岩土力学 ›› 2024, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (S1): 654-664.doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2023.1039

• 数值分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

含不同孔洞类岩石材料的动力响应机制研究

任富强1,谷金泽1,孙博2,常远1   

  1. 1. 辽宁科技大学 土木工程学院,辽宁 鞍山 114000;2. 辽宁科技大学 矿业工程学院,辽宁 鞍山 114000
  • 收稿日期:2023-07-17 接受日期:2023-09-28 出版日期:2024-09-18 发布日期:2024-09-21
  • 作者简介:任富强,男,1992年生,博士,副教授,主要从事岩石力学和边坡稳定性方面的研究。E-mail: renfuqiang@ustl.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(No.51974187);辽宁省教育厅资助项目(No.JYTMS20230958)

Dynamic response mechanism of rock-like materials with different shape holes

REN Fu-qiang1, GU Jin-ze1, SUN Bo2, CHANG Yuan1   

  1. 1. School of Civil Engineering, University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan, Liaoning 114000, China; 2. School of Mining Engineering, University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan, Liaoning 114000, China
  • Received:2023-07-17 Accepted:2023-09-28 Online:2024-09-18 Published:2024-09-21
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (51974187) and the Province Education Department of Liaoning (JYTMS20230958).

摘要: 为揭示动载作用下深埋巷道的横截面形状效应,制备了含5种不同孔洞形状(矩形(R)、圆形(C)、直墙拱形(S)、纵、横椭圆形(E、E))的水泥砂浆类岩石材料试样,利用落锤冲击试验系统地开展了试样动力响应特征研究。从应变时程曲线、洞周裂纹扩展过程、破坏模式3方面讨论了孔洞形状的影响,并结合PFC2D对试样的动态抗压强度、细观开裂机制进行了分析。结果表明:相同的冲击荷载作用下,纵椭圆试样的极限应变最大。孔洞顶板宏观裂纹的起裂位置位于中部;矩形和直墙拱形孔洞试样底板处裂纹更易从角点位置向下扩展,而其他孔洞形状的试样则从底板中部向下扩展贯通。矩形、直墙拱形和横椭圆形孔洞试样的顶板以张剪复合破坏为主,而圆形和纵椭圆形试样顶板的张拉破坏更显著。纵椭圆、直墙拱、圆形、矩形、横椭圆试样的动态抗压强度依次降低,故纵椭圆形试样的抗冲击效果最好。冲击荷载作用初期,拉应力主要集中于孔洞顶板处,集中区域大小与孔洞上边界的横向跨度正相关;试样临近峰值应力时,拉应力由顶板向两侧扩散至整个试样。峰后纵椭圆和圆形孔洞试样的回弹模量与弹性模量基本一致,塑性变形较小,而其他孔洞试样具有较高的残余应变。

关键词: 孔洞形状, 落锤冲击, 开裂模式, 动力特性, 细观机制

Abstract: To reveal the cross-sectional shape effect of a deeply buried roadway under dynamic load, cement mortar rock-like material samples with five different hole shapes (rectangular, R, circular, C, straight wall arch, S, vertical, E, and horizontal ellipse, E) were prepared, and the dynamic response characteristics of the samples were studied by using the drop weight impact test system. The influence of hole shape was discussed from three aspects: strain time history curve, crack propagation process around the hole, and failure mode. The dynamic compressive strength and meso-cracking mechanism were analyzed by PFC2D. The results showed that the ultimate strain of the specimen with E∥ was the largest under the same impact load. The crack initiation position of the hole roof’s macroscopic crack was in the middle. The cracks at the bottom of specimens with the R and S were more likely to extend downward from the corner point, while the other specimens extended downward from the middle of the bottom. The roof of R, S, and E⊥ specimens was dominated by tensile-shear composite failure. In contrast, the tensile failure of the roof of C and E∥ specimens was more significant. The dynamic compressive strength of E∥, S, C, R, and E⊥ specimens decreased sequentially, therefore, the E∥ specimen had the best impact resistance. During the initial dynamic loading stage, the tensile stress was mainly concentrated at the roof of the hole, and the concentrated area was proportional to the transverse span of the upper boundary of the hole. When the stress was close to peak, the tensile stress gradually diffused to both sides of the specimen. In the post-peak stage, the rebound modulus of the E∥ and C samples was close to the elastic modulus, the plastic deformation was small, while the other samples showed a higher residual strain.

Key words: hole shape, drop weight impact, cracking mode, dynamic mechanical properties, mesomorphic mechanisms

中图分类号: TU458+.3
[1] 王滢, 刘嘉怡, 高盟, 孔祥霄, . 地震作用下深海含气能源土动力特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2025, 46(2): 457-466.
[2] 黄锋, 米吉龙, 杨永浩, 董广法, 张班, 刘星辰, . 分级动荷载下土石混合体滞回曲线形态特征试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(3): 674-684.
[3] 吴琳, 吕亚茹, 张申, 丁思超. 砂土SHPB冲击试验与数值模拟研究进展及问题探讨[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(11): 3461-3480.
[4] 赵明珠, 吴学震, 叶青, 王刚, 蒋宇静, 邓涛, . 缩管式恒阻大变形锚杆抗冲击特性及其治理岩爆潜力研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(11): 3355-3365.
[5] 蔡永明, 王志杰, 齐逸飞, 杨广庆, 王贺, . 土工格栅加筋橡胶碎石动力特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(1): 87-96.
[6] 陈国兴, 韩勇, 梁珂, . 徐州城区黏性土与粉土的动剪切模量与阻尼比特性[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(S1): 163-172.
[7] 李文炜, 占鑫杰, 王保田, 朱群峰, 许小龙, 左晋宇, 王家辉, . 冲击碾压加固松散堰塞坝料的细观机制研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(8): 2297-2307.
[8] 李雪, 王滢, 高盟, 陈青生, 彭晓东, . 地震荷载作用下南海非饱和钙质砂动力特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(3): 821-833.
[9] 王思远, 蒋明镜, 李承超, 张旭东, . 三轴剪切条件下胶结型深海能源土应变局部化离散元模拟分析[J]. 岩土力学, 2023, 44(11): 3307-3317.
[10] 丁扬, 熊晔, 陈孜孜, 吴晓寒, 王小波, . 灌注桩动力特性试验与数值模拟研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(S2): 640-646.
[11] 孟凡丽, 娄桢桢, 葛威, . 长期循环荷载下卸荷粉土动力特性的试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(S1): 383-388.
[12] 柴少波, 宋浪, 刘欢, 阿比尔的, 柴连增, . 酸性干湿循环下充填节理岩石劣化性能试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(11): 2993-3002.
[13] 邓泽之, 吉恩跃, 王刚, . 波动水力条件下土体内侵蚀特性的 透明土试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2022, 43(10): 2726-2734.
[14] 王柳江, 刘斯宏, 赵志杰, 沈超敏, 鲁洋. 土工袋界面动力特性的循环直剪试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(6): 1625-1634.
[15] 邓华锋, 方景成, 李建林, 李冠野, 齐豫, 许晓亮. 水-岩和循环加卸载次序作用下 砂岩动力特性损伤演化规律[J]. 岩土力学, 2021, 42(2): 343-351.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!