Study on the damage mechanism of deep ingate lining structure disturbed by cyclic blasting

XiangLi

PhD

ZhishuYao2

XiaohuLiu

PhD

XiaonanWang

PhD

1✉Phone+86-15723182306Emailxnwang@cqust.edu.cn

School of Safety Science and EngineeringChongqing University of Science and Technology20 University Town East Road401331ChongqingChina

2School of Civil Engineering and ArchitectureAnhui University of Science and Technology232001HuainanChina

Xiang Li ¹ *, PhD; Zhishu Yao² *; Xiaohu Liu² *, PhD; Xiaonan Wang¹ *, PhD

¹ School of Safety Science and Engineering, Chongqing University of Science and Technology, Chongqing 401331, China.

² School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Anhui University of Science and Technology, Huainan 232001, China.

Word Count: 3521words (main body) with 11 figures and 4 tables

Version: 1

Corresponding author: Xiaonan Wang, PhD, School of Safety Science and Engineering, Chongqing University of Science and Technology, 20 University Town East Road, Chongqing 401331, China.

Tel: +86-15723182306, E-mail: xnwang@cqust.edu.cn

Xiang Li PhD, Zhishu Yao, Xiaohu Liu PhD and Xiaonan Wang PhD contributed equally to this work.

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 52174104) and the Research Foundation of Chongqing University of Science and Technology (Grant No. 182201056).

Abstract

Frequent blasting disturbance is one of the important reasons for the damage of the deep ingate lining structure. Understanding the damage mechanism of the deep ingate lining structure under blasting disturbance field can help improve the design of blasting schemes and optimize the materials and forms of the lining structure. The article combined model experiments and numerical calculations to study the distribution characteristics, damage degree, and evolution law of the lining structure of deep ingate under cyclic blasting disturbance. The results showed that under certain confining pressure conditions, when the initial explosive charge exceeded the threshold, the arch crown, arch shoulder, and side walls of the same side junction section were damaged in sequence. After cyclic blasting disturbance, the cumulative damage values of these three parts were the highest. Secondly, the cumulative damage generated by the "first strong, then weak" disturbance on the same side as the first blasting was always higher than the "first weak, then strong" disturbance on the other side, and the cumulative damage value depended on the first damage value. When the blasting working face reached a safe distance, the damage no longer developed. Thirdly, after two cycles, the cumulative damage value of SFRC structure (DSFRC = 0.0043) was about 1/15 of that of HSC structure (DHSC = 0.032), indicating that SFRC exhibited superior anti explosion disturbance performance. The research results were of great significance for improving the safety of the deep ingate lining structure and reducing the impact of blasting disturbance.

Key words:

Deep ingate lining structure

Cycle blasting disturbance

Damage mechanism

LS-DYNA

1. INTRODUCTION

The main energy source in China is coal, and the development of coal resources will still maintain a considerable scale for a certain period in the future. With the increasing demand for energy, the mining intensity of coal resources is constantly increasing. As a result, Chinese shallow resources are decreasing day by day, and domestic and foreign mines have entered a state of deep resource extraction one after another [1]. Vertical shafts are mainly used for transportation and ventilation required for the mining of deep coal resources. The connection between the deep shaft and the horizontal roadway at the bottom of the shaft is called the deep shaft ingate, which is the throat of the deep mine. Due to its large cross-sectional size, complex structure, numerous connecting chambers, the ingate is frequently disturbed during construction. The engineering problems such as stress concentration and instability of ingate have also been exacerbated, which is a major technical bottleneck in the field of deep shaft construction [2].

Due to its unique location, the deep ingate is not suitable for tunnel boring machine operations, while the drilling and blasting method is more suitable for ingate excavation operations due to its flexible characteristics. In the support process, due to the complex structure and difficulty of support of the ingate, shotcrete anchor support and integral formwork concrete composite lining have become the most commonly used support methods. After the lining structure is solidified, it will be subject to the high crustal stress of deep surrounding rock and the vibration disturbance from the blasting excavation of the horizontal, and the possibility of damage will be greatly increased. Many scholars have conducted research on such engineering problems using on-site experiments and numerical simulations. Wang et al. used FLAC3D to analyze the dynamic response of subway lining structure under the action of foundation pit blasting [3].

Chu et al. conducted cyclic blasting on young concrete using a vibration experiment system and proposed a blasting-vibration safety standard for the concrete based on the effect of damage accumulation [4]. Zhang et al. conducted on-site experiments to study the impact of adjacent tunnel blasting vibration on the blasting vibration of existing tunnel lining [5]. According to the measured vibration waves, the maximum vibration due to the peak particle velocity from each blast was always induced by cut blasting. In attention, the particle velocities in the region along the excavating direction were 1.12 to 1.79 times larger than those in the region opposite to the excavating direction, and the difference increased with the increasing distance to the blasting source. Tang et al. conducted blasting excavation experiments at the tunnel site, fitted the Sadovski formula, and verified it using LS-DYNA simulation results. Then, they conducted blasting vibration experiments on concrete specimens of different ages, and obtained the relationship between age and blasting vibration velocity [6]. Wu et al. established a tunnel blasting finite element model based on the consideration of in situ stress using ABAQUS simulation software. Then, they analyzed the vibration response and stress response of tunnel lining considering dynamic static coupling effect [7]. Lamis Ahmed et al. established a 2D finite element model of young shot-concrete tunnel lining and simulated the disturbance caused by blasting construction using ABAQUS [8]. By comparing the results of numerical simulation and field tests, they concluded that 2D numerical simulation was an effective method to study the response of tunnel lining structure under blasting dynamic load disturbance. To sum up, numerical simulation was a feasible research method to study the response of underground lining structure to blasting disturbance. However, there are few reports on the blasting disturbance of the lining structure of ingate or the lining structure located deep underground.

In this study, the damage evolution law and damage distribution characteristics of deep ingate were studied in the static field of deep surrounding rock pressure and the dynamic field of horizontal roadway blasting vibration.

2. METHODS

2.1. Project overview

Zhangji Coal Mine belonged to Huainan Mining Group Co., LTD., which was administratively subordinate to Fengtai County, Huainan City, Anhui Province. It covered an area of 71km² and had an approved production capacity of 12.6 million tons every year. Its new east return air shaft had been built. The depth of the air shaft ingate bottom plate was 771.5m, and the overall pouring section was between 761.5m and 771.5m. This ingate structure was selected as the research object of the study. The dimensions of the lining structure of the ingate were shown in Fig. 1. The dimensions in the Fig. 1 were “mm”.

Figure 1. Size of ingate lining structure.

Mudstone was the surrounding rock of the ingate lining structure and its properties were list in Table 1.

Table 1
Parameter of surrounding rock.
Surrounding rock	Density (kg/m³)	Elastic modulus (GPa)	Poisson's ratio	Compressive strength (MPa)	Tensile strength (MPa)
Mudstone	2350	18.7	0.25	24.6	2.2

In order to counter the high stress of the deep surrounding rock and ensure the safety of ingate structure, high strength concrete (HSC) was often used as lining material for the structure. Therefore, HSC with compressive strength of 60MPa was selected as the test material. Moreover, this study tried to avoid the damage of lining structure by using new materials, so steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) with 1.0% volume content was selected. The properties of concrete which were obtained through laboratory material tests were listed in Table 2.

Table 2
Parameter of concrete.
Concrete	Density (kg/m³)	Elastic modulus (GPa)	Poisson's ratio	Compressive strength (MPa)	Tensile strength (MPa)
HSC	2450	37.8	0.21	61.9	3.6
SFRC	2500	39.1	0.21	66.5	5.2

2.2. Numerical simulation test

Finite element model of the ingate lining structure was established by Hypermesh14.0 whose overall size was 69.3×25.0×25.0m. There were 637008 grid elements and 677312 nodes in the model. The model included four parts: ingate lining structure of concrete, surrounding rock, explosive and rock to be excavated. Common nodes were adopted among the grids. The internal structure was shown in Fig. 2. The units used in the model were “mm” in length, “ms” in time, “kg” in mass, “GPa” in stress, and “m/s” in velocity [9].

Figure 2. Cross-sectional view of finite element model.

The surrounding rock pressure acting on the outside of the ingate structure is generally not more than 300kPa.Therefore, the numerical simulation was designed as three horizontal confining pressure static load of 50kPa, 150kPa and 250kPa, which directly acted on the outer surface of ingate lining structure. Constraints and non-reflective boundaries were set on each face of the global model.

According to the blasting design of horizontal roadway on both sides of the ingate, PT473 water-glue explosive was selected, millisecond delay blasting was adopted, the dosage of 9.6kg was used in the section with the largest loading, the circulating footage was 2.6m, the left and right sides were operated alternately. In order to simplify the explosive part of blasting, a gun hole grid was divided into the central position of the horizontal roadway on both sides for equivalent purposes during the grid division.

003-PLASTIC_KINEMAIC was selected as the material model for surrounding rock and excavated rock mass. 008-HIGH_EXPLOSIVE_BURN was selected as the material model for explosives. The custom dynamic damage constitutive model was selected as the structural material model for HSC and SFRC lining [10–19]. The equation of state of explosive was JWL, and other parameters were shown in Table 3.

Table 3
Parameter of explosive.
Materials	Density (kg/m³)	Detonation velocity (m/s)	Detonation pressure (GPa)
Explosive	1300	4000	5.2

3. RESULTS

3.1 Stress distribution under deep confining pressure under static load

Static loading of 50kPa, 150kPa and 250kPa confining pressure was applied to the HSC and SFRC ingate lining structures respectively, until the structures were balanced. Since tensile stress was positive and compressive stress was negative in the system, the maximum and minimum principal stress were respectively taken as tensile stress and compressive stress and strength limits for comparative analysis. The test results showed that the stress distribution pattern was basically the same in the structure under different confining pressure static load, and the stress value increases linearly with the increase of confining pressure static load. Take the lining structure of HSC ingate lining under 250kPa confining pressure static load as an example. Figure 3 showed the distribution of maximum and minimum principal stresses on the inner and outer sides of the structure.

Fig. 3

Principal stress distribution of HSC ingate lining structure inside under 250kPa static confining pressure: (a) maximum principal stress of inside; (b) minimum principal stress of inside; (c) maximum principal stress of outside; (d) minimum principal stress of outside.

As can be seen from Fig. 3-(a), the concentration area of tensile stress was located at the side wall and spandrel of the inner surface. The maximum tensile stress point was located in the side wall and its value was 0.54MPa. which was 15% of the tensile strength value of 3.60MPa of HSC.

In Fig. 3-(b), the concentration area of compressive stress was located at the top of the arch where the shaft lining met the roadway lining, and along the bottom corner line of the roadway of the inner surface. The maximum compressive stress value was 1.20MPa, which was far lower than the compressive strength of HSC.

It can be seen from Fig. 3-(c), in the outer surface of the ingate lining structure, the tensile stress concentration area was located along the bottom corner line, and the tensile stress value was almost above 1.0MPa. The maximum tensile stress value was 1.66MPa, which had reached 46.1% of the tensile strength value of 3.60MPa of HSC.

In Fig. 3-(d), in the outer surface of the ingate lining structure, the compressive stress concentration area was located in the surface of outside wall of the horizontal section, the shaft lining and the bottom corner. The maximum compressive stress value was 1.20MPa, which was far lower than the compressive strength of HSC.

It can be seen that, under the static loading condition of 250kPa confining pressure, the compressive stress of all parts of the ingate lining structure was far lower than the strength limit of HSC. In contrast, although the tensile stress along the lateral wall and the lateral bottom corner of the inner horizontal section did not reach the tensile strength of HSC, the maximum tensile stress had reached 15.0% and 46.1% of the tensile strength of HSC.

Under the confining pressure static load condition, the ingate structure of SFRC had almost the same stress distribution with the structure of HSC. However, because SFRC had higher tensile strength than HSC, the maximum tensile stress of the ingate structure only reached 31.9% of its tensile strength.

The location of tensile stress concentration was the weakest part of the whole structure under static load condition. If the static load of the confining pressure of the structure increased in the later period, the structure was disturbed by other loads, or the strength of the concrete material was reduced due to the influence of other factors, the damage and destruction of the structure may be caused.

Therefore, improving the tensile strength of concrete was an effective way to improve the safety and reliability of the ingate lining structure.

3.2 Blasting damage charge threshold

Under the static load of surrounding rock pressure, the lining structure of ingate was subject to the blasting disturbance from horizontal roadway excavation. Since the first blasting distance to the structure was the closest, it had the greatest influence on the structure. The initial damage of the structure was also bound to occur at the first blasting, and its minimum mass was the charge threshold of damage blasting. Through the dichotomy method, the assignment of blasting charge was adjusted constantly, and it was found that the damage of the first blasting occurs in the apex arch unit of the intersecting arch line [20–22]. The relationship between blasting damage charge threshold and confining pressure of ingate lining structure was shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Relationship between blasting damage threshold charge and confining pressure.

As can be seen from Fig. 4, the threshold of blasting charge to the ingate lining structure was negatively correlated with the static load of surrounding rock. The threshold of blasting charge decreased with the increase of confining pressure. Moreover, in the confining pressure stage of 50–250kPa, the damage dose threshold of SFRC was significantly higher than that of HSC, showing significant resistance to blasting disturbance. Thirdly, the damage charge threshold of SFRC decreased gradually with the rise of confining pressure while the damage charge threshold of HSC decreased rapidly. In other words, when the confining pressure increased, the HSC had a lower charge threshold and was more susceptible to the impact of blasting disturbance to cause damage.

3.3 Evolution law of vibration velocity

The case of cyclic blasting with 250kPa confining pressure and 15kg explosive was taken as an example. Then, five sections of ingate lining structure were selected as the research. These sections were named as “left middle section (SA)”, “left connecting arch section (SB)”, “upper shaft section (SC)”, “right connecting arch section (SD)” and “right middle section (SE)”. The apex of arch element was selected as the representative element of each arch section because it was the most vulnerable element. The central front element (X = 0) was selected as the representative element of the upper shaft section. The representative elements of each section were named “SAE”, “SBE”, “SCE”, “SDE” and “SEE”.

Time history curves of velocity in three directions of each section were shown in Fig. 5–Fig. 9. In the figures, X represented the length direction of the horizontal roadway, Y represented the width direction, and Z represented the height direction [23–27].

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 5

Vibration velocity time history curve of SAE: (a) X direction; (b) Y direction; (c) Z direction.

Figure 7. Vibration velocity time history curve of SCE: (a) X direction; (b) Y direction; (c) Z direction.

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 8

Vibration velocity time history curve of SDE: (a) X direction; (b) Y direction; (c) Z direction.

Figure 9. Vibration velocity time history curve of SEE: (a) X direction; (b) Y direction; (c) Z direction.

The values of peak particle velocity (PPV) of the curves were extracted and listed in Table 4.

Table 4
PPV of different sections.
Directions	SAE	SBE	SCE	SDE	SEE
X	21.4	38.0	29.1	14.9	4.9
Y	1.0	0.7	0.7	1.9	6.3
Z	23.2	17.9	22.9	27.4	5.2

Table 4 showed that the order of maximum vibration velocity of each curve was as follows: V_X-SBE = 38.0cm/s > V_X-SCE = 29.1cm/s > V_Z-SDE = 27.4cm/s > V_Z-SAE = 23.2cm/s > V_Y-SEE = 6.3cm/s. The values of the vault elements ranged 23.2–38.0cm/s which was significantly higher than V_Y-SEE. That meant the arched structure of the horizontal part of the ingate lining was significantly more disturbed by blasting than that of the upper part of the shaft lining.

By comparing the maximum vibration velocity in different directions, the maximum vibration velocities of SAE and SCE were V_X, while that of SBE and SDE were V_Z, and that of SEE was V_Y. The results showed that the maximum vibration velocity of the feature elements appeared in the normal direction of their free surfaces such as SAE, SDE and SEE. For the multi-free surface, the V_X was higher than that of the other direction such as SBE and SCE [28].

It can be seen from Fig. 5 – Fig. 9 that the vibration velocity of the first 1–4 times of blasting disturbance were much higher than that of other times in the later period. With the distance of blasting away, the vibration velocity of each element gradually attenuates, and the attenuation velocities of SAE, SBE, SCE and SDE were higher than that of SEE. In the later period, the maximum vibration velocities of SAE, SBE, SCE and SDE were in the range of 2–4cm/s, and that of SEE was within 1cm/s.

3.4 Damage evolution law

The ingate lining structure was damaged after blasting disturbance. The element which was damaged initially was also the element that accumulated the most damage. The element’s evolution characteristics could represent the damage pattern of most elements of the structure. The most damaged elements of SBE and SCE were taken as the research objects to analyze the damage evolution law [29–32]. The curves of the two elements of HSC and SFRC was shown in Fig. 10.

Figure 10. Damage evolution curves of vault of SBE and SCE.

As can be seen from Fig. 10, the two cures of HSC gradually flattened out, the damage no longer developed and the blasting disturbance had no influence after the 20th disturbance. That meant 26m was the safe distance for the HSC lining structure. In the same way, SFRC ingate lining structure had no influence after the 14th blasting. That meant 18.2 m was the safe distance for the SFRC lining structure.

In addition, both HSC and SFRC ingate lining structure, the development rate of damage at SBE was higher than that at SCE, and the cumulative damage degree of the former was also higher than that of the latter. The reason might be related to the initial cracks. Because the blasting disturbance alternated left and right, SBE was disturbance by "first strong and then weak" type effect, while SCE was disturbance by "first weak and then strong" type effect. The initial cracks of SBE were wider, longer and more than SCE after first time disturbance. In the subsequent evolution and development process, both the evolution speed and cumulative damage degree of SBE were higher than that of SCE.

3.5 Cumulative damage distribution characteristics

Fig. 11

Cumulative damage distribution diagram of ingate lining structure: (a) HSC; (b) SFRC.

After the disturbance of circular blasting excavation on both sides of ingate lining structure, the damage was mainly distributed above the arch, spandrel and sidewall of SBE and SCE. The damage area was also located in the static load stress concentration area.

By comparing the damage area of SBE and SCE, it was found that the maximum cumulative damage element was located at SBE which was on the same side as the first blasting. The maximum damage degree of HSC and SFRC structure was 0.0863 and 0.025, respectively, and the damage degree of HSC structure was obviously greater than that of SFRC structure.

When the blasting stress wave reached the free surface boundary of the structure, due to the difference of wave impedance, there would be emission and refraction on the surface, which was also an important reason for the cross section more prone to damage.

4. CONCLUSION

Under the action of deep static confining pressure, the tensile stress concentration area of the ingate lining structure was located along the bottom corner line. The area was the weakest part of the structure. For this reason, improving the tensile performance of concrete material was an effective way to improve the safety reserve of the ingate lining structure.

The damage generation of deep ingate lining structure had a blasting charge threshold value which was negatively correlated with static confining pressure of surrounding rock. The threshold of SFRC was significantly higher than that of HSC, showing obvious blasting disturbance resistance characteristics. Under static loading of 250kPa confining pressure and cyclic blasting disturbance of 15kg charge, the damage evolution of HSC and SFRC ingate lining structure stopped after the horizonal roadway was excavated to 26m and 18.2m, respectively.

Because the damage of the initial crack damage element developed faster than other elements, the cumulative maximum damage element and the first blasting were always located on the same side of the ingate lining structure. This meant that reducing the amount of first blasting charge to control the first damage was of great significance for controlling the cumulative damage of the ingate lining structure.

The maximum vibration velocity was caused by the effect of blasting disturbance for excavating horizontal roadways on both sides of ingate lining structure. The order of the PPV value of each section was as follows: V_X-SBE > V_X-SCE > V_Z-SDE > V_Z-SAE > V_Y-SEE. In the whole cycle blasting process, the ingate lining structure was disturbed for the first 4 times, which were much higher than that of other times in the later period. After 20 times of alternating cyclic blasting effect for excavating, the cumulative damage distributed in the vault, spandrel and vertical wall of section B and section C. The maximum damage of HSC and SFRC ingate lining structure was located on the vault of section B, and the values were 0.0863 and 0.025 respectively. The cumulative damage degree of SFRC structure was obviously lower than that of HSC structure.

Data Availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author Contribution

X. Li contributed to conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, and writing the original draft. Z.S. Yao was responsible for conceptualization, resources, supervision, project administration, and funding acquisition. X.H. Liu performed the software development, validation, investigation, and visualization. X.N. Wang handled data curation, contributed to writing through review and editing, and performed figure editing.

REFERENCES

He, M. C. et al. Study on rock mechanics in deep mining engineering. Chin. J. Rock. Mech. Eng. 24 (16), 2803–2813 (2005).

Yao, Z. S. et al. Construction disturbance of deep mine shaft ingate and its countermeasures. J. Guangxi Univ. (Nat Sci. Ed). 41 (04), 1001–7445 (2016).

Wang, H. B. et al. Numerical Analysis of the influence of foundation pit blasting on a nearby metro tunnel. Shock Vib. 6693697 (2021). (2021).

Chu, H. B. et al. Experimental study on the blasting-vibration safety standard for young concrete based on the damage accumulation effect. Constr. Build. Mater. 217, 20–27 (2019).

Zhang, Q. B. et al. Characteristics of vibration waves measured in concrete lining of excavated tunnel during blasting in adjacent tunnel. Coatings 12 (7), 954 (2022).

Tang, X. X. et al. Analysis of the influence of tunnel blasting construction on initial concrete. J. Railw Eng. Soc. 39 (01), 73–78 (2022).

Wu, P. et al. A plasticity-based dynamic constitutive model for ultra high toughness cementitious composites. Int. J. Impact Eng. 161, 104146 (2022).

Ahmed, L. & Ansell, A. Vibration vulnerability of shotcrete on tunnel walls during construction blasting. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 42, 105–111 (2014).

Mussa, M. H. et al. Assessment of damage to an underground box tunnel by a surface explosion. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 66, 64–76 (2017).

10.

Shi, X. W. & Feng, X. Numerical Assessment of the Structural Damage of a Composite Lining Water Conveyance Tunnel Subjected to Reverse Fault Conditions. Buildings 12(10), 1647 (2022).

11.

Wang, X. et al. Propagation characteristics and prediction of blast-induced vibration on closely spaced rock tunnels. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 123, 104414 (2022).

12.

Wang, F. Y. et al. Cracking feature and mechanical behavior of shield tunnel lining simulated by a phase-field modeling method based on spectral decomposition. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 119, 104241 (2022).

13.

Wang, S. Y. et al. Influence of material heterogeneity on the blast-induced crack initiation and propagation in brittle rock. Comput. Geotech. 155, 105203 (2023).

14.

Wang, Z. L. et al. Finite element analyses of constitutive models performance in the simulation of blast-induced rock cracks. Comput. Geotech. 135, 104172 (2021).

15.

Wang, Q. et al. Evaluation Residual Compressive Strength of Tunnel Lining Concrete Structure after Fire Damage Based on Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity and Shear-Wave Tomography. Processes 10(3), 576 (2022).

16.

Wu, B. et al. Research on Dynamic Response of Shallow Buried Tunnel Lining Constructed by Drilling and Blasting Method. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2007735 (2022). (2022).

17.

Xu, M. N. et al. A study on hollow effect and safety design of deep crossing caverns under blasting vibration. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 111, 103866 (2021).

18.

Zhang, Z. et al. Dynamic response and safety control of civil air defense tunnel under excavation blasting of subway tunnel. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 112, 103879 (2021).

19.

Yi, C. P. et al. Numerical modeling for a simulated rockburst experiment using LS-DYNA. Undergr. Space. 6 (2), 153–162 (2021).

20.

Zhao, D. et al. Numerical investigations on dynamic responses of subway segmental tunnel lining structures under internal blasts. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 135, 105058 (2023).

21.

Rehman, J. U. et al. Predicting blast-induced damage and dynamic response of drill-and-blast tunnel using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Appl. Sci. 14 (14), 6152 (2024).

22.

Duan, J. et al. Study on stress wave propagation and failure characteristics of key parts in tunnel under blasting load. Sci. Rep. 14 (1), 29034 (2024).

23.

Yang, J. et al. Characteristics and PPV thresholds of rock damages under underground blasting excavation. J. Vib. Shock. 38 (2), 131–139 (2019).

24.

Liu, H. et al. Vibration velocity control of compound wedge-shaped excavation blasting in tunnels under complex environments. J. Vibroeng. 27 (2), 266–284 (2025).

25.

Li, J. et al. Influence of geological conditions and blast design on particle vibration and its forecasting model. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 82 (1), 32 (2023).

26.

Zong, Q. et al. Numerical analysis on dynamic response and damage threshold characterization of deep rock mass under blasting excavation. Front. Mater. 11, 1329549 (2024).

27.

Jiang, N. et al. Propagation law and prediction of blast-induced vibration in rock mass with different joints distribution. Rock. Mech. Rock. Eng. 55 (11), 6879–6898 (2022).

28.

Senthil, K. et al. A review on the performance of the underground tunnels against blast loading. J. Struct. Eng. Appl. Mech. 4 (1), 1–17 (2021).

29.

Huang, J. et al. Physical model test and numerical simulation study of cumulative damage to deep tunnel surrounding rock under cyclic blasting load. Int. J. Damage Mech. 32 (2), 161–184 (2023).

30.

Ji, L. et al. Numerical studies on the cumulative damage effects and safety criterion of a large cross-section tunnel induced by single and multiple full-scale blasting. Rock. Mech. Rock. Eng. 54 (12), 6393–6411 (2021).

31.

Cui, Y. et al. Research on blasting cumulative dynamic damage of surrounding rock in step construction tunnel. Sci. Rep. 13 (1), 1974 (2023).

32.

Xu, M. et al. Study on the vibration superposition effect and damage control of tunnel surrounding rock under millisecond blasting. Int. J. Rock. Mech. Min. Sci. 170, 105533 (2023).

Yes