ArticleScientific reports2025
Effect of thickness ratio on uniaxial mechanical behavior of soft-hard composite rock masses: experimental analysis and modeling.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The properties of laminated soft-hard composite rock masses are significantly influenced by the thickness ratio of the soft and hard rock layers, due to their inherent heterogeneity and anisotropy. This study investigates the mechanical properties and mesoscopic damage of soft-hard composite rock mass with varying layer thickness ratios. Soft-hard composite rock samples with different thickness ratios were prepared, and uniaxial compression experiments were conducted using an acoustic emission (AE) system to examine the mechanical behaviour and failure characteristics of these composite rock masses. The key findings are as follows: (1) Mechanical parameters exhibit a linear decline with increasing soft rock thickness. When the soft rock thickness ratio increased from 10% to 90%, the peak strength of the composite rock mass decreased by 62.8%, from 45.12 MPa to 16.8 MPa; the elastic modulus decreased by 36.8%, from 9.77 GPa to 6.17 GPa. (2) The number of surface cracks gradually decreases as the proportion of soft rock thickness increases, while oblique cracks progressively increase. The failure mode transitions from splitting failure to shear failure. When soft rock thickness is low, splitting failure dominated by hard rock predominates. As soft rock thickness increases, the failure mode shifts to predominantly shear failure, with the duration of the plastic stage extending from 200 s to 600 s. (3) Based on the law of conservation of energy, the energy evolution of the rock under unidirectional loading was analysed. The relationship between the energy evolution of soft-hard composite rock mass and the layer thickness ratio was constructed by considering the elastic constant and peak strength of the soft-hard composite rock mass. (4) A damage constitutive model was proposed based on Weibull distribution theory. This model accounts for the influence of the layer thickness ratio on macroscopic deformation localization, considering microscopic rupture damage. It provides a better fit for the stress-strain curve of soft-hard composite rock masses under unidirectional loading, offering an effective characterization of their mechanical behaviour.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.