Advertisement

Physical and Mechanical Characterization of Himalayan Dolomite

Conference paper
  • 381 Downloads
Part of the Sustainable Civil Infrastructures book series (SUCI)

Abstract

In the present work, dynamic stress-strain response of Himalayan dolomite is tested under high loading rates using 38 mm split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) device. The physical and static mechanical properties of dolomite e.g. density, specific gravity, static compressive strength and elastic modulus values are also determined. Petrological studies of dolomite are carried out through X-ray diffraction (XRD) test and scanning electron microscope (SEM) test. In the SHPB tests, it is observed from the stress-strain response that the dynamic peak stress increases with increasing strain rate whereas the elastic modulus does not show any clear trend with an increase in strain rate. Dynamic force equilibrium at the incident and transmission bar ends of the rock samples is attained in all tests till the failure of the rock samples. Dynamic increase factor (DIF) for the rock is determined at a particular strain rate by comparing the dynamic to static peak compressive stress.

Keywords

Dynamic Increase Factor (DIF) Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) SHPB Test Transmission Bar Peak Stress Increases 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. ASTM D3148-02.: Standard test method for elastic moduli of intact rock core specimens in uniaxial compression. American Society for Testing and Materials (2002)Google Scholar
  2. ASTM D4543-08.: Standard practices for preparing rock core as cylindrical test specimens and verifying conformance to dimensional and shape tolerances. American Society for Testing and Materials (2008)Google Scholar
  3. Abotula, S., Shukla, A., Chona, R.: Dynamic constitutive behavior and fracture initiation toughness of Hastelloy X under thermo-mechanical loads. Proceedings of the Society of Experimental Mechanics, Implast Conference. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base RBSM (2010)Google Scholar
  4. Blanton, T.L.: Effect of strain rates from 10−2 to 10 sec−1 in triaxial compression tests on three rocks. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abs. 18(1), 47–62 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Christensen, R.J., Swanson, S.R., Brown, W.S.: Split Hopkinson bar tests on rock under confining pressure. Exp. Mech. 12, 508–541 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dusenberry, D.O.: Handbook for Blast Resistant Design of Buildings, 1st edn, p 512. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ (2010)Google Scholar
  7. Frew, D.J., Forrestal, M.J., Chen, W.: A split Hopkinson pressure bar technique to determine compressive stress-strain data for rock materials. Exp. Mech. 41(1), 40–46 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Frew, D.J., Forrestal, M.J., Chen, W.: Pulse shaping techniques for testing brittle materials with a split Hopkinson pressure bar. Exp. Mech. 42(1), 93–106 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fuenkajorn, K., Kenkhunthod, N.: Influence of loading rate on deformability and compressive strength of three thai sandstones. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 28, 707–715 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fukui, K., Okubo, S., Ogawa, A.: Some aspects of loading-rate dependency of sanjome andesite strengths. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 41(7), 1215–1219 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. Grady, D.E.: Shock wave properties of brittle solids. In: Schmidt, S. (ed.) Shock Compression of Condensed Matters, pp. 9–20. AIP Press, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  12. ISRM: International society of rock mechanics commission on testing methods, suggested method for determining point load strength. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abs. 22, 51–60 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ISRM: International society of rock mechanics commission on testing methods, suggested methods for determining the uniaxial compressive strength and deformability of rock materials. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abs. 16(2), 138–140 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Klepaczko, J.R.: Behavior of rock-like materials at high strain rates in compression. Int. J. Plast 6, 415–432 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kumar, R.: Testing and constitutive modelling of the strain-softening behaviour of some rocks. Ph.D. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Delhi (2007)Google Scholar
  16. Lindholm, U.S., Yeakley, L.M., Nagy, A.: The dynamic strength and fracture properties of dresser basalt. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abs. 11, 181–191 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li, X.B., Lok, T.S., Zhao, J.: Dynamic characteristics of granite subjected to intermediate loading rate. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 38(1), 21–39 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lu, Y.B., Li, Q.M., Ma, G.W.: Numerical investigation of the dynamic compressive strength of rocks based on split Hopkinson pressure bar tests. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 47(5), 829–838 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lundberg, B.: A split Hopkinson bar study of energy absorption in dynamic. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abs. 13, 187–197 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ming, L., Xian-biao, M., Li-li, C., Rong-rong, M., Guang-hui, Z.: High strain rate effects on mechanical behavior of coal-serial sandstone. Electron. J. Geotech. Eng. 19, 6035–6046 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. Ngo, T., Mendis, P., Gupta, A., Ramsay, J.: Blast loading and blast effects on structures–an overview. Electron. J. Struct. Eng. Spec. Issue: Load. Struct. 7, 76–91 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. Olsson, W.A.: The compressive strength of tuff as a function of strain rate from 10−6 to 103/sec. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abs. 28(1), 115–118 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Perkins, R.D., Green, S.J.: Macroscopic description low and medium strain rates. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 7, 527–535 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Qi, C.Z., Wang, M.Y., Qihu, Q.: Strain-rate effects on the strength and fragmentation size of rocks. Int. J. Impact Eng. 36, 1355–1364 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang, Z.G., Meyer, L.W.: On the plastic wave propagation along the specimen length in SHPB test. Exp. Mech. 50, 1061–1074 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Xia, K., Yao, W.: Dynamic rock tests using split Hopkinson (Kolsky) bar system–a review. J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 7, 27–59 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhao, J., Li, H.B., Wu, M.B., Li, T.J.: Dynamic uniaxial compression tests on a granite. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 36, 273–277 (1999)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology (IIT) DelhiHauz Khas, New DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations