Mechanical experiments reveal correlations between fractal dimension and strength parameters in tectonic soft coal, indicating the significance of grain size grading.
Based on mechanical experiments conducted on bulk raw coal and coal of different types in order to explore the correlations between the fractal dimension and the grain size gradation and strength parameters of coal samples, the fractal statistics method was used to statistically analyze the grain size distribution characteristics of tectonic soft coal, while fractal theory was applied to study the grain size fractal characteristics of tectonic soft coals of categories III–V. The results of this study show that coal types III–V have increasing fractal dimension numbers, and the content of coarse particles decreases with an increasing fractal dimension number. Within this sampling range, the Class V coal is better graded, and the fractal dimension number decreases as the distance of the sampling point from the fault zone increases. In the direct shear experiments, the internal friction angle of the bulk raw coal decreased linearly with an increasing fractal dimension number, and the regularity of the cohesive force and the fractal dimension number was not strong, but the adhesion cohesion of the types of coal exhibited a positive exponential relationship with the fractal dimension, and the relationship between the internal friction angle and the fractal dimension was not strong. There was a positive exponential relationship, and the internal friction angle was relatively stable. The uniaxial compressive strength of the types of coal exhibited a good correlation with the coefficient of firmness of the coal samples and the fractal dimension, and the coefficient of firmness of the coal samples was the main factor influencing the uniaxial compressive strength of the types of coal compared with the particle size gradation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: