4.5 Article

Investigation of proper specimen geometry for mode I fracture toughness testing with flattened Brazilian disc method

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FRACTURE
卷 169, 期 1, 页码 61-75

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10704-011-9584-z

关键词

Fracture mechanics; Finite element analysis; Stress intensity factor; Toughness testing; Rock

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Investigation of geometrical parameters for flattened Brazilian disc method is important, since this is a simple and attractive method for mode I fracture toughness testing on rock cores. Evaluating numerical modeling results, a parametric equation in terms of principal stresses at the center of the disc and the loading angle of the flattened end was developed. An equation was proposed for maximum stress intensity factors at critical crack lengths around stable to unstable crack propagation. Comparing fracture toughness results of flattened Brazilian disc method to the results of the suggested cracked chevron notched Brazilian disc method, geometrical parameters for flattened Brazilian discs were investigated. Diameter, loading angle of flattened ends, and thickness of andesite rock core specimens were changed to obtain comparable results to the suggested method. The closest results to the suggested method were obtained by 54 mm diameter discs with loading angles larger than 32A degrees, and thicknesses between 19 and 34 mm. Results were confirmed by the flattened Brazilian disc tests on a marble rock. In flattened Brazilian disc tests with smaller loading angles and larger diameters, larger fracture toughness values than the results of the suggested cracked chevron notched were obtained. However, excluding tests with large loading angles over 27A degrees; specimen size was less effective on the results of these tests. Critical crack length parameters computed from modeling and experiments were close to each other for the flattened Brazilian disc specimens with smaller loading angles around 20A degrees and thickness/radius ratio equal or less than 1.1.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据