International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Mining Science and Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmst

Mechanical behavior and failure mechanisms of rock bolts subjected to

static-dynamic loads
Hongpu Kang ⇑, Guiyang Yuan, Linpo Si, Fuqiang Gao, Jinfu Lou, Jinghe Yang, Shuangyong Dong
CCTEG, Coal Mining Research Institute, Beijing 100013, China
State Key Laboratory of Intelligent Coal Mining and Strata Control, Beijing 100013, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study explores the effects of dynamic and static loading on rock bolt performance a key factor in
Received 6 January 2024 maintaining the structural safety of coal mine roadways susceptible to coal bursts. Employing a house-
Received in revised form 20 February 2024 made load frame to simulate various failure scenarios, pretension-impact-pull tests on rock bolts were
Accepted 28 February 2024
conducted to scrutinize their dynamic responses under varied static load conditions and their failure
Available online 10 April 2024
traits under combined loads. The experimental results denote that with increased impact energy, maxi-
mum and average impact loads on rock bolts escalate significantly under pretension, initiating plastic
Keywords:
deformation beyond a certain threshold. Despite minor reductions in the yield load due to impact-
Rock bolt
Pretension
induced damage, pretension aids in constraining post-impact deformation rate and fluctuation degree
Static and dynamic load of rock bolts. Moreover, impact-induced plastic deformation causes internal microstructure dislocation,
Impact fortifying the stiffness of the rock bolt support system. The magnitude of this fortification is directly
related to the plastic deformation induced by the impact. These findings provide crucial guidance for
designing rock bolt support in coal mine roadway excavation, emphasizing the necessity to consider both
static and dynamic loads for improved safety and efficiency.
Ó 2024 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Mining & Technology. This is an open
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction of rock bolts is relatively limited. Yi and Kaiser [13] conducted a ser-
ies of drop tests to investigate the energy absorption capacity of rock
Rock bolts play a vital role in maintaining the stability and bolts under impact loading. In recent years, more sophisticated
safety of underground excavations, particularly in the mining and experimental techniques have been employed to investigate the
tunneling industries. They are extensively utilized as essential ele- dynamic response of rock bolts [14–16]. For instance, St-Pierre
ments of ground support to withstand the forces exerted by the et al. [17] conducted drop weight tests on tapered bolts and identi-
surrounding rock mass, thereby ensuring the structural integrity fied the impact speed of the drop hammer as the crucial factor influ-
of the excavated openings. In recent years, there has been a grow- encing bolt deformation. They determined that momentum serves
ing interest in comprehending the response of rock bolts under the as the most effective indicator for assessing bolt damage under
influence of combined static-dynamic loads. Impact loads can arise impact loads. Gaudreau [18] performed cyclic drop tests on
from various factors such as rockbursts, seismic events, and blast- improved tapered bolts and observed that the bolts do not undergo
ing operations, often leading to premature failure of rock bolts. plastic deformation after the first impact load reaches the bolt’s
Consequently, it is crucial to investigate the behavior and failure yield point. After a large number of drop tests on the D-bolt, Li and
mechanisms of rock bolts when subjected to combined static- Doucet [19] discovered a linear relationship between bolt extension
dynamic loads. Such research endeavors aim to improve the design and impact energy under impact loads. The energy absorption capa-
of ground support systems and mitigate the risk of failure in under- bility of the D-bolt was found to depend on factors such as cross-
ground excavations. sectional area, tensile strength, and elongation of the bolt. Using
Numerous studies have focused on the mechanical behavior of the WASM (Western Australian School of Mines) Dynamic Test Facil-
rock bolts under static loads including tension, shear, and the com- ity, Player et al. [20,21] conducted a series of dynamic tests on thread
bination of both [1–12]. However, research on the dynamic response bar reinforcement systems. They revealed that several factors,
including embedment, decoupling, confinement, surface hardware,
and steel grade, significantly affect the system’s performance. He
⇑ Corresponding author. et al. [22] employed a split Hopkinson pressure bar to analyze the
E-mail address: [email protected] (H. Kang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmst.2024.02.007
2095-2686/Ó 2024 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of China University of Mining & Technology.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

dynamic behavior of rock bolts. They observed a distinct change in horizontally positioned within a circular steel container, providing
the failure mode with increasing strain rates. Sharifzadeh et al. stability. During the rock bolt’s installation, the torque, propulsion
[23] identified that both shank stretching and ploughing/extrusion speed, and pushing force are measured with sensors. The rock bolt
bolts absorb energy approximately proportional to the displace- is pre-tensioned by tightening the nut.
ment. Li et al. [24] compared identical rockbolts tested on four To simulate inward deformation of the excavation surface, ten-
dynamic testing rigs using the direct impact method and revealed sion load can be applied to the bolt using two symmetrically posi-
high repeatability within each rig but differences between them, tioned loading cylinders on either side. Additionally, an impact
indicating equipment-dependent biases. More recently, Lou et al. load can be introduced by raising the impact pendulum to a speci-
[25] performed split-tube drop test with varying impact energy to fic angle and allowing it to fall, impacting a beam placed behind
reproduce the dynamic performance of MP1 rockbolts under a wide the bearing plate. The resulting impact energy is determined by
range of seismic event magnitudes. the angle between the pendulum rod and the vertical line, allowing
In the aforementioned experimental studies, the rock bolts for the generation of various impact energies by adjusting the
were subjected to a specific set of loading conditions (static or angle accordingly. The impact energy Eh can be calculated as
dynamic). However, in practical scenarios, deformation and failure
Eh ¼ m  g  l  f1  cos½ða þ bÞ=180  pg ð1Þ
of roadway surrounding rock involve a wide range of complex sit-
uations, such as fragmentation, dilation, rock stratum slipping, and where m and l are the weight and length of the impact pendulum,
impact. Consequently, rock bolts generally experience a complex respectively; g the gravity; a the angle between the pendulum
stress environment throughout their service life, involving simul- rod and the vertical line; and b the centroid rotation angle.
taneous actions of tension, shear, and impact. In addition to endur-
ing complex static loads like tension and shear, rock bolts are also 2.2. Test procedures
influenced by microseismic events of varying magnitudes and fre-
quencies. These events lead to dynamic impacts with different First, the initial tensile load was applied to the rock bolts using a
energy levels and frequencies, resulting in a significant reduction tension loading system until the predetermined tensile load was
in the effectiveness of their support and increasing the vulnerabil- reached. Subsequently, the impact loading module, utilizing a pen-
ity of the support system to failure and damage. dulum hammer, was employed to deliver a single predetermined
While limited studies have been conducted to investigate the energy impact to the support unit. After the impact was completed,
mechanical behavior of rock bolts under complex loading condi- an axial load was once again applied using an axial hydraulic cylin-
tions. Kang et al. [26] conducted a comprehensive experimental der until the rock bolts were stretched to failure. The experimental
study on multiple rock bolts under various loading conditions, design, as presented in Table 1, involved a total of seven rock bolt
including tension, torque, shear, and impact. They discovered that tests to investigate the mechanical response characteristics of rock
the mechanical behavior of rock bolts under complex conditions bolts under the same energy impact at different pretensions (i.e.,
differs significantly from that of rock bolts under pure tension. 42, 84, 126 and 168 kN which corresponding to 20%, 40%, 60%,
In this study, a sophisticated load frame for rock bolt mechanical and 80% of the yield load of the bolt, respectively) and under differ-
performance was used to simulate the impact conditions on rock ent energy impacts at the same tensile load.
bolts caused by different instantaneous failure scenarios, based on
the previous expansion deformation of the rock mass. Pretension-
impact-pull tests were conducted on rock bolts to systematically 3. Mechanical behavior of rock bolt subjected to pretension-
investigate the influence of static loading on the dynamic response impact-pull loading conditions
of the rock bolts and the failure characteristics of the rock bolts
under the combined effects of dynamic and static loads. The find- 3.1. Curve features
ings of this study provide a reference basis for the design of rock
bolt support in roadway excavation prone to coal bursts. Fig. 2 illustrates the typical mechanical response curve of rock
bolts under the pretension-impact-pull condition. In this experi-
ment, the rock bolts were pre-tensioned with a tensile load of
2. Test equipment and procedures 126 kN and subjected to an impact with the energy of 10 kJ. The
curve of the rock bolt can be divided into four stages:
2.1. Test equipment
(1) Pre-tensioning stage: The rock bolt was installed on the test-
Fig. 1 depicts the equipment designed for testing rock bolts ing machine, and a pre-torque of 50 Nm was applied to the
under challenging loading conditions. The equipment comprises nut. The axial load increased to approximately 20 kN. Ten-
several components: a bolt installation unit, a loading unit, an sioning was then performed until the axial load of the rock
impact pendulum, a measurement system, and a console. With this bolts reached 126 kN (corresponding to 60% of the yield
equipment, it is possible to monitor the mechanical response of a strength of the bolt). During this stage, the rock bolt was
rock bolt throughout its installation process, pre-tensioning, and in the elastic range, and the load-deformation curve
various combinations of tension, torsion, bending, shear, and increased approximately linearly.
impact loading. To replicate rock conditions, a resin-anchored rock (2) Impact tensioning stage: The impact was applied at the ini-
bolt is inserted into a pre-drilled borehole in a one-meter-long con- tial static loading level. The pendulum hammer was raised to
crete column using the installation unit. The diameter of the con- the predetermined 10 kJ energy position and released. When
crete column is 120 mm, while the pre-setting borehole has a the pendulum hammer first impacted the impact beam, the
diameter of 30 mm. The column is made using CGM-1 high- axial load of the rock bolts rapidly increased to its maximum
performance cement-based grouting material. Left-hand thread- value and then oscillated downward. Significant plastic
less ribbed rock bolts produced by the same manufacturer and deformation occurred in the rock bolts during the oscillating
from the same batch are used for the experiment. The rock bolts load reduction process.
have a nominal diameter of 22 mm and a yield strength of (3) Impact rebound stage: After the impact, the pendulum ham-
500 MPa. The rock bolt is anchored along its full length within mer disengaged from the impact beam. As the testing appa-
the concrete column with resin anchoring agents. The column is ratus employed a hydraulic loading system, the extension
282
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

Fig. 1. Developed equipment for testing rock bolt under complex loads including tension, torsion, bending, shear, and impact.

Table 1
Loading conditions of rock bolt subjected to pretension-impact-pull.
To analyze and compare the deformations of the rock bolts dur-
ing the impact stage, different stages within the impact phase have
No. Bolt ID Pretension (kN) Impact energy (kJ) been defined in this study, as shown in Fig. 3. Maximum deforma-
1 TDT-1 42 10 tion refers to the axial deformation increment starts from the
2 TDT-2 84 moment the pendulum hammer makes initial contact with the
3 TDT-3 126
4 TDT-4 168
rock bolt and continues until the rebound is initiated. Rebound
5 TDT-5 126 1 deformation means the sum of the elastic deformations generated
6 TDT-6 4 during the pre-tensioning stage and the elastic deformations of the
7 TDT-7 8.5 rock bolts during the impact. Plastic deformation refers to the dif-
ference between the deformation of the rock bolts when they are
tensioned again to the initial axial load value after the impact
and the deformation of the rock bolts corresponding to the
pretension.
The load-deformation curves for each rock bolt are shown in
Fig. 4. It can be observed that the load-deformation curves of all
rock bolts exhibit good consistency throughout the entire process.
The variations in these curves are in line with that of the rock bolt
subjected to pure tension, demonstrating the typical processes of
yielding, strengthening, and necking fracture. The analysis of the
temporal response processes for the rock bolts under the four
experimental conditions is described as follows.

Fig. 2. Typical load-deformation curve of rock bolt subjected to tension-impact-

tension.

speed of the tensioning hydraulic cylinder was slower than

that of the rock bolts, causing the axial load of the rock bolts
to decrease to 0. During this process, the stored elastic defor-
mation in the rod was released, and the rod experienced
recoil.
(4) Fracture stage: The rock bolts were pulled out using the ten-
sioning hydraulic cylinder until failure which was mani-
fested by the fracture of the rock bolt. The load-
deformation curve in this stage was similar to the curve of
the rock bolts that was subjected to pull-out test. Fig. 3. Determination of deformations of rock bolt when subjected to impact load.

283
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

Fig. 4. Load-deformation curves of rock bolts subjected to pretension-impact-pull.

(1) After being subjected to different pretensions, the rock bolts ferences. This phenomenon can be attributed to the complex inter-
experienced an impact of 10 kJ energy, resulting in a defor- play between the energy absorption capabilities of the rock bolt
mation ranging from 19.87 to 21.5 mm. During the yielding system and the dynamic loading conditions. At lower impact ener-
stage, the yield loads for the bolts were in the range of 210– gies, the system’s response is predominantly elastic, with minimal
215 kN, corresponding to axial deformation values of 30– plastic deformation, resulting in similar yielding loads. As the impact
35 mm and elongation rates of 1.91%–2.24%. At the end of energy increases, the system transitions to a more plastic response,
the yielding stage, the accumulated deformation reached with the yielding load approaching the pure tension scenario due
56–57 mm, with an elongation rate of 3.56%–3.63%. to the energy dissipation mechanisms becoming more pronounced.
(2) As the tension continued, the rock bolts gradually entered This behavior underscores the robustness of the rock bolt system in
the strengthening stage. The peak load reached 267–269 dynamically absorbing energy and highlights the nuanced relation-
kN, accompanied by an axial deformation of 170–184 mm ship between impact energy and yielding load, which warrants fur-
and a maximum elongation rate of 10.85%–11.75%. ther investigation to fully understand the mechanisms.
(3) During the necking fracture stage, the rock bolts underwent After completing the pure tension test (TDT-1) and the
progressive necking until failure occurred. The axial defor- pretension-impact-pull test (TDT-4), longitudinal cross-section
mation just prior to fracture ranged from 187 to 209 mm, metallographic samples were prepared from the rebars. The pre-
with a system axial elongation rate of 11.94%–13.32%. pared samples were etched and observed under a metallographic
(4) In pure tension, the peak load corresponded closely to the microscope to examine the morphology of the cross-sectional met-
deformation just before fracture, with a difference in defor- allographic structure. Representative observation results are
mation ranging from 2 to 7 mm. The fracture occurred shown in Fig. 5. It can be observed that the metallographic struc-
abruptly. In contrast, after undergoing the tension-impact- ture of the rebar underwent significant changes after experiencing
fracture process, the difference in deformation reached a 10 kJ impact. The lattice became distorted, grains underwent
13.5–32 mm. This indicates that the rock bolt reached its shear and slip, and elongation occurred, resulting in increased
maximum load with relatively small deformation after expe- hardness of the surface layer metal. The cold work hardening effect
riencing the impact. was evident, leading to a significant increase in the stiffness of the
rock bolt. This enhanced stiffness improved its resistance to sur-
It is interesting to note that the yielding loads across different rounding rock deformation, allowing the rock bolt to enter a ‘‘high
impact energy levels (1, 4, 8.5, and 10 kJ) did not show significant dif- stiffness” operating state.

Fig. 5. Metallographic analysis of rock bolts.

284
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

3.2. Peak impact load

The impact duration on the rock bolts was around 25 ms. To

analyze the characteristics of load variation on the rock bolts dur-
ing the impact process, impact load-time curves were plotted in
Fig. 6. The impact process can be divided into two stages: elonga-
tion and rebound. The elongation stage is represented by the blue
curve, while the rebound stage is depicted by the red curve. The
following characteristics can be observed.

(1) During the elongation stage, the rock bolt continued to elon-
gate, and the load experienced significant fluctuations,
appearing as a multi-peak distribution. Particularly, the first
three peak segments were most prominent, with peak loads
exceeding 350 kN. However, the overall load fluctuations
tended to revolve around a certain value.
(2) During the rebound stage, the load on the rock bolt
decreased sharply. Fig. 7. Comparison of the load-time curves of rock bolts subjected to impact with
different pretensions.
The impact load-time curves of each rock bolt were summa-
rized and presented in Fig. 7. It can be observed that despite differ-
ent pretensions, there was good consistency in the trend of load 4. Effect of impact energy on the mechanical behavior of rock
variation and distribution of peaks during the impact elongation bolts
phase. The load profiles at corresponding moments and the subse-
quent changes showed a relatively consistent pattern. An interest- 4.1. Impact load and deformation
ing phenomenon was that with larger pretension, the first peak of
the impact load was higher. However, there was no clear relation- The rock bolts were subjected to the same pretension and then
ship between the subsequent peak loads and the pretension. reloaded to failure after different levels of impact energy. The com-

Fig. 6. Load-time curves of rock bolts subjected to impact with different pretensions.

285
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

Fig. 8. Load-deformation curves of rock bolts subjected to same initial tension and
different levels of impact energy. Fig. 10. Effect of impact energy on the deformation of rock bolts subjected to
pretension-impact-pull.

and 1 kJ impact energies were 21.33, 13.76, 7.04, and

2.23 mm, respectively. As the impact energy increases, the
maximum deformation increases.
(2) Stage of rebound deformation: The higher the impact energy
is, the faster the rate of rebound deformation exhibited by
the rock bolts is. Moreover, the duration of both the stage
of increasing impact deformation and the stage of rebound
deformation becomes longer as the impact energy increases.

Fig. 10 illustrates the influence of impact energy on the

mechanical parameters of the rock bolts. The following observa-
tions can be drawn from Fig. 10 and Table 2.

(1) The impact load increased significantly with impact energy.

Moreover, when the impact energy exceeded 4 kJ, the max-
imum impact load on the rock bolts exceeded the peak load
of the rock bolts subjected to pure tension.
Fig. 9. Impact deformation and time history curve of rock bolt. (2) The elongation increased as the impact energy increased.
(3) When the impact energy was 1 kJ, the rock bolts exhibited
no plastic deformation, and the plastic deformation gradu-
ally increased with impact energy. It can be inferred that
plete stress–strain curves during this process are shown in Fig. 8. when the peak impact load was below the elastic limit of
During the pre-tensioning stage, the load-deformation curves of the rock bolts, only elastic deformation occurred. However,
the rock bolts under four different impact energy conditions exhib- when the impact load exceeded the elastic limit, plastic
ited good consistency, with slight deviations primarily attributed deformation was observed in the rock bolts.
to system clearances and material differences in the model.
The relationship between impact deformation and time of the
rock bolts under different levels of impact energy is shown in 4.2. Fracture characteristics
Fig. 9. Table 2 lists the obtained parameters. It is evident that the
impact deformation of the rock bolts can be divided into two stages Fig. 11 depicts the load-deformation curve of the rock bolts dur-
under three different impact energy levels. ing the period from experiencing impact load to reaching failure
under the action of tensile load. It can be observed that the curves
(1) Stage of continuous increase in impact deformation: The of the rock bolts after impact are generally similar in shape to that
greater the impact energy is, the faster the rate of increase of pure tension.
in impact deformation during this stage is. The maximum To analyze the influence of early impact energy on the later
deformations observed under the influence of 10, 8.5, 4, mechanical characteristics of rock bolts, four aspects can be exam-

Table 2
Obtained mechanical properties of rock bolt with different levels of impact energy.

Bolt ID Peak load (kN) Extension (mm) Rebound (mm) Plastic (mm)
TDT-5 210.89 2.23 2.62 0.00
TDT-6 292.49 7.04 6.34 3.70
TDT-7 355.35 13.76 7.66 9.63
TDT-3 384.31 21.33 7.17 17.50

286
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

4.2.2. Deformation in the strengthening stage

After being subjected to different impact energy levels of 1, 4,
8.5, and 10 kJ, the deformations in the strengthening stage of the
rock bolts were 123.47, 143.38, 128.81, and 128 mm, respectively.
Compared to the length of the strengthening stage during static
tension, which is 147.08 mm, the deformations in the strengthen-
ing stage significantly decrease after the impact. This indicates that
when the impact energy exceeds the threshold for plastic deforma-
tion in the rock bolts, higher impact energy leads to greater plastic
deformation during the impact stage. Moreover, the consumed
plastic deformation is attributed to both the yielding stage and
the strengthening stage of the rock bolts.

4.2.3. Stiffness of the rock bolt

To investigate the influence of impact energy on the stiffness of
the rock bolt, the load-deformation curves of the rock bolts under
different impact energy levels, including no impact (0), 1, 4, 8.5,
Fig. 11. Load-deformation curves of rock bolts under pretension after suffering and 10 kJ, were extracted. From the five fitted load-deformation
impact load. curves of the rock bolts under different impact energies (increment
of axial load per unit elongation, measured in kN/mm), as shown in
Fig. 12, it can be observed that under no impact (0), 1, and 4 kJ
impact energy levels, the slopes of the load-deformation curves
ined: deformation in the yielding stage, deformation in the during subsequent tension are relatively similar. This suggests that
strengthening stage, stiffness of the rock bolt, and capacity of the the impact energies of 1 and 4 kJ have no significant influence on
rock bolt. the stiffness of the rock bolt support system. However, under 8.5
and 10 kJ impact energy levels, the slopes of the load-
deformation curves noticeably increase compared to the no-
impact condition, with a growth magnitude of 54%. It can be con-
4.2.1. Deformation in the yielding stage
cluded that the stiffness of the rock bolt support system signifi-
Based on the plastic deformation characteristics of rock bolts
cantly increases after impact when the impact energy causes
under the influence of four different impact energy levels, it is evi-
plastic deformation in the rock bolts.
dent that when the impact energy is below the energy threshold
required for plastic deformation in the rock bolts, no plastic defor-
mation occurs under the impact load. However, when the impact 4.2.4. Capacity of the rock bolt
energy exceeds the threshold, plastic deformation is induced in Under pure tension where no impact load was applied, the
the rock bolts, and higher impact energy results in greater plastic yielding load of the rock bolt was 223 kN. For the four different
deformation. After being subjected to different impact energy levels impact energy levels of 1, 4, 8.5, and 10 kJ, the yielding loads were
of 1, 4, 8.5, and 10 kJ, the deformations in the yielding stage of the 221, 219, 220, and 218 kN, respectively, with no significant differ-
rock bolts were 37.69, 32.83, 29.64, and 22.34 mm, respectively. It ences. Under pure tension, the maximum load of the rock bolt was
is notable that the deformations in the yielding stage significantly 274.55 kN. For the four different impact energy levels of 1, 4, 8.5,
decrease after the impact. When the impact energy exceeds the and 10 kJ, the maximum loads of the rock bolt support system
threshold for plastic deformation in the rock bolts, higher impact were 258, 254, 260, and 265 kN, respectively, again without show-
energy leads to greater plastic deformation during the impact stage ing any significant differences among the four different impact
and consumes a longer length of the yielding stage. energy levels.

Fig. 12. Calculation of the stiffness of rock bolts after subjected to different levels of impact energy.

287
H. Kang, G. Yuan, L. Si et al. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 34 (2024) 281–288

5. Conclusions [5] Kılıc A, Yasar E, Celik AG. Effect of grout properties on the pull-out load
capacity of fully grouted rock bolt. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
2002;17:355–62.
(1) Under pre-tension conditions, as the impact energy [6] Kılıc A, Yasar E, Atis CD. Effect of bar shape on the pull-out capacity of fully-
increases, the maximum and average impact loads on the grouted rockbolts. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 2003;18(1):1–6.
[7] Karanam UMR, Dasyapu SK. Experimental and numerical investigations of
rock bolts significantly increase. When the impact energy
stresses in a fully grouted rock bolts. Geotech Geol Eng 2005;23:297–308.
exceeds a certain threshold, the rock bolts start to exhibit [8] Spang K, Egger P. Action of fully-grouted bolts in jointed rock and factors of
plastic deformation, and the magnitude of plastic deforma- influence. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1990;23(3):201–29.
[9] Ferrero AM. The shear strength of reinforced rock joints. Int J Rock Mech Min
tion and axial force loss in the rock bolts increases with
Sci Geomech Abstr 1995;32(6):595–605.
the increment of impact energy. The yield load of the rock [10] Pellet DF, Egger P. Analytical model for the mechanical behaviour
bolt material is not significantly affected by the impact, of bolted rock joints subjected to shearing. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1996;29(2):
showing only a slight decrease in the maximum load. This 73–97.
[11] Grasselli G. 3D behaviour of bolted rock joints: Experimental and numerical
is because the impact causes certain damage and degrada- study. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2005;42(1):13–24.
tion to the overall structure of the rock bolt support system, [12] Jalalifar H, Aziz N, Hadi M. The effect of surface profile, rock strength and
resulting in a minor attenuation of the maximum load after pretension load on bending behaviour of fully grouted bolts. Geotech Geol Eng
2006;24(5):1203–27.
the peak of the support system. [13] Yi X, Kaiser PK. Impact testing for rockbolt design in rockburst conditions. Int J
(2) Pretension significantly affects the axial deformation charac- Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1994;31(6):671–85.
teristics of the rock bolts. The impact elongation and plastic [14] Hagan TO, Milev A, Spottiswoode S, Hildyard MV, Grodner M, Rorke AJ, Finnie
GJ, Reddy N, Haile AT, Le Bron KB, Grave DM. Simulated rockburst
deformation are negatively correlated with the pretension. experiment—an overview. J S Afr N Inst Min Metall 2001;101:217–22.
The fluctuation amplitude significantly decreases as the pre- [15] Haile AT, Bron KL. Simulated rockburst experiment-evaluation of rock bolt
tension increases. Increasing the pretension effectively con- reinforcement performance. J S Afr I Min Metall 2001;101(5):247–51.
[16] St-Pierre L, Hassani FP, Ouellet J, Radziszewski PH. An investigation on the
strains the deformation rate and fluctuation degree of the
dynamic testing, properties and responses of support systems. In: Proceedings
rock bolts after the impact load. of the 11th ISRM congress. Lisbon, Portugal: International Society for Rock
(3) The impact induces plastic deformation in the rock bolts, Mechanics and Rock Engineering; 2007.
[17] St-Pierre L, Hassani FP, Radziszewski PH, Ouellet J. Development of a dynamic
leading to dislocation of the internal microstructure of the
model for a cone bolt. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2009;46(1):107–14.
rock bolt material. The impact also significantly enhances [18] Gaudreau D. Performance assessment of tendon support systems submitted to
the stiffness of the rock bolt support system. The greater dynamic loading. Doctoral dissertation, Montreal: École Polytechnique de
the plastic deformation induced by the impact is, the more Montreal, 2004.
[19] Li CC, Doucet C. Performance of D-bolts under dynamic loading. Rock Mech
pronounced the strengthening effect on the stiffness of the Rock Eng 2012;45(2):193–204.
rock bolt support system after the impact is. [20] Player J, Villaescusa E, Thompson AG. Dynamic testing of rock reinforcement
using the momentum transfer concept. In: Proceeding of the 5th international
symposium on ground support in mining and underground construction.
Kalgoorlie, Australia: Rock Support and Reinforcement; 2004.
Acknowledgements [21] Player JR. Dynamic testing of rock reinforcement systems. Doctoral
dissertation. Perth: Curtin University of Technology; 2012.
[22] He MC, Li C, Gong WL, Sousa LR, Li SL. Dynamic tests for a constant-resistance-
This work has been supported by the National Natural Science large-deformation bolt using a modified SHTB system. Tunn Undergr Space
Foundation of China (Nos. 52074151, 51927807, and 52274123) Technol 2017;64:103–16.
and Tiandi Science and Technology Co., Ltd. (No. 2022-2-TD- [23] Sharifzadeh M, Lou JF, Crompton B. Dynamic performance of energy-absorbing
rockbolts based on laboratory test results. Part II: Role of inherent features on
MS012)
dynamic performance of rockbolts. Tunn Undergr Space Technol
2020;105:103555.
References [24] Li CC, Hadjigeorgiou J, Mikula P, Knox G, Darlington B, Royer R, Pytlik A, Hosp
M. Performance of identical rockbolts tested on four dynamic testing rigs
[1] Farmer IW. Stress distribution along a resin grouted rock anchor. Int J Rock employing the direct impact method. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 2021;13
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1975;12:347–51. (4):745–54.
[2] Dunnam RK. Anchorage tests on strain gauged resin bonded bolts. Tunn Tunn [25] Lou JF, Gao FQ, Li JZ, Yuan GY, Sharifzadeh M. Effect of dynamic loading
Int 1976;8. conditions on the dynamic performance of MP1 energy-absorbing
[3] Freeman T. The behaviour of fully-bonded rock bolts in the Kielder rockbolts: insight from laboratory drop test. Int J Min Sci Technol 2023;
Experimental Tunnel. Tunn Tunn Int 1978;10:37–40. 33(2):215–31.
[4] Björnfot F, Stephansson O. Interaction of grouted rock bolts and hard rock [26] Kang HP, Yang JH, Gao FQ, Li JZ. Experimental study on the mechanical
masses at variable loading in a test drift of the Kiirunavaara, Mine, behavior of rock bolts subjected to complex static and dynamic loads. Rock
Sweden. Rotterdam: Balkema; 1984. p. 377–95. Mech Rock Eng 2020;53(11):4993–5004.

288