Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

DOI 10.1007/s11069-014-1042-6

ORIGINAL PAPER

Temperature effect of rock burst for hard rock

in deep-buried tunnel

Guoqing Chen • Tianbin Li • Guofeng Zhang • Hongyu Yin •

Hang Zhang

Received: 25 July 2013 / Accepted: 9 January 2014 / Published online: 18 January 2014
Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract Much research has been conducted on the influence of rock burst mechanisms
and temperature on the mechanical properties of hard rock while research on the effect of
temperature on rock bursts is scarce. Therefore, this paper focuses on Rock Burst
Proneness Index tests and acoustic emission (AE) tests under the action of high temper-
ature. It was found that the Rock Burst Proneness Index and the AE energy will rise as the
temperature rises. It means that the degree of rock burst is increasing instead of decreasing
with rising temperature. The research results revealed the temperature effect of rock burst
in long deep tunnels under a certain thermal stress condition, which is helpful for
explaining the rock burst disaster in tunnels at high ground temperature.

Keywords Rock burst  High ground temperature  Acoustic emission 

Deep-buried tunnel

1 Introduction

Many deeply buried long tunnels arose with the extensive construction of railways,
highways and hydroelectric projects (Rybach and Pfister 1994; Cavagnaro and Brulard
1997; Marechal et al. 1999; Li and Dai 2011; Chen et al. 2013a, b, c). Rock burst hazards
may occur when deep-buried long tunnels cross through zones with high geo-stress and
hard rock masses. It has been recognized as one of the geological hazards in the con-
struction of underground engineering since the rock burst in a British tin tunnel in 1738.
High ground temperatures pose a second problem in the excavation of deep-buried tunnels.

G. Chen  T. Li (&)  G. Zhang  H. Yin  H. Zhang

State Key Laboratory of Geohazard Prevention and Geoenvironment Protection, Chengdu University
of Technology, Chengdu 610059, Sichuan, China
e-mail: ltb@cdut.edu.cn
G. Chen
e-mail: chgq1982@126.com

123
916 Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

It worsens the working environment of the tunnel (when the ground temperature exceeds
30 °C) and greatly threatens the security and life of the workers. The changes of tunnel
temperature can generate special thermal stress on the surrounding rock. The combination
of high geo-stresses with high ground temperatures is a complicating factor in the
assessment of rock burst hazards and deserves further study.
Some progress has been made in the field of rock burst and brittle damage. The strain
energy index method was used to evaluate rock burst proneness of coal and rock (Kidy-
binski 1981; Chen et al. 2013a, b, c). The local energy release rate was used in the
numerical simulation of conditions causing rock bursts (Jiang et al. 2010; Feng and Hudson
2011; Jiang et al. 2013). Diederichs et al. (2004) used a damage coefficient obtained from
the uniaxial compression strengths to discuss the brittle failure conditions of deep hard
rock tunnels. Song et al. (2010) proposed a prediction index of rock burst which consists of
pulse intensity and quantity. Zhang and Wang (2007) gave a theoretical discussion about
the deformation mechanics of spalling rock burst based on the terrestrial stress direction
and fracture mechanics. Meanwhile, true triaxial test systems that simulate the rock burst
process were developed, to analyze the simulated rock burst phenomena together with the
stress–strain curves. (Alexeev et al. 2004; Cheon et al. 2006). In recent years, case histories
of the characteristics and mechanisms of rock bursts in deep tunnels were presented by
Zhang et al. (2012). The potential of in situ monitoring of rock bursts with digital borehole
cameras and by using micro-seismic system techniques has been studied thoroughly by Li
et al. (2012); Chen et al. (2013a, b, c). The above-mentioned studies were focused on
macroscopic mechanical tests, while some studies on the rock burst processes were carried
out on a microscopic scale. Lei et al. (2004) analyzed the acoustic emission (AE) distri-
bution of damaged rock, and Dou et al. (2009) assessed rock burst types by using AE,
magnetic emission and the micro-tremor number. He et al. (2010) found that AE showed
high-amplitude and low-frequency characteristics during the failure process induced by
true triaxial unloading tests.
In the research field of thermal coupling on hard rocks, many new results have been
achieved in the international cooperative project DECOVALEX-THMC (Hudson et al. 2001;
Pan et al. 2009). Vinciguerraa et al. (2005) and Lin et al. (2009) studied thermal cracking
using the AE tests. Xu et al. (2009) found by conducting AE, SEM and X-ray tests that at high
temperatures, hard rock transformed during failure from a brittle to ductile state. It can be
concluded that fruitful research has been carried out on rock burst mechanisms and thermal
properties of hard rocks. However, research on the thermal mechanism of rock bursts caused
by temperature is inadequate. Therefore, this paper aims to reveal the mechanism of rock
bursts in deep-buried long tunnels under thermal–mechanical conditions.
In this study, we will conduct advanced thermal rock mechanical tests to study brittle
rock failure under different temperature conditions. With the help of AE tests, failure
intensity and energy values of hard rock are assessed. The basic mechanical properties of
the rock and the Rock Burst Proneness Index under different temperature conditions were
analyzed, to understand the effect of temperature on rock burst.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Test materials and equipment

Many deep-buried long tunnels have emerged, which is shown in Table 1. In the field of
deep underground tunneling, the engineering practice is confronted with a large number of

123
Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926 917

Table 1 Some data about deep-buried tunnels

No. Country Tunnel Maximum buried Geostress Ground
depth (m) (MPa) temperature (°C)

1 Italy Lyon–Turin 2,000 15 40

2 Japan Anfang 700 10 75
3 Switzerland Simplon 2,140 20 55
4 France Mont Blanc 2,480 25 37
5 Italy Apennines 2,000 30 64
6 China Gaoligong 1,167 25 60
7 China Motuo 4,000 108 90
7 China Kongur 1,500 15 90
10 China Galongla 821 28 50
11 Japan New black 1,000 13 170

Table 2 Characteristics of test samples used for determination of the Rock Burst Proneness Index
No. Sample Sample size diameter 9 Natural density Temperature
number height (cm) (g/cm3) (°C)

1 B-10 51.10 9 98.99 2.65 20

2 B-40 50.85 9 96.91 2.63 40
3 B-60 50.49 9 98.84 2.66 60
4 B-90-1 50.83 9 98.56 2.65 90
5 B-130 50.95 9 97.60 2.63 130

rock bursts which occur mainly in granites (e.g., Frid 2001; Frid and Vozoff 2005; Li et al.
2010). Many examples of rock bursts are reported in hydropower engineering during the
construction of diversion tunnels in granites (e.g., Huang et al. 2001). The Dali–Ruili
railway in southwest China crosses in many places through high temperate zones with
granites and many rock bursts (e.g., Chen et al. 2013a, b, c). Therefore, for this study,
granite samples were collected along the Dali–Ruili railway track to carry out the tem-
perature tests. The rock specimen used in this study is biotitic granite. The machining of
these rock specimens was performed according to the standard of International Society for
Rock Mechanics (ISRM). The cylindrical samples have a diameter of 50 mm with a height
of 100 mm. The flatness at the top and bottom of the specimen is around ±0.02 mm, and
the height of the specimen is within the accuracy of 1 mm. The top and bottom face should
be perpendicular to the axis of the specimen with a deviation of not more than ±0.25°. The
bearing plates at the two ends of the specimen are consistent with the diameter, which
avoids the formation of a radial pressure zone at the end face when the specimen is loaded.
The specifications of the specimens are shown in Table 2.
We adopted the thermal rigidity servo testing machine (MTS815Teststar) to conduct the
uniaxial compression tests on the granite specimens. The temperature range of the MTS
machine is from room temperature to 200 °C. The MTS machine has a good dynamic,
static and system stiffness; the system can track the whole process of rock failure and
delivers the complete stress–strain curve under different temperatures.

123
918 Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

The temperature was set to five degrees, which are, respectively, 20, 40, 60, 90 and
130 °C. The specimen-heating equipment is a DHG-9203 electro-thermostatic blast oven.
The temperature was kept constant for 2 h after the desired temperature was reached. An
axial displacement control was used in the early initial period of the test, and the loading
rate value was 0.1 mm/min. A transverse deformation control was performed to control the
loading speed when the deformation reached the yield stage, and the loading rate value is
0.03 mm/min until the specimen completely failed.

2.2 Test principles and methods

From an energy consideration, it can be established that the elastic strain energy accu-
mulated in the rocks is the internal leading factor of the rock burst. The process of rock
burst is a releasing process in which surrounding rocks accumulate elastic strain energy.
The accumulation ability of the elastic strain energy can be determined quantitatively
according to the elastic strain energy index.
The elastic strain energy index (Wet) was adopted to evaluate the rock burst proneness of
coal and rock (Kidybinski 1981). The index is defined as the ratio between stored elastic
strain energy and dissipated energy in the plastic deformation process. The sample is
loaded to 70–90 % Rc and then unloaded to 5 % Rc, where the Rc is the uniaxial com-
pressive strength. Therefore, a set of uniaxial compressive tests must be carried out first to
get an average value for the compressive strength Rc, and then, the Wet tests can be
conducted. The Wet index can be determined with the loading and unloading stress–strain
curve as depicted in Fig. 1. The computational expression for the Wet is as follows:
Wet ¼ Usp =Ust ð1Þ
where Usp is the stored elastic strain energy of the sample, Ust is the energy of plastic
deformation which is dissipated. Usp and Ust are as follows:
Zet
Usp ¼ f1 ðeÞde ð2Þ
ep

Zet Zet
Ust ¼ Uc  Usp ¼ f ðeÞde  f1 ðeÞde ð3Þ
0 ep

where the f(e) and f1(e) are loading and unloading curves, respectively; et, ep are, respec-
tively, the total strain and plastic strain.
The Wet index presents the ability of storing elastic strain energy before the peak
strength is reached in the deformation process of loading. The larger the Wet index, the
larger is the violent degree of the rock burst. Therefore, the Wet index can well reflect
the violent degree of rock burst. The standard classification of rock burst proneness
with the Wet index is as follows: high violent degree is more than 5.0; medium or low
violent degree when 2.0 B Wet \ 5.0; no rock burst will happen when Wet \ 2.0. In
our tests, the samples were loaded with a rate of 20 kN/min until a final loading value
of 0.7 Rc. Then the specimen was unloaded to 0.05 Rc at the same rate. In the next
paragraph, the violent degree of rock burst under different temperatures will be
analyzed.

123
Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926 919

Fig. 1 Loading and unloading

stress–strain curves to calculate
the Wet index

3 Rock Burst Proneness Index tests under different temperatures

The uniaxial compressive strength was tested under different temperatures, and the results
are shown in Fig. 2. There is with rising temperature a slight increase in strength followed
by a slight decrease. The average value of the uniaxial compressive strength is 100 MPa,
and therefore, the samples can be classified as hard rocks, vulnerable for rock bursts and
brittle under high geo-stresses. The temperature within the range of 20–130 °C has limited
effect on the basic strength, but whether the temperature has influence on the rock burst
probability is uncertain. Therefore, we determined under different temperatures the elastic
strain energy index (Wet) as an index for rock burst proneness.
The Rock Burst Proneness Index Wet is calculated through the loading and unloading
stress–strain curve (Fig. 3). It appeared that the stress–strain curves for loading and
unloading are almost the same at different temperatures and therefore only the curve of
20 °C is displayed in Fig. 3. The Wet index values for different temperatures are shown in
Fig. 4. Wet index increases until a maximum between 40° and 60° and gradually decreases
for temperatures between 60° and 130°. The Rock Burst Proneness Index Wet of granite at
temperatures between 20 and 130 °C is nearly in all cases above 5.0. It means that the
granite can show intensive rock burst characteristics.
In general, at temperatures below or equal to 60 °C, the rock brittleness has the ten-
dency to increase with increasing temperature. When temperature keeps rising, the failure
form of the rock will transform from brittle failure to ductile failure.

4 The acoustic emission test

4.1 The test principle

A rock burst is accompanied with a sudden release of energy, which is a process of micro-
crack formation, stable propagation and unstable propagation. Rock produces interior
micro-fracturing during loading. At the same time, the initial fractures and cracks con-
tinually expand and cross each other. The phenomenon of macroscopic failure is the result
of many microscopic failures, and the phenomenon of strain energy release in the form of

123
920 Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

Fig. 2 Rock uniaxial 150

compressive strength at different
temperatures 120
96

Rc (MPa)
90 107 103
102
93
60

30
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
T/

70
60
50
(MPa)

40
30
20
10
0
0.000 0.001 0.002
1

Fig. 3 Loading and unloading stress–strain curves at a temperature of 20°. The Wet index is 5.40

Fig. 4 Rock Burst Proneness 8

Index Wet in relation to the
temperature change
6
6.18 6.12 4.98
W et

5.57
5.40
4

2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
T/

elastic waves is known as AE (He et al. 2010). The AE is the most direct method to
monitor and predict the process of rock burst. AE energy reflects the strength of the AE,
refers to the total emitted energy of all emission events observed in a unit time, and to a
certain extent, reflects the degree of cracking and the growth rate of stress inside the rock
crystals.
The rock burst hazard is a brittle failure which is accompanied with a sudden release of
energy (Lockner 1993; Cheon et al. 2011). A part of the energy during a rock burst will
spread outward in the form of elastic stress waves (AE) during this brittle failure process.
The micro-fracturing, which is not visible to the human eye, can be detected by monitoring
of the AE activities of the rock. AE gives us information about the violent degree of rock

123
Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926 921

failure and especially brittle failure (Feng et al. 2006; Ganne et al. 2007), which is directly
related to the violent degree of a potential rock burst.

4.2 Test instruments

The Wet tests were accompanied with the monitoring of the AE. For the emission tests,
we adopted the PCI-II three-dimensional positioning real-time monitoring and display
system of the Physical Acoustics Corporation of America (PAC). The device of the test
consists of an automatic digital computer control system. This system is based on the
visual operating software of the Windows platform. The AE is monitored with a multi-
channel digital system. It can not only record and store automatically the physical
parameters of the AE events, but it can also analyze the wave forms and related
parameters.
The sampling frequency of the AE system during the test is 5 MHz; the threshold value
of the data recording system is 55 dB; the AE monitoring system works in the range of
100 Hz–100 kHz; and the wave frequency of the filter is 10–100 kHz. The sensor of
preamplifier gains 40 dB.

4.3 The analysis of the test results

The variation of energy during the increase in stress was followed during the whole test
process since the detection of the AE is synchronized with the loading process. The AE
results are shown in Fig. 5.
Figure 5a shows the loading process until failure and thereafter at a temperature of
20 °C. During the initial loading period, micro-fissures inside the rock are closing, and
therefore, the frequency of AE events is low and the released energy is small. The fre-
quency increases gradually until a maximum together with an increase toward a maximum
of the axial stress.
Due to the rise of temperature of the sample until a temperature of 40 °C, the
expansion of mineral particles closes the preliminary micro-fissures inside the rock.
Therefore, new cracks are generated continuously already at the initial loading phase,
which causes a much higher frequency of emissions compared with the 20 °C test
(Fig. 5b). At a temperature of 130 °C, the mutual acting forces inside the minerals of the
rock have been weakened and the release of energy caused by the dislocation of crystals
is very small. The failure mode of the rock converted from a brittle to a brittle–plastic
mode. Therefore, the frequency of AEs, the release of energy and the release of energy
at the time of failure are much lower than for the tests at temperatures between 20 and
60 °C.
Table 3 shows the values of instantaneous released energy at failure at different tem-
peratures, which reflect the violent degree of brittle failure of the hard rock. The table does
not give the data for the 90 °C due to the unsuccessful test at this temperature.
Figure 6 reproduces the relationship between the released energy and temperature in
combination with the Wet curve. The released energy at failure rises with temperature
until a maximum at 60 °C and decreases more sharply for temperatures between 60 and
130 °C.
The combined analysis of the energy release and Rock Burst Proneness Index reveals
that the violent degree of brittle failure of the rock increases with the rise in temperature
from 20 to 60 °C. The failure mode changes from brittle failure to brittle–plastic failure as
the temperature continues to rise above 60 °C.

123
922 Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

Fig. 5 Acoustic emission test Stress-Time Energy-Time

results

Energy (aJ/s)
(MPa)
Time (s)
(a) T=20

Stress-Time Energy-Time

Energy (aJ/s)
(MPa)

Time (s)
(b) T=40
Stress-Time Energy-Time

Energy (aJ/s)
(MPa)

Time (s)
(c) T=60

Stress-Time Energy-Time
Energy (aJ/s)
(MPa)

Time (s)
(d) T=130

123
Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926 923

Table 3 Instantaneous released energy in the AE tests

Temperature (°C) 20 40 60 130

Released energy (aJ/s) 7.5e7 8.34e7 9.26e7 3.46e7

6.5 1.00E+08
6 9.00E+07
5.5 8.00E+07
7.00E+07

Energy (aJ/s)
5
6.00E+07
4.5
5.00E+07
W et

4
4.00E+07
3.5 Wet-Temperature 3.00E+07
3 Energy-Temperature 2.00E+07
2.5 1.00E+07
2 0.00E+00
0 30 60 90 120 150
T/

Fig. 6 Released energy of AE tests and the Wet index in relation to temperature

5 Discussion

According to traditional thought, the rise of temperature can soften the hard rock and
thereby reduce brittle failure of the rock. But the results of our rock burst proneness tests at
high temperatures show that in a certain temperature range, the increasing temperature in
tunnels will increase the degree of brittleness failure in hard rock. Figure 7 showed that the
damaged zone increased after heating (Andersson and Martin 2009).
The mechanical and thermal parameters of granite remain unchanged at a lower tem-
perature range (e.g., 20–60 °C). Temperature does not influence the rock but influence rock
mass in this environment. The thermal stress is generated by temperature when the tunnel
temperature increases. Thermal stress causes stress concentration of rock mass, and then,
release of more energy for the surrounding rock enhances the brittle failure of tunnel. As
the ground temperature of the deep-buried tunnel is almost lower than 100 °C, the tem-
perature will not affect the basic mechanical properties of surrounding rock, while the
thermal stress generated by the temperature will increase the violent degree of brittle
failure of the tunnel.
From the mesoscopic perspective, rock mass is composed of tiny fine particles. Heated
particles will expand and generate thermal stress. When the rock mass generates additional
thermal stress caused by temperature load, the additional stress actually increases the
degree of stress concentration of the surrounding rocks in the tunnel, and therefore, the
temperature strengthens the violent degree of rock burst.
The field tests conducted in the Äspö Pillar tunnel in Sweden have shown that heating of
the granite enlarged the failure area and intensified the failure of the heated rock. (An-
dersson and Martin 2009; Koyamaa et al. 2013). Figure 8 shows the temperature change of
the Äspö Pillar tunnel in Sweden after the rock pillars have been heated. The temperature
of the rock pillars ranges between 0 and 60 °C. The test results of Äspö Pillar tunnel can be
compared with the Wet loading test results in this paper because it is the same rock type and
the range in temperature is close to the loading temperature in our experiments

123
924 Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

Damaged zone after excavation

Damaged zone after heating

Fig. 7 Damaged zone after heating of the Äspö Pillar (Andersson and Martin 2009)

Fig. 8 Change in temperature after heating in the Äspö Pillar tunnel

Zhang et al. (2010) aimed to investigate the effects of temperature on the proneness of
rock burst for hard rocks. A real-time uniaxial compression test was carried out under high
temperatures (25–850 °C). The rock burst proneness increases sharply with the rise of
temperature rises from 25 to 250 °C, which showed that temperature will increase the
brittle failure of hard rocks, and this conclusion is consistent with the test results in this
paper. Through a uniaxial compression test (Liu and Xu 2000), it is found that the releasing
rate of energy increases with the rising of temperature, which is consistent with the test
results in this paper.

6 Conclusion

Slight rock bursts will be transformed into intense rock bursts when temperature rises from
20 until 60 °C. The rock burst proneness continually decreases with further rising tem-
peratures over 60 °C and decreases continually with further rising of the temperature.
The change in AE energy release and the course of the Rock Burst Proneness Index
indicate that the degree of brittle failure increases with a rise of the temperature from 20

123
Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926 925

until 60 °C. Above 60 °C, the failure form of the rock changes from brittle failure into
brittle–plastic failure.
In the range from the room temperature to 60 °C, the brittle failure degree of the
surrounding rock increases as the rising of temperature in the hard rock tunnel. The
surrounding rock will gather higher level of stress and energy due to the additional stress
generated by the rising of temperature, thus intensifying the stress concentration degree of
the surrounding rock.

Acknowledgments The authors thank the Cultivating Program of excellent innovation team of Chengdu
University of Technology (No. HY0084). This work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 41230635, 41002110 and 41272330 and also by the West Traffic
Construction Science and Technology Project of the Ministry of Transport (No. 20113188051090).

References

Alexeev AD, Revva VN, Alyshev NA et al (2004) True triaxial loading apparatus and its application to coal
outburst prediction. Int J Coal Geol 58(2):245–250
Andersson JC, Martin CD (2009) The Aspo Pillar Stability Experiment: part II-rock mass response to
coupled excavation-induced and thermal-induced stresses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 46(5):879–895
Cavagnaro M, Brulard J (1997) Aerodynamic and thermal investigations for the new lyon/turin cross-alpine
rail link. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 12(3):377–384
Chen BR, Feng Gl et al (2013a) Analysis of microseismic characteristic and rock burst risk during TBM
excavation under deeply buried tunnel. Disaster Adv 6(s1):122–128
Chen GQ, Li TB, Yin HY et al (2013b) Brittle characteristics of granite under temperature action. Disaster
Adv 6(13):345–355
Chen GQ, Li TB, Gao MB et al (2013c) Deformation warning and dynamic control of dangerous disaster for
large underground caverns. Disaster Adv 6(s1):422–430
Cheon DS, Jeon S, Park C et al (2006) An experimental study on the brittle failure under true triaxial
conditions. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 21(3):448–449
Cheon DS, Jung YB, Park ES et al (2011) Evaluation of damage level for rock slopes using acoustic
emission technique with waveguides. Eng Geol 121(1):75–88
Diederichs MS, Kaiser PK, Eberhardt E (2004) Damage initiation and propagation in hard rock during
tunneling and the influence of near-face stress rotation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 41(5):785–812
Dou LM, Lu CP, Mu ZL (2009) Prevention and forecasting of rock burst hazards in coal mines. Min Sci
Technol 19(5):585–591
Feng XT, Hudson JA (2011) Rock engineering design. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Feng XT, Pan PZ, Zhou H (2006) Simulation of the rock microfracturing process under uniaxial com-
pression using an elasto-plastic cellular automaton. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43(7):1091–1108
Frid V (2001) Calculation of electromagnetic radiation criterion for rockburst hazard forecast in coal mines.
Pure appl Geophys 158(5):931–944
Frid V, Vozoff K (2005) Electromagnetic radiation induced by mining rock failure. Int J Coal Geol
64(1):57–65
Ganne P, Vervoort A, Wevers M (2007) Quantification of pre-peak brittle damage: correlation between
acoustic emission and observed micro-fracturing. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 44(5):720–729
He MC, Miao JL, Feng JL (2010) Rock burst process of limestone and its acoustic emission characteristics
under true-triaxial unloading conditions. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 47(2):286–298
Huang RQ, Wang XN, Chan LS (2001) Triaxial unloading test of rocks and its implication for rock burst.
Bull Eng Geol Environ 60(1):37–41
Hudson JA, Stephenson O, Anderson J et al (2001) Coupled T–H–M issues relating to radioactive waste
repository design and performance. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 38(1):143–161
Jiang Q, Feng XT, Xiang TB (2010) Rock burst characters and numerical simulation based on a new energy
index: a case study of tunnel under 2,500 m depth. Bull Eng Geol Environ 69(3):381–388
Jiang Q, Feng XT, Chen J et al (2013) Estimating in situ rock stress from spalling veins: a case study. Eng
Geol 152(1):38–47
Kidybinski A (1981) A bursting liability indices of coal. Int J Rock Mech Sci Geomech Abstr 12(2):295–304

123
926 Nat Hazards (2014) 72:915–926

Koyamaa T, Chijimatsub M, Shimizuc H et al (2013) Numerical modeling for the coupled thermo-
mechanical processes and spalling phenomena in Äspö Pillar Stability Experiment (APSE). J Rock
Mech Geotech Eng 5(1):58–72
Lei XL, Masuda K, Nishizawa O et al (2004) Detailed analysis of acoustic emission activity during
catastrophic fracture of faults in rock. J Struct Geol 26(2):247–258
Li XQ, Dai LX (2011) Cooling technology for construction of high earth temperature section of a diversion
tunnel. Water Resour Hydropower Eng 42(2):36–41
Li DJ, Jia XN, Miao JL et al (2010) Analysis of fractal characteristics of fragment from rockburst test of
granite. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 29(s1):3280–3289
Li SJ, Feng XT, Li ZH (2012) In situ monitoring of rock burst nucleation and evolution in the deeply buried
tunnels of Jinping II hydropower station. Eng Geol 137(6):85–96
Lin QX, Liu YM, Tham LG (2009) Time-dependent strength degradation of granite. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 46(7):1103–1114
Liu QS, Xu XC (2000) The analysis of damage of brittle rock under temperature. Chin J Rock Mech Eng
19(4):408–411 (in Chinese)
Lockner D (1993) The role of acoustic emission in the study of rock fracture. Int J Rock Mech Mining Sci
Geomech Abstr 30(7):883–899
Marechal JC, Perrochet P, Tacher L (1999) Long-term simulations of thermal and hydraulic characteristics
in a mountain massif: the Mont Blanc case study, French and Italian Alps. Hydrogeol J 7(4):341–354
Pan PZ, Feng XT, Huang XH (2009) Coupled THM processes in EDZ of crystalline rocks using an elasto-
plastic cellular automaton. Environ Geol 57(6):1299–1311
Rybach L, Pfister M (1994) Temperature predictions and predictive temperatures in deep tunnels. Rock
Mech Rock Eng 27(2):77–88
Singh SP (1988) Bursting energy release index. Rock Mech Rock Eng 21(1):149–155
Song DZ, Wang EY, Wang C (2010) Electromagnetic radiation early warning criterion of rock burst based
on statistical theory. Min Sci Technol 20(5):686–690
Vinciguerraa S, Trovatoa C, Meredith PG (2005) Relating seismic velocities, thermal cracking and per-
meability in Mt. Etna and Iceland basalts. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42(7):900–910
Xu XL, Kang ZX, Ji M (2009) Research of microcosmic mechanism of brittle-plastic transition for granite
under high temperature. Proced Earth Planet Sci 1(1):432–437 (in Chinese)
Zhang XC, Wang JQ (2007) Research on the mechanism and prevention of rock burst at the Yinxin gold
mine. J Chin Univ Min Technol 17(4):541–545
Zhang ZZ, Gao F, Liu Z (2010) Research on rock burst proneness and its microcosmic mechanism of granite
considering temperature effect. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 29(8):1591–1602 (in Chinese)
Zhang CQ, Feng XT, Zhou H, Qiu SL (2012) Case histories of four extremely intense rock bursts in deep
tunnels. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45(3):275–288

123
Copyright of Natural Hazards is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.