4.7 Article

Elastic modulus of claystone evaluated by nano-/micro-indentation tests and meso-compression tests

Journal

Publisher

SCIENCE PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrmge.2016.02.002

Keywords

Claystone Elastic modulus; Scaling effect; Nano- and micro-indentation; Meso-compression tests; Multi-scale mechanical tests

Funding

  1. GNR NEEDS-MIPOR

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Toarcian claystone such as that of the Callovo-Oxfordian is a qualified multiphase material. The claystone samples tested in this study are composed of four main mineral phases: silicates (clay minerals, quartz, feldspars, micas) (approximate to 86%), sulphides (pyrite) (approximate to 3%), carbonates (calcite, dolomite) (approximate to 10%) and organic kerogen (approximate to 1%). Three sets ofmeasurements of themodulus of deformabilitywere compared as determined in (i) nanoindentation tests with a constant indentation depth of 2 mu m, (ii) micro-indentation tests with a constant indentation depth of 20 mu m, and (iii) meso-compression testswith a constant displacement of 200 mu m. These three experimental methods have already been validated in earlier studies. Themain objective of this study is to demonstrate the influence of the scaling effect on the modulus of deformability of the material. Different frequency distributions of the modulus of deformability were obtained at the different sample scales: (i) in nano-indentation tests, the distribution was spread between 15 GPa and 90 GPa and contained one peak at 34 GPa and another at 51 GPa; (ii) in the micro-indentation tests, the distributionwas spread between 25 GPa and 60 GPa and displayed peaks at 26 GPa and 37 GPa; and (iii) in the meso-compression tests, a narrow frequency distributionwas obtained, ranging from25 GPa to 50 GPa and with a maximumat around 35 GPa. (C) 2017 Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Production and hosting by Elsevier B. V.

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