Advertisement

Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering

, Volume 52, Issue 10, pp 3659–3674 | Cite as

Numerical Investigation of Radial Strain-Controlled Uniaxial Compression Test of Äspö Diorite in Grain-Based Model

  • Jaehong Chung
  • Hyeji Lee
  • Sangki KwonEmail author
Original Paper
  • 309 Downloads

Abstract

A complete stress–strain curve is difficult to obtain for Class II rocks because of the abrupt failure after peak stress. Although the servo-controlled loading system has been used successfully in laboratory tests to analyze the failure of Class II rocks, improved simulation techniques are still needed to control the failure of Class II rocks. In this study, the Class II behavior of Äspö diorite was reproduced explicitly using the GBM-UDEC model. The relative differentiations in all mechanical properties between the simulation and laboratory tests were within ± 5%, such as Young’s modulus, and slope of the post-peak stress–strain curve. Based on the stress and crack generation in UCS test simulation, the failure behavior of the Äspö diorite in the post-peak stress region could be classified into three stages: (V) unstable crack growth with decreasing stress, (VI) stable crack growth with increasing stress, (VII) unstable crack growth, and failure of the rock specimen with decreasing stress. Throughout the simulation, the microcrack investigation was conducted in the aspect of number, angle, relative strength of contacts, and location. In the pre-peak stress region, the cracks between 0° and 20° with respect to axial stress was dominant with over 62% of population among total cracks. Cracks were generated preferentially in relatively weak contacts. The ratio of brakeage in the weakest contact was 22%, while the average breakage value of the other stronger contacts was 16%. In the post-peak stress region, the number of cracks generated between 20° and 40° was approximately 1.4 times higher than those between 0° and 20° at Stages V and VII. There was a significant increase in the number of cracks in the strongest contacts when the model was at the beginning of Stage V and Stage VII. In Stage VII, microcracks were generated intensively in central column of the rock model. Moreover, crack coalescence was monitored in the inner column and rock spalling, complete detachment of block in rock specimen model, was observed at the lateral side of the rock model in Stage VII. In the energy calculation, 23% of the strain energy stored in the model was extracted immediately after peak stress to prevent the violent failure of the rock and most of the energy extracted resulted from grain blocks compared to contacts.

Keywords

Class II rocks Äspö diorite UCS test Numerical analysis GBM-UDEC 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We deeply appreciate the precious comments during the preparation of this manuscript from the late Professor John A. Hudson. This work was supported by the Korea Energy and Mineral Resources Engineering Program (KEMREP) grant funded by Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE); and Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2016R1D1A1B03933268).

References

  1. Amann F, Kaiser P, Button EA (2012) Experimental study of brittle behavior of clay shale in rapid triaxial compression. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45:21–33.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-011-0195-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson JC (2009) Rock mass response to coupled mechanical thermal loading. Äspö Pillar Stability Experiment, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  3. Bäckström A, Antikainen J, Backers T et al (2008) Numerical modelling of uniaxial compressive failure of granite with and without saline porewater. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 45:1126–1142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2007.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bass JD (1995) Elasticity of minerals, glasses, and melts. In: Ahrens TJ (ed) Mineral physics and crystallography: a handbook of physical constants. American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, pp 45–63Google Scholar
  5. Bieniawski ZT (1967) Mechanism of brittle fracture of rock; part I—theory of the fracture process. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 4:395–406.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(67)90030-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bieniawski ZT, Bernede MJ (1979) Suggested methods for determining the uniaxial compressive strength and deformability of rock materials. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 16:137–140.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(79)91450-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cai M (2010) Practical estimates of tensile strength and Hoek-Brown strength parameter miof brittle rocks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 43:167–184.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-009-0053-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eberhardt E, Stead D, Stimpson B, Read RS (1998) Identifying crack initiation and propagation thresholds in brittle rock. Can Geotech J 35:222–233.  https://doi.org/10.1139/t97-091 CrossRefGoogle 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 36:361–380.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-9062(99)00019-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farahmand K, Vazaios I, Diederichs MS, Vlachopoulos N (2018) Investigating the scale-dependency of the geometrical and mechanical properties of a moderately jointed rock using a synthetic rock mass (SRM) approach. Comput Geotech 95:162–179.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2017.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gao F, Stead D, Elmo D (2016) Numerical simulation of microstructure of brittle rock using a grain-breakable distinct element grain-based model. Comput Geotech 78:203–217.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2016.05.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hallbauer DK, Wagner H, Cook NGW (1973) Some observations concerning the microscopic and mechanical behaviour of quartzite specimens in stiff, triaxial compression tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 10:713–726.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(73)90015-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. He C, Okubo S, Nishimatsu Y (1989) A study on the class II behavior of rock. Shigen-to-Sozai 105:591–596.  https://doi.org/10.2473/shigentosozai.105.591 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hoek E, Bieniawski ZT (1965) Brittle rock fracture propagation in rock under compression brittle rock fracture propagation in rock under compression. Int J Fract Mech 1:137–155.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00186851 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hoek E, Martin CD (2014) Fracture initiation and propagation in intact rock—a review. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6:287–300.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2014.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hudson JA, Jing L (2006) DECOVALEX_THMC, Task B Understanding and characterizing the excavation disturbed zone (EDZ), Phase 2 SKI ReportGoogle Scholar
  17. Hudson JA, Brown ET, Fairhurst C (1971) Optimizing the control of rock failure in servo-controlled laboratory tests. Rock Mech Felsmech Mecanique Roch 3:217–224.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01238181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hudson JA, Crouch SL, Fairhurst C (1972) Soft, stiff and servo-controlled testing machines: a review with reference to rock failure. Eng Geol 6:155–189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7952(72)90001-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hudson JA, Bäckström A, Rutqvist J et al (2009) Characterising and modelling the excavation damaged zone in crystalline rock in the context of radioactive waste disposal. Environ Geol 57:1275–1297.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-008-1554-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. ITASCA UDEC (2004) Version 4.0 User's manuals, Itasca Consulting Group, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  21. Jansen DC, Shah SP, Rossow EC (1995) Stress-strain results of concrete from circumferential strain feedback control testing. ACI Mater J 92:419–428Google Scholar
  22. Khazaei C, Hazzard J, Chalaturnyk R (2015) Damage quantification of intact rocks using acoustic emission energies recorded during uniaxial compression test and discrete element modeling. Comput Geotech 67:94–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.02.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Labuz JF, Biolzi L (1991) Class I vs Class II stability: a demonstration of size effect. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 28:199–205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(91)92167-W CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lajtai EZ, Lajtai VN (1974) The evolution of brittle fracture in rocks. J Geol Soc London 130:1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.130.1.0001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lampinen H (2006) Äspö Hard Rock Laboratory Detailed geological mapping, SKB Report IPR-05-24Google Scholar
  26. Lan H, Martin CD, Hu B (2010) Effect of heterogeneity of brittle rock on micromechanical extensile behavior during compression loading. J Geophys Res 115:B01202.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JB006496 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee C, Kwon S, Jeon S (2011) Numerical simulation of radial strain controlled uniaxial and triaxial compression test of rock using bonded particle model. Tunn Undergr Sp 21:216–224Google Scholar
  28. Liang ZZ, Xing H, Wang SY et al (2012) A three-dimensional numerical investigation of the fracture of rock specimens containing a pre-existing surface flaw. Comput Geotech 45:19–33.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.04.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lisjak A, Grasselli G (2014) A review of discrete modeling techniques for fracturing processes in discontinuous rock masses. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6:301–314.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2013.12.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martin CD (1993) The strength of massive Lac du Bonnet granite around underground openings. PhD. Thesis, University of ManitobaGoogle Scholar
  31. Martin CD, Chandler NA (1994) The progressive fracture of Lac du Bonnet granite. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 31:643–659.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(94)90005-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin J, Ann B, Quanhong F (2009) Studies of factors that affect and controls the excavation damage/disturbed zone, R-09-17. SKB Rep R-09-17Google Scholar
  33. Mavko G, Mukerji T, Dvorkin J (2009) The rock physics handbook: tools for seismic analysis in porous media. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  34. Mayer JM, Stead D (2017) Exploration into the causes of uncertainty in UDEC Grain Boundary Models. Comput Geotech 82:110–123.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2016.10.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moore DE, Lockner DA (1995) The role of microcracking in shear-fracture propagation in granite. J Struct Geol 17:95–114.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8141(94)e0018-t CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Munoz H, Taheri A (2019) Postpeak deformability parameters of localized and nonlocalized damage zones of rocks under cyclic loading. Geotech Test J.  https://doi.org/10.1520/gtj20170266 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Munoz H, Taheri A, Chanda EK (2016a) Pre-peak and post-peak rock strain characteristics during uniaxial compression by 3D digital image correlation. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:2541–2554.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-016-0935-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Munoz H, Taheri A, Chanda EK (2016b) Fracture energy-based brittleness index development and brittleness quantification by pre-peak strength parameters in rock uniaxial compression. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:4587–4606.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-016-1071-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nicksiar M, Martin CD (2014) Factors affecting crack initiation in low porosity crystalline rocks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 47:1165–1181.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-013-0451-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Okubo S, Nishimatsu Y (1985) Uniaxial compression testing using a linear combination of stress and strain as the control variable. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 22:323–330.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(85)92064-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pan PZ, Feng XT, Hudson JA (2006) Numerical simulations of Class I and Class II uniaxial compression curves using an elasto-plastic cellular automaton and a linear combination of stress and strain as the control method. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43:1109–1117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2006.02.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Park J, Lee Y, Park C, Park E (2014) Numerical simulation for characteristics of rock strength and deformation using grain-based distinct element model. Tunn Undergr Sp 24:243–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Potyondy DO (2010) A grain-based model for rock: approaching the true microstructure. Rock Mech Nord Ctries 2010:225–234Google Scholar
  44. Potyondy DO, Cundall PA (2004) A bonded-particle model for rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41:1329–1364.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.09.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shimizu H, Koyama T, Ishida T et al (2010) Distinct element analysis for Class II behavior of rocks under uniaxial compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 47:323–333.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2009.09.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tang C, Liu H, Lee PK et al (2000) Numerical studies of the influence of microstructure on rock failure in uniaxial compression—part I: effect of heterogeneity. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 37:555–569.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1365-1609(99)00121-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vasconcelos G, Lourenço PB, Alves CAS, Pamplona J (2009) Compressive behavior of granite: experimental approach. J Mater Civ Eng 21:502–511.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2009)21:9(502) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vogler UWOL, Stacey TR (2016) The influence of test specimen geometry on the laboratory-determined Class II characteristics of rocks. J South Afr Inst Min Metall 116:987–1000.  https://doi.org/10.17159/2411-9717/2016/v116n11a1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wang X, Cai M (2018) Modeling of brittle rock failure considering inter- and intra-grain contact failures. Comput Geotech 101:224–244.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2018.04.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wawersik WR, Brace WF (1971) Post-failure behavior of a granite and diabase. Rock Mech Felsmech Mécanique Roches 3:61–85.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01239627 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wawersik WR, Fairhurst C (1970) A study of brittle rock fracture in laboratory compression experiments. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 7:561–575.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(70)90007-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wong TF, Wong RHC, Chau KT, Tang CA (2006) Microcrack statistics, Weibull distribution and micromechanical modeling of compressive failure in rock. Mech Mater 38:664–681.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2005.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhang Y, Wong LNY (2018) A review of numerical techniques approaching microstructures of crystalline rocks. Comput Geosci 115:167–187.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2018.03.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhao XG, Cai M, Wang J, Ma LK (2013) Damage stress and acoustic emission characteristics of the Beishan granite. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 64:258–269.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2013.09.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Energy Resources EngineeringInha UniversityIncheonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations