| Literature DB >> 34960591 |
Wen He1,2,3, Changsong Zheng1,2, Shenhai Li1,2, Wenfang Shi1,2, Kui Zhao1,2.
Abstract
The strength of cemented paste backfill (CPB) directly affects mining safety and progress. At present, in-situ backfill strength is obtained by conducting uniaxial compression tests on backfill core samples. At the same time, it is time-consuming, and the integrity of samples cannot be guaranteed. Therefore guided wave technique as a nondestructive inspection method is proposed for the strength development monitoring of cemented paste backfill. In this paper, the acoustic parameters of guided wave propagation in the different cement-tailings ratios (1:4, 1:8) and different curing times (within 42 d) of CPBs were measured. Combined with the uniaxial compression strength of CPB, relationships between CPB strength and the guided wave acoustic parameters were established. Results indicate that with the increase of backfill curing time, the guided wave velocity decreases sharply at first; on the contrary, attenuation of guided waves increases dramatically. Finally, both velocity and attenuation tend to be stable. When the CPB strength increases with curing time, guided wave velocity shows an exponentially decreasing trend, while the guided wave attenuation shows an exponentially increasing trend with the increase of the CPB strength. Based on the relationship curves between CPB strength and guided wave velocity and attenuation, the guided wave technique in monitoring the strength development of CPB proves feasible.Entities:
Keywords: attenuation of guided wave; cemented paste backfill; guided wave; guided wave velocity
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34960591 PMCID: PMC8707897 DOI: 10.3390/s21248499
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Main chemical properties of the tailings.
Particle size distribution of the tailings samples.
|
| 0~33 | 33~45 | 45~74 | >74 | |
|
| 38.82 | 4.31 | 14.71 | 42.16 | 100 |
Figure 2The dimension of specimens for guided wave testing. (a) Side view; (b) Top view; (c) Photograph.
Figure 3Diagram of guided wave testing system.
Figure 4Pickup at the starting point and the time difference between the excitation and reception waves.
Figure 5The High-pressure triaxial testing system.
Figure 6Effect of excitation wave parameter n on the receiving wave. The characteristics of the received wave are observed by changing the excitation wave parameter n. The amplitude decay, wave packet shape and overlap of the received wave are compared to optimize the parameter n.
Figure 7Velocities at different guided wave frequencies; (a) sample A; (b) sample B.
Figure 8Attenuation at different guided wave frequencies; (a) sample A; (b) sample B.
Uniaxial compressive strength of CPBs.
| UCS/MPa | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 d | 7 d | 14 d | 28 d | |
| Cement-tailings Ratio (1:4) | 1.25 | 1.73 | 2.12 | 3.42 |
| 1.23 | 2.01 | 2.15 | 3.33 | |
| 1.08 | 1.82 | 2.38 | 3.15 | |
| 1.32 | 1.64 | 2.34 | 3.65 | |
| Cement-tailings Ratio (1:8) | 0.69 | 1.14 | 1.67 | 2.12 |
| 0.73 | 1.12 | 1.47 | 2.08 | |
| 0.71 | 1.15 | 1.23 | 1.99 | |
| 0.75 | 1.08 | 1.51 | 2.29 | |
Figure 9Relationship between UCS and velocity data for different cement-tailings ratio. Quantification of UCS by wave velocity.
Figure 10Relationship between UCS and attenuation data for different cement-tailings ratio. Quantification of UCS by wave attenuation.