Skip to Main Content
We tried to evaluate the applicability of applied methods for a wider range of data. In other words, all data series were combined, then for predicting the hydraulic jump characteristics, as the dependent variable, the superior model of any characteristics and the model with only F1 as input variable were reanalyzed for the combined data state. The results of SVM models are given in Table 9 and Figure 9. According to the results of the combined data, it could be stated that adding h1/B and h2/h1 to input parameters caused an increment in model efficiency. However comparison between Tables 5–7 and 9 indicated that SVM models for the combined data set did not show the desired accuracy, and analyzing data sets separately led to more accurate results. It should be noted that for the combined date state, data series with different conditions (i.e. different hydraulic data range and different appurtenances) were used altogether. Therefore, the results are not so accurate. Figure 9 shows the verification between measured and estimated values of test series for the best proposed model for any characteristics.
Table 9

Statistical parameters of the SVM models for combined data

Output variableInput variable(s)Optimal parameters
Performance criteria
Train
Test
cɛγRDCRMSERDCRMSE
Sequent depth ratio 
h2/h1 F1 10 0.10 0.828 0.680 0.092 0.774 0.580 0.098 
F1, h1/B 10 0.01 0.873 0.760 0.079 0.816 0.660 0.088 
Length of hydraulic jump 
Lj/h1 F1 8.0 0.01 0.435 0.272 0.158 0.401 0.251 0.172 
F1,h2/h1 10 0.10 0.564 0.306 0.113 0.554 0.272 0.132 
Loss of energy 
EL/E1 F1 10 0.02 0.740 0.572 0.188 0.667 0.419 0.196 
F1, h1/B 10 0.01 0.885 0.781 0.101 0.882 0.647 0.118 
Output variableInput variable(s)Optimal parameters
Performance criteria
Train
Test
cɛγRDCRMSERDCRMSE
Sequent depth ratio 
h2/h1 F1 10 0.10 0.828 0.680 0.092 0.774 0.580 0.098 
F1, h1/B 10 0.01 0.873 0.760 0.079 0.816 0.660 0.088 
Length of hydraulic jump 
Lj/h1 F1 8.0 0.01 0.435 0.272 0.158 0.401 0.251 0.172 
F1,h2/h1 10 0.10 0.564 0.306 0.113 0.554 0.272 0.132 
Loss of energy 
EL/E1 F1 10 0.02 0.740 0.572 0.188 0.667 0.419 0.196 
F1, h1/B 10 0.01 0.885 0.781 0.101 0.882 0.647 0.118 
Figure 9

Comparison of observed and predicted hydraulic jump characteristics; combined data.

Figure 9

Comparison of observed and predicted hydraulic jump characteristics; combined data.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal