Indian Geotechnical Journal

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 700–712 | Cite as

Effect of Microstructure Deficiency on Quasi-static and Dynamic Compressive Strength of Crystalline Rocks

  • H. AhmadianEmail author
  • H. Hashemolhosseini
  • A. Baghbanan
Original Paper


Grain size and microdeficits control static and dynamic behavior of crystalline rocks. Therefore, characterization and evaluation of the impact of such intrinsic parameters on mechanical behavior of rocks are necessary. Two marble stones of Baghat and Maroon in Iran, which consist of a unique mineral composition but different microstructural features, were selected as test samples. Microstructures of rocks were characterized using different techniques such as scanning electronic microscopic, fluorescent replacement and polarization microscopic techniques. A number of both rock types with different sizes were prepared and subjected to quasi-static and dynamic loading by a split Hopkinson pressure bar under different strain rates conditions, and mechanical properties of both marbles were measured. Microscopic studies about microstructure deficits show that fractal dimension in Maroon marble is higher than in Baghat marble. The results also show that the dynamic strength in both marbles is higher than their static strength. Strain rate controls mechanical properties in both rock types; however, in Baghat marble with a relatively lower microstructure intensity, this phenomenon is more significant. With increasing sample volume, dynamic strength of rocks is decreased. Morphology study of fracture surface in microscale indicated that in dynamic loading the intensity of created microcracks particularly intercrystalline microcracks is increased compared to the quasi-static loading condition.


Split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) Dynamic compressive strength Microstructure Dynamic increasing factor (DIF) Grain size Crystalline calcite marbles 

List of Symbols


Input strain


Reflected strain


Transmitted strain

\(\dot{\varepsilon }\)

Strain rate

\(\sigma \left( t \right)\)

Stress on the sample


Strain on the sample


Young’s modulus of the bar


Radius of all particles Maroon marbles


Length of the sample


Area of the sample


Area of the bar


Fractal dimension


Longitudinal wave velocity in bars


Dynamic compressive strength


Quasi-static compressive strength


The average length of microcracks


The average diameter of grains


Radius of all particles Baghat marbles


  1. 1.
    Zhang Q, Zhao J (2014) A review of dynamic experimental techniques and mechanical behaviour of rock materials. Rock Mech Rock Eng 47(4):1411–1478. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hudson JA, Harrison JP (1997) Rock dynamics and time-dependent aspects. In: Engineering rock mechanics. Chap 13. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 207–221.
  3. 3.
    Dai F, Xu Y, Zhao T, N-w Xu, Liu Y (2016) Loading-rate-dependent progressive fracturing of cracked chevron-notched Brazilian disc specimens in split Hopkinson pressure bar tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 88:49–60. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhang QB, Zhao J (2014) Quasi-static and dynamic fracture behaviour of rock materials: phenomena and mechanisms. Int J Fract 189(1):1–32. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    T-f Wong, Wong RHC, Chau KT, Tang CA (2006) Microcrack statistics, Weibull distribution and micromechanical modeling of compressive failure in rock. Mech Mater 38(7):664–681. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krumbholz M, Vollbrecht A, Aschoff M (2014) Recent horizontal stress directions in basement rocks of southern Sweden deduced from open microcracks. J Struct Geol 65:33–43. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levasseur S, Welemane H, Kondo D (2015) A microcracks-induced damage model for initially anisotropic rocks accounting for microcracks closure. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 77:122–132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mahmutoğlu Y (2006) The effects of strain rate and saturation on a micro-cracked marble. Eng Geol 82(3):137–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhou Y, Zhao J (2011) Advances in rock dynamics and applications. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang QB, Zhao J (2013) Determination of mechanical properties and full-field strain measurements of rock material under dynamic loads. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 60:423–439. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang QZ, Yang JR, Zhang CG, Zhou Y, Li L, Zhu ZM, Wu LZ (2015) Sequential determination of dynamic initiation and propagation toughness of rock using an experimental–numerical–analytical method. Eng Fract Mech 141:78–94. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Christensen R, Swanson S, Brown W (1972) Split-Hopkinson-bar tests on rock under confining pressure. Exp Mech 12(11):508–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cusatis G (2011) Strain-rate effects on concrete behavior. Int J Impact Eng 38(4):162–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frew DJ, Forrestal MJ, Chen W (2001) A split Hopkinson pressure bar technique to determine compressive stress–strain data for rock materials. Exp Mech 41(1):40–46. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grote D, Park S, Zhou M (2001) Dynamic behavior of concrete at high strain rates and pressures: I. Experimental characterization. Int J Impact Eng 25(9):869–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim H, Keune JN (2007) Compressive strength of ice at impact strain rates. J Mater Sci 42(8):2802–2806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ross CA, Tedesco J (1989) Split-Hopkinson pressure-bar tests on concrete and mortar in tension and compression. Mater J 86(5):475–481Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang QZ, Li W, Song XL (2006) A method for testing dynamic tensile strength and elastic modulus of rock materials using SHPB. Pure appl Geophys 163(5):1091–1100. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu H, Zhang Q, Huang F, Jin Q (2005) Experimental and numerical investigation on the dynamic tensile strength of concrete. Int J Impact Eng 32(1–4):605–617. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hong L, Li X, Ma C, Yin S, Ye Z, Liao G (2008) Study on size effect of rock dynamic strength and strain rate sensitivity. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 27(3):526–533Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xia K, Nasseri MHB, Mohanty B, Lu F, Chen R, Luo SN (2008) Effects of microstructures on dynamic compression of Barre granite. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 45(6):879–887. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Amrollahi H, Baghbanan A, Hashemolhosseini H (2011) Measuring fracture toughness of crystalline marbles under modes I and II and mixed mode I-II loading conditions using CCNBD and HCCD specimens. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 48(7):1123–1134. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gran HC (1995) Fluorescent liquid replacement technique. A means of crack detection and water: binder ratio determination in high strength concretes. Cem Concr Res 25(5):1063–1074. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nishiyama T, Kusuda H (1994) Identification of pore spaces and microcracks using fluorescent resins. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 31(4):369–375. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Standard RM (1974–2006) ISRM suggested methods. SM for petrographic description of rocksGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    He Z, Li G, Tian S, Wang H, Shen Z, Li J (2016) SEM analysis on rock failure mechanism by supercritical CO2 jet impingement. J Pet Sci Eng 146:111–120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kruhl JH (2013) Fractal-geometry techniques in the quantification of complex rock structures: a special view on scaling regimes, inhomogeneity and anisotropy. J Struct Geol 46:2–21. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liu K, Ostadhassan M (2017) Multi-scale fractal analysis of pores in shale rocks. J Appl Geophys 140:1–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Standards RM (2007–2014) ISRM suggested methods. Basic rock sample preparationGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhou YX, Xia K, Li XB, Li HB, Ma GW, Zhao J, Zhou ZL, Dai F (2012) Suggested methods for determining the dynamic strength parameters and mode-I fracture toughness of rock materials. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 49:105–112. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brown ET (2015) The ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 2007–2014. In: Ulusay R (ed) Springer, Cham. Engineering Geology 199:165–166.
  32. 32.
    Naghdabadi R, Ashrafi M, Arghavani J (2012) Experimental and numerical investigation of pulse-shaped split Hopkinson pressure bar test. Mater Sci Eng, A 539:285–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heuze FE (1980) Scale effects in the determination of rock mass strength and deformability. Rock Mech 12(3):167–192. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    ASTM (2000) Standard test methods for particle-size distribution (gradation) of soils using sieve analysis. ASTM, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kranz RL (1983) Microcraks in rocks: a review. Tectonophysics 100(1983):449–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Geotechnical Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Ahmadian
    • 1
    Email author
  • H. Hashemolhosseini
    • 2
  • A. Baghbanan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mining EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations