Dynamic response mechanism of a rock-filling interfacial coupling body to blasting in it
-
摘要: 充填采矿法的充填体与矿岩体构成的界面耦合结构体，受采矿爆破影响会持续受到动力扰动，在充-岩界面耦合处易产生脱粘、裂隙扩展等行为，为井下生产带来安全隐患。采用ANSYS/LS-DYNA建立了充-岩界面耦合体模型，分析了爆破作用对界面耦合体结构的力学影响，获取了不同界面粗糙度、充填体养护龄期和起爆方式等因素对爆破裂隙扩展及应力波峰值应力的影响，探讨了爆破动力作用机理。结果表明：（1）爆破冲击在界面耦合体中存在拉、压和剪3种力学作用，且随着界面粗糙度的提高，界面受力呈先上升后下降趋势；（2）随着充填体养护时间增长，界面破坏逐步从受拉转化成剪切损伤；（3）同时起爆对耦合界面的损伤比逐孔起爆的小。Abstract: The interfacial coupling structure between the backfill and ore rock body in the filling mining method will be continuously disturbed by the influence of mining and blasting. In the filling-rock interfacial coupling, it is easy to produce the behaviors of debonding and fissure expansion, which will bring potential safety hazards to underground production. Because the field experiment is time-consuming and laborious, and it is difficult to observe the impact effect and the rock crack propagation process when the explosive is detonated, the simulation method was adopted for research. In the simulation, reasonable simplification is particularly important. According to the actual situation of blasting hole layout, the three rows of blasting holes that were detonated at one time were simplified into a single-row blasting hole model and an edge blasting hole model. According to the research results in related literatures, the coupling surfaces of the filling bodies and the ore rocks were simplified into three kinds (a flat interface, wavy interface and serrated interface). The three different shapes of the interfaces correspond to the different roughnesses of the interfaces, respectively. By considering that the hole arrangement method used in stope blasting is vertical hole arrangement, the holes are parallel, and at the same time, in order to improve the calculation of the software efficiency, simplified the three-dimensional model of the stope into a two-dimensional plane model. After a series of simplifications, a physical model for the filling-rock interface coupling body was proposed, and the corresponding geometric analysis model was established by using the ANSYS/LS-DYNA software And different material parameters were assigned to the different parts of the model, and the blasting effect was analyzed by software calculation. The mechanical influence of the interface coupling body structure was obtained, and the response law of different interface roughness, the curing age of the filling body and the blasting method on the blasting shock was obtained, and the mechanism of the blasting dynamics was discussed. The research results can reveal mechanical behaviors such as debonding and crack propagation at the coupling of filling-rock interface, and clarify the influence of different factors on the law of blasting shock response and the mechanism of blasting dynamics, which has certain guiding significance for downhole safety production. The results show as follows. (1) The blasting impact has three mechanical effects in the interface coupling body: tension, pressure and shear. When the stress wave passes through the interface, the peak acceleration of the monitoring point at the interface will increase due to different degrees of refraction. After passing through the coupling interface, the stress wave energy decays rapidly. (2) The impact of different interface roughness on blasting action is different. The joint roughness coefficient (JRC) represents the roughness of the interface coupling body. With the increase of the JRC value, the interface stress tends to rise first and then decline, but the overall damage decreases. (3) As the curing time of the backfill increases, the fracture range at the coupling interface shrinks, and the interface damage gradually changes from tensile damage to shear damage. (4) The damage of different detonation modes to the interface coupling body is different, and the damage of simultaneous detonation to the coupling interface is weaker than that of hole-by-hole detonation.
-
Key words:
- coupling structure /
- explosive impact /
- dynamic disturbance /
- crack propagation
-
温压炸药(thermobaric explosive，TBX)是一类能够充分利用压力效应和温度效应对目标造成毁伤的炸药。近几十年，温压炸药成为炸药研究的热点之一。A.Hahma等[1]通过测量冲击波超压研究, 比较了不同金属燃料对温压炸药TNT当量的影响；Zhang Fan等[2]利用大型爆炸罐, 研究了不同气氛条件下TNT基含铝炸药爆轰后的等静压、燃烧温度和爆炸火球状态；李秀丽等[3]采用红外热成像仪研究温压炸药的爆炸温度；阚金玲等[4-5]用红外热成像仪对温压炸药和普通炸药的火球特征参数进行了测量，发现温压炸药的能量远大于普通炸药；王晓峰等[6]根据量热法原理建立了在不同气氛条件下温压炸药爆炸能量的测量方法，用于定量评价温压炸药的爆炸总能量、爆轰能和后燃烧能。综上所述，现阶段温压炸药的研究重点是某种特定环境下能量释放规律的研究，而温压炸药是一种可以利用环境中部分氧来实现炸药能量的释放的含铝炸药，不同环境对炸药能量的释放具有不同的影响。本文中，拟采用自行设计的密闭爆炸装置对温压炸药在真空状态和空气状态下爆轰后的爆炸压力和爆炸温度进行实验测试，结合爆炸后气体产物的测试结果，分析环境状态对温压炸药爆炸性能的影响。
1. 实验
1.1 实验样品
实验原材料：奥克托今基温压炸药，铝粉质量分数为30%，理论密度为1.96 g/cm3。样品制备：将温压炸药采用模压方式压制成带8#雷管孔的药柱，药柱直径为25 mm，药柱质量为(25.000±0.050) g。
1.2 实验装置
实验装置如图 1所示，密闭爆炸装置为一钢结构的圆柱型弹体，其高为400 mm，外径为270 mm，内径为188 mm，内容积为5.8 L。本实验装置的温度传感器采用具有自恢复能力的快速反应钨铼热电偶，布置在距离端盖中心40 mm处，下端距离上端盖底部180 mm，响应时间达10-5 s；最大可耐压力达135 MPa；测温系统频带宽度为200 kHz；放大倍数为100，温度范围为-240~1 200 ℃, 精度小于1%。本实验装置的压力传感器采用超高温硅压阻传感器，布置在距离端盖中心40 mm处，其压力范围为0~140 MPa，精度小于1%。
1.3 实验方法
真空环境下的实验步骤：
首先, 将点火装置短路，把实验用温压炸药样品悬挂在距离上端盖20 cm处，再将起爆雷管接到点火装置上;
然后, 将实验装置上端盖密封，用真空泵抽空爆炸罐内的空气，再向爆炸罐内缓慢充入氮气，如此循环3次，将爆炸罐内的氧气完全抽走，使爆炸罐内剩余气体的压力约为3 kPa，起爆实验样品，压力传感器和温度传感器记录50 s内的电信号数据；
最后，通过通气装置，用气体采样袋采集反应后的气体样品，利用Clarus500气相色谱仪对爆轰后的N2、CO2、CO、CH4等主要气体产物进行定量分析。
空气环境下的实验步骤：
首先, 将点火装置短路，把实验用温压炸药样品悬挂在距离上端盖20 cm处，再将起爆雷管接到点火装置上;
然后, 将实验装置上端盖密封，起爆实验样品，压力传感器和温度传感器记录50 s内的电信号数据;
最后, 通过通气装置，用气体采样袋采集反应后的气体样品，利用Clarus500气相色谱仪对爆轰后的N2、CO2、CO、CH4等主要气体产物进行定量分析。
2. 结果与分析
2.1 温压炸药爆炸压力
实验得到的温压炸药真空和空气环境下爆炸压力的电压U信号与时间t的关系曲线如图 2所示。将图 2数据处理后可得到：真空环境下的入射峰值压力和平衡压力分别为4.44和0.25 MPa, 空气环境下的入射峰值压力和平衡压力分别为8.77和0.39 MPa。由此可知，空气环境下温压炸药的爆炸入射峰值压力比真空环境下的高97%。其原因是：在真空环境下，温压炸药爆炸能量没有传播的载体，只能依靠自身反应生成的气体向外膨胀来传播，因此炸药爆炸压力衰减迅速；在空气环境下，温压炸药爆炸能量可以通过空气向外传播，因此，其爆炸压力衰减相对真空环境衰减缓慢。空气环境下的平衡压力比真空环境下的高56%，这是由于在空气环境下，空气与温压炸药爆轰后的气体产物的摩尔量总和高于真空环境下温压炸药爆轰后的气体产物的摩尔量。
图 2 温压炸药爆炸压力随时间的变化Figure 2. Explosion pressure of thermobaric explosive varying with time2.2 温压炸药爆炸场温度
实验得到的温压炸药真空和空气环境下爆炸温度的电压信号与时间的关系曲线如图 3所示。将图 3数据处理后可得入射峰值温度和平衡温度。真空环境下，温压炸药爆炸产物入射峰值温度为943 ℃，平衡温度为283 ℃；空气环境下，温压炸药爆炸产物入射峰值温度高于1 371 ℃，平衡温度为320 ℃。温压炸药在空气环境下的爆炸场峰值温度比真空环境下的高45%以上，温压炸药在空气环境下的平衡温度比真空环境下的高13%。其原因是：真空环境下，温压炸药中的单质炸药首先爆炸生成高温高压的气体产物，高温环境下其气体产物与铝粉发生氧化还原反应并放出热量，爆炸产物温度迅速上升，与此同时高温高压的气体产物不断对外膨胀做功输出能量，使爆炸产物温度下降，由于温度的下降以及氧化反应导致的产物中氧含量的降低制约了铝粉的反应放热，致使真空环境下爆炸温度随着爆炸产物的膨胀而迅速降低，直至达到温度平衡；而在空气环境下，温压炸药中的单质炸药首先爆炸生成高温高压的气体产物，高温环境下其气体产物与铝粉发生氧化还原反应并放出热量，爆炸产物温度迅速上升，与此同时高温高压的气体产物不断对外膨胀做功输出能量，在气体产物膨胀的过程中与空气充分混合提高了氧含量，可以促进铝粉的氧化反应，提高铝粉反应的完全性及放热量，因此，在爆炸产物膨胀至温度传感器时仍能保持比真空环境下较高的温度。
图 3 温压炸药爆炸温度与时间关系Figure 3. Explosion temperature of thermobaric explosive varying with time2.3 气体产物测试分析
不同环境条件下，温压炸药爆炸后收集的气体产物气相色谱分析结果见表 1，表中各气体的含量是其摩尔量的百分比含量。由表 1中数据可知，空气环境下温压炸药的气体产物中CO2的含量明显低于真空环境下。按照温压炸药配方组成计算，25.00 g温压炸药，氧元素的物质的量为0.425 7 mol。温压炸药在空气环境下爆炸时，系统的氧元素的物质的量为0.519 7 mol。
表 1 不同氛围下气体产物的摩尔分数Table 1. Mole fraction of gas product under different conditions氛围 x(CH4)/% x(CO2)/% x(N2)/% x(CO)/% 真空 0.625 0 3.617 5 42.764 1 25.803 3 空气 1.551 5 0.029 2 33.556 9 26.283 2 将炸药爆炸后的气体视为理想气体，按照实验测得的平衡状态下的压力和温度，通过理想气体状态方程计算气体产物的物质的量，以及结合表 1中数据计算得表 2。由表 2中数据可知，虽然空气环境下剩余氧元素的物质的量nrem(O)比真空环境下的高0.017 3 mol，由于空气环境下氧元素的总摩尔量nal(O)比真空环境下的高0.094 0 mol，因此，空气环境下实际参加氧化反应的氧元素的物质的量nrea(O)比真空环境下的多0.076 7 mol，正是由于这部分氧气参加氧化反应放出的热量使空气环境下的平衡温度比真空环境下的高37 ℃。
表 2 不同氛围下气体产物的摩尔量Table 2. Mole of gas product under different conditions氛围 nal(O)/mol n(CH4)/mol n(CO2)/mol n(N2)/mol n(CO)/mol nrem(O)/mol nrea(O)/mol 真空 0.425 7 0.002 0 0.011 3 0.134 2 0.080 9 0.103 5 0.322 2 空气 0.519 7 0.007 1 0.000 1 0.154 0 0.120 6 0.120 8 0.398 9 3. 结论
通过测量25 g温压炸药真空和空气条件下在容积为5.8 L的密闭爆炸罐内爆轰后的爆炸压力和爆炸温度以及气态产物分析，得到以下结论:(1)温压炸药在空气环境下爆轰后的平衡压力和平衡温度明显高于真空环境下的平衡压力和平衡温度; (2)空气中的氧气参与了温压炸药第3阶段铝粉有氧燃烧反应，证明温压炸药在空气中爆轰存在明显的后燃效应。
-
图 2 物理模型(以单排炮孔模型为例）
Figure 2. The physical model (taking the single-row blasting hole model as an example)
图 3 网格划分（以两帮炮孔模型为例)
Figure 3. Grid division (taking the edge blasting hole model as an example)
图 4 爆破应力云图（以7 d龄期的平直形界面耦合体为例）
Figure 4. Blasting stress nephograms (taking the 7-day-age coupling body with a flat interface as an example)
图 6 监测点应力时程曲线对比（以7 d龄期的平直形界面耦合体为例）
Figure 6. Comparison of stress-time curves at the monitoring points (taking the 7-day-age coupling body with a flat interface as an example)
图 7 监测点加速度时程曲线对比（以7 d龄期的平直形界面耦合体为例）
Figure 7. Comparison of acceleration-time curves at the monitoring points (taking the 7-day-age coupling body with a flat interface as an example)
图 8 不同粗糙度耦合界面爆破裂隙对比（以采用不同炮孔模型逐孔起爆的7 d龄期界面耦合体为例）
Figure 8. Comparison of blasting cracks at different roughness coupling interfaces (taking the 7-day-age interface coupling body detonated hole by hole based on different blasing hole models as an example)
图 9 不同龄期、不同界面粗糙度界面耦合体爆破裂隙对比（以基于单排炮孔模型逐孔起爆的界面耦合体为例）
Figure 9. Comparison of blasting cracks in different-age interfacial coupling bodies with different interface roughnesses (taking the interface coupling bodies detonated hole by hole based on the the single-row blasting hole model as an example)
图 10 不同龄期、不同界面粗糙度界面耦合体爆破裂隙对比（以基于两帮炮孔模型逐孔起爆的界面耦合体为例）
Figure 10. Comparison of blasting cracks in different-age interfacial coupling bodies with different interface roughnesses (taking the interface coupling bodies detonated hole by hole based on the the edge blasting hole model as an example)
图 11 基于单排炮孔模型，不同起爆方式下，界面粗糙度不同的7 d龄界面耦合体爆破裂隙对比
Figure 11. Comparison of blasting cracks in 7-day-age interface coupling bodies with different interfacial roughnesses detonated by different modes based on the single-row blasting holde model
图 12 基于两帮炮孔模型，不同起爆方式下，界面粗糙度不同的7 d龄界面耦合体爆破裂隙对比
Figure 12. Comparison of blasting cracks in 7-day-age interface coupling bodies with different interfacial roughnesses detonated by different modes based on the edge blasting holde model
表 1 炮孔布置参数
Table 1. Parameters of blasting hole arrangement
布置方式 炸药密度/（kg·m−3） 孔径/mm 孔深/m 炮孔排距/m 炮孔间距/m 垂直中深孔 1060 90 8 2 2 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 耦合界面形态及对应节理粗糙度
Table 2. Coupling interface morphologies and the corresponding joint roughness coefficients
耦合界面类别 剖面线形态 cjr 平直形 
0 波浪形 
8.12 锯齿形 
18.38
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 炸药材料及JWL状态方程参数
Table 3. Parameters for explosive materials and JWL equation of state
密度/（kg·m−3） 爆速/（km·s−1） A/GPa B/GPa R1 R2 ω E/GPa 1 060 4 220 0.2 4.5 1.1 0.35 4.2
下载: 导出CSV
表 4 岩石和充填体材料参数
Table 4. Parameters for rocks and filling materials
材料 密度/(kg·m−3) 泊松比 弹性模量/GPa 单轴抗压强度/GPa 岩石 2 551 0.25 25.00 100.00 7 d龄期充填体 2 180 0.31 0.92 2.10 28 d龄期充填体 2 200 0.24 2.20 4.17
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 不同粗糙度界面耦合体监测点1～4峰值拉应力
Table 5. Peak tensile stress at monitoring points 1−4 in the interface coupling bodies with different roughnesses
监测点编号 单排炮孔峰值拉应力/MPa 两帮炮孔峰值拉应力/MPa cjr=0 cjr=8 cjr=20 cjr=0 cjr=8 cjr=20 1 9.96 3.06 2.56 0.73 4.76 0.73 2 0 2.85 0.04 0.90 4.46 0.04 3 0 9.17×10−3 0.02 3.73×10−3 0.01 0.02 4 0 9.61×10−3 0.01 4.86×10−3 0.02 0.02
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 不同龄期界面耦合体监测点1～4峰值拉应力
Table 6. Peak tensile stress at monitoring points 1−4 in different-age interface coupling bodies
监测点编号 单排炮孔峰值拉应力/MPa 两帮炮孔峰值拉应力/MPa 7 d龄期 28 d龄期 7 d龄期 28 d龄期 1 9.96 3.12 0.73 0.70 2 1.15×10-3 2.10×10-3 0.90 0.97 3 1.43×10-3 0.03 3.73×10-3 0.56 4 9.56×10-4 0.02 4.86×10-3 0.26
下载: 导出CSV
表 7 不同起爆方式下界面耦合体监测点1～4峰值拉应力
Table 7. Peak tensile stress at monitoring points 1−4 in interfacial coupling bodies with different detonation modes
监测点编号 单排炮孔峰值拉应力/MPa 两帮炮孔峰值拉应力/MPa 同时起爆 逐孔起爆 同时起爆 逐孔起爆 1 9.96 2.66 0.73 14.64 2 0 0.09 0.90 2.34 3 0 0.05 3.73×10−3 0.19 4 0 0.04 4.86×10−3 0.16
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 张海波, 宋卫东. 评述国内外充填采矿技术发展现状 [J]. 中国矿业, 2009, 18(12): 59–62. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4051.2009.12.018.ZHANG H B, SONG W D. Discussion on the current state of backfill mining from the domestic and foreign development [J]. China Mining Magazine, 2009, 18(12): 59–62. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4051.2009.12.018. [2] 王湘桂, 唐开元. 矿山充填采矿法综述 [J]. 矿业快报, 2008, 24(12): 1–5.WANG X G, TANG K Y. Overview of cut and fill method for mines [J]. Express Information of Mining Industry, 2008, 24(12): 1–5. [3] 尹升华, 吴爱祥. 缓倾斜中厚矿体采矿方法现状及发展趋势 [J]. 金属矿山, 2007(12): 10–13. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-1250.2007.12.002.YIN S H, WU A X. Status quo of mining methods for gently inclined medium-thick orebodies and their development trend [J]. Metal Mine, 2007(12): 10–13. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-1250.2007.12.002. [4] 刘光生. 充填体与围岩接触成拱作用机理及强度模型研究[D]. 北京: 北京科技大学, 2017: 17−22.LIU G S. Required strength model of cemented backfill with research on arching mechanism considering backfill-rock interaction [D]. Beijing: University of Science and Technology Beijing, 2017: 17−22. [5] 韩斌, 王贤来, 肖卫国. 基于多元非线性回归的井下采场充填体强度预测及评价 [J]. 采矿与安全工程学报, 2012, 29(5): 714–718.HAN B, WANG X L, XIAO W G. Estimation and evaluation of backfill strength in underground stope based on multivariate nonlinear regression analysis [J]. Journal of Mining and Safety Engineering, 2012, 29(5): 714–718. [6] 贺桂成, 刘永, 丁德馨, 等. 废石胶结充填体强度特性及其应用研究 [J]. 采矿与安全工程学报, 2013, 30(1): 74–79.HE G C, LIU Y, DING D X, et al. Strength characteristic of cemented waste rock backfills and its application [J]. Journal of Mining and Safety Engineering, 2013, 30(1): 74–79. [7] 孙宁新, 雷明锋, 张运良, 等. 软弱夹层对爆炸应力波传播过程的影响研究 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2020, 39(16): 112–119, 147. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2020.16.016.SUN N X, LEI M F, ZHANG Y L, et al. A study on the influence of weak interlayer on the propagation process of explosion stress wave [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2020, 39(16): 112–119, 147. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2020.16.016. [8] 李夕兵. 论岩体软弱结构面对应力波传播的影响 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 1993, 13(4): 334–342.LI X B. Influence of the structural weakness planes in rock mass on the propagation of stress waves [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 1993, 13(4): 334–342. [9] 李夕兵, 陈寿如. 应力波在层状矿岩结构中传播的新算法 [J]. 中南大学学报(自然科学版), 1993, 24(6): 738–742.LI X B, CHEN S R. A new method for investigating the propagation of stress waves through layered rockmass [J]. Journal of Central South University, 1993, 24(6): 738–742. [10] 李夕兵, 古德生, 赖海辉. 爆炸应力波遇夹层后的能量传递效果 [J]. 有色金属, 1993, 45(4): 1–6.LI X B, GU D S, LAI H H. Energy transmission effects of transient stress waves through sandwiches in rock mass [J]. Nonferrous Metals, 1993, 45(4): 1–6. [11] SCHOENBERG M. Elastic wave behavior across linear slip interfaces [J]. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1980, 68(5): 1516–1521. DOI: 10.1121/1.385077. [12] PYRAK L J, MYER L R, COOK N G W. Anisotropy in seismic velocities and amplitudes from multiple parallel fractures [J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 1990, 95(B7): 11345–11358. DOI: 10.1029/JB095iB07p11345. [13] SCHOENBERG M E, MUIR F. A calculus for finely layered anisotropic media [J]. Geophysics, 1989, 54(5): 581–589. DOI: 10.1190/1.1442685. [14] FAN L F, MA G W, LI J C. Nonlinear viscoelastic medium equivalence for stress wave propagation in a jointed rock mass [J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2012, 50: 11–18. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2011.12.008. [15] LI J C, MA G W, ZHAO J. An equivalent viscoelastic model for rock mass with parallel joints [J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 2010, 115(B3): B03305. DOI: 10.1029/2008jb006241. [16] MA G W, FAN L F, LI J C. Evaluation of equivalent medium methods for stress wave propagation in jointed rock mass [J]. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2013, 37(7): 701–715. DOI: 10.1002/nag.1118. [17] 杨立云, 刘振坤, 周莹莹, 等. 爆炸应力波在含层理介质中传播规律的实验研究 [J]. 爆破, 2008, 35(2): 1–5, 11. DOI: 10.3963/j.issn.1001-487X.2018.02.001.YANG L Y, LIU Z K, ZHOU Y Y, et al. Study on propagation law of explosive stress wave in layered media [J]. Blasting, 2008, 35(2): 1–5, 11. DOI: 10.3963/j.issn.1001-487X.2018.02.001. [18] 杨仁树, 李炜煜, 方士正, 等. 层状复合岩体冲击动力学特性试验研究 [J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2019, 38(9): 1747–1757. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2019.0021.YANG R S, LI W Y, FANG S Z, et al. Experimental study on impact dynamic characteristics of layered composite rocks [J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2019, 38(9): 1747–1757. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2019.0021. [19] 包会云. 层状岩体应力波传播特性及震源定位研究[D]. 沈阳: 东北大学, 2015: 45−61.BAO H Y. Research on propagation characteristics of stress wave propagation in layered rock and vibration source localization [D]. Shenyang: Northeastern University, 2015: 45−61. [20] 武仁杰, 李海波. SHPB冲击作用下层状千枚岩多尺度破坏机理研究 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2019, 39(8): 083106. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0187.WU R J, LI H B. Multi-scale failure mechanism analysis of layered phyllite subject to impact loading [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2019, 39(8): 083106. DOI: 10.11883/bzycj-2019-0187. [21] 刘婷婷, 李新平, 李海波, 等. 应力波在充填节理岩体中传播规律的数值研究 [J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2016, 35(S2): 3552–3560. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2016.0829.LIU T T, LI X P, LI H B, et al. Numerical study on stress wave propagation across filled joints [J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2016, 35(S2): 3552–3560. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2016.0829. [22] 李秀虎, 郭连军, 潘博, 等. 节理岩体爆破数值模拟研究 [J]. 辽宁科技大学学报, 2017, 40(5): 390–395. DOI: 10.13988/j.ustl.2017.05.013.LI X H, GUO L J, PAN B, et al. Numerical simulation of blasting in jointed rock mass [J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Liaoning, 2017, 40(5): 390–395. DOI: 10.13988/j.ustl.2017.05.013. [23] 朱鹏瑞, 宋卫东, 曹帅, 等. 爆破动载下胶结充填体的张拉力学响应机制 [J]. 采矿与安全工程学报, 2018, 35(3): 605–611. DOI: 10.13545/j.cnki.jmse.2018.03.022.ZHU P R, SONG W D, CAO S, et al. Tensile mechanical response mechanism of cemented backfills under blasting load [J]. Journal of Mining and Safety Engineering, 2018, 35(3): 605–611. DOI: 10.13545/j.cnki.jmse.2018.03.022. [24] 刘志祥, 李夕兵. 爆破动载下高阶段充填体稳定性研究 [J]. 矿冶工程, 2004, 24(3): 21–24. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-6099.2004.03.007.LIU Z X, LI X B. Research on stability of high-level backfill in blasting [J]. Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, 2004, 24(3): 21–24. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-6099.2004.03.007. [25] 王振昌. 二步回采围岩和充填体爆破损伤特征及安全阈值研究[D]. 福州: 福州大学, 2018: 10−26.WANG Z C. Study on blasting damage characteristics and safety threshold of surrounding rock and backfill in two-step mining [D]. Fuzhou: Fuzhou University, 2018: 10−26. [26] 李化, 黄润秋. 岩石结构面粗糙度系数JRC定量确定方法研究 [J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2014, 33(S2): 3489–3497. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2014.s2.012.LI H, HUANG R Q. Method of quantitative determination of joint roughness coefficient [J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2014, 33(S2): 3489–3497. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2014.s2.012. [27] 王岐. 用伸长率R确定岩石节理粗糙度系数的研究[C]//地下工程经验交流会论文选集. 甘肃: 中国岩石力学与工程学会, 1982: 355−360.WANG Q. Study on determining the roughness coefficient of rock joints with elongation R [C] // Gansu: Meeting on Underground Engineering Experience Sharing, 1982: 355−360. [28] 杜时贵, 陈禹, 樊良本. JRC修正直边法的数学表达 [J]. 工程地质学报, 1996, 4(2): 36–43.DU S G, CHEN Y, FAN L B. Mathematical expression of JRC modified straight edge [J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 1996, 4(2): 36–43. [29] 段军, 常诗源, 张鹏飞, 等. 双利铁矿台阶爆破空气间隔长度研究与应用 [J]. 中国矿业, 2020, 29(6): 155–158. DOI: 10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2020.06.006.DUAN J, CHANG S Y, ZHANG P F, et al. Study and application of bench blasting interval length in Shuangli mine [J]. China Mining Magazine, 2020, 29(6): 155–158. DOI: 10.12075/j.issn.1004-4051.2020.06.006. [30] 曹杨. 中深孔台阶爆破模拟与研究[D]. 太原: 中北大学, 2012: 27−47.CAO Y. Simulation and research on the medium-length hole bench blasting [D]. Taiyuan: North University of China, 2012: 27−47. [31] 季京晨. 花岗岩物理力学性质与宏微观力学特性研究[D]. 安徽淮南: 安徽理工大学, 2019: 27−28.JI J C. Study on the physical and mechanical properties of the granite and the micro-mechanical properties of the macro [D]. Huainan, Anhui: Anhui University of Science and Technology, 2019: 27−28. [32] 刘永涛. 不同龄期尾砂胶结充填体单轴压缩破坏的声发射及断口分形特征[D]. 武汉: 武汉科技大学, 2018: 21−26.LIU Y T. Acoustic emission and fractal characteristics of cemented tailings backfill in different age under uniaxial compression [D]. Wuhan: Wuhan University of Science and Technology, 2018: 21−26. [33] 蔡美峰, 何满潮, 刘东燕. 岩石力学与工程[M]. 2版. 北京: 科学出版社, 2013: 24−25.CAI M F, HE M C, LIU D Y. Rock mechanics and engineering [M]. 2nd ed. Beijing: Science Press, 2013: 24−25. 期刊类型引用(12)
1. 刘泉，姚箭，宋先钊，蒋欣利，李斌，王永旭，张丹，解立峰，张国凯. 初始环境压力对RDX基温压炸药冲击波超压和温度的影响. 北京理工大学学报. 2024(09): 913-922 . 
百度学术2. 张思维，张鹏程，王子，彭文联，谈玲华，张兴高. 温压炸药配方及毁伤评估研究进展. 兵工学报. 2024(S1): 147-160 . 百度学术3. 刘超龙，叶阳，曾亚武，程树范. 气体密度和初压对炸药爆炸压力衰减的影响. 中国安全生产科学技术. 2022(11): 126-132 . 百度学术4. 李志敏，汪旭光，汪泉，陆军伟，林朝键，刘文震. 负压环境对炸药爆炸冲击波影响的实验研究. 火炸药学报. 2021(01): 35-40 . 百度学术5. 孙立鹏，王少娟，谭小艳，向凯轮，王晓峰. 一种温压炸药的爆热表征与影响因素分析. 化学推进剂与高分子材料. 2021(06): 52-55 . 百度学术6. 郭涛，张启威，原景超. 密闭立方体爆炸冲击波数值模拟分析. 电子技术应用. 2020(04): 57-60 . 百度学术7. 张广华，李彪彪，沈飞，王胜强，王辉. 真空条件下炸药爆炸特性试验研究. 火炸药学报. 2020(03): 308-313 . 百度学术8. 张龙，廖旭东，张宝国，张东亮，赵艳，孔德骞. 有限空间爆炸瞬态温度的动态补偿方法研究. 传感技术学报. 2020(06): 861-866 . 百度学术9. 张继军，张东亮，赵建伟，张宝国，崔云霄. 小比距离密闭空腔爆炸爆后气体温度和压力测量技术研究. 爆炸与冲击. 2019(02): 104-109 . 
本站查看10. 张广华，屈可朋，沈飞，王辉. 组合装药的撞击安全性与内爆威力试验研究. 高压物理学报. 2019(04): 175-181 . 百度学术11. 何宁，向聪，李伟，张奇. 硝基甲烷与铝粉混合物燃爆特性实验研究. 兵工学报. 2018(01): 111-117 . 百度学术12. 许珂，李秀地，毛怀源，芦天翊. 坑道内温压炸药冲击波传播特性的试验研究. 爆破. 2018(03): 42-48 . 百度学术其他类型引用(3)
-
下载:
百度学术
计量
- 文章访问数: 593
- HTML全文浏览量: 363
- PDF下载量: 82
- 被引次数: 15