Effect of inclination angle on 3D crack growth from a surface flaw in sandstone under uniaxial compression
Zhenyu Han , Diyuan Li , Xing Su , Chenxi Zhang , Yingming Xiao
Journal of Central South University ›› : 1 -28.
Surface discontinuities are commonly distributed in natural rock masses and highly affect their structural stability. In this study, uniaxial compression tests were carried out on prismatic sandstone to examine 3D crack development from a surface flaw with various inclination angles (0° – 90°). Experimental results indicate that the reduction of strength is between 0.88% at 90° and 14.05% at 30°. The major principal strain and horizontal displacement nephograms demonstrate that the crack trajectories on the front surface differ from those on the back surface, and cracks also propagate along the specimen thickness. Both intragranular and intergranular cracks are found around the surface flaw perimeter at a micro scale (µm), confirming the 3D nature of crack growth. The 15° flawed specimens exhibit the highest susceptibility to rockburst, with the largest and smallest proportions of releasable elastic strain energy and dissipated energy in input energy. The stress intensity factors (SIFs) along the surface flaw periphery are theoretically derived to determine the crack initiation position and fracture angle. As the flaw extends deeper, the nature of the initiating crack transforms from a hybrid type I-III to a hybrid type I-II-III, with an increasing proportion in KII and decreasing proportion in KIII. Sensitivity analysis is conducted to investigate the effects of dimensional flaw depth and flaw aspect ratio on the SIF distribution. Finally, the strain and displacement values in the vicinity of the flaw area are extracted to elucidate the disparity in deformation between the front and back surfaces during the loading process.
Surface flaw / Uniaxial compression / Fracture / Stress intensity factor / Energy
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
|
| [50] |
|
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
|
| [53] |
|
| [54] |
|
| [55] |
|
| [56] |
|
| [57] |
China Academy of AeronauticsHandbook of stress intensity factors [M], 1981, Beijing: Science Press(in Chinese) |
| [58] |
|
Central South University
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |