2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2010.05.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Formula for calculating the critical stress intensity factor in rock fracture toughness tests using cracked chevron notched Brazilian disc (CCNBD) specimens

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The average values of mode I and mode II fracture toughness were obtained as 1:206MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p and 1:435 MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p and the fracture toughness ratio K IIc /K Ic as 1.19. It is noteworthy that K Ic was reported as 1:06 MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p in [6], but according to the modified formula suggested by Wang [32] for determining mode I fracture toughness using the standard CCNBD specimen, the value of K Ic is corrected to 1:206 MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p . Since the tensile strength s t of Yeosan marble was not given in [6], it was taken from Lee et al [33] who reported the tensile strength of Yeosan marble as s t ¼16 MPa.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The average values of mode I and mode II fracture toughness were obtained as 1:206MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p and 1:435 MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p and the fracture toughness ratio K IIc /K Ic as 1.19. It is noteworthy that K Ic was reported as 1:06 MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p in [6], but according to the modified formula suggested by Wang [32] for determining mode I fracture toughness using the standard CCNBD specimen, the value of K Ic is corrected to 1:206 MPa ffiffiffiffi ffi m p . Since the tensile strength s t of Yeosan marble was not given in [6], it was taken from Lee et al [33] who reported the tensile strength of Yeosan marble as s t ¼16 MPa.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of 1/ √ R term was proposed in Fowell and Xu (1993); Xu and Fowell (1994); Fowell and Xu (1994); Fowell et al (2006); Iqbal and Mohanty (2006); Nasseri and Mohanty (2008) and Cui et al (2010). Using 1/ √ R term in the basic formula and constants u and ν improved by Wang et al (2004b) and Wang (2010) for computation of the dimensionless stress intensity factor, average K Ic becomes 1.62 ± 0.07 MPa √ m for CCNBD tests on andesite rock.…”
Section: Maximum Stress Intensity Factor Computationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using 1/ √ R term and constants u and ν improved by Wang et al (2004b) and Wang (2010) for computation of the dimensionless stress intensity factor, average K Ic becomes 1.23 ± 0.13 MPa √ m for CCNBD tests on marble rock. Table 2 shows K Ic avg values for different diameters and different 2α ranges together with minimum and maximum loading angles (2α min and 2α max , respectively) of individual specimens in a particular group of tests on andesite rock.…”
Section: Maximum Stress Intensity Factor Computationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(11) and the values of parameters u, v, as suggested by the ISRM [6]. In order to improve the fracture toughness tests using CCNBD, recent research [8,9,16], based on the slice synthesis method [22] and other numerical methods, presented updated values of the two parameters of the exponential function (Eq. (11) (Fig 10).…”
Section: Experimental Results Ans Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(5) and (6) In the ISRM suggested methods [6] the mode I fracture toughness IC K of CCNBD specimens [6,14,15,16] can be calculated by the following equation:…”
Section: Fracture Toughness Calculation For Ccnbd Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%