PDF(2224 KB)
Influence of Rockfill Morphology on Compressive Strength of Rock-Filled Concrete
ZHAO Heng, TANG Mao-gang, LIU Lu, LI Xin-zhan, LUO Tao, LI Li, JIN Feng
Journal of Changjiang River Scientific Research Institute ›› 2026, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (9) : 231-238.
PDF(2224 KB)
PDF(2224 KB)
Influence of Rockfill Morphology on Compressive Strength of Rock-Filled Concrete
[Objective] This study aims to investigate the evolution of uniaxial compressive mechanical behavior in rock-filled concrete (RFC) with different rockfill morphologies, elucidate the effects of curing age (3 d, 7 d, 14 d, and 28 d) and rockfill morphology (block and pebble) on the mechanical properties of RFC and self-compacting concrete (SCC), and establish the conversion coefficient between the cubic and prismatic compressive strengths of RFC. [Methods] Compressive strength tests were conducted on cubic and prismatic specimens of SCC, block RFC, and pebble RFC. Failure modes and stress-strain curves were monitored to assess peak stress, peak strain, elastic modulus (defined as the slope of the ascending and descending segments of the stress-strain curve), and strain energy density. The compressive mechanical behavior was compared between SCC and RFC, between block RFC and pebble RFC, and among specimens with different sizes. [Results] From 3 to 28 days, the cubic compressive strength of RFC was consistently higher than that of SCC at the corresponding ages. However, at 28 days, the prismatic compressive strength of RFC was lower than that of SCC, and RFC showed more vertical cracks than SCC. This difference resulted from the weakened constraint effect of SCC on the rockfill skeleton during prismatic compression. The conversion coefficient between cubic and prismatic compressive strengths of RFC was determined to be 0.461. Compared with block RFC, pebble RFC exhibited higher cubic compressive strength, while block RFC demonstrated higher prismatic compressive strength. However, pebble RFC exhibited markedly lower peak strain, fewer vertical cracks, and lower energy dissipation than block RFC. This difference was attributed to variations in the void space of the rockfill skeleton caused by morphological differences between blocks and pebbles. [Conclusion] The rockfill skeleton in RFC contributes to the increase in cubic compressive strength from the early curing stage, and this strengthening effect increases with age due to improved interface bonding resulting from continuous hydration. The weakened hoop effect in prismatic specimens reduces the matrix constraint on the rockfill skeleton, leading to lower prismatic compressive strength and a unique conversion coefficient for RFC. Rockfill morphology significantly affects the mechanical behavior of RFC. Block rockfill improves ductility and energy dissipation through mechanical interlocking, while pebble rockfill increases cubic compressive strength through dense filling. The established strength conversion coefficient and the identified rockfill skeleton-matrix synergy mechanism provide essential theoretical and data support for the mix design, performance optimization, and engineering application of RFC. Future research should focus on multi-age tests of pebble RFC and the effects of rockfill morphology on other mechanical properties to facilitate broader engineering applications of RFC.
rock-filled concrete / mechanical property evolution / rockfill skeleton-matrix synergy / rockfill morphology regulation / hoop effect
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
任文渊, 曲茹茹, 刘又溢, 等. 堆石混凝土力学性能研究进展[J]. 西北水电, 2025(5): 1-8.
(
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
常亮, 马羽戈, 付兴府, 等. 基于应变软化模型的堆石混凝土受压破坏模拟[J]. 西北水电, 2025(5): 44-50.
(
|
| [9] |
罗滔, 颜景, 张天祺, 等. 工程尺度堆石混凝土抗压性能试验研究[J]. 水资源与水工程学报, 2023, 34(6): 147-155, 163.
(
|
| [10] |
王辉, 马嘉均, 周虎, 等. 堆石混凝土单轴受压力学性能[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 62(2):339-346.
该文进行了堆石混凝土(RFC)和自密实混凝土(SCC)试件单轴受压试验,得到了完整的应力-应变全曲线,对比分析了2种混凝土试件的破坏形态、峰值应力、峰值点应变、弹性模量及全曲线特征,给出了相应的应力-应变全曲线方程。结果表明,RFC破坏界面不仅存在堆石骨料与SCC基体之间的界面,而且存在堆石骨料自身的破裂面。在破坏后期,由于堆石骨架的作用,RFC试件的应力-应变全曲线下降段较为平缓。与SCC试件相比,RFC试件的平均峰值应力和峰值点应变分别降低了29%和51%,平均弹性模量增大了42%。RFC试件中堆石骨料的形状、摆放位置及堆石骨料与SCC基体之间的粘结都影响其力学性能,使得RFC试件试验结果离散大。由方程得出的RFC与SCC的理论应力-应变全曲线与试验全曲线吻合较好。
(
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
DL/T 5150—2020 水工混凝土试验规程[S].
(DL/T 5150—2020 Test code for hydraulic concrete[S]. (in Chinese))
|
| [15] |
GB/T 50081—2019 混凝土物理力学性能试验方法标准[S].
(GB/T 50081—2019 Standard for test method of mechanical properties on ordinary concrete[S]. (in Chinese))
|
| [16] |
GB/T 50010—2010 混凝土结构设计标准(2024年版)[S].
(GB/T 50010—2010 Code for design of concrete structures (2024 Edition)[S]. (in Chinese))
|
| [17] |
金峰. 堆石混凝土坝建设与技术标准体系发展与展望[J]. 水利水电科技进展, 2025, 45(5): 13-25.
(
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |