MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956058164 · doi:10.1177/2041419619858098

Blast load simulation using conical shock tube systems

2019· article· en· W2956058164 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Protective Structures · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShock tubeShock (circulatory)Structural engineeringConical surfaceEngineeringShock waveExplosive materialTube (container)MechanicsRotational symmetryComputational fluid dynamicsMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increased frequency of accidental and deliberate explosions, evaluating the response of civil infrastructure systems to blast loading has been attracting the interests of the research and regulatory communities. However, with the high cost and complex safety and logistical issues associated with field explosives testing, North American blast-resistant construction standards (e.g. ASCE 59-11 and CSA S850-12) recommend the use of shock tubes to simulate blast loads and evaluate relevant structural response. This study first aims at developing a simplified two-dimensional axisymmetric shock tube model, implemented in ANSYS Fluent, a computational fluid dynamics software, and then validating the model using the classical Sod’s shock tube problem solution, as well as available shock tube experimental test results. Subsequently, the developed model is compared to a more complex three-dimensional model and the results show that there is negligible difference between the two models for axisymmetric shock tube performance simulation; however, the three-dimensional model is necessary to simulate non-axisymmetric shock tubes. Following the model validation, extensive analyses are performed to evaluate the influences of shock tube design parameters (e.g. the driver section pressure and length and the expansion section length) on blast wave characteristics to facilitate a shock tube design that would generate shock waves similar to those experienced by civil infrastructure components under blast loads. The results show that the peak reflected pressure increases as the driver pressure increases, while a decrease in the expansion length increases the peak reflected pressure. In addition, the positive phase duration increases as both the driver length and expansion length are increased. Finally, the developed two-dimensional axisymmetric model is used to optimize the dimensions of a physical large-scale conical shock tube system constructed for civil infrastructure component blast response evaluation applications. The capabilities of such shock tube system are further investigated by correlating its design parameters to a range of explosion threats identified by different hemispherical TNT charge weight and distance scenarios.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · 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