MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132649569

Digital twinning of a flood control structure using an open-source software (OpenFOAM)

2024· article· en· W7132649569 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Danial Goodarzi, Aboghasem Pilechi, Majid Mohammadian

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic flow and structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydraulic structureFlood mythFlood controlFocus (optics)Flow (mathematics)Computational fluid dynamicsTwin citiesSoftware
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the dynamics of water flow around hydraulic structures is vital for safety, operation and optimization. The use of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) in design and assessment of hydraulic structures has become popular. However, for efficient use of CFD models, it’s crucial to focus on key aspects of the model setup such as mesh, turbulence models, numerical methods, and boundary conditions. This study investigates the capabilities of an open-source CFD Toolbox, OpenFOAM, in simulating the hydrodynamics of water flow through the flood diversion structure of the Springbank Off-stream Reservoir. The Springbank Off-stream Reservoir was designed for the management of extreme flood risk. The design was previously evaluated through a series physical experiment at National Research Council Canada and the performance of the structure was examined in various condition. By creating a digital twin of the physical model with OpenFOAM, we examined the model’s performance in replicating measured water levels and velocity. The validated digital twin showed an average error of less than 5% between the model predictions and experimental data for water levels. The results provide insights into the best practices for employing OpenFOAM to assess the hydraulic behavior of flood diversion structures with characteristics similar to the Springbank Off-stream Reservoir. The findings also demonstrate that OpenFOAM can be a reliable and efficient tool for evaluating and optimizing new designs. Moreover, the tool can be utilized for the digital twinning of existing hydraulic structures, thereby informing operational needs, facilitating structural safety assessments, and enabling climate risk assessments and adaptation planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicHydraulic flow and structuresFrench-language works237,207