## 4 Analysis of Calculation Results
### Application and Validation of Analytical Methods  
Five different sets of existing experiments were analyzed and verified by the analytical methods detailed above.  
Experiment 1: In reference to the internal explosion shrinkage ratio experiments carried out by [PERSON] [6], the test device is a square-shaped single box structure with extended boundaries. The square box structure had side lengths of 300 mm, 450 mm and 600 mm, and plate thickness of 2 mm, 3 mm, and 4 mm, respectively. The top plate in the middle of the circular hole was used to place the TNT explosive in the center of the box.  
Experiment 2: A series of experiments on the deformation response of box structures subjected to internal explosions were carried out in reference [29] with a box structure size of 200 mm \(\times\) 200 mm \(\times\) 200 mm the plate thickness of 3 mm, 4 mm, and 5 mm, respectively. The side plate is welded to the bottom plate by fillet welding and bolted to the top plate. The PE4 explosive is placed in the center of the box, and the burst distance for each plate is 100 mm.  
Experiment 3: Reference [16] carried out a series of internal explosion experiments. A rectangular box structure (explosive cylinder) using clamps of different thickness with dimensions of 800 mm \(\times\) 800 mm sheet metal specimens were assembled with 36 M16 bolts of steel plate on the specimen clamping restraint, which will have different yields of TNT cylindrical charge that are placed in the center of the box and detonated.  
Experiment 4: The size of the 200 mm \(\times\) 200 mm Q235 metal plate is sandwiched between two 20 mm-thick steel plates, and the measurement of its deformation under different equivalent explosive loads is observed [24].  
Experiment 5: The experimental setup [30; 31] is placed in a water tank of 15 m \(\times\) 12 m \(\times\) 10 m. The exposed area of the metal plate of HS steel and mild steel of two materials are measured at 300 mm \(\times\) 250 mm with a thickness of 2 mm. The PEK I explosives of different equivalents are placed in the channel section of the box chamber device.  
The experimental parameters are substituted into Equation (6) to obtain the dimensionless number \(D_{in}^{*}\), and when \(D_{in}^{*}\) < 0.37, the dimensionless deflection of the center deformation of each wall is calculated using Equation (10); when \(D_{in}^{*}\) > 0.37, it is calculated using equation (11). The material parameters, experimental working conditions, and calculation results and errors of the control experiment are shown in Table 8.  
Figure 12: The variation of deflection of anisotropic box structure with \(D_{in}^{*}\).  
In these experiments, the experimental conditions, the chamber structure size and material, the box welding or fixing method, the type of explosives, and the height of the burst are different. The errors of the dimensionless deflection calculated with this analysis method are within 26%, which indicates that the method is effective. The error may exist because it does not take into account the height of the burst and box welding method, and these conditions have a great impact on the degree of deformation of the wall plate. In addition, as shown in Experiment 1, the scaling law of \"imperfect similarity\" [6] will also have an impact on the wall deformation results.