1887
Volume 67 Number 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Granular materials submitted to uniaxial compression undergo pore space reduction due to mechanisms such as particle rearrangement and grain crushing. These changes in the internal structure of the material release energy in the form of elastic waves that can be detected by sensors sensitive to acoustic emission. In this study, Acoustic emission monitoring with a wavelet‐based signal processing technique is used to identify the various mechanisms occurring during high‐pressure sand compaction. Particle movement, grain failure, friction between grains and the surface of the compression cell and intergranular friction are studied. Acoustic emission data recorded during these simplified tests are used to characterize each phenomenon. Wavelet transform analyses allow the identification of useful features, making possible frequency discrimination among sliding, rolling, friction and grain fragmentation processes. For instance, we observe that at low stress, grain flow is characterized by the lowest centroid and peak frequencies, while at greater stresses, intergranular friction and grain fragmentation have the higher values. In the tests performed, the stress–strain evolution and final condition of the tested sand are broadly consistent, irrespective of the condition employed: continuous, stepwise or even variable loading rate or temperature. However, Acoustic emission data manifest much more complex behaviour (including thermal, load‐rate dependency and delayed fragmentation phenomena) than that suggested by stress–strain relationships. At low stress levels, grain flow (sliding/rolling) is a relevant strain‐accommodation mechanism, but so is crushing due to the effect of concentrated forces at the grain contact level. At high stresses, when crushing is generalized, intergranular friction is also a relevant phenomenon due to the increase in the coordination number produced by previous fragmentation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12691
2018-10-12
2020-04-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AgarJ.G., MorgensternN.R. and ScottJ.D.1987. Shear strength and stress‐strain behaviour of Athabasca oil sand at elevated temperatures and pressures. Canadian Geotechnical Journal24, 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. AggelisD.G.2011. Classification of cracking mode in concrete by acoustic emission parameters. Mechanics Research Communications38, 153–157.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. AharonovE. and SparksD.W.1999. Rigidity phase transitions in granular packing. Physical Review E60, 6890–6896.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. AkerE., KühnD., VavryčukV., SoldalM. and OyeV.2014. Experimental investigation of acoustic emissions and their moment tensors in rock during failure. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences70, 286–295.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. ASTM
    ASTM1997. Standard guide for mounting piezoelectric acoustic emission sensors. E 650–97. In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 03.03. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ASTM
    ASTM1999. Standard guide for determining the reproducibility of acoustic emission sensor response, E 976–99. In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 03.03. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. BehniaA., ChaiH.K. and ShiotaniT.2014. Advanced structural health monitoring of concrete structures with the aid of acoustic emission. Construction and Building Materials65, 282–302.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. BrzesowskyR.H., HangxS.J.T., BrantutN. and SpiersC.J.2014a. Compaction creep of sands due to time‐dependent grain failure: Effects of chemical environment, applied stress, and grain size. Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth, 119, 7521–7541.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. BrzesowskyR.H., SpiersC.J., PeachC.J. and HangxS.J.T.2014b. Time‐independent compaction behavior of quartz sands. Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth119, 936–956.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. BrzesowskyR.H., SpiersC.J., PeachC.J. and HangxS.J.T.2011. Failure behavior of single sand grains: Theory versus experiment. Journal of Geophysical Research116, B06205.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. CaicedoB., MartinezA. and VallejoL.2011. Assessing of crushing in granular materials using acoustic emission. Pan‐Am CGS Geotechnical Conference. http://geoserver.ing.puc.cl/info/conferences/PanAm2011/panam2011/pdfs/GEO11Paper205.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. CampioniM., MalaspinaN. and FrezzottiM.L.2015. Threshold size for fluid inclusion decrepitation. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth120, 7396–7402.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. CarpinteriA., LacidognaG., AccorneroF., MpalaskasA.C., MatikasT.E. and AggelisD.G.2013. Influence of damage in the acoustic emission parameters. Cement & Concrete Composites44, 9–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. ChenY., NagayaY. and IshidaT.2015. Observations of fractures induced by hydraulic fracturing in anisotropic granite. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering48, 1455–1461.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. ChmelA. and ShcherbakovI.2014. Temperature dependence of acoustic emission from impact fractured granites. Tectonophysics632, 218–223.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. ChuhanF.A., KjeldstadA., BjørlykkeK. and HøegK.2002. Porosity loss in sand by grain crushing – experimental evidence and relevance to reservoir quality. Marine and Petroleum Geology19, 39–53.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. ChuhanF.A., KjeldstadA., BjørlykkeK. and HøegK.2003. Experimental compression of loose sands: relevance to porosity reduction during burial in sedimentary basins. Canadian Geotechnical Journal40, 995–1011.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. ColomboI.S., MainI.G. and FordeM.C.2003. Assessing damage of reinforced concrete beam using “b‐value” analysis of acoustic emission signals. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering15, 280–286.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. DelageP., DoanD.H., NauroyJ.F. and TangA.M.2013. Compression behavior of Canadian oil sands. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering139, 158–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. EinavI.2007. Soil mechanics: breaking ground. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences365, 2985–3002.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. EitzenD.G. and WadleyH.N.G.1984. Acoustic emission: Establishing the fundamentals. Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards89, 75–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. FernandesF., SyahrialA.I. and ValdesJ.R.2010. Monitoring the oedometric compression of sands with acoustic emissions. Geotechnical Testing Journal33, 410–415.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. FortinJ., StanchitsS., DresenG. and GueguenY.2009. Acoustic emissions monitoring during inelastic deformation of porous sandstone: Comparison of three modes of deformation. Pure and Applied Geophysics166, 823–841.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. GhafghaziM., ShuttleD.A. and DeJongJ.T.2014. Particle breakage and the critical state of sand. Soils and Foundations54, 451–461.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. GrahamC.C., StanchitsS., MainI.G. and DresenG.2010. Comparison of polarity and moment tensor inversion methods for source analysis of acoustic emission. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences47, 161–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. HallD.L. and BodnarR.J.1989. Comparison of fluid inclusion decrepitation and acoustic emission profiles of Westerly granite and Sious quartzite. Tectonophysics168, 283–296.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. HammerØ., HarperD.A.T. and RyanP.D.2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica4, 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. HangxS.J.T., SpiersC.J. and PeachC.J.2010. Creep of simulated reservoir sands and coupled chemical‐mechanical effects of CO2 injection. Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth, 115, B09205.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. HardinB.O.1985. Crushing of soil particles. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering ASCE11, 1177–1192.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. HégronL., SornayP. and Favretto‐CristiniN.2014. Compaction of a bed of fragmentable UO2 particles and associated acoustic emission. IEEE Transactions of Nuclear Science, 61, 2175–2181.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. HsiehA., DightP. and DyskinA.V.2014. Ghost Kaiser effect at low stress. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences68, 15–21.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. IshidaT.2001. Acoustic emission monitoring of hydraulic fracturing in laboratory and field. Construction and Building Materials15, 283–295.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. IshidaT., LabuzJ.F., MantheiG., MeredithP.G., NasseriM.H.B., SchinK. et al. 2017. ISRM suggested method for laboratory acoustic emission monitoring. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 50, 665–674.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. KapurR.A.2006. Acoustic emission in orthopaedics: A state of the art review. Journal of Biomechanics49, 4065–4072.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. KarimpourH. and LadeP.V.2010. Time effects relate to crushing in sand. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering136, 1209–1219.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. KarnerS.L., ChesterF.M., KronenbergA.K. and ChesterJ.S.2003. Subcritical compaction and yielding of granular quartz sand. Tectonophysics377, 357–381.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. KarnerS.L., ChesterJ., ChesterF.M. and HajashA.2005. Laboratory deformation of granular quartz sand: Implications for the burial of clastic rocks. AAPG Bulletin89, 603–625.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. KeshtgarA. and ModarresM.2013. Detecting crack initiation based on acoustic emission. Chemical Engineering Transactions33, 547–552.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. LaiX. and MaS.2014. Laboratory acoustic emission study for earthquake generation process. Earthquake Science27, 627–646.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. LavrovA.2003.The Kaiser effect in rocks: Principles ad stress estimation techniques. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences40, 151–171.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. LeiX., MasudaK., NishizawaO., JouniauxL., LiuL., MaW. et al. 2004. Detailed analysis of acoustic emission activity during catastrophic fracture of faults in rock. Journal of Structural Geology26, 247–258.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. LocknerD.1993. The role of acoustic emission in the study of rock fracture. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Geomechanical Abstracts30, 883–899.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. MaoW. and TowhataI.2015. Monitoring of single‐particle fragmentation process under static loading using acoustic emission. Applied Acoustics94, 39–45.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. MarketosG. and BoltonM.D.2007. Quantifying the extent of crushing in granular materials: A probability‐based predictive method. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids55, 2142–2156.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Martínez‐GonzálezE., PicasI., RomeuJ. and CasellasD.2013. Filtering of acoustic signals for the accurate identification of fracture mechanisms in bending tests. Materials Transactions54, 1087–1094.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. MazalP., VlasicF. and KoulaV.2015. Use of acoustic emission method for identification of fatigue micro‐cracks creation. Procedia Engineering, 133, 379–378.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. McLaskeyG.C. and LocknerD.A.2014. Preslip and cascade processes initiating laboratory stick slip. Journal of Geophysical Research – Solid Earth119, 6323–6336.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. MichlmayrG., CohenD. and OrD.2012. Sources and characteristics of acoustic emissions from mechanically stressed geologic granular media – A review. Earth‐Science Reviews112, 97–114.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. MoradianZ., EinsteinH.H. and BallvyG.2016. Detection of cracking levels in brittle rocks by parametric analysis of the acoustic emission signals. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering49, 785–800.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. MoradianZ. and LiB.Q.2015. Hit based acoustic emission monitoring of rock fractures: Challenges and solutions. In: Advances in Acoustic Emission Technology, vol. 179 (eds G.Shen, Z.Wu and J.Zhang) pp. 357–370. Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. NguyenV.H., GlandN., DautriatJ., DavidC., WassermannJ. and GuélardJ.2014. Compaction, permeability evolution and stress path effects in unconsolidated sand and weakly consolidated sandstone. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences67, 226–239.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. NunezR., NishinoH. and YoshidaK.2008. Characterization of AE signals generated by gas leak on pipe with artificial defect at different wall thickness. Materials Transactions49, 2341–2346.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. OhnoI.1995. Temperature variation of elastic properties of α–quartz up to the α–β transition. Journal of Physics of the Earth43, 157–169.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. OhtsuM. and WatanabeH.2001. Quantitative damage estimation of concrete by acoustic emission. Construction and Building Materials15, 217–224.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. OjalaI., MainI. and NgwenyaB.2004. Strain rate and temperature dependence of Omori law scaling constants of AE data: Implications for earthquake foreshock‐aftershock sequences. Geophysical Research Letters31, L24617.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. OlsonR.E.1986. State of the Art: Consolidation testing. In: Consolidation of Soils: Testing and Evaluation (eds R.N.Yong and F.C.Townsend), pp. 7–70. Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. PabstW. and GregorováE.2013. Elastic properties of silica polymorphs–A review. Ceramic–Silikáty57, 167–184.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. RaoM.V.M.S. and Prasanna‐LakshmiK.J.2005. Analysis of b‐value and improved b‐value of acoustic emissions accompanying rock fracture. Current Science89, 1577–1582.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. ReinickeA., RybackiE., StanchitsS., HuengesE. and DresenG.2010. Hydraulic fracturing stimulation techniques and formation damage mechanisms – Implications from laboratory testing of tight sandstone‐proppant systems. Chemie der Erde70, 107–117.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. SaadatfarM., FrancoisN., AradA., MadadiM., SheppardA., SendenT. et al. 2013. Grain‐based characterization and acoustic wave propagation in a sand packing subjected to triaxial compression. AIP Conference Proceedings1542, 571.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. ShrivastavaS. and PrakashR.2009. Assessment of bone condition by acoustic emission technique: A review. Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering2, 144–154.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. StanchitsS., MayrS., ShapiroS. and DresenG.2011. Fracturing of porous rock induced by fluid injection. Tectonophysics503, 129–145.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. TheobaldP., ZequiriB. and AvisonJ.2008. Couplants and their influence on AE sensor sensitivity. Journal of Acoustic Emission26, 91–97.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. VallenJ. and VallenH.2010. Latest improvements on freeware AGU‐Wallen‐wavelet. Proceedings of the European Working Group Acoustic Emission, Vienna, Austria, September 2010.
  65. VilharG., JovičićV. and CoopM.R.2013. The role of particle breakage in the mechanics of a non‐plastic silty sand. Soils and Foundations53, 91–104.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. WeeksJ., LocknerD. and ByerleeJ.1978. Change in b‐value during movement on cut surfaces in granite. Bulletin of the Seismologic Society of America68, 331–341.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. YongC. and WangC.1980. Thermally induced acoustic emission in westerly granite. Geophysical Research Letters7, 1089–1092.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. ZhaoX.G., CaiM., WangJ. and MaL.K.2013. Damage stress and acoustic emission characteristics of the Beishan granite. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences64, 258–269.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. ZhengW. and TannantD.2016. Frac sand crushing characteristics and morphology changes under high compressive stress and implications for sand pack permeability. Canadian Geotechnical Journal53, 1412–1423.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12691
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12691
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Acoustic emission , b‐value , Grain crushing , Sand compaction and Wavelet transform analysis
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error