Experimental Study on Directional Fracture Blasting of Cutting Seam Cartridge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the cutting seam cartridge has sound directional breaking effect, in order to explore its blasting wave mechanism, an experimental study was conducted on the blast wave of a cutting seam cartridge using a high‐speed laser schlieren system and air overpressure test system. The research results show that during cartridge explosion, the cutting seam pipe can effectively control the energy release and detonation gas dynamic behaviors. Additionally, the cartridge blast wave and the detonation gas remain highly symmetrical in expansion form. The blast wave first propagates along the cutting seam direction, and the detonation gas initially expands from the seam in the direction of the cutting seam. The pressure in the cutting seam direction is higher than that in the noncutting seam direction. The blast wave change of the whole flow field of the cutting seam cartridge was numerically simulated and was basically consistent with the results of the schlieren test in distribution form. The presence of a cutting seam prolongs the blast wave effect. During expansion of the cutting seam pipe under the influence of a blast wave, the inner wall of the cutting seam pipe is mainly subject to tensile stress. When the tensile force applied to the inner wall reaches the local yield limit, the cutting seam pipe fails.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".