4.7 Article

The Brazilian Disc Test for Rock Mechanics Applications: Review and New Insights

Journal

ROCK MECHANICS AND ROCK ENGINEERING
Volume 46, Issue 2, Pages 269-287

Publisher

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00603-012-0257-7

Keywords

Brazilian test; Tensile strength; Tensile strain; Crack initiation; Rock mechanics; Review

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11102239]
  2. 973 Program [2010CB732004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The development of the Brazilian disc test for determining indirect tensile strength and its applications in rock mechanics are reviewed herein. Based on the history of research on the Brazilian test by analytical, experimental, and numerical approaches, three research stages can be identified. Most of the early studies focused on the tensile stress distribution in Brazilian disc specimens, while ignoring the tensile strain distribution. The observation of different crack initiation positions in the Brazilian disc has drawn a lot of research interest from the rock mechanics community. A simple extension strain criterion was put forward by Stacey (Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 18(6):469-474, 1981) to account for extension crack initiation and propagation in rocks, although this is not widely used. In the present study, a linear elastic numerical model is constructed to study crack initiation in a 50-mm-diameter Brazilian disc using FLAC(3D). The maximum tensile stress and the maximum tensile strain are both found to occur about 5 mm away from the two loading points along the compressed diameter of the disc, instead of at the center of the disc surface. Therefore, the crack initiation point of the Brazilian test for rocks may be located near the loading point when the tensile strain meets the maximum extension strain criterion, but at the surface center when the tensile stress meets the maximum tensile strength criterion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available