MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2380369622

Development of an Equivalent Equipment on Underwater Explosion Impulsive Loading

2014· article· en· W2380369622 on OpenAlexaff
Xiang Da-li

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Armamentarii · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderwaterShock wavePiston (optics)Underwater explosionConical surfaceImpulse (physics)MechanicsShock (circulatory)Impact pressureAcousticsStructural engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineeringWavefrontOpticsGeologyClassical mechanics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to obtain an equivalent underwater explosion impulsive loading,the theoretical analysis is carried out for the impact of a flyer plate on a piston,which seals a conical target chamber filled with water,based on one-dimensional elastic wave propagation and a linear equation of state for water.The impact process is simulated by using AUTODYN software,and the decay times of shock waves for two pistons with different thicknesses are analyzed and compared. According to the theory and numerical simulation research,an equivalent equipment is designed,and the pressure-time curve is measured at the central point of chamber medial wall. The results show that it is feasible to obtain an equivalent underwater explosion shock waves in the laboratory through high speed impact,and the flyer speed and the piston thickness determine the peak pressure and decay time in the conical target chamber,respectively. The equivalent equipment can be used to investigate the shock response of typical structures and materials subjected to underwater explosion impulse loading.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa ArmamentariiSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207