The Dynamic Behaviour of the Floor of a Surrogate Vehicle Under Explosive Blast Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improvised Explosive Devices have been the signature weapon in the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. High-rate axial forces exerted by the vehicle floor to the lower limbs of occupants have been the cause of severe injuries. In order to gain a greater understanding of the mechanisms of these injuries so that countermeasures can be developed, one is required to know how the vehicle floor behaves; therefore, the purpose of this study was to characterise the behaviour of a vehicle floor surrogate to a range of explosive loads. Explosive loads between 1 and 6 kg TNT were detonated beneath a vehicle floor surrogate resulting in peak floor velocities between 5.8 and 80.5 m/s reached in a time between 0.10 and 3.13 ms. The data can now be used to (a) test numerical models of blast and its interaction with structures for validity, and (b) ensure that the velocity profiles replicated in a laboratory environment to understand human tolerance to injury are relevant to the blast process. These will ensure that preventive measures are developed based on realistic physical and numerical models of injury.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".