Where curling stones collide with rock physics: Cyclical damage accumulation and fatigue in granitoids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Fatigue and damage accumulation in granitoids are classical, but poorly characterised, rock mechanics problems. We explore these phenomena by examining curling stone impacts. Curling stones are slid on ice and made to collide along a circumferential striking band. This well constrained scenario involves uniaxial compression of convex surfaces (i.e., Hertzian contacts). Each stone experiences about 2900 impacts per season, over a lifespan of 10–15 years before refurbishment, providing a unique opportunity to study fatigue and damage accumulation under cyclic loading. Here, we first determine the stress magnitudes of head-on curling stone impacts using on-ice experiments involving a high-speed camera and pressure-sensitive films. We then characterise the damage observed in aged stones using photogrammetry, microtomography, and microscopy. For high-velocity impacts (2.93 ± 0.15 ms−1), a curling stone is locally and momentarily stressed to at least 300–680 MPa, exceeding its unconfined compressive strength. Curling stone impacts are dynamic in nature, as evidenced by strain rates (24 ± 4 s−1) that resemble seismic magnitudes, ejection of rock powder during collisions, and prevalence of Hertzian cone fractures in aged stones. In the striking band, damage is confined to macroscopic Hertzian cone fractures and their immediate collet zones, and does not appear to extend beyond about 3–5 cm into the stones (radially). The circumferential density of cone fractures is limited to about 2–2.5 fractures per cm. We propose that (1) early, high-velocity impacts initiate cone fractures up to a specific spatial density, and (2) with subsequent collisions in the same regions of the striking band, cone fractures progressively propagate and coarsen. This concentrates and channels the accumulated damage, shielding the rest of the stones from reaching critical stress levels for damage. Our findings are significant for applications where rocks are exposed to repetitive, high-stress impacts and suggest that narrow damage zones can dampen high-impact stresses.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".