Advertisement

Acoustic Emission RA-Value and Granite Fracture Modes Under Dynamic and Static Loads

  • Xiling Liu
  • Zhou Liu
  • Xibing Li
  • Jiahui Cui
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Physics book series (SPPHY, volume 218)

Abstract

The RA-value characteristics and distribution versus rock acoustic emission average frequency, the peak frequency characteristics, and the evolution of rock fracture modes under dynamic and static loads were studied to understand the fracture modes of rock under dynamic and static loads. The Split-Hopkinson pressure bar system and MTS322 servo-controlled rock mechanical test system were used, respectively, to carry out impact-loading tests and uniaxial compression tests at different loading rates. The results indicate that the RA-value under impact loading is higher in the initial stage, decreases to below 1 ms v−1 through the failure process, and even the variation trend tends to horizontal lines with loading time, which demonstrates that the fracture modes are dominated by tensile failure. An opposite variation in RA-value under static loading results when the loading rate is lower, but the variation corresponds with the impact-loading tests when the loading rate is higher, which indicates that tensile fracture still dominates the failure process and the occurrence of shear failure, as loads peak when the loading rate is lower. The acoustic emission signals exhibit a higher peak frequency under impact loads than those under static loads. Furthermore, in impact-loading tests, the peak RA-value will increase gradually with an increase in strain rate. The RA-value can be used to classify the crack type and as a rock fragmentation evaluation index. In general, the peak frequency can be used to distinguish two typical signals under impact-loading tests; signals with a higher peak frequency (fp > 100 kHz) can be generated by rock fracturing, whereas those with a lower peak frequency and a higher RA-value can be generated by elastic wave propagation.

Keywords

Rock acoustic emission RA-value Rock fracture modes Split-Hopkinson pressure bar Peak frequency 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the National Key Research and Development Plan (Project No. 2016YFC0600706), the National Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China (Grant No. 2016JJ3148), and the Open-End Fund for the Valuable and Precision Instruments of Central South University (CSUZC201701). The authors are extremely grateful for the financial support provided by these funds.

References

  1. 1.
    K. Mogi, Study of the elastic shocks caused by the fracture of heterogeneous materials and its relation to earthquake phenomena. Bull. Earthq. Res. Inst. 40, 125–173 (1962)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C.H. Scholz, The frequency-magnitude relation of microfracturing in rock and its relation to earthquakes. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 58, 399–415 (1968)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.H. Scholz, Experimental study of the fracturing process in brittle rock. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 73, 1447–1454 (1968)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    C.H. Scholz, Microfracturing and inelastic deformation of rock in compression. J. Geophys. Res. 73, 1417–1432 (1968)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    X.L. Liu, X.B. Li, Acoustic emission characteristics of rock under impact loading. J. Cent. South Univ. 22(9), 3571–3577 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Yuyama, Z.W. Li, Y. Ito, et al., Quantitative analysis of fracture process in RC column foundation by moment tensor analysis of acoustic emission. Constr. Build. Mater. 13(1–2), 87–97 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Shiotani, M. Ohtsu, K. Ikeda, Detection and evaluation of AE waves due to rock deformation. Constr. Build. Mater. 15(5–6), 235–246 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Soulioti, N.M. Barkoula, A. Paipetis, et al., Acoustic emission behavior of steel fibre reinforced concrete under bending. Constr. Build. Mater. 23(12), 3532–3536 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D.G. Aggelis, A.C. Mpalaskas, T.E. Matikas, Investigation of different fracture modes in cement-based materials by acoustic emission. Cem. Concr. Res. 48(2), 1–8 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D.G. Aggelis, A.C. Mpalaskas, D. Ntalakas, et al., Effect of wave distortion on acoustic emission characterization of cementitious materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 35, 183–190 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    D.G. Aggelis, T.E. Matikas, Effect of plate wave dispersion on the acoustic emission parameters in metals. Comput. Struct. 98–99(5), 17–22 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    D.G. Aggelis, Classification of cracking mode in concrete by acoustic emission parameters. Mech. Res. Commun. 38(3), 153–157 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    C.U. Grosse, F. Finck, Quantitative evaluation of fracture processes in concrete using signal-based acoustic emission techniques. Cem. Concr. Compos. 28(4), 330–336 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    K. Ohno, M. Ohtsu, Crack classification in concrete based on acoustic emission. Constr. Build. Mater. 24(12), 2339–2346 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Y. Lu, Z. Li, W.I. Liao, Damage monitoring of reinforced concrete frames under seismic loading using cement-based piezoelectric sensor. Mater. Struct. 44(7), 1273–1285 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S.Q. Yang, H.W. Jing, S.Y. Wang, Experimental investigation on the strength, deformability, failure behavior and acoustic emission locations of red sandstone under triaxial compression. Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 45(4), 583–606 (2012)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    D.S. Cheon, Y.B. Jung, E.S. Park, et al., Evaluation of damage level for rock slopes using acoustic emission technique with waveguides. Eng. Geol. 121(1), 75–88 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    W.W. Bucheim, Geophysical Methods for the Study of Rock Pressure in Coal and Potash Salt Mining (International Strata Control Congress, Leipzig, 1958), p. 222Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    H.J. Wang, D.A. Liu, Z.D. Cui, et al., Investigation of the fracture modes of red sandstone using XFEM and acoustic emissions. Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 85, 283–293 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    K.W. Xia, W. Yao, Dynamic rock tests using split Hopkinson (Kolsky) bar system – a review. J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 7(1), 27–59 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Rippengill, K. Worden, K.M. Holford, et al., Automatic classification of acoustic emission patterns. Strain 39(1), 31–41 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    G. Manthei, Characterization of acoustic emission sources in a rock salt specimen under triaxial load. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 95(5), 1674–1700 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiling Liu
    • 1
  • Zhou Liu
    • 1
  • Xibing Li
    • 1
  • Jiahui Cui
    • 1
  1. 1.Central South UniversityChangshaChina

Personalised recommendations