Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Technical note
1. Introduction
The fragmentation of rock subjected to dynamic
loading largely depends on the fracture process, which
plays an important role in controlling the number of
fractures produced, fracture propagation direction, etc.
The fracture process is affected by rock inhomogeneity
and external conditions, such as the loading rate [13].
Inhomogeneity is an important factor in progressive
failure, and is generally treated as the distribution of
fracture strength and the elastic modulus of the rock.
Various loading rates result in different crack growth
and fracture patterns.
In rock fracture mechanics, a non-linear process zone
is caused by the initiation and propagation of microcracks in the immediate vicinity of a crack tip. This can
be described using the fracture process zone (FPZ) [46],
i.e., non-linear fracture mechanics are appropriate for
describing the fracture process in rock. In rocks, the
FPZ is usually characterized by a bridging zone and a
microcracking zone around the crack tip, as illustrated
in Fig. 1. A similar FPZ is observed in front of the area
of crack propagation with different rock fracture
methods, such as hydraulic fracture and in a fracture
toughness experiment [7]. Yon et al. [8] investigated the
dynamic behavior of the FPZ in concrete, and showed
that the fracture energy is ostensibly insensitive to the
strain rate. Kaneko et al. [9] identied the FPZ of rocks
as a factor in the fragmentation process in rock blasting.
The evolution of the FPZ and its inuence on dynamic
Corresponding author. Tel./fax: +81 11 706 6325.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
562
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568
0:25S t
St
Dh
W1
W 2 Dh
W2 W1
(1)
Smax
Dh
Dhmax
DhoDhmax ,
(3)
Fig. 2. Tensile softening curve for the fracture process zone (FPZ) and
determination of cohesion S* with variation of crack opening
displacement (COD) Dh.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568
Type I
Type II
Type III
Type IV
20
563
15
10
0
0
50
100
150
Time (s)
Fig. 3. Geometry of the model subjected to dynamic loading.
Table 1
Analysis models for the dynamic tensile strengths and fractures
Model
Type
Type
Type
Type
I
II
III
IV
Geometry
Incident pressure
Height H (m)
Length L (m)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
20
18
16
14
1
1
1
1
50
70
90
110
ARTICLE IN PRESS
564
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568
Table 2
Mechanical properties and calculation conditions for the analysis
model
Parameter
Value
Density r (kg/m3)
Elastic modulus E (GPa)
Poissons ratio n
Mean microscopic compressive strength S c
(MPa)
Mean microscopic tensile strength S t (MPa)
Fracture energy Gf (Pa m)
Critical COD of micro-crack zone W1
(106 mm)
Critical COD of bridging zone W2 (106 mm)
Coefcient of uniformity m
Time step Dt (ms)
P wave velocity CP (m/s)
S wave velocity Cs (m/s)
Bar velocity Cb (m/s)
2500
40
0.25
60
4.0
01000
1.88187.50
12.501250
2, 5, 20, 50 and N
0.02
4381
2529
4000
,
2
2
(4)
12 M V Gf D,
(5)
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568
565
Fig. 6. Dynamic tensile strength plotted against the apparent strain rate when Gf 300: (a) m 2; (b) m 5; (c) m 10; (d) m 50; and (e)
m 1:
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568
566
Fig. 7. Relationship between the slope constant of the tted line and
the coefcient of uniformity when Gf 0; 30, and 300 Pa m.
Fig. 10. The velocity ratio variation with increasing fracture energy,
Gf ; for m 5; 10 and 50.
t0
t0+t
t0+2t
Time, t
ARTICLE IN PRESS
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568
567
Fig. 11. Experimental setup for the dynamic tensile test based on
Hopkinsons effect with the spalling phenomena.
100
Ve /Vb=0.80
n=0.329
Coefficient of uniformity m
Ve/Vb=0.9
Ve/Vb=0.8
Ve/Vb=0.7
n=0.3
10
n=0.4
n=0.45
Gf =48.5
m=9.5
1
0
50
100
150
200
Fracture energy Gf (Pa m)
250
300
Table 3
Dynamic tensile test results for Inada granite
Exp. no.
L (m)
r (kg/m3)
Cp (m/s)
d (m)
t0 (ms)
Dt (ms)
Vf (m/s)
Ve (m/s)
Vb (m/s)
Ve/Vb
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
0.341
0.340
0.349
0.340
2595
2584
2609
2603
3710
3620
3769
3731
0.044
0.052
0.048
0.038
5.0
4.0
5.6
5.0
11.9
14.4
12.7
10.2
4.20
3.90
3.71
4.35
4.20
3.90
3.71
4.35
5.40
4.25
5.40
5.20
0.77
0.91
0.68
0.84
L: Length of a specimen, r: Density of a specimen, Cp: P-wave velocity, d: Length of a separated specimen, t0: Rising time, Dt: Collapse time of stress
wave from the free end to the fracture plane, Vf: Flying velocity observed using the high-speed video camera, Ve: Flying velocity measured using the
laser vibration meter and Vb: Initial velocity estimated using the measured displacementvelocity curve.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
568
S.H. Cho et al. / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 42 (2005) 561568