4.5 Article

Cracking process of a granite specimen that contains multiple pre-existing holes under uniaxial compression

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ffe.12990

关键词

crack coalescence; granite; multiple holes; PFC3D; strength

资金

  1. National Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talents [BX20180359]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51734009]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M642360]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pre-existence of openings, which play an important role in the mechanical properties and cracking behaviours of rock, is prevalent in rock mass. The interaction among pre-existing openings (or holes) complicates the instability problems when rock contains multiple holes. Studying the strength failure behaviour of rock that contains multiple pre-existing holes contributes to the fundamental knowledge of the excavation and stability of underground rock engineering. In this study, first, a series of uniaxial compression tests were performed on granite specimens that contain multiple small holes to investigate the effect of the geometry of pre-existing holes on the strength and fracture behaviours of rock. The crack initiation, propagation and coalescence process, and acoustic emission (AE) characteristics were investigated using photographic and AE monitoring. Three failure modes were identified, ie, splitting failure, stepped path failure, and planar failure modes. Second, a set of micromechanical parameters in the PFC3D model were calibrated by comparison with the experimental results of an intact granite specimen. The numerically simulated peak strength, peak strain, and failure mode of preholed specimens were consistent with the experimental results. In accordance with the numerical results, the failure modes of the preholed specimens were dependent on the bridge angle and number of holes. Last, the internal fracture characteristics of numerical specimens were revealed by analyzing the horizontal and vertical cross sections at different positions.

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