4.7 Article

A breakage matrix methodology to predict particle size evolution of calcareous sands

期刊

POWDER TECHNOLOGY
卷 407, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2022.117626

关键词

Particle breakage; Dyed calcareous sand; One-dimensional compression; Particle size distribution; Breakage matrix

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [52008402]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province [2021JJ40758]
  3. Central South University autonomous exploration project [2022ZZTS0795]
  4. Huxiang high-level talent gathering project innovation team project [2019RS1008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a breakage matrix approach to investigate the evolution of particle size distribution in granular materials. It is found that the breakage-induced particle size distribution tends to be fractally distributed and the degree of particle breakage is linearly related to the input work.
Breakage-induced evolution of particle size distribution (PSD) will greatly affect the mechanical behavior of granular materials, and has been an important concern in geotechnical engineering. This paper presents a breakage matrix approach to investigate the evolution of PSD with detailed breakage information of each single-sized particles via conducting one-dimensional compression tests on dyed calcareous sands with different initial conditions. The breakage of each single-sized particles of soil samples with multi-sized particles under different initial conditions was analysed by the PCAS image recognition technologies. It has been found that the breakage-induced PSD of each single-sized particles of the soil samples tends to be fractally distributed, regardless of their initial PSDs. Furthermore, the degree of particle breakage of each single-sized particles is linearly related with the input work per unit volume. Finally, the proposed model establishes the breakage matrices of both uniform and gap-graded calcareous sands, which demonstrates its satisfactory performance.

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

4.7
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