4.6 Article

Experimental study on energy dissipation of fragments during rockburst

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10064-019-01463-9

关键词

Rockburst; Loading rate; Fragments; Energy dissipation; True-triaxial test; Granite

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51869003]
  2. Guangxi Natural Science Foundation [2016GXNSFGA380008]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering [SKLGP2017K022]
  4. Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences [Z016009]
  5. Study Abroad Program for Excellent Ph.D. Students of Guangxi University
  6. Innovation Project of Guangxi Graduate Education [YCBZ2018024]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, rectangular prismatic coarse-grain granites were analyzed through an application of a modified true-triaxial rockburst testing system. Various loading rates were considered in a process in which one face was kept free and loading conducted on the other five faces. Using a proposed surface energy per unit area measurement method, the energy dissipation due to the formation of rock fragments during the rockburst process was quantitatively analyzed. The experimental results show that rockburst occurrence depends on several conditions, including - specifically the tangential loading rate exceeding a certain threshold, the presence of considerable amounts of stored strain energy, the dissipation of energy through rock splitting on the free face, and the shear failure in the potential rockburst pit. With increases in the loading rate from 0.5 to 4.0 MPa/s, the fragmentation and energy dissipation of fragments decline linearly. Lamellar coarse fragments are found to be primarily induced by tension failure from the rockburst pit surface. Blocky medium, fine fragments and white powdery tiny particles are mainly induced by shear failure from the rockburst pit interior. Under various loading rates, the dissipated energy of fragments induced by shear is more than 90% of the total dissipated energy.

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

4.6
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