Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Vol. 4, pp. 425--430. Pergamon Press Ltd. 1967.

Printed in Great Britain

MECHANISM OF BRITTLE F R A C T U R E OF ROCK

PART III--FRACTURE IN TENSION AND UNDER LONG-TERM LOADING

Z. T. BIENIAWSKI
National Mechanical Engineering Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa

(Received 10 January 1967)

1. INTRODUCTION
IN PART I of the present paper, the theory of the fracture process was discussed and a
hypothesis on the mechanism of brittle fracture of rock was propounded. In Part II,
experimental verifications of this mechanism were dealt with for rock tested under com-
pressive stress conditions. In this, Part III of the paper, the propounded mechanism is
applied to rock subjected to tensile stress conditions as well as to long-term stress conditions.
It will be recalled from Parts I and II of this paper that the following stages of brittle
fracture are propounded to take place in rock under multiaxial compression:

1. Closing of cracks
I. Crack closure
2. Linear elastic deformation
II. Fracture initiation
3. Stable fracture propagation
III. Critical energy release
4. Unstable fracture propagation
IV. Strength failure (maximum stress)
5. Forking and coalescence of cracks
V. Rupture (maximum deformation)

For convenience, the above mechanism is diagrammatically represented in Fig. 1. A

complete stress--strain curve for a hard rock, namely norite, in uniaxial compression is given
in Fig. 2 while complete stress-strain curves for a soft rock, namely sandstone, in both
uniaxial and triaxial compression are given in Fig. 3. For detailed explanations of these
figures the reader is referred to Parts I and II of this paper.

2. BRITI'LE FRACTURE O F ROCK IN TENSION

The mechanism of brittle fracture of rock given in Fig. 1 is valid not only for multiaxial
compression but also for multiaxial tension. In tension, however, crack closure will be ab-
sent and processes of stable and unstable fracture propagation will be of very small dura-
tion due to the fact that in tension a crack will propagate in its own plane[l]. In Fig. 4
stress-strain curves obtained on norite specimens in uniaxial tension are given. The special
experimental techniques used for this study are fully described elsewhere[2]; It will be seen
425
426 Z. T. B1ENIAWSKI

50,000

40000

~0,000

10,0013

0 2000 4000 5000 8000 io,0oo

FzG. 2. Completestress-strain curve for norite in uniaxial compression.

m
o

1200C / ~ k=40

4000 / ~.~ .... • Uniaxial

ion )
0 4oo0 800o I2000 troo00 2OO00
Axial stroin, ~in/in
FxG.3. Completestress-strain curves for sandstonein uniaxialand triaxial compression.
 I Ttorminol vel~ci÷v v .

MOhr envelope
parabola

//
k=15 /
~5

• TV Sfrengfh failure
~roin Insfable
shatte ;rocfure propogafion m Critical energy release (long-term -
doJnin, ;table ~ _4GcE/Tc strength)
crock~ :mcfure propagation
eli Fracture initiation
~=J2yE/~c
• rfectly elastic or
leformaflon o-t= ~ 3 ( ~ / v i ' ~ ) + o'c
:
............ =T CroCkclosure
;losincj OTcraCKS
Volumetric s'Hain

Grain bou~dories in rock :~

oct"ing os pre-existing MOh.r envelope
(Griffifh) crocks

O"

FIo. 1. Mechanism of Brittle fracture of rock in multlaxial compression.

]acing page 420 R.M.

 MECHANISM OF BRITTLE FJRACTURE OF ROCK-PART III 427

from Fig. 4 that the determination of fracture initiation as well as the onset of unstable
fracture propagation may be affected in the same manner as that obtained in case of com-
pression specimens as discussed in Part II of this paper.
However, comparison of fracture processes in norite in compression (see Fig. 5) and in
tension (see Fig. 4) reveals that for norite fracture initiation takes place in compression at
35.0 per cent of maximum load while in tension at 94.5 per cent of maximum load. Further,
unstable fracture propagation occurs in compression at 73.0 per cent of nbaximum load
while in tension at 96.5 per cent of maximum load.

failure ruptwe
fracture womaation
n initiation’

Stroln, pin/in

FIG. 4. Stress-strain curves for norite in uniaxial tension.

Consequently, for practical purposes, it may be assumed that, in tension, fracture initi-
ation and strength failure occur simultaneously, with the process of fractu#e propagation
virtually non-existent. It also means that the Griffith hypothesis applicable anly to fracture
initiation, may be used as a strength failure criterion in the case of fracture under tensile
stress conditions, a procedure unacceptable in the case of fracture under compressive stress
conditions[3].
On the other hand, because of the close proximity of stress levels for fracture initiation
and rupture in tension it is difficult to determine the complete stress-strain aurves for rock
in tension and so far no comparison can be made with the curves given in Figs. 2 and 3
obtained for compression. It must be stated, however, that such curves for tension would be
of academic interests only since, because of predominance of compressive sttess conditions
in rock mechanics problems, Figs. 2 and 3 are of particular interest in practical applications.

3. BRITTLE FRACTUREl OF ROCK UNDER LONG-TERM LOADING

It has been stated in Part II of this paper, Section 3.6, that the onset of u&table fracture
propagation is an important stage in the fracture processes since as from dtis instant the
fracture process is self-maintaining. At the onset of unstable fracture pdopagation the
428 z.T. BIENIAWSKI

energy released during fracturing, G, reaches its critical value, Go, and further the curve
of the crack velocity versus crack length (see Fig. 18, Part II) changes its sign.
It is believed that the stress level at the onset of unstable fracture propagation corresponds
to the long-term strength of the material. Full discussion of this concept can be found
elsewhere[3]. The onset of unstable fracture propagation may be determined from the plot
of volumetric strain versus axial stress and is applicable to both uniaxial compression and
tension. It can also be determined equally well for triaxial compression from the plot of
volumetric strain versus maximum stress difference.

50

40
-J- Strength failure
= 39,100 psi

~) 30
- B Critical energy release G=Gc
onset of unstable fracture
d propagation
O'B=28,500 psi =73%
20

,°// Fracture initiation

! o~ = 13,700 psi = 3,5 % crc

0 -500 -I000 -1500 -200o

Volumetric strain, /xin/in

FIG. 5. Relationship between axial stress and volumetric strain for norite in uniaxial compression.

In Fig. 5, a typical plot is given for norite in uniaxial compression. Point B in this figure
represents the onset of unstable fracture propagation. It will be noted from this figure
that up to point B the volumetric strain decreases with increasing compressive stress. Be-
yond point B, the volumetric strain increases with increasing compressive stress. Since it is
also known from independent studies[4] that a volume increase characterizes the long-term
strength of the material, it stands to reason that the stress level at point B in Fig. 5 may repre-
sent the long-term strength of this rock. If it is so, then the author's hypothesis will offer
a convenient and quick determination of long-term strength of rock which will be of con-
siderable value in practical applications.
In order to verify the above reasoning long-term tests have been conducted on norite
subjected to a uniaxial compressive test under constant temperature and humidity conditions.
A rock 'creep' testing machine illustrated in Fig. 7 was used for this study. Details of the
apparatus and techniques employed are given elsewhere[2].
Typical results are shown in Fig. 6. In this figure the ratio of time-dependent strength
over uniaxial compressive strength of samples is plotted versus time. The testing procedure
was as follows. Rock samples of norite were loaded at various constant uniaxial compressive
stress levels as a percentage of the uniaxial compressive strength. The samples were left
in the machine until failure occurred, the time at failure being automatically recorded.
 FIG. 6. 15-ton compression testing machine for long-term testing of rock saml~les.

facing page 428 R.M.

 MECHANISM OF BRITTLE FRACTURE OF ROCK--PART IIl 429

It will be seen from the comparison of the results in Figs. 7 and 5 that the long-term
strength of norite (Fig. 7) approaches asymptotically the stress level of 74 per cent of its
uniaxial compressive strength ae which agrees favourably with the stress level obtained at
point B in Fig. 5 (73 per cent ac).

0 9~

0,90

0.85 1

0.8C "
IS
o k. _
0.75
0"74 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

II
0"70~ I 2 3 4 5
Time, hr (17d0y$~

FIG. 7. Relationship between time-dependent strength of norite and time.

It may be concluded therefore that the author's hypothesis offers a convenient means for
determining the long-term strength of rock. Confirmation of this hypothesis has also been
recently obtained by WILD[5] for other rock materials.

4. C O N C L U S I O N S
In this study, presented in a series of three papers, a detailed mechanism of rock fracture
in compression and tension has been propounded. On the basis of this mechanism it is
possible to explain all the significant processes taking place in rock from initial load applica-
tion to complete separation of the specimen.
The fracture mechanism described in this series has been developed for brittle fracture
in general although the emphasis of the experimental investigations was on hard rocks. The
propounded mechanism applies to uniaxial as well as biaxial and triaxial compression.
The mechanism is also valid for multiaxial tension and long-term load applications. In
tension, however, crack closure will, of course, be absent and processes of Stable and un-
stable fracture propagation will be of very small duration. For practical purposes, it may
therefore be assumed that, in tension, fracture initiation and strength failure occur simulta-
neously. The propounded hypothesis on the mechanism of rock fracture also enables quick
determination of the long-term strength of rock.

Acknowledgements--This work forms part of an extensive rock mechanics research p r o g r a n ~ e being carried
out by the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research on behalf of th~ Transvaal and
Orange Free State Chamber of Mines. The author is indebted to these organizations f6r permission to
publish the material contained in this paper.
The author wishes to thank Dr. H. G. DENKHAUS, Director of the Institute for his valuable criticism and
encouragement and to Messrs. U.W.O.L. VOGLER and M. N. MARAIS for their assistance in carrying out
the tests.
430 z . T . BIENIAWSK1

REFERFaNCES
1. HOEK E. and BIENIAWSKIZ. T. Brittle fracture propagation in rock under compression. Int. J. Fracture
Mech. 1, (3) 137-155 (1965).
2. BIENIAWSKI Z. T. Determination of Rock Properties. Report of the South African Council of Scientific
and Industrial Research No. M E G 518, January (1967).
3. BIENIAWSKIZ. T. Mechanism of Rock Fracture in Compression. Report of the South African Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research No. M E G 459, June (1966).
4. GLOCKLICH J. The influence of sustained loads on the strength of concrete. Rilem Bull. No. 5, pp. 14-17,
December (1959).
5. W1LD B. L. The Time-Dependent Behaviour of Rock; Considerations with Regard to a Research Programme.
Report of the South African Council of Scientific and Industrial Research. No. M E G 514, December
(1966).