Wing crack propagation model under high hydraulic pressure in compressive-shear stress state

Article
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

A new wing crack model subjected to hydraulic pressure and far-field stresses was proposed considering the effect of hydraulic pressure in wing crack and the connected part of the main crack on the stress intensity factor at the wing crack tip. With the equivalent crack length leq of the wing crack introduced, the stress intensity factor KI at the wing crack tip was assumed to the sum of two terms: on one hand a component KI(1) for a single isolated straight wing crack of length 2l, and subjected to hydraulic pressure in the wing crack and far-field stresses; on the other hand a component KI(2) due to the effective shear stress induced by the presence of the equivalent main crack. The lateral tensile stress and hydraulic high pressure are the key factors that induce crack propagation unsteadily. The new wing crack theoretical model proposed can supply references for the study on hydraulic fracture in fractured masses, hydraulic fracturing in rock masses.

Keywords

rock mechanics wing crack hydraulic pressure 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ashby M F, Hallam S D, 1986. The failure of brittle solids containing small cracks under compressive stress states. Acta Metall., 34: 497–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashby M F, Sammis, 1990. The damage mechanics of brittle solids in compression. Pageoph., 133(3): 489–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baud P, Reuschle T, Charlez P, 1996. An improved wing crack model for the deformation and failure of rock in compression. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts, 33(5): 539–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cai M, 2008. Influence of intermediate principal stress on rock fracturing and strength near excavation boundaries: insight from numerical modeling. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, 45: 763–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cai M, Kaiser P K, 2005. Assessment of excavation damaged zone using micromechanics model. Tunnell Undergr Space Tech nology, 20(4): 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Horii H, Nemat-Nasser S, 1985. Compression-induced micro-crack growth in brittle solids: axial splitting and shear failure. J. Geophys.Res., 90: 3 105–3 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Horri H, Nemat-Nasswer S, 1986. Brittle failure in compression: splitting, faulting and brittle-ductile transition. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond, 139(A): 337–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Katsumi N, Hirokazu M, Hiroaki N, Noriyoshi T, 2008. Mechanical and hydraulic coupling of injection-induced slip along pre-existing fractures. Geothermics, 37: 157–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lee M Y, Haimson B C, 1989. Statistical evaluation of hydraulic fracturing stress measurement parameters. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr., 26: 447–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Luo X R, Guy V, 2002. Natural hydraulic cracking: numerical model and sensitivity study. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 201: 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Papanastasiou P C, 1997. A coupled elastoplastic hydraulic fracturing model. Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci., 34: 3–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sahouryeh E, Dyskin A V, Germanovich L N, 2002. Crack growth under biaxial compression. Eng. Fract. Mech., 69(18): 2 187–2 198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Steif P S, 1984. Crack extension under compressive loading. Engng. Fract. Mech., 20: 463–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Tang L S, Zhang P C, Wang S J, 2002. Testing study on effects of chemical action of Aqueous solution on crack propagation in rock. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 21(6): 822–827.Google Scholar
  15. Wang Y H, Xu Y, Tang G H, 2000. An improved calculative model for wing crack. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 22(5): 612–615.Google Scholar
  16. Yoshito N, 1993. Buoyancy-driven propagation of an isolated fluid-filled crack in rock: implication for fluid transport in metamorphism. Contributions to Mineralogy and Petrology, 114: 289–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zhao Y L, Cao P, Wang Y X, Liu Y K, 2008a. Coupling model of seepage-damage-fracture in fractured rock masses and its application. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 27(8): 1 634–1 643.Google Scholar
  18. Zhao Y L, Cao P, Wen Y D, 2008b. Damage fracturefailure mechanism of compressive-shear rock cracks underseepage pressure. Journal of Central South University: Science and Technology, 39(4): 838–844.Google Scholar
  19. Zhuang N, 2006. Propagation rule of crack rock mass and its mathematics model research under the hydraulic-stress coupling. Doctors’thesis: Tongji University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editorial Office of Journal of Coal Science and Engineering (China) and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Safe Mining Techniques of Coal MinesHunan University of Science and TechnologyXiangtanChina
  2. 2.School of Engery and Safty EnginerringHunan University of Science and TechnologyXiangtanChina

Personalised recommendations