不同尺寸砂岩动态力学性质和应力平衡性的试验研究

张盛; 王峥; 张旭龙; 荣腾龙; 周锐; 徐瑞泽

doi:10.11883/bzycj-2021-0447

不同尺寸砂岩动态力学性质和应力平衡性的试验研究

doi: 10.11883/bzycj-2021-0447

张盛^{1, 2,},
王峥^1, ,,
张旭龙¹,
荣腾龙¹,
周锐¹,
徐瑞泽¹

1.
河南理工大学能源科学与工程学院，河南焦作 454003
2.
河南理工大学煤炭安全生产与清洁高效利用省部共建协同创新中心，河南焦作 454003

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金（51674101）；国家自然科学基金青年基金（52004081）；国家自然科学基金面上项目（52174074）

详细信息

作者简介:
张　盛（1976－　），男，博士，教授，博士生导师，zhangs@hpu..edu.cn

通讯作者:
王　峥（1997－　），男，硕士研究生，wz_hpu@163.com

中图分类号: O346; TU45
计量
- 文章访问数: 605
- HTML全文浏览量: 168
- PDF下载量: 92
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-10-28
- 修回日期: 2022-03-25
- 网络出版日期: 2022-03-29
- 刊出日期: 2022-10-31

Rock dynamic mechanical properties and dynamic stress balance of sandstone specimens with different sizes

1.
School of Energy Science and Engineering, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454003, Henan, China
2.
Collaborative Innovation Center of Coal Work Safety and Clean High Efficiency Utilization, Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454003, Henan, China

摘要

摘要: 采用大直径分离式霍普金森压杆系统获得的不同尺寸试样的实验冲击动态力学参数有差异，因此在直径100 mm压杆上进行了3种直径（50、75和100 mm）和5种长径比（0.4、0.5、0.6、0.8和1.0）的砂岩试样冲击试验，分析了不同尺寸试样应力-应变曲线和应变率曲线随尺寸的变化，提出了用于比较波形对齐重合度的波形叠加系数，并与应力平衡因子共同构建了动态应力平衡性研究体系，由此确定大直径霍普金森压杆试验的试样建议尺寸。同时，利用高速摄影机监测试样的动态破坏状况。结果表明：当长径比相同时，直径75与100 mm岩石试样的动态抗压强度测试值相近，直径50 mm试样具有更明显的长度效应；随着试样直径的增大，应变率曲线从单峰变为双峰；小尺寸试样更易发生轴向劈裂破坏，大尺寸试样受内部应力波叠加影响产生了较大的拉应力，易发生层裂拉伸和轴向劈裂的复合型破坏；对直径75 mm且长径比0.3~0.4的试样，波形对齐后重合度较高，在起始破坏前拥有充足的应力平衡时间，应变率加载效果较好。获得了砂岩试样冲击压缩试验的尺寸效应，可为大直径岩石试样的尺寸选择提供参考。
- 动态压缩力学性质 /
- 尺寸效应 /
- 应力平衡因子 /
- 大直径霍普金森压杆 /
- 砂岩
Abstract: Aiming at a clarification of the differences in dynamic mechanical properties of rock specimens with different sizes when characterized by a large diameter split Hopkinson pressure bar system, sandstone specimens with three different diameters (50, 75 and 100 mm) and five kinds of length-diameter ratios (0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0) were employed for impact experiments on a pressure bar of diameter 100 mm. The variations of stress versus strain and strain rate versus time of specimens with different sizes were analyzed. The concept of a superposition coefficient for comparing waveform alignment overlap was then proposed, and together with the equilibrium factor it was used to study dynamic stress equilibrium. Thus, the recommended size range of specimens was determined for large-diameter split Hopkinson pressure bar tests. Also, a high-speed camera was used to observe the dynamic damage of the specimens. The results show that when the length-diameter ratio of specimen remains the same, the tested dynamic compressive strengths are close for the specimens of diameter 75 mm and 100 mm, but it is affected by more pronounced specimen length for the specimens of diameter 50 mm. With the increase of specimen’s diameter, the curve of strain rate versus time changes from single peak to double peak. The small-size specimen is more prone to axial splitting failure, and the large-size specimen produces larger tensile stress due to the superposition of internal stress waves, which is prone to the composite failure of spallation tension and axial splitting. When the specimen with a diameter of 75 mm and the length-diameter ratio of 0.3–0.4 is used, the coincidence degree after waveform alignment is better, sufficient stress balance time is achieved before initial failure, and the strain rate loading is more effective. It is helpful to reveal the size effect on the rock dynamic compression mechanical properties with different sizes of specimens, as it can provide a good reference for the specimen size selection in large-diameter SHPB tests.
- dynamic compression mechanical properties /
- size effect /
- stress balance factor /
- large-diameter split Hopkinson pressure bar /
- sandstone

HTML全文

图 1 SHPB系统

Figure 1. An SHPB system

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 杆径100 mm的SHPB试验装置

Figure 2. An SHPB test device with the rod diameter of 100 mm

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 监测设备布置

Figure 3. Layout of monitoring equipments

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 粘贴应变片的试样

Figure 4. The specimen with strain gauges

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 砂岩颗粒的微观组成

Figure 5. Microscopic compositions of sandstone particles

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 长径比0.5试样的波形

Figure 6. Waveforms of specimens with the length-diameter ratio of 0.5

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 不同尺寸试样的透射波波形

Figure 7. Transmission waveforms of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 不同尺寸试样的动态应力-应变曲线

Figure 8. Dynamic stress-strain curves of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 不同长径比试样的动态抗压强度

Figure 9. Dynamic compressive strengths of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 不同尺寸试样的应变率曲线

Figure 10. Strain rate curves of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 不同长径比试样的最大应变率

Figure 11. The maximum strain rates of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 不同尺寸试样的动态破坏过程

Figure 12. Dynamic destruction processes of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 应力波平移分析

Figure 13. An analytical diagram of stress-wave translation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 不同尺寸试样的冲击波波形叠加

Figure 14. The impact waveform superposition of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 不同尺寸下试样的波形叠加系数

Figure 15. Waveform superposition coefficients of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 不同尺寸试样的应力平衡因子

Figure 16. Stress balance factors of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 17 不同尺寸试样的平衡点和破坏起始点

Figure 17. Balance points and damage starting points of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 18 不同尺寸试样的破坏起始点与平衡点的时间差

Figure 18. Time differences between damage starting points and balance points of specimens with different sizes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 不同尺寸试样的动态分析

Table 1. Dynamic analyses of specimens with different sizes

情况	$ \varnothing $50 mm	$ \varnothing $75 mm	$ \varnothing $100 mm
应变率加载	良好	双峰	较明显双峰
动态破坏	轴向劈裂	轴向劈裂	轴向劈裂和纵向层裂的复合型破坏
γ≤0.5	无法满足	满足	x= 0.2～0.5
Δt≥25 μs	x=0.2～0.5	x=0.2～0.4	x=0.2

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(37)

[1]	蔡美峰. 岩石力学与工程 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002: 1–68.
[2]	方正峰. 基于SHPB试验的灰岩动态力学特性及损伤破坏过程研究 [D]. 贵阳: 贵州大学, 2017: 1–13.
[3]	胡时胜, 王礼立, 宋力, 等. Hopkinson压杆技术在中国的发展回顾 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2014, 34(6): 641–657. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2014)06-0641-17. HU S S, WANG L L, SONG L, et al. Review of the development of Hopkinson pressure bar technique in China [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2014, 34(6): 641–657. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2014)06-0641-17.
[4]	GAMA B A, LOPATNIKOV S L, GILLESPIE JR J W. Hopkinson bar experimental technique: a critical review [J]. Applied Mechanics Reviews, 2004, 57(4): 223–250. DOI: 10.1115/1.1704626.
[5]	VAN MIER J G M, VAN VLIET M R A. Influence of microstructure of concrete on size/scale effects in tensile fracture [J]. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2003, 70(16): 2281–2306. DOI: 10.1016/S0013-7944(02)00222-9.
[6]	ULUSAY R. The ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 2007-2014 [M]. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2015.
[7]	PATERSON M S, WONG T F. Experimental rock deformation-the brittle field [M]. New York, USA: Springer-Verlag, 2005: 5–15.
[8]	洪亮. 冲击荷载下岩石强度及破碎能耗特征的尺寸效应研究 [D]. 长沙: 中南大学, 2008: 91–118. HONG L. Size effect on strength and energy dissipation in fracture of rock under impact loads [D]. Changsha, Hunan, China: Central South University, 2008: 91–118.
[9]	李夕兵. 岩石动力学基础与应用 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2014: 1–47. LI X B. Rock dynamics fundamentals and applications [M]. Beijing, China: Science Press, 2014: 1–47.
[10]	宫凤强, 李夕兵, 饶秋华, 等. 岩石SHPB试验中确定试样尺寸的参考方法 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2013, 32(17): 24–28. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2013.17.005. GONG F Q, LI X B, RAO Q H, et al. Reference method for determining sample size in SHPB tests of rock materials [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2013, 32(17): 24–28. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2013.17.005.
[11]	李地元, 肖鹏, 谢涛, 等. 动静态压缩下岩石试样的长径比效应研究 [J]. 实验力学, 2018, 33(1): 93–100. DOI: 10.7520/1001-4888-16-254. LI D Y, XIAO P, XIE T, et al. On the effect of length to diameter ratio of rock specimen subjected to dynamic and static compression [J]. Journal of Experimental Mechanics, 2018, 33(1): 93–100. DOI: 10.7520/1001-4888-16-254.
[12]	平琦, 张号, 苏海鹏. 不同长度石灰岩动态压缩力学性质试验研究 [J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2018, 37(S2): 3891–3897. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2018.0646. PING Q, ZHANG H, SU H P. Study on dynamic compression mechanical properties of limestone with different lengths [J]. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2018, 37(S2): 3891–3897. DOI: 10.13722/j.cnki.jrme.2018.0646.
[13]	杜晶. 不同长径比下岩石冲击动力学特性研究 [D]. 长沙: 中南大学, 2011: 39–57. DU J. Size effect on the dynamic mechanical properties under impact loads of rock [D]. Changsha, Hunan, China: Central South University, 2011: 39–57.
[14]	YUAN Q P, XIE G X, WANG L, et al. Experimental study on stress uniformity and deformation behavior of coals with different length-to-diameter ratios under dynamic compression [J]. Shock and Vibration, 2021, 2021: 6675200. DOI: 10.1155/2021/6675200.
[15]	ZHAO F Q, XU P B, WEN H M. Influence of specimen size in SHPB tests on concrete [J]. Chinese Journal of High Pressure Physics, 2018, 32(1): 014101. DOI: 10.11858/gywlxb.20170532.
[16]	梁书锋, 吴帅峰, 李胜林, 等. 岩石材料SHPB实验试件尺寸确定的研究 [J]. 工程爆破, 2015, 21(5): 1–5. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7051.2015.05.001. LIANG S F, WU S F, LI S L, et al. Study on the determination of specimen size in SHPB experiments of rock materials [J]. Engineering Blasting, 2015, 21(5): 1–5. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7051.2015.05.001.
[17]	郭瑞奇, 任辉启, 张磊, 等. 分离式大直径Hopkinson杆实验技术研究进展 [J]. 兵工学报, 2019, 40(7): 1518–1536. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2019.07.023. GUO R Q, REN H Q, ZHANG L, et al. Research progress of large-diameter split Hopkinson bar experimental technique [J]. Acta Armamentarii, 2019, 40(7): 1518–1536. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1093.2019.07.023.
[18]	HOPKINSON J. On the rupture of iron wire by a blow [C] // Proceedings of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester. Manchester, UK, 1872: 40–45.
[19]	HOPKINSON B. A method of measuring the pressure produced in the detonation of high explosives or by the impact of bullets [J]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and and Engineering Sciences, 1914, 213(497): 437–456.
[20]	TAYLOR G I. The testing of materials at high rates of loading [J]. Journal of the ICE, 1946, 26(8): 486–519. DOI: 10.1680/ijoti.1946.13699.
[21]	DAVIES R M. A critical study of the Hopkinson pressure bar [J]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 1948, 240(821): 375–457. DOI: 10.1098/rsta.1948.0001.
[22]	LINDHOLM U S. Some experiments with the split Hopkinson pressure bar [J]. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 1964, 12(5): 317–325. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5096(64)90028-6.
[23]	KOLSKY H. An investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very high rates of loading [J]. Proceedings of the Physical Society Section B, 1949, 62(11): 676–700. DOI: 10.1088/0370-1301/62/11/302.
[24]	王礼立. 应力波基础 [M]. 2版. 北京: 国防工业出版社, 2005: 5–64. WANG L L. Foundation of stress waves [M]. 2nd ed. Beijing, China: National Defense Industry Press, 2005: 5–64.
[25]	刘金旭. D-Wave软件说明书 [Z]. 北京: 北京理工大学, 2012.
[26]	刘德顺, 李夕兵. 冲击机械系统动力学 [M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1999: 42. LIU D S, LI X B. Mechanical impact dynamics [M]. Beijing, China: Science Press, 1999: 42.
[27]	任亮, 何瑜, 王凯. 基于整形器的UHPC材料SHPB试验数值模拟与分析 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2019, 38(21): 44–52. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2019.21.007. REN L, HE Y, WANG K. Numerical simulation and analysis of SHPB test for UHPC material based on shaper [J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2019, 38(21): 44–52. DOI: 10.13465/j.cnki.jvs.2019.21.007.
[28]	陈刚, 张青平, 黄西成. 基于软材料的SHPB波形整形技术 [J]. 中国科学: 技术科学, 2016, 46(4): 393–399. DOI: 10.1360/N092015-00368. CHEN G, ZHANG Q P, HUANG X C. Pulse shaping with soft material for SHPB [J]. Scientia Sinica: Technologica, 2016, 46(4): 393–399. DOI: 10.1360/N092015-00368.
[29]	FORRESTAL M J, WARREN T L. A conical striker bar to obtain constant true strain rate for Kolsky bar experiments [J]. Journal of Dynamic Behavior of Materials, 2021, 7(1): 161–164. DOI: 10.1007/s40870-020-00269-1.
[30]	GAO M Z, XIE J, GAO Y N, et al. Mechanical behavior of coal under different mining rates: a case study from laboratory experiments to field testing [J]. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2021, 31(5): 825–841. DOI: 10.1016/J.IJMST.2021.06.007.
[31]	张盛, 喻炳鑫, 王峰, 等. 不同尺寸含裂缝岩样动态破坏特征的实验研究 [J]. 采矿与安全工程学报, 2021, 38(5): 1045–1054. DOI: 10.13545/j.cnki.jmse.2021.0131. ZHANG S, YU B X, WANG F, et al. Experimental study on dynamic fracture characteristics of different sizes of rock specimens with a crack [J]. Journal of Mining & Safety Engineering, 2021, 38(5): 1045–1054. DOI: 10.13545/j.cnki.jmse.2021.0131.
[32]	宋力, 胡时胜. SHPB测试中的均匀性问题及恒应变率 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2005, 25(3): 207–216. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2005)03-0207-10. SONG L, HU S S. Stress uniformity and constant strain rate in SHPB test [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2005, 25(3): 207–216. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2005)03-0207-10.
[33]	毛勇建, 李玉龙. SHPB试验中试件的轴向应力均匀性 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2008, 28(5): 448–454. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2008)05-0448-07. MAO Y J, LI Y L. Axial stress uniformity in specimens of SHPB tests [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2008, 28(5): 448–454. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2008)05-0448-07.
[34]	周风华, 王礼立, 胡时胜. 高聚物SHPB试验中试件早期应力不均匀性的影响 [J]. 实验力学, 1992, 7(1): 23–29. ZHOU F H, WANG L L, HU S S. On the effect of stress nonuniformness in polymer specimen of SHPB tests [J]. Journal of Experimental Mechanics, 1992, 7(1): 23–29.
[35]	朱珏, 胡时胜, 王礼立. SHPB试验中粘弹性材料的应力均匀性分析 [J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2006, 26(4): 315–322. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2006)04-0315-08. ZHU J, HU S S, WANG L L. Analysis on stress uniformity of viscoelastic materials in split Hopkinson bar tests [J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2006, 26(4): 315–322. DOI: 10.11883/1001-1455(2006)04-0315-08.
[36]	杜晶, 李夕兵, 宫凤强, 等. 岩石冲击实验碎屑分类及其分形特征 [J]. 矿业研究与开发, 2010, 30(5): 20–22, 84. DOI: 10.13827/j.cnki.kyyk.2010.05.006. DU J, LI X B, GONG F Q, et al. Classification and Fractal Characteristics of the fragments from impacting experiment of rock [J]. Mining Research and Development, 2010, 30(5): 20–22, 84. DOI: 10.13827/j.cnki.kyyk.2010.05.006.
[37]	杜忠华, 高光发, 李伟兵. 撞击动力学 [M]. 北京: 北京理工大学出版社, 2017: 162–170. DU Z H, GAO F G, LI W B. Impact dynamics [M]. Beijing, China: Beijing Institute of Technology Press, 2017: 162–170.