Experimental Investigation of Aluminum Foam Lined Suppressive Shield Containment Vessels
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manufacture, transport, and storage of dangerous goods, especially energetic materials, in Canada and around the world pose serious challenges to explosives regulators and inspectors. Currently siting of manufacturing and storage facilities are in accordance with quantity-distance principles designed to mitigate effects of accidental explosions. The land requirements to satisfy these principles are imposing financial burdens on the explosives sector. This paper presents an experimental program designed to investigate the effectiveness of suppressive shield containers in reducing the blast pressure outside of the container while eliminating fragments thus reducing the distance requirement for the stored amount of explosives. Several suppressive shield panels including aluminium foam-lined panels were tested to study their effect on blast pressure and impulse. In addition computational fluid dynamics techniques were used to study suppressive shields effects on blast environment. The results show reduction of the incident peak blast pressure by 60% and the incident impulse by 58%. The aluminium foam-lined suppressive shield panels attenuated the peak incident pressure and impulse by 80%.
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.
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 it