MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002730478 · doi:10.1002/prep.200300011

Effect of Scale and Confinement on Gap Tests for Liquid Explosives

2003· article· en· W2002730478 on OpenAlexafffund
F. X. Jetté, Akio Yoshinaka, Andrew Higgins, Fan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuePropellants Explosives Pyrotechnics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaMcGill University
FundersMinistère de la Défense NationaleDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsDetonationExplosive materialMaterials scienceNitromethaneShaped chargeShock (circulatory)Composite materialMechanicsChemistryThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The factors influencing initiation of detonation in gap tests for liquid explosives are investigated experimentally. A calibrated donor charge (nitromethane) and PMMA attenuator disk arrangement are used to transmit shocks of known strength (2–10 GPa) into a test explosive of nitromethane sensitized with 5% diethylenetriamine. The test explosive is contained in capsules of different wall materials (PVC, Teflon, aluminum), and the dimensions of the charges vary from 25 mm to 100 mm in diameter. For the small‐scale charges, the presence of the confining wall of the test capsule is seen to have a pronounced effect on the detonation initiation. Certain wall materials (PVC, Teflon) exhibit a multi‐valued critical gap thickness, meaning that a weaker shock may result in initiation while a stronger shock does not. The effect of the wall materials could not be correlated with their acoustic or shock impedance, and the only way to eliminate these effects was to make the diameter of the test charge larger than the donor charge. When the size of the donor charge was increased, the critical pressure required for initiation decreased. These results could be correlated to “ideal” shock initiation experiments that use flyer plates as shock sources assuming that lateral rarefactions quench detonation initiation if they reach the central axis of the charge before the onset of detonation is complete.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePropellants Explosives PyrotechnicsSame topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207