MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416070968 · doi:10.1063/5.0295470

Trajectory solution to the reflected blast wave problem

2025· article· en· W4416070968 on OpenAlexaff
Monjee K. Almustafa, Moncef L. Nehdi

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Response to Dynamic Loads
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlast waveOverpressureTrajectoryCollisionShock waveWave propagationScalingScope (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With an unprecedented rise in explosions occurring in urban regions, it has become imperative to revisit the classical reflected blast wave problem, characterizing its backwards propagation into disturbed medium after impinging on surfaces, such as buildings. When encountering obstacles in its path, blast waves reflect backwards and become defined by more intricate decay characteristics than its unobstructed counterpart and can only be obtained via complex numerical simulation. Attempts to produce an analytical solution to post-reflection blast waves have been limited in scope and unapplicable to broader ranges of explosion scenarios. Here, we introduce a numerical data-driven, closed-form solution, R(t,θ,Z), to map the three-dimensional trajectory and decay behavior of reflected blast waves. We demonstrate the solution's accuracy within, and beyond, scaled blast strengths of 0.5≤Z≤4.0 m/kg1/3 and its adaption to arbitrary explosion sizes through Cranz–Hopkinson blast scaling law. In addition, a closed-form solution on directional post-reflected overpressure is formulated. We discuss how the developed models advance fields of blast wave collision theory, urban blast pattern formation, and real-time identification of repeated blast exposure to personnel in urban blast events. Our work provides a foundation for understanding asymmetric collisions of blast wave and pioneers a generalized fast-running solution for post-reflection explosions, enhancing military operational safety and first aid in blast trauma scenarios previously unachievable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicStructural Response to Dynamic LoadsFrench-language works237,207