Correlation analysis between fracture toughness and tensile strength of cement soil based on notched semi-circle bend specimen
Source abstract
Abstract
To reveal the influence of cement proportion (P) and curing age (T) on the anti-cracking ability of cement soil, notched semi-circular bending specimens were used in this study. Tensile strength tests and mode I fracture tests were performed on cement soils with different P and T. The evolutionary characteristics of the tensile strength σt and mode I fracture toughness KIC were obtained. The test results showed that σt and KIC gradually increased with increasing cement proportion P and curing age T, with both exhibiting a logarithmic function relationship. Predictive models for σt and KIC, which were developed using regression analysis, can be used to evaluate the anti-cracking ability of cement soils. Therefore, the correlation between KIC and σt of cement soils was theoretically analyzed. The variability of the correlation coefficients was discussed in the context of existing research on soil materials, and the differences in the critical dimensions were analyzed based on the correlation coefficients.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Grouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics · Microbial Applications in Construction Materials · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Chongqing Municipal Research Institute of Design, Chongqing, China
Engineering Research Center of Diagnosis Technology and Instruments of Hydro-Construction, Chongqing Jiaotong Univ, Chongqing, China
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Chongqing Jiaotong Univ, Chongqing, China
Funding
Innovation and Development Joint Fund of Chongqing Natural Science Foundation
References (41)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12471010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.124710 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.bgtech.2023.10000210.1016/j.bgtech.2023.100002 ↗
3. 10.1080/01694243.2020.171780410.1080/01694243.2020.1717804 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.04010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.040 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.bgtech.2023.10002010.1016/j.bgtech.2023.100020 ↗
6. 10.3208/sandf.47.65710.3208/sandf.47.657 ↗
7. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1988)114:8(915)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1988)114:8(915) ↗
8. 10.1139/t99-05910.1139/t99-059 ↗
9. 10.1016/0148-9062(95)90063-210.1016/0148-9062(95)90063-2 ↗
10. 10.1007/s10333-004-0036-510.1007/s10333-004-0036-5 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2019.01.02910.1016/j.engfracmech.2019.01.029 ↗
12. 10.13140/RG.2.1.4605.328910.13140/RG.2.1.4605.3289 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2019.03.01410.1016/j.enggeo.2019.03.014 ↗
14. 10.1016/S1365-1609(97)00141-X10.1016/S1365-1609(97)00141-X ↗
15. 10.1016/j.coldregions.2011.05.00210.1016/j.coldregions.2011.05.002 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.coldregions.2011.05.00210.1016/j.coldregions.2011.05.002 ↗
17. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.438-439.19710.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.438-439.197 ↗
18. 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.000390510.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003905 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.11210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.01.112 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.12010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.120 ↗
21. 10.1007/s12205-020-1671-010.1007/s12205-020-1671-0 ↗
22. 10.1080/1064119X.2018.156440610.1080/1064119X.2018.1564406 ↗
23. 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.000198810.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001988 ↗
24. 10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.000178810.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001788 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.clay.2022.10676110.1016/j.clay.2022.106761 ↗
26. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.470.105110.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.470.1051 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.sandf.2017.08.01110.1016/j.sandf.2017.08.011 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.sandf.2017.08.01110.1016/j.sandf.2017.08.011 ↗
29. 10.1007/s00603-013-0422-710.1007/s00603-013-0422-7 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.commatsci.2006.04.00810.1016/j.commatsci.2006.04.008 ↗
31. 10.1007/s12517-013-1037-810.1007/s12517-013-1037-8 ↗
32. 10.1617/s11527-012-9833-210.1617/s11527-012-9833-2 ↗
33. 10.3390/su1311643010.3390/su13116430 ↗
34. Schmidt RA. A microcrack model and its significance to hydraulic fracturing and fracture toughness testing. In: U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics; 1980.
35. 10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.06.00510.1016/j.enggeo.2007.06.005 ↗
36. Cao K. Determination of mode I fracture toughness tensile strength and adhesion of compacted clays. University of Calgary; 2018.
37. Huang SY. Mechanism and criterion on fracture failure of clay mixed with gravel. Chongqing Jiaotong University; 2020.
38. 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2010.08.02310.1016/j.ijrmms.2010.08.023 ↗
39. Li HS Zhu YL. Frozen soil fracture and mechanics and application. China Ocean Press. 2002.
40. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.10736510.1016/j.engfracmech.2020.107365 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2023.10410710.1016/j.tafmec.2023.104107 ↗