Estimation of tensile strength and moduli of a tension-compression bi-modular rock

IF 2.5 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, CIVIL Geomechanics and Engineering Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.12989/GAE.2021.24.4.349
Jiong Wei, Jingren Zhou, Jae-Joon Song, Yulong Chen, P. Kulatilake
{"title":"Estimation of tensile strength and moduli of a tension-compression bi-modular rock","authors":"Jiong Wei, Jingren Zhou, Jae-Joon Song, Yulong Chen, P. Kulatilake","doi":"10.12989/GAE.2021.24.4.349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Brazilian test has been widely used to determine the indirect tensile strength of rock, concrete and other brittle materials. The basic assumption for the calculation formula of Brazilian tensile strength is that the elastic moduli of rock are the same both in tension and compression. However, the fact is that the elastic moduli in tension and compression of most rocks are different. Thus, the formula of Brazilian tensile strength under the assumption of isotropy is unreasonable. In the present study, we conducted Brazilian tests on flat disk-shaped rock specimens and attached strain gauges at the center of the disc to measure the strains of rock. A tension-compression bi-modular model is proposed to interpret the data of the Brazilian test. The relations between the principal strains, principal stresses and the ratio of the compressive modulus to tensile modulus at the disc center are established. Thus, the tensile and compressive moduli as well as the correct tensile strength can be estimated simultaneously by the new formulas. It is found that the tensile and compressive moduli obtained using these formulas were in well agreement with the values obtained from the direct tension and compression tests. The formulas deduced from the Brazilian test based on the assumption of isotropy overestimated the tensile strength and tensile modulus and underestimated the compressive modulus. This work provides a new methodology to estimate tensile strength and moduli of rock simultaneously considering tension-compression bi-modularity.","PeriodicalId":12602,"journal":{"name":"Geomechanics and Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geomechanics and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12989/GAE.2021.24.4.349","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Brazilian test has been widely used to determine the indirect tensile strength of rock, concrete and other brittle materials. The basic assumption for the calculation formula of Brazilian tensile strength is that the elastic moduli of rock are the same both in tension and compression. However, the fact is that the elastic moduli in tension and compression of most rocks are different. Thus, the formula of Brazilian tensile strength under the assumption of isotropy is unreasonable. In the present study, we conducted Brazilian tests on flat disk-shaped rock specimens and attached strain gauges at the center of the disc to measure the strains of rock. A tension-compression bi-modular model is proposed to interpret the data of the Brazilian test. The relations between the principal strains, principal stresses and the ratio of the compressive modulus to tensile modulus at the disc center are established. Thus, the tensile and compressive moduli as well as the correct tensile strength can be estimated simultaneously by the new formulas. It is found that the tensile and compressive moduli obtained using these formulas were in well agreement with the values obtained from the direct tension and compression tests. The formulas deduced from the Brazilian test based on the assumption of isotropy overestimated the tensile strength and tensile modulus and underestimated the compressive modulus. This work provides a new methodology to estimate tensile strength and moduli of rock simultaneously considering tension-compression bi-modularity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
拉压双模岩石抗拉强度和模量的估计
巴西试验已被广泛用于确定岩石、混凝土和其他脆性材料的间接抗拉强度。巴西抗拉强度计算公式的基本假设是岩石在拉压作用下的弹性模量相同。然而,事实是,大多数岩石的拉伸和压缩弹性模量是不同的。因此,各向同性假设下的巴西抗拉强度公式是不合理的。在本研究中,我们对扁平的圆盘状岩石试样进行了巴西试验,并在圆盘中心附加应变片来测量岩石的应变。提出了一种拉压双模模型来解释巴西试验的数据。建立了圆盘中心主应变、主应力与压缩模量与拉伸模量之比之间的关系。因此,新公式可以同时估计出抗拉模量和抗压模量以及正确的抗拉强度。用这些公式计算得到的拉伸模量和压缩模量与直接拉伸和压缩试验结果吻合较好。基于各向同性假设的巴西试验推导出的公式高估了抗拉强度和抗拉模量,低估了抗压模量。该研究提供了一种考虑拉压双模性同时估计岩石抗拉强度和模量的新方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Geomechanics and Engineering
Geomechanics and Engineering ENGINEERING, CIVIL-ENGINEERING, GEOLOGICAL
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Geomechanics and Engineering aims at opening an easy access to the valuable source of information and providing an excellent publication channel for the global community of researchers in the geomechanics and its applications. Typical subjects covered by the journal include: - Analytical, computational, and experimental multiscale and interaction mechanics- Computational and Theoretical Geomechnics- Foundations- Tunneling- Earth Structures- Site Characterization- Soil-Structure Interactions
期刊最新文献
An analytical approach to estimate the mechanical state of roof strata in underground longwall mining Investigating of free vibration behavior of bidirectional FG beams resting on variable elastic foundation Evaluation of grout penetration in single rock fracture using electrical resistivity Study on lateral behavior of digging well foundation with consideration of soil-foundation interaction A novel preloading method for foundation underpinning for the remodeling of an existing building
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1