curves which are presented in this document. The experiments were performed using a full scale model roadway at the Ocean, Coastal and River Engineering Research Centre of the National Research Council Canada in Ottawa. Water flows ranging from 0.001 - 0.41 m³/s were delivered to the model roadway and six (6) road grades ranging from 0.5 - 10.0% and cross-slopes of 0.0, 2.0 and 4.0% were examined. In this document the experimental setup and methodology are reviewed. The 116 best fit catch basin inlet ratings curves are provided. The experimental data on which the rating curves are based along with the uncertainty analyses are provided. An example of the analysis to obtain the best fit ratings curves from the experimental data is reviewed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.033 |
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".