Advertisement

Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 893–908 | Cite as

Experimental and Numerical Studies on Development of Fracture Process Zone (FPZ) in Rocks under Cyclic and Static Loadings

  • M. Ghamgosar
  • N. Erarslan
Original Paper

Abstract

The development of fracture process zones (FPZ) in the Cracked Chevron Notched Brazilian Disc (CCNBD) monsonite and Brisbane tuff specimens was investigated to evaluate the mechanical behaviour of brittle rocks under static and various cyclic loadings. An FPZ is a region that involves different types of damage around the pre-existing and/or stress-induced crack tips in engineering materials. This highly damaged area includes micro- and meso-cracks, which emerge prior to the main fracture growth or extension and ultimately coalescence to macrofractures, leading to the failure. The experiments and numerical simulations were designed for this study to investigate the following features of FPZ in rocks: (1) ligament connections and (2) microcracking and its coalescence in FPZ. A Computed Tomography (CT) scan technique was also used to investigate the FPZ behaviour in selected rock specimens. The CT scan results showed that the fracturing velocity is entirely dependent on the appropriate amount of fracture energy absorbed in rock specimens due to the change of frequency and amplitudes of the dynamic loading. Extended Finite Element Method (XFEM) was used to compute the displacements, tensile stress distribution and plastic energy dissipation around the propagating crack tip in FPZ. One of the most important observations, the shape of FPZ and its extension around the crack tip, was made using numerical and experimental results, which supported the CT scan results. When the static rupture and the cyclic rupture were compared, the main differences are twofold: (1) the number of fragments produced is much greater under cyclic loading than under static loading, and (2) intergranular cracks are formed due to particle breakage under cyclic loading compared with smooth and bright cracks along cleavage planes under static loading.

Keywords

FPZ Subcritical crack propagation Rock fracture toughness CCNBD CT scan SEM 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Newcrest Mining is acknowledged for funding the Scholarship of the first author during the course of the research on which this paper was in part based, and for providing monsonite core samples from Cadia Valley, which were used for testing purposes. Golders Associates are acknowledged for providing access to Brisbane tuff core samples from the CLEM7 tunnel project in Brisbane, which were used for testing purposes. The author would like to express his sincere thanks to Professor Arcady Dyskin and Professor Eduardo A. G. Marquesn for their kind help and technical advice.

References

  1. Anderson TL (2005) Fracture mechanics: fundamentals and applications, CRC pressGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson BK (1984) Subcritical crack growth in geological materials. J Geophys Res Solid Earth (1978–2012) 89:4077–4114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson BK, Avdis V (1980) Fracture mechanics parameters of some rock-forming minerals determined using an indentation technique. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 17:383–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Costin L, Holcomb D (1981) Time-dependent failure of rock under cyclic loading. Tectonophysics 79:279–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eberhardt E, Stead D, Stimpson B, Read R (1998) Identifying crack initiation and propagation thresholds in brittle rock. Can Geotech J 35:222–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Erarslan N, Williams D (2012) Mechanism of rock fatigue damage in terms of fracturing modes. Int J Fatigue 43:76–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Evans A (1972) A method for evaluating the time-dependent failure characteristics of brittle materials—and its application to polycrystalline alumina. J Mater Sci 7:1137–1146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Evans A (1974) Slow crack growth in brittle materials under dynamic loading conditions. Int J Fract 10:251–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Evans A, Fuller E (1974) Crack propagation in ceramic materials under cyclic loading conditions. Metall Trans 5:27–33Google Scholar
  10. Fairhurst C (1971) Fundamental considerations relating to the strength of rock. In: Colloquium on rock fracture, Ruhr University, Bochum, Germany, Veröff. Inst. Bodenmechanik und Felsmechanik (Karlsruhe), vol 55, pp 1–56Google Scholar
  11. Fowell R, Xu C (1994) The use of the cracked Brazilian disc geometry for rock fracture investigations. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts. Elsevier, pp 571–579Google Scholar
  12. Fowell RJ, Hudson JA, Xu C, Chen JF, Zhao X (1995) Suggested method for determining mode I fracture toughness using cracked chevron notched Brazilian disc (CCNBD) specimens. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 32(1):57–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Franklin JA, Zongqi S, Atkinson BK, Meredith PC, Rummel F, Mueller W, Nishimatsu Y, Takahahsi H, Costin LS, Ingraffea AR, Bobrov GF (1988) Suggested methods for determining the fracture toughness of rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 25:71–96Google Scholar
  14. Ghamgosar M, Erarslan N, Williams D (2014) Assessment of rock mechanics parameters for improved waste disposal management and containment. The 7th International Congress on Environmental Geotechnics MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  15. Ghamgosar M, Erarslan N, Williams D (2014) In Press. Multiple factorial analysis of rock fragmentation under various cyclic loading conditions. ISRM 13th International Congress on Rock MechanicsGoogle Scholar
  16. Giner E, Sukumar N, Tarancón JE, Fuenmayor FJ (2009) An Abaqus implementation of the extended finite element method. Eng Fract Mech 76:347–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Griffith A (1920) VI The Phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Phil Trans Roy Soc (Lon) A 221:163–198Google Scholar
  18. Gross D, Seelig T (2011) Fracture mechanics: with an introduction to micromechanics, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  19. Hillerborg A, Modéer M, Petersson PE (1976) Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem Concr Res 6:773–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horii H, Nemat-Nasser S (1985) Compression-induced microcrack growth in brittle solids: axial splitting and shear failure. J Geophys Res Solid Earth (1978–2012) 90:3105–3125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Horii H, Nemat-Nasser S (1986) Brittle failure in compression: splitting, faulting and brittle-ductile transition. Philosophical Transactions for the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, pp 337–374Google Scholar
  22. Labuz J, Shah S, Dowding C (1987) The fracture process zone in granite: evidence and effect. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts. Elsevier, pp 235–246Google Scholar
  23. Maji A, Wang J (1992) Experimental study of fracture processes in rock. Rock Mech Rock Eng 25:25–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mindess S (1984) The effect of specimen size on the fracture energy of concrete. Cem Concr Res 14:431–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ouchterlony F (1980) Review of fracture toughness testing of rock. SveDeFo, Stiftelsen Svensk Detonikforskning, pp 145–159Google Scholar
  26. Schmidt RA (1980) A microcrack model and its significance to hydraulic fracturing and fracture toughness testing. The 21st US Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS). American Rock Mechanics AssociationGoogle Scholar
  27. Schmidt R, Lutz T (1979) K Ic and J Ic of Westerly granite—effects of thickness and in-plane dimensions. Fract Mech Appl Brittle Mater ASTM STP 678:166–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sih GC (1977) Mechanics of Fracture: elastodynamic crack problems, vol 4. Noordhoff International Publishing, Leyden, pp 50–60Google Scholar
  29. Spyropoulos C, Griffith WJ, Scholz CH, Shaw BE (1999) Experimental evidence for different strain regimes of crack populations in a clay model. Geophys Res Lett 26:1081–1084CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tang C-A, Yang Y-F (2012) Crack branching mechanism of rock-like quasi-brittle materials under dynamic stress. J Cent South Univ 19:3273–3284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wang QZ, Jia XM, Kou SQ, Zhang ZX, Lindqvist PA (2004) The flattened Brazilian disc specimen used for testing elastic modulus, tensile strength and fracture toughness of brittle rocks; analytical and numerical results. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci (1997) 41:245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Whittaker BN, Singh RN, Sun G (1992) Rock fracture mechanics: principles, design, and applications, vol 71. Elsevier, Amsterdam, New York, pp 81–110Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of Queensland, School of Civil EngineeringBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Adana Science and Technology University, Mining and Mineral Processing EngineeringAdanaTurkey

Personalised recommendations