MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520491091 · doi:10.1002/prep.201600099

Deposition Rates from Blow‐in‐Place of Different Donor Charges: Comparison of Composition C‐4 and Shaped Charges

2016· article· en· W2520491091 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePropellants Explosives Pyrotechnics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National DefenceDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersMinistère de la Défense NationaleDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsExplosive materialDeposition (geology)DemolitionCharge (physics)Unexploded ordnanceComposition (language)Environmental scienceMaterials scienceEnvironmental chemistryChemistryForensic engineeringGeologyEngineeringCivil engineeringPhysicsArtRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For more than 70 years, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) have been using the plastic explosive Composition C‐4 based mainly on the explosive hexahydro‐1,3,5‐trinitro‐1,3,5‐triazine (RDX) for various operational needs. Composition C‐4 is used as donor charge for the blow‐in‐place destruction of unexploded ordnance (UXO) by Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams and, as well, mostly used as a demolition explosive by engineering units. RDX is very stable in the environment, somewhat water‐soluble and moves relatively rapidly towards surface and groundwater bodies in Ranges and Training Areas (RTA). It is the key contaminant that triggered the closure of a major RTA in the USA and the use of C‐4 was proven to contribute to its accumulation in demolition ranges. A study was conducted to measure the deposition of RDX generated from the use of Canadian C‐4 blocks and two shaped charges for comparison purposes, as the shaped charge represents a possible alternative for C‐4 as a donor charge in blow‐in‐place operations. The shaped charges studied were the Excalibur and two diameters of the SM‐EOD suite from SAAB Bofors. These shaped charges were selected for their potential to destroy UXOs. The Excalibur shaped charge led to RDX deposition rates similar to those observed with C‐4 blocks, whereas the SM‐EOD showed forensic traces of RDX. Based on these results, SM‐EOD shaped charges provide a possible alternative to using C‐4 for blow‐in‐place (BIP) operations, as they generate only small quantities of critical contaminants (such as RDX). By eliminating the contamination from the donor charge, the BIP operation will necessarily be improved and cleaner.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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