MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053480215 · doi:10.1260/2041-4196.6.1.1

Numerical Determination of Equivalent Reflected Blast Parameters Acting on Circular Cross Sections

2015· article· en· W2053480215 on OpenAlexaff
Yazan Qasrawi, Pat J. Heffernan, Amir Fam

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Protective Structures · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpulse (physics)Structural engineeringMechanicsEngineeringAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A number of experimenters observed that the blast shockwave loads experienced by circular cross sections were lower than the predicted loads. These observations revealed a gap in the understanding of the interaction between blasts and structures. The question of quantifying these reduced loads for purposes of analysis and design presented itself for investigation. This paper presents the numerical investigation of the blast reflection reduction due to diffraction around a circular cross section using the commercial software ANSYS Autodyn. The investigation focused on the effects of the cross section's diameter and the explosion's scaled distance on the reflected blast pressure and impulse. Nine numerical gauge points recorded pressure-time and impulse-time histories at regular radial intervals around the front quarter of the circular section. The model's results agreed with incident and reflected pressure and impulse design values. The results indicated that as the diameter of the section increased the peak reflected pressure and impulse at the point of incidence rapidly approached the design values. The results also indicated that both the pressure and the impulse varied sinusoidally between a maximum at the point of incidence and a minimum, approximately equal to the incident pressure and impulse, at the side of the section. Using a sinusoidal curve fit to obtain equivalent reflected pressure and impulse values showed that the actual pressure and impulse acting on a circular cross section were approximately half the recommended design values. The results supported the obvious advantages of designing circular members to resist blast loading. Simplified equations are proposed for calculating the equivalent pressure and impulse acting on circular sections from the standard design values.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Protective StructuresSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207