PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 9, 2026Journal of Engineering Mechanics0 citations

BLAST-NN: Physics-Informed Deep Learning for Blast Wave Propagation

View Full Paper
YLYang LiPDPeng DengCZChao Zhang

Key Points

  • To develop a physics-informed neural network that accurately resolves shock front characteristics in blast wave propagation.
  • Proposed BLAST-NN algorithm integrating artificial viscosity and Rankine-Hugoniot relation.
  • Validated through three test cases: shock tube problem, planar and spherical blast propagation.
  • Conducted hyperparameter analysis to evaluate its effects on prediction accuracy.
  • BLAST-NN achieves mean R2 values of 0.97 for shock tube, 0.98 for planar, and 0.92 for spherical cases.
  • Demonstrates agreement with finite difference method solutions in all test cases.
  • Highlights significant influence of network architecture and loss function on prediction accuracy.

Abstract

Blast waves exhibit discontinuous rises in pressure, density, and velocity at the shock front. This characteristic leads to numerical solutions of partial differential equations displaying unphysical oscillations at the shock front, presenting a significant challenge for accurate shock front resolution. To address this challenge, a novel physics-informed neural network (NN) algorithm named BLAST-NN is proposed. This algorithm captures the shock front in blast wave propagation by integrating artificial viscosity and the Rankine–Hugoniot relation. Artificial viscosity is employed to avoid the unphysical oscillations at the shock front. The Rankine–Hugoniot relation is applied to ensure the physical consistency of the shock front. The proposed algorithm is validated through three test cases, including the shock tube problem, planar blast wave propagation, and spherical blast wave propagation. The results indicate that BLAST-NN demonstrates agreement with finite difference method solutions for all cases, achieving mean R2 values of 0.97, 0.98, and 0.92, respectively. Additionally, hyperparameter analysis demonstrates that the network architecture, loss function weights, and the shock front detection interval critically influence the algorithm’s prediction accuracy.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Li et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fed17eb9154b0b82878d44https://doi.org/10.1061/jenmdt.emeng-8750
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Gradient-annihilated PINNs for solving Riemann problems: Application to relativistic hydrodynamics2024 · 38 citations
  2. 2A coordinate transformation-based physics-informed neural networks for hyperbolic conservation laws2025 · 11 citations
  3. 3Solution of two‐dimensional Riemann problems for gas dynamics without Riemann problem solvers2002 · 393 citations
  4. 4A Method for the Numerical Calculation of Hydrodynamic Shocks1950 · 2,166 citations
  5. 5High Resolution Schemes for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws1997 · 278 citations