Numerical modeling of the coupled effect of specimen size and loading rate on the dynamic tensile strength of rock

Document Type : Original Research

Authors
P. Asadi 1
A. A. fakhimi 2
1 M.Sc. Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University
2 Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University
Abstract
The loading rate and specimen size are two main influential factors which control the tensile and compressive strengths of Quasi-brittle materials such as concrete, ceramic and rock. Most of the studies in the past have been focused on the size effect in the static loading situations i.e. in situations in which the effect of the loading rate and inertia can be ignored. In particular, fracture mechanics size effect have received substantial attention both with respect to the physical testing and the numerical modeling. On the other hand, combined effect of the specimen size and loading rate on the rock strength has received little attention in the literature. Understanding the dynamic size effect of Quasi-brittle materials such as rock is essential for better analysis and design of rock structures. This is particularly the case when rock is subjected to the blasting loads or when it is prone to the strain bursting. Studies on the failure of rock under the coupled effect of specimen size and loading rate are far from sufficient. Due to the limitations of the laboratory test devices, limited research efforts have been conducted on the size effect of materials under dynamic loading. In this study, a 3D hybrid finite-discrete element code called CA3 was used to simulate the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar test. The Incident and Transmitted bars were modeled by the finite element method while the Brazilian specimen was simulated using a Bonded Particle Model (BPM). The bars were assumed to beave elastically while the simulated specimen could develop micro and macro cracks which eventually could end up to complete disintegration and failure. Brazilian specimens with different sizes were numerically modeled. The specimen contained a vertical notch so that fracture mechanics size effect under high strain loading rate could be studied. The samples were subjected to different loading rate by adjusting the incoming wave in the incident bar. A micromechanical model in which the contact bond strength was allowed to vary in proportion to the relative velocity at the contact point of the involved particles was employed to capture the loading rate effect. The effect of sample size on the dynamic tensile strength of rock was explored and compared with the static size effect. The results were analyzed and discussed using the dimensional analysis approach. The numerical results suggest that the dynamic size effect on tensile strength of rock is different from the static size effect. While for small loading rates, the rock strength reduces as the specimen size increases, this is not the case when high loading rates are involved. For high loading rates, with the increase in the specimen size, the tensile strength initially increases. However, with further increase in the specimen size and the increase in the distance between the notch tips and the impact points, it appears that the inertia and loading rate effects reach to a stable situation, i.e. with further increase in the specimen size, the material strength remains constant. This interesting observation is discussed and compared with the published data in the literature.

Keywords

Subjects

[1]. Palmström A., Singh R. 2001 The deformation modulus of rock masses comparisons between in situ tests and indirect estimates,Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, vol. 16 (3), pp. 115-131.
[2]. Weibull W. 1939 A statistical theory of the strength of materials, Proceeding of Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Science, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 1-45.
[3]. Griffith A. A. 1924 The Theory of Rupture, In proceeding of 1st International Congress of Applied Mechanics, Delf, Netherlands.
[4]. Bazant Z. P., Kazemi M. T., Hasegawa T. 1991 Size effect in brazilian splitcylinder tests: measurements and fracture analysis, ACI Material Journal, vol.88, pp.325-332.
[5]. Carpinteri A. 1994 Fractal nature of material microstructure and size effects on apparent mechanical properties, Mechanics of Materials, vol. 18, pp. 89-101.
[6]. Carpinteri A., Ferro G. 1994 Size effects on tensile fracture properties: a unified explanation based on disorder and fractality of concrete microstructure, Materials and Structures, vol. 27(10), pp. 563-571.
[7]. Kadlecek V., Modry S. 2002 Size effect of test specimens on tensile splitting strength of concrete: general relation, Journal of Materials and structures, vol.35, pp.28-34.
[8]. Li Q. M., Meng H. 2003 About the dynamic strength enhancement of concrete-like ‎materials in a split Hopkinson pressure bar test, Int. J. Solids Struct., vol. ‎‌40‌‎, no. ‎‌2‌‎, pp. ‎‌343-36.
[9]. Li X. B., Lok T. S., Zhao J., Zhao P. J. ‎‌2000 Oscillation elimination in the ‎Hopkinson bar apparatus and resultant complete dynamic stress-strain curves for ‎rocks, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., vol. ‎‌37‌‎, no. ‎‌7‌‎, pp. ‎‌1055‌‎–‎‌1060‌‎.‎
[10]. Elfahal MM., Krauthammer T. 2005 Dynamic size effect in normal-and high-strength concrete cylinders, ACI Mater J, 02(2):77.
[11]. Bindiganavile V., Banthia N. 2006 Size effects and the dynamic response of plain concrete, J Mater Civ Eng, 18(4): 485–91.
[12]. Hu WH., Zou R., Peng G., Zou S. 2015 Energy absorption characteristics and size effect of concrete under different strain rates, J Yangtze River Sci Res Inst, 32(5):1326.
[13]. Wang X., Zhang S., Wang C., Song R., Shang C., Fang X. 2018 Experimental investigation of the size effect of layered roller compacted concrete (RCC) under high-strain-rate loading. Constr Build Mater, 165: pp. 45–57.
[14]. Li M., Hao H., Shi Y., Hao Y. 2018 Specimen shape and size effects on the concrete compressive strength under static and dynamic tests. Constr Build Mater,161: pp.84-93.
[15]. Jin L., Yu W., Du X., Yang W. 2019 Dynamic Size Effect of Concrete under Tension: A Numerical Study. International Journal of Impact Engineering. 132. 103318.
[16]. Fakhimi A. 2009 A hybrid discrete–finite element model for numerical simulation of geomaterials. Comput Geotech 36:386–395.
[17]. Davies R. M. 1948 A Critical Study of the Hopkinson Pressure Bar, Philos. Trans. R. ‎Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., vol. ‎‌240‌‎, no. 821‌‎, pp. ‎‌375‌‎–‎‌457.
[18]. Xia K., Yao W. 2015 Dynamic rock tests using split Hopkinson (Kolsky) bar ‎system – A review, J. Rock Mech. Geotech.Eng., vol.7 no.1‌‎, pp. ‎‌27‌‎–‎‌59.
[19]. Cundall P .A., Strack ODL. 1979 A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies. Ge´otechnique 29:47–65.
[20]. Fakhimi A., Azhdari P., Kimberley J. 2018 Physical and numerical evaluation of rock strength in Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar testing. Comput Geotech 102:1-11.
[21]. Majedi M.R., Afrazi M., & Fakhimi, A. 2020 A Micromechanical Model for Simulation of Rock Failure Under High Strain Rate Loading. Int J Civ Eng. 1-15.
[22]. Fakhimi A., Villegas T. 2007 Application of dimensional analysis in calibration of a discrete element model for rock deformation and fracture. Rock Mech Rock Eng 40: 193–211.
[23]. Li X., Zou Y., Zhou Z. 2014 Numerical Simulation of the Rock SHPB Test with a Special Shape Striker Based on the Discrete Element Method, Rock Mech. Rock Eng., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 1693–1709.
[24]. Rougier E., et al. 2011 The Combined Finite-Discrete Element Method applied to the Study of Rock Fracturing Behavior in 3D.
[25]. Atkinson C., Smelser R. E., Sanchez, J. 1982 Combined mode fracture via the cracked Brazilian disk test. International Journal of Fracture, Vol.18, pp. 279-291.
[26]. Alitalesh M., Naeimabadi M., Yazdani M. 2018 Investigation of crack growth in rock-like brittle material Modares Civil Engineering Journal, 18(4), pp. 143-155. (In Persian)
[27]. Pereira LF., Weerheijm J., Sluys LJ. 2017 A new effective rate dependent damage model for dynamic tensile failure of concrete. Eng Fract Mech; 176:281–99.
Modares Civil Engineering journal
Volume 21, Issue 1
March and April 2021
Pages 135-147