破裂起裂压力对胶结膏体充填体强度的影响。

IF 1.5 4区 工程技术 Q3 METALLURGY & METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-25 DOI:10.1007/s42461-025-01257-6
James A Frimpong, Basel Ahmad Shabab, Rohit Pandey, Snehamoy Chatterjee, Gabriel Walton, Alexander S Brand
{"title":"破裂起裂压力对胶结膏体充填体强度的影响。","authors":"James A Frimpong, Basel Ahmad Shabab, Rohit Pandey, Snehamoy Chatterjee, Gabriel Walton, Alexander S Brand","doi":"10.1007/s42461-025-01257-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This laboratory-scale study presents the development and validation of a hydraulic fracturing technique to directly measure the tensile strength of cemented paste backfill (CPB), providing an alternative to traditional strength testing methods. Fracture initiation pressure (FIP) was used as the primary measure of CPB strength. Experimental results were compared with traditional benchmark measures such as uniaxial compressive strength (UCS), Brazilian tensile strength (BTS), and critical Mode-I fracture toughness (K<sub>Ic</sub>). Regression analysis of experimental results revealed a strong linear relationship between FIP and these benchmark strength measures, indicating that FIP can be used as a reliable predictor of CPB strength. However, traditional linear elastic failure models did not adequately explain the observed FIP values, as they significantly over-predicted the CPB tensile strength. To address this, the Point Stress (PS) model was applied, which provided a more accurate prediction of tensile strength, especially in cases involving small boreholes. The PS model explained observed effects of borehole size on the material's response to hydraulic pressurization. This study confirms that hydraulic fracturing, interpreted through the PS model, is an effective method for determining CPB strength and provides a practical alternative measure to conventional testing methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":18588,"journal":{"name":"Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration","volume":"42 3","pages":"1305-1323"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12158861/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fracture Initiation Pressure as a Measure of Cemented Paste Backfill Strength.\",\"authors\":\"James A Frimpong, Basel Ahmad Shabab, Rohit Pandey, Snehamoy Chatterjee, Gabriel Walton, Alexander S Brand\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s42461-025-01257-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This laboratory-scale study presents the development and validation of a hydraulic fracturing technique to directly measure the tensile strength of cemented paste backfill (CPB), providing an alternative to traditional strength testing methods. Fracture initiation pressure (FIP) was used as the primary measure of CPB strength. Experimental results were compared with traditional benchmark measures such as uniaxial compressive strength (UCS), Brazilian tensile strength (BTS), and critical Mode-I fracture toughness (K<sub>Ic</sub>). Regression analysis of experimental results revealed a strong linear relationship between FIP and these benchmark strength measures, indicating that FIP can be used as a reliable predictor of CPB strength. However, traditional linear elastic failure models did not adequately explain the observed FIP values, as they significantly over-predicted the CPB tensile strength. To address this, the Point Stress (PS) model was applied, which provided a more accurate prediction of tensile strength, especially in cases involving small boreholes. The PS model explained observed effects of borehole size on the material's response to hydraulic pressurization. This study confirms that hydraulic fracturing, interpreted through the PS model, is an effective method for determining CPB strength and provides a practical alternative measure to conventional testing methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18588,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration\",\"volume\":\"42 3\",\"pages\":\"1305-1323\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12158861/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-025-01257-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"METALLURGY & METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s42461-025-01257-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"METALLURGY & METALLURGICAL ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项实验室规模的研究展示了水力压裂技术的发展和验证,该技术可以直接测量胶结膏体充填体(CPB)的抗拉强度,为传统的强度测试方法提供了一种替代方法。断裂起裂压力(FIP)作为CPB强度的主要指标。实验结果比较了传统的基准指标,如单轴抗压强度(UCS)、巴西抗拉强度(BTS)和临界i型断裂韧性(KIc)。实验结果的回归分析显示,FIP与这些基准强度指标之间存在很强的线性关系,表明FIP可以作为CPB强度的可靠预测因子。然而,传统的线性弹性破坏模型并不能充分解释观察到的FIP值,因为它们明显高估了CPB的抗拉强度。为了解决这个问题,应用了点应力(PS)模型,该模型提供了更准确的抗拉强度预测,特别是在涉及小井眼的情况下。PS模型解释了观测到的钻孔尺寸对材料水压响应的影响。该研究证实,通过PS模型解释的水力压裂是确定CPB强度的有效方法,为常规测试方法提供了一种实用的替代措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fracture Initiation Pressure as a Measure of Cemented Paste Backfill Strength.

This laboratory-scale study presents the development and validation of a hydraulic fracturing technique to directly measure the tensile strength of cemented paste backfill (CPB), providing an alternative to traditional strength testing methods. Fracture initiation pressure (FIP) was used as the primary measure of CPB strength. Experimental results were compared with traditional benchmark measures such as uniaxial compressive strength (UCS), Brazilian tensile strength (BTS), and critical Mode-I fracture toughness (KIc). Regression analysis of experimental results revealed a strong linear relationship between FIP and these benchmark strength measures, indicating that FIP can be used as a reliable predictor of CPB strength. However, traditional linear elastic failure models did not adequately explain the observed FIP values, as they significantly over-predicted the CPB tensile strength. To address this, the Point Stress (PS) model was applied, which provided a more accurate prediction of tensile strength, especially in cases involving small boreholes. The PS model explained observed effects of borehole size on the material's response to hydraulic pressurization. This study confirms that hydraulic fracturing, interpreted through the PS model, is an effective method for determining CPB strength and provides a practical alternative measure to conventional testing methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration Materials Science-Materials Chemistry
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
177
期刊介绍: The aim of this international peer-reviewed journal of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (SME) is to provide a broad-based forum for the exchange of real-world and theoretical knowledge from academia, government and industry that is pertinent to mining, mineral/metallurgical processing, exploration and other fields served by the Society. The journal publishes high-quality original research publications, in-depth special review articles, reviews of state-of-the-art and innovative technologies and industry methodologies, communications of work of topical and emerging interest, and other works that enhance understanding on both the fundamental and practical levels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信