Testing Study on Damage Fracture Responses of Rock under Dynamic Impact Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dynamic impact loading has the destructive effect to the surrounding rock mass. Rock specimen such as rock plate was found to become invalid under dynamic impact loading. This paper presents brittle damage evolution law for dynamic impact damage of brittle rock based on low velocity (10 m/s ~40m/s) impact test, when a source of impact loading is applied to a rock plate specimen, damage cracks are developed from the source to the boundaries. This paper is concerned with the description and explanation of this phenomenon. The test results show that the cracks propagation length and break area are not arbitrary, but are influenced by the angle of dynamic impact loading. According to the test results, the study found that the scope of impact resistance optimization angle is about 30°~45°, and the cuspidal point of impact velocity is about 30 m/s ~35 m/s ; The crack length and the break area increase with the increase of the impact loading; When the break area decreases abruptly, the crack length increases suddenly, which shows that there was an obvious incubation period of crack forming, at first some pits appearing on the verge of the rock plate and the propagation rate of crack length and break area decreasing with the impact velocity increasing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".