岩土力学 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (S1): 42-52.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2023.0766

• 基础理论与实验研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

层状复合岩石滑动变形破坏特征研究

许海亮,谭安福,宋义敏,安栋,张苑玉,杜羽,高晗钧   

  1. 北方工业大学 土木工程学院,北京 100144
  • 收稿日期:2023-06-09 接受日期:2023-08-07 出版日期:2024-09-18 发布日期:2024-09-18
  • 通讯作者: 宋义敏,男,1972年生,博士,教授,主要从事岩石力学实验和理论方面的教学与研究工作。E-mail: ssyymmok@sina.com
  • 作者简介:许海亮,男,1978年生,博士,高级工程师,主要从事边坡工程、岩石力学方面研究。E-mail: hailiang_xu@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金资助项目(No.51474013)

Sliding deformation and failure characteristics of layered composite rocks

XU Hai-liang, TAN An-fu, SONG Yi-min, AN Dong, ZHANG Yuan-yu, DU Yu, GAO Han-jun   

  1. School of Civil Engineering, North China University of Technology, Beijing 100144, China
  • Received:2023-06-09 Accepted:2023-08-07 Online:2024-09-18 Published:2024-09-18
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51474013).

摘要: 为分析层状复合岩石层间滑动演化规律及变形破坏特征,采用三点弯曲试验,以数字散斑相关方法为观测手段,对一种由细砂岩组成的层状复合岩石试件进行研究。主要结论如下:(1)层间接触条件(或是否发生滑动)对复合岩石断裂顺序、峰值荷载等变形破坏特征有较大影响。层间接触面发生滑动,上层岩石首先出现破坏,且峰值荷载小于没有发生滑动的同类结构,以本次试验为例,前者峰值荷载为后者的56%。(2)层状复合岩石变形破坏过程中,层间滑动位移总体呈现波动状态分布;第2组试验中最大滑动位移为0.320 mm,第4组试验中最大滑动位移为0.027 mm,两者相差近10倍;不同区域层间滑动位移和竖向位移在荷载曲线突降处均产生突变,但第2组和第4组试验表现出的突变规律不相同,主要是由复合岩层首先出现裂隙破坏的位置差异造成。(3)本次试验中,复合岩石层间接触面产生滑动时,水平应力与竖向应力比例系数波动幅值在0.15内;未产生滑动时,应力比例系数波动幅值大部分在0.5内。(4)层间发生滑动,上层岩石破裂过程中,层间出现水平方向及竖直方向加速度,且竖直方向加速度变化幅值约为水平方向加速度变化幅值的50%,因此岩石破坏过程中释放的能量在水平和竖直两个方向以横波与纵波两种方式释放传播。上述研究结论对煤矿开采过程中高位岩层矿震的发生和上覆岩层承载变形特征的相关研究有一定的借鉴意义。

关键词: 层状复合岩石, 三点弯曲试验, 接触面, 层间滑动

Abstract: To analyze the interlayer sliding evolution patterns and deformation failure characteristics of layered composite rocks, we conducted a three-point bending test on a layered composite rock specimen composed of fine sandstone, using digital speckle correlation as the observation method. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) interlayer contact conditions (or occurrence of sliding) significantly influence the fracture sequence and peak load deformation characteristics of composite rocks. When sliding occurs at the interlayer contact surface, the upper rock layer is the first to undergo failure, and the peak load is smaller compared to the same structure without sliding. In this experiment, for instance, the peak load during sliding conditions was 56% of that without sliding. (2) During the deformation and failure process of layered composite rocks, the interlayer sliding displacement exhibits an overall fluctuating distribution. In the second set of experiments, the maximum sliding displacement reached 0.320 mm, whereas in the fourth set, it was only 0.027 mm, indicating a nearly 10-fold difference. Abrupt changes in sliding and vertical displacements were observed in different regions at the sudden drops of the load curve. However, the patterns of these abrupt changes differed between the second and fourth sets of experiments, primarily due to variations in the initial crack formation locations within the composite rock layers. (3) In our study, when sliding occurred at the interlayer contact surface of the composite rocks, the fluctuation amplitude of the ratio between horizontal and vertical stresses remained within 0.15. In contrast, when no sliding occurred, the fluctuation amplitude of the stress ratio was mostly confined to 0.5. (4) During the rupture of the upper rock layer accompanied by interlayer sliding, both horizontal and vertical accelerations were detected. Notably, the amplitude of vertical acceleration variations was approximately 50% of that of horizontal accelerations. Consequently, the energy released during the rock failure process propagates in both horizontal and vertical directions, specifically as shear waves and longitudinal waves. These research insights offer valuable implications for studying high-level rockbursts during coal mining operations and for understanding the deformation characteristics of overlying rock layers.

Key words: laminated composite rocks, three-point bending experiments, contact surface, interlayer sliding

中图分类号: TU451
[1] 李林, 张等红, 张淼, 顾晓强, 徐龙飞, . 考虑水-力耦合的桩-非饱和黄土接触面荷载传递模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(5): 1343-1355.
[2] 李世昌, 李剑, 余飞, 耿赟, 杨奇志, 王江琛, . 峰前等剪应力幅值下黏土−混凝土接触面小变形特性分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(S1): 208-216.
[3] 龚耕, 潘佳, 赵立春, 熊峰, 张国华, 唐志成, . 基于压敏胶片的法向应力作用下砂岩节理的接触特征研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(10): 2907-2918.
[4] 许海亮, 谭安福, 宋义敏, 朱力, 安栋, 杜羽, 高晗钧, . 层状复合岩石变形破坏全过程接触面力学特征研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(6): 1683-1694.
[5] 冯大阔, 张建民, . 应力幅值比对土-结构接触面非共轴特性影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(11): 3047-3058.
[6] 卢浩, 冯夏庭, 杨成祥, 张希巍, . 不同预制裂缝方法及长度对岩石三点弯曲 试验的影响[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(4): 1115-1125.
[7] 冯大阔, 张建民, . 法向应力对接触面循环单剪力学特性的影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(1): 18-26.
[8] 徐衍, 周晓敏, 和晓楠, 吴涛, 张建岭, 李森. 矿山竖井井壁与围岩热−固耦合作用分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(S1): 217-226.
[9] 樊科伟, 刘斯宏, 廖洁, 方斌昕, 王建磊, . 袋装石土工袋剪切力学特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2020, 41(2): 477-484.
[10] 李文轩, 卞士海, 李国英, 吴俊杰, . 粗粒料接触面模型及其在土石坝工程中的应用[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(6): 2379-2388.
[11] 李春红, 孔纲强, 张鑫蕊, 刘汉龙, 许晓亮, 许俊奎, . 温控桩-土接触面三轴试验系统研制与验证[J]. 岩土力学, 2019, 40(12): 4955-4962.
[12] 张 磊, 刘 慧, 王铁行. 固结与不固结条件下黄土-混凝土接触面剪切试验[J]. 岩土力学, 2018, 39(S2): 238-244.
[13] 陈 琛,冷伍明,杨 奇,金子豪,聂如松,邱 鋆,. 混凝土桩-泥皮-砂土接触面力学特性试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2461-2472.
[14] 赵 坤,陈卫忠,赵武胜,杨典森,宋万鹏,李 灿,马少森, . 地下工程衬砌与减震层接触面力学特性直剪试验及数值仿真[J]. , 2018, 39(7): 2662-2670.
[15] 石泉彬,杨 平,于 可,汤国毅,. 冻土与结构接触面次峰值冻结强度试验研究[J]. , 2018, 39(6): 2025-2034.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!