MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050505487 · doi:10.1080/13855140600858339

Timing effects on the fragmentation of small scale blocks of granodiorite

2006· article· en· W2050505487 on OpenAlexaff
P.D. Katsabanis, A. S. Tawadrous, Courtney Braun, Claire Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueFragblast · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRock Mechanics and Modeling
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetonatorFragmentation (computing)GeologyRock blastingExplosive materialBoreholeGeotechnical engineeringComputer scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of small scale tests, simulating multi-hole blasts have been performed to establish the effect of delays on blast fragmentation. The blasts were performed in high quality granodiorite blocks, which were cut from stone prepared by dimensional stone quarry operations. The pattern used was equilateral triangular, with a distance of 10.2 cm between boreholes, which had a diameter of 11 mm, were loaded with detonating cord and the coupling medium was water. The delays used were achieved using different lengths of detonating cord for the cases of delays between 0 and 100 μs between holes and a sequential blasting machine firing seismic detonators for larger delays up to 4 ms. All fragments were collected and screened. The experiments showed that the worst fragmentation was achieved with simultaneous initiation of all charges. Fragmentation improved with the delay time between holes up to 1 ms between holes. If the experiments are scaled up, the results show that in granodiorite, fragmentation optimization requires delays of few milliseconds per metre of burden. The findings, agree with previously published work, involving larger scale experiments and other rock types.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations41
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFragblastSame topicRock Mechanics and ModelingFrench-language works237,207