2004
DOI: 10.1108/02644400410519848
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simulations of underground structures subjected to dynamic loading using the distinct element method

Abstract: This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
43
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
43
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many models have been developed in the field of computational fracture mechanics, such as linear and nonlinear elastic fracture mechanics based methods (Bittencourt et al, 1996;Ingraffea and Manu, 1980;Swenson and Ingraffea, 1988), the extended finite element method (XFEM) (Belytschko and Black, 1999;Karihaloo and Xiao, 2003;Melenk and Babuška, 1996;Sukumar and Prévost, 2003), the cohesive-zone model (Bocca et al, 1991;de Borst, 2003) and meshless methods, such as the element free Galerkin method (EFGM) (Bordas et al, 2008;Fleming et al, 1997). Moreover, discontinuumbased numerical methods that are originally used for granular materials, such as the smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method (Das and Cleary, 2010;Gray et al, 2001;Ma et al, 2011) and the discrete element method (DEM) (Cundall and Strack, 1979;Morris et al, 2004;Shi and Goodman, 1985) have also become increasingly popular in fracture modelling. In actual numerical simulations of engineering applications, the choice of modelling approach should be based on the likely failure mechanism of the material, i.e.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many models have been developed in the field of computational fracture mechanics, such as linear and nonlinear elastic fracture mechanics based methods (Bittencourt et al, 1996;Ingraffea and Manu, 1980;Swenson and Ingraffea, 1988), the extended finite element method (XFEM) (Belytschko and Black, 1999;Karihaloo and Xiao, 2003;Melenk and Babuška, 1996;Sukumar and Prévost, 2003), the cohesive-zone model (Bocca et al, 1991;de Borst, 2003) and meshless methods, such as the element free Galerkin method (EFGM) (Bordas et al, 2008;Fleming et al, 1997). Moreover, discontinuumbased numerical methods that are originally used for granular materials, such as the smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method (Das and Cleary, 2010;Gray et al, 2001;Ma et al, 2011) and the discrete element method (DEM) (Cundall and Strack, 1979;Morris et al, 2004;Shi and Goodman, 1985) have also become increasingly popular in fracture modelling. In actual numerical simulations of engineering applications, the choice of modelling approach should be based on the likely failure mechanism of the material, i.e.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the present study, we have accomplished this extension by developing an interface between NUFT and LDEC, a distinct-element geomechanical model developed by Morris et al (2002Morris et al ( , 2003. This interface facilitates mapping the injection-induced pressure perturbation along and above the reservoir/cap-rock contact into the corresponding evolution of effective stress and microfracture apertures.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This topic is too detailed to cover even cursorily here, and the reader is referred to a number of works on dynamic loading of geomaterials [11], [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25].…”
Section: Near--source Signal Propagationmentioning
confidence: 99%