Advertisement

Effect of loading rates and stress paths on rock strengths: a novel approach based on experimental evidence

  • Kai Zhang
  • Chunshun ZhangEmail author
  • Shili Qiu
  • Pathegama Gamage Gamage
Technical Note
  • 41 Downloads

Abstract

Tests of rock strength under different loading rates and stress paths often lead to ambiguous results, as both factors are inter-playing each other. As a result, there is surprisingly little research into the study of unifying both factors when comparing the rock strengths from various triaxial compression tests. In this technical note, we propose a simple but rigorous mathematics expression to assess and compare the rock strengths under different loading rates and stress paths. To make the proposed method as accessible as possible to a broad application, we have derived the explicit forms of solutions for three popular rock failure criteria. We then examine and validate the proposed method using the results of triaxial tests on marbles and sandstones, based on the important Mohr-Coulomb criterion.

Keywords

Loading rate Rock strength Stress path Triaxial compression tests 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (grant no. 2015XKZD06).

References

  1. Bruning T, Karakus M, Nguyen G, Goodchild D (2018) Experimental study on the damage evolution of brittle rock under triaxial confinement with full circumferential strain control. Rock Mech Rock Eng 51(9):3321–3341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen WZ, Liu D, Yang J, Tan X, Wang C (2008) Power function based Mohr strength criterion for marble with unloading confining pressures. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 27:2214–2220Google Scholar
  3. Dehkordi MS, Lazemi HA, Shahriar K (2015) Application of the strain energy ratio and the equivalent thrust per cutter to predict the penetration rate of TBM, case study: Karaj-Tehran water conveyance tunnel of Iran. Arab J Geosci 8(7):4833–4842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ewy RT (1999) Wellbore-stability predictions by use of a modified lade criterion. SPE Drill Complet 14:85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feng X, Zhang X, Kong R, Wang G (2016) A novel Mogi type true triaxial testing apparatus and its use to obtain complete stress – strain curves of hard rocks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:1649–1662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hudson JA, Harrison JP (1997) Engineering rock mechanics [M].  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-043864-1.X5000-9
  7. Huang D, Tan Q, Huang R (2012) Study of micro-mesoscopic characteristics of marble fracture surface and correlation with unloading rock mass strength under high stress and unloading. Rock Soil Mech 33:8–15Google Scholar
  8. Li D, Sun Z, Xie T, Li X, Ranjith PG (2017) Energy evolution characteristics of hard rock during triaxial failure with different loading and unloading paths. Eng Geol 228:270–281.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2017.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Li X, Feng F, Li D, Du K, Ranjith PG, Rostami J (2018) Failure characteristics of granite influenced by sample height-to-width ratios and intermediate principal stress under true-Triaxial unloading conditions. Rock Mech Rock Eng 51(5):1321–1345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Liu J, Li JP (2011) Experimental research on sandstone pre-peak unloading process under high confining pressure. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 30:473–479Google Scholar
  11. Munoz H, Taheri A, Chanda E (2016) Pre-peak and post-peak rock strain characteristics during uniaxial compression by 3D digital image correlation. Rock Mech Rock Eng 49:2541–2554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Qi C, Wang M, Bai J, Wei X, Wang H (2016) Investigation into size and strain rate effects on the strength of rock-like materials. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 86:132–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Qiu S, Feng X, Zhang C, Yang J (2012) Experimental research on mechanical properties of deep marble under different initial damage levels and unloading paths. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 31:1686–1697Google Scholar
  14. Qiu S, Feng X, Zhang C, Zhou H, Sun F (2010) Experimental research on mechanical properties of deep-buried marble under different unloading rates of confining pressures. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 29:1807–1817Google Scholar
  15. Su H, Jing H, Du M, Wang C (2016) Experimental investigation on tensile strength and its loading rate effect of sandstone after high temperature treatment. Arab J Geosci 9(13):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. You M (2002) Strength and deformation of rock under complex loading path. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 21:23–28Google Scholar
  17. Zhang K, Zhou H, Pan P, Shen L, Feng X, Zhang Y (2010) Characteristics of strength of rocks under different unloading rates. Rock Soil Mech 31:2072–2078Google Scholar
  18. Zhang ZX, Kou SQ, Yu J, Yu Y, Jiang LG, Lindqvist P (1999) Effects of loading rate on rock fracture. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 36:597–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zou C, Wong LNY, Loo JJ, Gan BS (2016) Different mechanical and cracking behaviors of single-flawed brittle gypsum specimens under dynamic and quasi-static loadings. Eng Geol 201:71–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kai Zhang
    • 1
  • Chunshun Zhang
    • 2
    Email author
  • Shili Qiu
    • 3
  • Pathegama Gamage Gamage
    • 4
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory for Geomechanics & Deep Underground EngineeringChina University of Mining & TechnologyXuzhouChina
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Geomechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Institute of Rock and Soil MechanicsChinese Academy of SciencesWuhanChina
  4. 4.Deep Earth Energy Research Laboratory, Department of Civil EngineeringMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations