Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering

, Volume 51, Issue 12, pp 3845–3852 | Cite as

Development of a Hollow Cylinder Torsional Apparatus for Rock

  • Hui Zhou
  • Yue Jiang
  • Jingjing Lu
  • Yang Gao
  • Jun Chen
Technical Note


The mechanical characteristics of rock subjected to the changing of the principal stress magnitude and orientation caused by excavation are significant for the construction of larger and deeper underground engineering. However, there have been few experimental studies on rock mechanical characteristics under the changing principal stress orientation due to the lack of the test device. Hence, in this paper, a new rock mechanical experimental technique and device was developed to conduct the complex stress path with coupling variations of stress magnitude and orientation. The theoretical principle and apparatus composition were introduced in this work, and two test cases were conducted to verify its feasibility and reliability. This study has important practical significance and scientific value for promoting the technical level of rock mechanical test and enriching the theoretical frame of rock mechanics.


Rock mechanical test Hollow cylinder torsional apparatus Complex stress path Principal stress axis rotation 

List of Symbols


Axial force


Inner confining pressure


Outer confining pressure



\({\sigma _{\text{z}}}\)

Axial stress

\({\sigma _{\text{r}}}\)

Radial stress

\({\sigma _\theta }\)

Circumferential stress

\({\tau _{{\text{z}}\theta }}\)

Shear stress

\({\sigma _1}\)

Maximum principal stress

\({\sigma _2}\)

Intermediate principal stress

\({\sigma _3}\)

Minimum principal stress


Rotation angle of the \({\sigma _1}\) and \({\sigma _3}\) caused by Mt


Length of the torque arm


Diameter of the axial loading piston


Radius of the piston in the torque hydraulic jack



The authors would like to thank the financial supports provided by China National Key Basic Research Program under Grant no. 2014CB046902, the Scientific Instrument Developing Project of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (YZ201553), National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (51427803, 51404240, 51709257, and 51704097) and Youth Innovation Promotion Association CAS. Besides, the authors are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our manuscript and their many helpful comments.


  1. Abel JF, Lee FT (1973) Stress changes ahead of an advancing tunnel. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 10(6):673–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abuov MG, Aitaliev SM, Ermekov TM, Zhanbyrbaev NB, Kayupov MA (1988) Studies of the effect of dynamic processes during explosive break-out upon the roof of mining excavations. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 24(6):581–590Google Scholar
  3. Amann F, Button EA, Evans KF, Gischig VS, Blumel M (2011) Experimental study of the brittle behaviour of clay shale in rapid unconfined compression. Rock Mech Rock Eng 44(4):415–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amann F, Kaiser PK, Button EA (2012) Experimental study of brittle behaviour of clay shale in rapid triaxial compression. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45(1):21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bieniawski ZT (1967) Mechanism of brittle fracture of rock, parts I, II, and III. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 4(4):395–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bobet A (2010) Characteristic curves for deep circular tunnels in poroplastic rock. Rock Mech Rock Eng 43(2):185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diederichs MS, Kaiser PK, Eberhardt E (2004) Damage initiation and propagation in hard rock during tunnelling and the influence of near-face stress rotation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41(5):785–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eberhardt E (2001) Numerical modeling of three-dimensional stress rotation ahead of an advancing tunnel face. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38(4):499–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eberhardt E, Stead D, Stimpson B (1999) Quantifying progressive pre-peak brittle fracture damage in rock during uniaxial compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 36(3):361–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ganne P, Vervoort A (2006) Characterisation of tensile damage in rock samples induced by different stress paths. Pure Appl Geophys 163(10):2153–2170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Germanovich LN, Dyskin AV (2000) Fracture mechanisms and instability of openings in compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 37(1–2):263–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hight DW, Gens A, Symes MJ (1983) The development of a new hollow cylinder apparatus for investigating the effects of principal stress rotation in soils. Geotenique 33(4):355–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ishihara K, Towhata I (1983) Sand response to cyclic rotation of principal stress directions as induced by wave loads. Soils Founds 23(4):11–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaiser PK, Yazici S, Maloney S (2001) Mining induced stress change and consequences of stress path on excavation stability—a case study. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38(2):167–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kielbassa S, Duddeck H (1991) Stress-strain fields at the tunnelling face three-dimensional analysis for two-dimensional technical approach. Rock Mech Rock Eng 24(3):115–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee DH, Juang CH, Chen J, Lin H, Shieh W (1999) Stress paths and mechanical behavior of a sandstone in hollow cylinder tests. Int J Rock Mech Min 36(7):857–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee DH, Juang CH, Lin HM (2002) Yield surface of Mu-San sandstone by hollow cylinder tests. Rock Mech Rock Eng 35(3):205–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Kelly BC, Naughton PJ (2005) Development of a new hollow cylinder apparatus for stress path measurements over a wide strain range. Geotech Test J 28(4):345–354Google Scholar
  19. Read RS, Chandler NA, Dzik EJ (1998) In situ strength criteria for tunnel design in highly-stressed rock masses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 35(3):261–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sayao A, Vaid YP (1991) A critical assessment of stress non-uniformities in hollow cylinder test specimens. Soils Found 3(1):60–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Vaid YP, Sayao A, Hou EH, Negussey D (1990) Generalized stress path dependent soil behaviour with a new hollow cylinder torsional apparatus. Can Geotech 27(5):601–66l6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Yong S, Kaiser PK, Loew S (2013) Rock mass response ahead of an advancing face in faulted shale. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 60(8):301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zhang CQ, Feng XT, Zhou H, Qiu SL, Wu WP (2012) A top pilot tunnel preconditioning method for the prevention of extremely intense rockbursts in deep tunnels excavated by TBMs. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45(3):289–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hui Zhou
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yue Jiang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jingjing Lu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yang Gao
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jun Chen
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Institute of Rock and Soil MechanicsChinese Academy of SciencesWuhanChina
  2. 2.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations