MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226051662 · doi:10.1177/20414196221074058

Mitigation of blast effects through novel energy-dissipating connectors

2022· article· en· W4226051662 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Protective Structures · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplosive materialStructural engineeringEngineeringCladding (metalworking)Component (thermodynamics)Reliability engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Explosions generate overpressures that can cause irreparable damage to structures. For many buildings, especially critical infrastructure, continued operation after an explosive attack is essential. The use of energy-dissipating methods will enable the protection of a structure and occupants from a blast and permit the timely repair and re-occupation of the building after an event. The concept behind the system presented is the creation of panels that can be used as cladding for structures. The panels are connected to the main structure using energy-dissipating component assemblies around the panel edge. When subjected to a blast load the panels transfer the blast pressure through the assemblies, thereby reducing the forces transmitted to the underlying structure. After an event, the panels and energy-dissipating component assemblies can be replaced quickly and easily, allowing the building to be reoccupied in a short time after an attack. This study focuses on the characterization of energy-dissipating component assemblies using static and dynamic laboratory testing. A predictive theory, supported by a single degree of freedom model, is developed and a general evaluation method proposed. Further laboratory testing expands the characterization of behaviour of the assemblies through experiments, with a blast generator in tension tests and in simulated blast panel tests. The time histories developed from tension tests are then compared to examine the effect of loading rate. The investigations on blast panels also include a comparison with predictions to determine whether the latter can describe the global behaviour of the system. Lastly, the response of the energy-dissipating component assemblies is evaluated in full-scale field blast tests on cladding panels.

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 score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.231 · 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