Dynamic Mechanical Behavior of Rock Materials

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Civil Engineering, Islamic Azad University-Electronic Branch, Tehran, Iran.

2 Department of Civil Engineering, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.

3 Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, Aburaihan Campus, University of Tehran, Pakdasht, Tehran, Iran.

10.15412/J.JCEMA.12010202

Abstract

Dynamic rock mechanics investigates the mechanical behavior of rock under dynamic loading conditions and change in mechanical properties of the rock. Loading techniques were almost used for both intermediate and high strain rate tests. In this work, dynamic tests and dynamic mechanical behavior of rock materials were studied. Dynamic tests were discussed to predict the stress-strain behavior. Different dynamic mechanical properties of rock materials including uniaxial and triaxial compressive strength, tensile strength, shear strength and fracture toughness were summarized. The effect of pressure, temperature and water saturation as well as microstructure, size and shape of rock on the mechanical properties of rock materials was considered.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Field JE, Walley S, Proud W, Goldrein H, Siviour C. Review of experimental techniques for high rate deformation and shock studies. International journal of impact engineering. 2004;30(7):725-75.
2. Nemat-Nasser S. High strain rate tension and compression tests. ASM hand book. 2000;8:427-8.
3. Walley S. Historical review of high strain rate and shock properties of ceramics relevant to their application in armour. Advances in Applied Ceramics. 2010;109(8):446-66.
4. Zhou Y, Zhao J. Advances in rock dynamics and applications: CRC Press; 2011.
5. Sharpe WN. Springer handbook of experimental solid mechanics: Springer Science & Business Media; 2008.
6. Toutlemonde F, Gary G. Dynamic behavior of concrete: experimental aspects. Dynamic behavior of concrete and seismic engineering. 2009:1-54.
7. Zhang Q, Zhao J. A review of dynamic experimental techniques and mechanical behaviour of rock materials. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering. 2014;47(4):1411-78.
8. Zhao J, Zhou Y, Xia K. Advances in rock dynamics modelling, testing and engineering. Harmonising Rock Engineering and the Environment. 2011:147.
9. Zhao J, Zhou Y, Hefny A, Cai J, Chen S, Li H, et al. Rock dynamics research related to cavern development for ammunition storage. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology. 1999;14(4):513-26.
10. Xia K, editor Status of characterization of strength and fracture properties of rocks under dynamic loading. Rock fragmentation by blasting: proceedings of the 10th international symposium on rock fragmentation by blasting; 2012: CRC Press.
11. Subhash G, Maiti S, Geubelle PH, Ghosh D. Recent advances in dynamic indentation fracture, impact damage and fragmentation of ceramics. Journal of the American Ceramic Society. 2008;91(9):2777-91.
12. Malvar LJ, Ross CA. Review of strain rate effects for concrete in tension. Materials Journal. 1998;95(6):735-9.
13. Gama BA, Lopatnikov SL, Gillespie JW. Hopkinson bar experimental technique: a critical review. Applied mechanics reviews. 2004;57(4):223-50.
14. Kuhn H, Medlin D. ASM Handbook. Volume 8: Mechanical Testing and Evaluation. ASM International, Member/Customer Service Center, Materials Park, OH 44073-0002, USA, 2000 998. 2000.
15. Cadoni E. Dynamic characterization of orthogneiss rock subjected to intermediate and high strain rates in tension. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering. 2010;43(6):667-76.
16. Chen WW, Song B. Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) bar: design, testing and applications: Springer Science & Business Media; 2010.
17. Gray III GT. Classic split-Hopkinson pressure bar testing. ASM Handbook, Mechanical testing and evaluation. 2000;8:462-76.
18. Foster J. Comments on the validity of test conditions for Kolsky bar testing of elastic-brittle materials. Experimental mechanics. 2012;52(9):1559-63.
19. Hartley R, Cloete T, Nurick G. An experimental assessment of friction effects in the split Hopkinson pressure bar using the ring compression test. International Journal of Impact Engineering. 2007;34(10):1705-28.
20. Davies E, Hunter S. The dynamic compression testing of solids by the method of the split Hopkinson pressure bar. Journal of the Mechanics and
Physics of Solids. 1963;11(3):155-79.
21. Young C, Powell C, editors. Lateral inertia effects on rock failure in split-Hopkinson-bar experiments. 20th US Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS); 1979: American Rock Mechanics Association.
22. Hakalehto KO. A study of the dynamic behaviour of rock using the Hopkinson split bar method: University of Minnesota; 1967.
23. Perkins R, Green S, Friedman M, editors. Uniaxial stress behavior of porphyritic tonalite at strain rates to 103/second. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts; 1970: Elsevier.
24. Siviour C, Grantham S. High resolution optical measurements of specimen deformation in the split Hopkinson pressure bar. The Imaging Science Journal. 2009;57(6):333-43.
25. Gary G, Bailly P. Behaviour of quasi-brittle material at high strain rate.Experiment and modelling. European Journal of Mechanics-A/Solids. 1998;17(3):403-20.
26. Asprone D, Cadoni E, Prota A, Manfredi G. Dynamic behavior of a Mediterranean natural stone under tensile loading. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences. 2009;46(3):514-20.
27. Huang S, Xia K, Dai F. Establishment of a dynamic Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion for rocks. International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation. 2012;13(1):55-60.
28. Lu Y, Li Q. About the dynamic uniaxial tensile strength of concrete-like materials. International journal of impact engineering. 2011;38(4):171-80.
29. Gilat A, Cheng C-S. Torsional split Hopkinson bar tests at strain rates above 104s− 1. Experimental Mechanics. 2000;40(1):54-9.
30. Omidvar M, Iskander M, Bless S. Stress-strain behavior of sand at high strain rates. International journal of impact engineering. 2012;49:192-213.
31. Dai F, Xia K, Zheng H, Wang Y. Determination of dynamic rock mode-I fracture parameters using cracked chevron notched semi-circular bend specimen. Engineering fracture mechanics. 2011;78(15):2633-44.
32. Kawakita M, Kinoshita S. The dynamic fracture properties of rocks under confining pressure. Memoirs of the Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University. 1981;15(4):467-78.
33. Christensen R, Swanson S, Brown W. Split-Hopkinson-bar tests on rock under confining pressure. Experimental Mechanics. 1972;12(11):508-13.
34. Frew DJ, Akers SA, Chen W, Green ML. Development of a dynamic triaxial Kolsky bar. Measurement Science and Technology. 2010;21(10):105704.
35. Carmona S, Aguado A. New model for the indirect determination of the tensile stress–strain curve of concrete by means of the Brazilian test.
Materials and structures. 2012;45(10):1473-85.
Journal of Civil Engineering and Materials Application
Volume 1, Issue 2
September 2017
Pages 39-44

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 26 April 2017
  • Revise Date: 11 June 2017
  • Accept Date: 10 October 2017

Share

How to cite

Statistics