You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Diagnostic techniques in deflagration and detonation studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chemistry Central Journal, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13065-015-0128-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William G. Proud, David M. Williamson, John E. Field, Stephen M. Walley |
| Abstract |
Advances in experimental, high-speed techniques can be used to explore the processes occurring within energetic materials. This review describes techniques used to study a wide range of processes: hot-spot formation, ignition thresholds, deflagration, sensitivity and finally the detonation process. As this is a wide field the focus will be on small-scale experiments and quantitative studies. It is important that such studies are linked to predictive models, which inform the experimental design process. The stimuli range includes, thermal ignition, drop-weight, Hopkinson Bar and Plate Impact studies. Studies made with inert simulants are also included as these are important in differentiating between reactive response and purely mechanical behaviour. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Germany | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 32% |
| Researcher | 5 | 23% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 5 | 23% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 23% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 18% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,729,864
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Chemistry Central Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,019
of 287,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chemistry Central Journal
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,562 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.