Loading…
Damage evolution and strength attenuation characteristics of carbonaceous slate under low velocity dynamic impact
Rock is subjected to impact loading during tunnel and subsurface engineering. For understanding the damage evolution of rock under dynamic impact, mechanical research was performed on the carboniferous slate surrounding the Muzhailing tunnel under different influencing factors based on the Split Hop...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of mountain science 2023, Vol.20 (1), p.256-272 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Rock is subjected to impact loading during tunnel and subsurface engineering. For understanding the damage evolution of rock under dynamic impact, mechanical research was performed on the carboniferous slate surrounding the Muzhailing tunnel under different influencing factors based on the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) experimental system. The results show that: (1) carbonaceous slate exhibits a continuous failure process, which develops more rapidly in the presence of joints; simultaneously, a negative correlation was found between the joint density and the dynamic strength of rock; (2) under different impact velocities and wavelengths, the method of using incident energy to represent the dynamic damage threshold of carbonaceous slate under high
in situ
stress was proposed based on the kinetic energy theorem, and the damage threshold of carbonaceous slate was calculated to be 53 J; (3) impact times is the most critical core variable and negatively correlated with peak strength and positively correlated with strain rate, maximum strain, and cumulative damage. The carbonaceous slate is subjected to repeated load impacts, which is followed by accumulation of damage, continuous strength attenuation, and internal dominant fracture expansion. In particular, when the samples break, there is only one main rupture surface, which is the most significant difference from the single impact rupture form. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1672-6316 1993-0321 1008-2786 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s11629-022-7392-8 |