From a practical point of view,grain structure heterogeneities are key parameters that control the rock response and still remains a challenge to incorporate in a quantitative manner.One of the less discussed topics i...From a practical point of view,grain structure heterogeneities are key parameters that control the rock response and still remains a challenge to incorporate in a quantitative manner.One of the less discussed topics in the context of the grain-based model(GBM)in the particle flow code(PFC)is the contact heterogeneities and the appropriate contact model to mimic the grain boundary behavior.Generally,the smooth joint(SJ)model and linear parallel bond(LPB)model are used to simulate the grain boundary behavior.However,the literature does not document the suitability of different models for specific problems.Another challenge in implementing GBM in PFC is that only a single bonding parameter is used at the grain boundaries.The aim of this study is to investigate the responses of a laboratory-scale specimen with SJ and LPB models,considering grain boundary heterogeneous and homogeneous contact parameters.Uniaxial and biaxial compression tests are performed to calibrate the response of Creighton granite.The stressestrain curves,volumetric dilation,inter-crack(crack in the grain boundary),and intra-crack(crack within the grain)development,and failure patterns associated with different contact models are examined.It was found that both the SJ and LPB models can reproduce the pre-peak behavior observed for a granitic rock type.However,the LPB model is unable to reproduce the post-peak behavior.Due to the large interlocking effect originating from the balls in contact and the ball size in the LPB model,local dilation is induced at the grain boundaries.This overestimates the volumetric dilation and residual shear strength.The LPB model tends to result in discontinuous inter-cracks and stress localization in the rock specimen,resulting in fine fragments at the rock surface during failure.展开更多
基金Supports from the University Transportation Center for Underground Transportation Infrastructure(UTC-UTI)at the Colorado School of Mines for funding this research under Grant No.69A3551747118 from the US Department of Transportation(DOT)the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under Grant No.A0920502052401-210 are gratefully acknowledged.
文摘From a practical point of view,grain structure heterogeneities are key parameters that control the rock response and still remains a challenge to incorporate in a quantitative manner.One of the less discussed topics in the context of the grain-based model(GBM)in the particle flow code(PFC)is the contact heterogeneities and the appropriate contact model to mimic the grain boundary behavior.Generally,the smooth joint(SJ)model and linear parallel bond(LPB)model are used to simulate the grain boundary behavior.However,the literature does not document the suitability of different models for specific problems.Another challenge in implementing GBM in PFC is that only a single bonding parameter is used at the grain boundaries.The aim of this study is to investigate the responses of a laboratory-scale specimen with SJ and LPB models,considering grain boundary heterogeneous and homogeneous contact parameters.Uniaxial and biaxial compression tests are performed to calibrate the response of Creighton granite.The stressestrain curves,volumetric dilation,inter-crack(crack in the grain boundary),and intra-crack(crack within the grain)development,and failure patterns associated with different contact models are examined.It was found that both the SJ and LPB models can reproduce the pre-peak behavior observed for a granitic rock type.However,the LPB model is unable to reproduce the post-peak behavior.Due to the large interlocking effect originating from the balls in contact and the ball size in the LPB model,local dilation is induced at the grain boundaries.This overestimates the volumetric dilation and residual shear strength.The LPB model tends to result in discontinuous inter-cracks and stress localization in the rock specimen,resulting in fine fragments at the rock surface during failure.
