Development of a poly-axial platen for testing true-triaxial behavior of rocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mining at greater depths can lead to stress-induced failure, especially in areas of high horizontal in situ stress. The induced stresses around the opening are known to be in a poly-axial stress state where, σ1 ≠ σ2 ≠ σ3 with special case of σ3 = 0 and σ1, σ2 ≠ 0 at its boundary, where σ1, σ2, σ3 are major, intermediate, minor principal stress, respectively. The conventional triaxial testing does not represent the actual in situ strength of the rock in regions of high horizontal stress, as it ignores the influence of intermediate principal stress (σ2). The typical poly-axial testing (biaxial and true-triaxial tests) of intact rock mostly requires sophisticated and expensive loading systems. This study investigated the mechanical behavior of intact rock under a poly-axial stress state using a simple and cost-effective design. The apparatus consists of a biaxial frame and a confining device. The biaxial frame has two platens that apply equal stress in both directions (σ1 = σ2) on a 50.8 mm cubical specimen when placed inside the uniaxial loading device. The confining device performed separate biaxial tests under constant intermediate principal stress (σ2 = constant) and true-triaxial tests when used along with the biaxial frame. This study then compared the failure modes and peak strength of Berea sandstone specimens with other biaxial–triaxial devices to validate the design of the poly-axial apparatus. We also performed uniaxial tests on both standard cylindrical samples and prismatic specimens of different slenderness ratios. These tests provided a complete understanding of the failure mode transition from standard uniaxial compressive tests to triaxial stress conditions on cubical specimens. Additionally, this study determined best-fitted strength envelopes for biaxial and triaxial stress state. Based on regression analysis, we found a quadratic polynomial to be a good fit to biaxial strength envelope. For the true-triaxial strength envelope, we found the three-dimensional (3D) failure criterion to be a good fit with R2 of 0.964.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".