Traditional bonded-particle models in the discrete element method often struggle to reproduce both unconfined compressive strength and Brazilian tensile splitting strength of brittle rock using a single micro-parameter set, because the same bond formulation is commonly applied to closure-dominated and opening-dominated loading paths. This study proposes a compression–separation history bonded-contact model to address this limitation. The model introduces closure-driven stiffness hardening to represent progressive microcrack closure under compression, together with a history-dependent damage rule that degrades normal and tangential bond strengths more strongly under opening-dominated kinematics. A two-stage surrogate-assisted calibration procedure is then used to identify the model parameters from laboratory UCS and BTS data. The framework is validated against three matched sandstone specimen groups spanning a wide experimental UCS-to-BTS ratio range. Quasi-static acceleration is assessed using an inertial number criterion and a rate-insensitivity check, enabling loading rate increases of up to 10 5 for UCS and 10 4 for BTS. Across all groups, the surrogate predicts DEM peak responses with errors below 5%, and the final calibrated simulations reproduce the experimental UCS-to-BTS ratios with absolute relative errors below 10%. The results show that the proposed bonded-contact model improves simultaneous DEM representation of compressive and tensile rock strength while providing an efficient and reproducible calibration framework.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: