Chapter 4

Advances in Research and

Development in Rock
Fragmentation, Damage, Wave
Propagation and Fracture
Mechanics Applications.
Advances in Numerical
Modelling and Simulation
Techniques for Drilling
and Blasting Optimization
98 Santiago Chile, May 2006 Fragblast-8
 The Mechanics of Spalling
in Rock - a Reconsideration
Hans Peter Rossmanith
Institute of Mechanics and Mechatronics A2
Vienna University of Technology A-1040 Vienna, Austria

Abstract
Spalling is a wave-induced dynamic fracture phenomenon where the waves can be either elastic, elasto-plastic, or
shock waves. From a continuum mechanics point of view, fracture mechanics and wave propagation form the main
ingredients in the formation of spalls. On a micro-structural level, however, micro-mechanics including damage
mechanics becomes the vehicle of investigation of spall formation. From a structural geology point of view, in many
cases the rock mass cannot be modeled as a continuum. In this case, a discontinuum approach has to be taken where
the individual features of the rock mass such as joints and faults need to be taken into account. From an application
point of view, spallation is important where rapid loading by explosives, impact, or energy deposition, occurs. The
range of applications stretches from blasting in mining engineering to damage prevention to structures under explosive
excitation (Bangash, 1993).
This contribution offers a multi-faceted and multi-disciplinary approach to the study of spalling with special attention
to analytical and experimental work. The reader is assumed to be somewhat familiar with the basics of continuum
mechanics, fracture mechanics, and propagation of elastic, plastic and shock waves. The application to rock and
concrete will show the effects of simple structural geological discontinuities such as open and closed joints on the
(shock) wave field. Use will be made of time-space diagrams which, in past investigations, proved very useful in
practical applications to blasting problems.

INTRODUCTION
Problems of material failure near a free surface due to
impulsive high intensity loading have been studied
extensively in the past (Hopkinson, 1914; Kolsky, 1963;
Rinehart & Pearson, 1964; Rinehart 1975). For materials
strong in compression but weak in tension such as rock and
concrete, spalling is one of the best known failure
phenomena caused by the reflection of incident
compressive pulses due to explosive or impact loading.
Even the earliest investigations revealed that spallation was
an evolutionary process where the fracture resulted through
nucleation and growth of micro-fractures in the material,
and Zhurkov was apparently the first to propose a damage
mechanics based concept (Zhurkov, 1965). Material
properties such as fracture toughness and mechanical
anisotropy, and the microstructure largely control the
formation of the spall process. In the early investigations it
was believed that the spall would be created
instantaneously at the time and the place when and where
the resulting stress would reach the fracture strength.
The response of materials and structures to rapid and
high intense loading is rather complex, but the behavior of
the impacted solid may be roughly divided into three
modes (Meyers, 1994):
a) Elastic behavior for loading conditions that result in
stresses below the yield limit; Hookes law is applicable
for metals, concrete and homogeneous rock.
b) Plastic behavior for loading conditions beyond the yield
limit; large deformations, heating and failure may result
due to a variety of mechanisms; strain rate effects on
plastic flow and plastic wave propagation need to be
taken into account.
c) Strong shock behavior for loading intensities where the
pressures generated exceed the strength of the colliding
solid bodies which now behave hydro-dynamically; the
loading is so short and intense that the material no
longer possesses rigidity.
For low intensity excitations both, the geometry of the
overall structure and the material the structural components
are made of, play a decisive role in resisting the external
dynamic incident. For high intensity excitations of short
duration, the interaction process becomes highly localized
and only a small portion or a single component of the
structure will be affected by the dynamic excitation. Hence,
the constitution of the material in this localized vicinity of
load application becomes the predominant factor and the
problem may be appropriately described by elastic,
plastic, or shock wave propagation. Loading cases of this
sort typically include explosive loading when blasting in
quarrying and open pit and underground mining, and high
velocity impact in penetration mechanics (Rossmanith,
1983; Atkinson, 1987).
In English the word spall denotes a fragment or a
splinter, and spalling has the meaning of to split or
fracture. The Cornish Mine terminology teaches that
spalling is an ore processing term: spalling is the breaking
up of large chunks of rocks into manageable lumps. A
modern definition of spall fracture rests on the notion of a
fracture process that occurs simultaneously over an area
by the nucleation and growth of many micro-cracks or
voids at essentially the same time, but not by the growth of
a single crack as in conventional fracture mechanics. Such
conditions are only created by stress waves. Hence, spall
fracture refers to damage caused by tensile waves
generated upon reflection of compression waves at free
surfaces or at interfaces with high-low acoustic impedance
mismatch. Grady defines spalling as the process of
internal failure or rupture of a solid due to tensile stresses
in excess of the tensile strength of the material. This
dynamic failure is usually achieved through transient stress
wave interference and interaction. In contrast to the
classical definition of a spall, in Gradys definition (Grady,
1988) free surfaces play no role in the spall process,
because the spall forms, when an internal region of the
material is carried into sufficient tension, and failure occurs
through a process of growth and coalescence of micro-
cracks or micro-cavities. The deformation can be either
elastic/brittle or elasto-plastic, in the extreme case of a
shock-wave like in a fluid (Seaman et al., 2003,
Rossmanith et al., 1993).

Fragblast-8 Santiago Chile, May 2006 99

 The tensile waves necessary for the formation of a spall,
however, can be produced by the interaction of a
compressive stress wave with a free face or a suitable
interface. In this case, spalling is the direct consequence of
dynamic interaction of a stress wave with a free surface
(and under certain circumstances at a dissimilar interface
separating two solids). The interaction occurs through the
superposition of a portion of an incident compression wave
that has not been reflected and the portion which has been
reflected and transformed into a tensile wave. If blast
waves interact with the free surface, additional spalling may
be achieved through the interaction of the trailing tensile tail
with the tensile reflection of the leading compressive part of
the blast wave. Depending on the material behavior the
dynamics of spall formation will be quite different.
Regarding the differing definitions of spalling by Grady &
Kipp, Kolsky and others one recognizes immediately that
there is no common agreement on a universally acceptable
definition of spalling and the process of spalling may
denote very different physical processes.
Over the last several decades, new findings using
sophisticated and innovative experimental techniques,
measurement diagnostics, and constitutive rate models
have led to a fundamental reformulation of the general
picture of the spall process and formation. The spall
process typically nucleates at a large number of
microscopic flaws and/or pores on a meso-level. If a
sufficiently high stress operates on the structure, the
statistical distribution of micro-inhomogeneities such as
micro-flaws or micro-voids nucleate, and as nucleation
proceeds by growing the micro-flaws or micro-voids, the
distribution evolves and the micro-discontinuities coalesce
within the material. This dynamic process of flaw or void
coalescence on the meso-level occurs at a stress and
temperature-dependent nucleation rate and the growth
extends over the entire period of stress and temperature
application. This combination of nucleation and
coalescence is termed damage, and smearing out the
inhomogeneities, a continuum damage theory may be
developed on this basis. If the damage concentrates and
reaches a certain limit fragmentation sets in. This damage
evolution process is controlled by the entire stress history
prior to fragmentation. It is clear that this process is not a
simple one-parameter process governed by a single
quantity such as the fracture strength or fracture
toughness, but rather a rate process where the microscopic
and macroscopic views of the fracture phenomena are
connected through events occurring in the process zone.
The fracture mechanics view point put forward originally by
Wieghardt, Griffith, and Irwin provides useful results at the
other extreme in which a body is fragmented into small or
larger particles under the action of very large stresses
(Wieghardt, 1907; Griffith, 1920; Irwin, 1957; Grady, 1988;
Grady & Kipp, 1995).
DYNAMICS OF SPALL CREATION
The classical spall process refers to elastic wave
reflection at a free surface or a hard-soft dissimilar material
interface. The material (here the rock mass) is viewed as a
continuum. This section will refer to uni-axial conditions of
plane strain. The incident wave will be a plane elastic wave.
The motion of a homogeneous, isotropic, linearly elastic
solid body is governed by the equations of motion, Hookes
law and the strain-displacement relations (Kolsky, 1963;
Graff, 1975; Goldsmith, 1960), together with appropriate
initial and boundary conditions. From these equations the
classical equation of wave motion may be derived.
An elastic wave will be reflected when it reaches a free
surface or a dissimilar interface of the material in which it is
traveling. Figure 1 shows the reflection of a pulse with
100 Santiago Chile, May 2006
arbitrary shape f+ = f(x-ct) with pulse length P and
magnitude o. The tensile stress has reached the fracture
strength sf at a distance dS behind the free face. At this
distance, the spall distance, the material will separate.
Momentum and energy associated with the shaded area
are trapped within the spall section which will fly off to the
right hand side. The remainder of the pulse - of length P*
= P - dS - xr - will be reflected at the newly established free
surface at position x = -dS. The spall time, tS, i.e. the time
elapsed between the time the front of the wave hits the free
face and occurrence of the fracture, and the spall distance,
dS, behind the front follow from the shape of the pulse by
tS = xr / cP and f = f(-dS - xr) + R f(-dS + xr) where R = 1
for a free surface. Generally, the position of the spall, dS,
depends strongly on the shape of the pulse. For a
rectangular pulse the spall distance is much larger than for
the triangular pulse of equal length.
Figure 1: Spalling by wave reflection at a free surface.
Spalling may also occur if an elastic plane stress wave is
reflected at a dissimilar interface joining an acoustically
hard to an acoustically soft material and the pulse hits the
interface from the acoustically hard side. Then, the incident
and reflected pulses are given by fi = f(x-cP1t) and fr = R
f(x+cP1t), respectively, where the reflection coefficient is
expressed in terms of the acoustical impedances Z1 and Z2
in the form R = (Z2 - Z1)/(Z2 + Z1). The product Z = 0cL is
the acoustic impedance of the material. Note that an
acoustically soft-hard interface does not produce spalling
when an incident compression wave impinges from the soft
material side. A particularly interesting situation arises in
the case of blast wave reflection (pulse length = ++)
at a free boundary or at a dissimilar interface, where a
leading compressive pulse + is followed by a trailing
tensile pulse , and stress superposition of the incident
tensile portion L- with the sign-converted reflected leading
tensile pulse -+ might exceed the materials tensile
strength and thus may induce spalling.
A single spall occurs if the amplitude or the compressive
part of the incident stress wave is only slightly higher than
the fracture strength of the material. However, if the material
is relatively weak against tensile fracture and the transient
stress pulse is relatively strong, multiple spalling may
occur. Multiple spalling is the development of several
parallel, juxtaposed fractures where successively new free
surfaces are being created by the flaking off of the spalls.
The remaining portions of the incident stress wave are
reflected at these free surfaces thereby chopping the
incident wave into pieces of definite momentum and
energy. The final portion of the wave with amplitude smaller
than the fracture strength will be simply reflected and does
not create any further spalls. A multiple spall phenomenon
Fragblast-8
may be characterized by the spall sequence: = {(dSi, tSi),
i = 1, 2, ... n} where the spall times and spall distances may
differ in legnth. Spall time and spall distance depend on the
shape of the incident wave and in the case of an interface
on the acoustic mismatch of the contacting materials. In
most realistic situations, the incident pulse changes its
shape and intensity as it moves through the material. A high
intensity short pulse usually decays and flattens out. The
consequence of this flattening is that on reflection at the
free face or the interface the spall distances will become
larger and the spall times longer. As pulse flattening
depends on the plate thickness for two-dimensional
experiments, the spall distance increases with increasing
plate thickness.
Since for elastic waves the induced stress and the
particle velocity are linearly related, the higher the stress,
the greater the velocity with which the material will tear
loose and move away. For a low amplitude stress pulse the
first spall will be the only fracture that develops and often
remains invisible inside the material. For higher amplitudes,
the spalled portion of the material will carry enough energy
and momentum to tear itself loose from the parent body and
move with considerable velocity. The respective ejection
velocity can be in the order of several hundred meters per
second and follows directly from the balance equation for
the momentum.
SPALLING IN JOINTED ROCK
In quarrying and mining engineering, the rock mass
invariably includes joints and other geometrical and
material discontinuities. Structural geology defines the
degree of inhomogeneity and anisotropy of a rock mass
(continuum with finite tensile and compressive strength
which is weakened by a finite set of parallel joints) the
structure of which may profoundly influence the spall
sequence and the resulting fragmentation pattern. The
interface toughness, Kc,int, or joint strength, f,int, at the
joints or interfaces, which may reach from zero to very large
values, is a decisive quantity in this spall process. The
interface toughness as well as the bond strength may also
differ from interface to interface in a regular or in a random
fashion. The joints can be either open, closed, weaker or
stiffer than the base rock material. Assume that the rock
mass in bench blasting is weakened by a set of vertical
joints Ji (i = 1, ... n) with associated joint strengths or
resistance Rfi = fj (i = 1, ... n) possibly different for each
joint. If the bench contains very weak joints (Rfi = fi 1)
a spall will appear just behind the free face, otherwise spall
fracture will occur further away from the original face of the
bench leading to larger chunks of unbroken rock. The
higher the joint strength the larger the block next to the face
in the bench (Rossmanith & Fourney, 1982; Rossmanith,
2002, 2004). As successive free faces of a bench will suffer
some degree of damage due to previous blasts, the
strength of joints in the benches of open pit operations
usually increases with depth from the bench face. Previous
damage reduces the likelihood of occurrence of larger
blocks. The individual spall initiation basically depends on
the structural geology of the rock formation and varies from
site to site and from blast to blast. If the joint strength
follows a random distribution the weak joints in any
realization will break earlier and thus introduce a random
type distribution of spall distances (= blocks) which may
contain one or more unbroken joints. Effectively, this
introduces a screening effect, where an open joint further
behind the front will open prior to others which are located
closer to the bench face. A trap is therefore created for part
of the stress pulse leading to out-of-sequence spalling. For
severely random distributed joint strengths highly uneven
spall sequences are obtained, which in turn results in highly
Fragblast-8 Santiago Chile, May 2006
non-uniform blasting results characterized by unwanted
non-uniform fragmentation.
Within the framework of electronic detonator based
advanced blasting technology optimal fragmentation, i.e.
the creation of an optimal spall sequence or spall pattern,
is also strongly influenced by the length of the stress pulse.
Shorter stress pulses expend their energy in the front
section of the face and there is very little or no spalling
behind the immediate vicinity of the free face. On the other
hand, long pulses enhance spalling and may open up a
large number of joints, perhaps all the way to the first row
of the blast. Of course, the gas pressure will cooperate with
spallation to ensure the blast result (Cooper, 1996). The
shape of the blast stress pulse is most important in pulse
reflection and joint fracture. In a highly pre-conditioned rock
mass the individual spalled blocks carry away trapped
momentum and energy. For easily spallable material the
entire stress pulse is successively trapped in the layers or
blocks and consumed. Further parameters that influence
spalling include varying or differing material properties of
the layers and joint fillings such as quartz or clay.
Further complexities are introduced when obliquely
impinging planar or non-planar stress waves interact with a
free surface or a dissimilar interface. Any obliquely
reflected longitudinal (shear) stress wave will give rise to
two reflected waves, and their superposition may introduce
oblique spalling. Here, it becomes necessary to distinguish
between the mechanics on the macro-level where the spall
will lead to fracture and fragmentation, and the meso-level
where local spalling will occur. In addition, the shear wave
enters the picture. Hence, local spalling on the micro-level
could occur by the formation of small micro-cracks under
tension, by the formation of shear cracking, or by a
combination thereof. The micro-flaws generated would then
coalesce to form a macro-crack on the macro-level. As the
amplitudes of the reflected waves strongly depend on the
angle of incidence, the formation of the micro-spalls as
shown in Figure 2 depends on the material behavior
(Rinehart, 1975). These micro-spalls do not extend very far
as the stress driving conditions in the wave do not allow for
appreciable extension. Hence, micro-spalling is a highly
localized phenomenon. In the case of mode conversion,
shear-induced micro-flaws will be generated which finally
will coalesce into a macro-crack. The character of the
macro-spall is determined by the angle of obliquity of the
incident wave.
Figure 2: Spalling due to oblique wave reflection at a free
boundary (taken from (Rinehart, 1975).
NON-LINEAR MATERIAL BEHAVIOR
A structured wave is a solution to the non-linear elastic
equations in which the velocity and the deformation
gradient, expressed in stress terms, are continuous
functions (Drumheller 1998; Meyers, 1994). If these
functions are discontinuous, the solution is termed a shock
101
wave. When studying the reflection of a non-linear
compressive stress wave from a free boundary or a
dissimilar interface, there is a fundamental difference
between the material (Lagrangian) and the spatial
(Eulerian) description and formulation of the problem. In the
Euler description the motion of the free surface or interface
must also be evaluated. The reflection and refraction of
weak elastic-plastic waves across interfaces between
solids of dissimilar elasto-plastic properties requires the
acceptance of weak discontinuities in the derivatives of
stress, strain, and velocity components (Jahsman, 1974).
SHOCK WAVES AND THEIR INTERACTION WITH
DISCONTINUITIES
The theoretical analysis of shock wave propagation rests
upon the three equations for the conservation of mass,
momentum and energy (Cooper, 1996; Seaman et al.,
2003). Usually the term Eulerian shock velocity refers to the
relative velocity of the shock with respect to particle velocity
of the moving non-shocked medium. Dynamic impulsive
loading of a rock mass by the detonation of an explosive
results in nearly steady state shock wave propagation in the
material. For steady waves a shock wave velocity U with
respect to the laboratory frame can be defined. Then, the
conservation equations may be recast into the well-known
Rankine-Hugoniot jump equations, which must be satisfied
by material parameters on the two sides of a shock front
(Asay et al., 1993; Davison et al., 1996; Kipp & Grady, 1996;
Zukas, 1991). The final state, after shocking, can be
calculated from the measurement of just two parameters,
the shock velocity, U, and the particle velocity, 1.
One of the striking differences between linear and
nonlinear stress waves (shock waves) is that linear waves
do not interact while nonlinear wave do interact when they
meet by reflecting off waves. Hence, wave-wave interaction
is a vital part in the analysis of nonlinear waves. When a
right-going shock interacts with a free surface a left-going
rarefaction wave which is characterized by a fan type
structure bounded by the left going fast rarefaction front
and the slower rarefaction tail is generated. When the
shock with amplitude P1 reaches the surface, the material
at the surface layer is highly compressed and as there is no
restraint against movement, it relieves the compression by
moving to the right hand side. The left-going rarefaction
wave reduces the pressure to zero. The Hugoniots for the
right going shock wave and the left going rarefaction wave
are shown in the pressure-velocity diagram in Figure 3. The
Figure 3: Pressure versus particle velocity relationship for a
shock wave reflected at a free boundary.
102 Santiago Chile, May 2006
particles behind the rarefaction wave have been
accelerated to twice the particle velocity in the shocked
region. Any characteristics within the fan region correspond
to tangents to the left-going isentrope (which for all
practical purposes collapses with the left-going Hugoniot)
between the shocked state {P1, 1} and the state at the free
edge, {0, 21}. Because the velocity of the characteristics
within the fan is proportional to the slope of the
characteristic, the wave velocities within the fan varies
between that of the leading edge, passing through the
point {P1, 1}, and the trailing edge passing through the
point {0, 21}.
CONCLUSIONS
Spalling is a dynamic tensile stress induced fracture
failure phenomenon which can occur in various materials
from brittle to ductile material behavior. Rock is considered
a quasi-brittle material and, therefore, spalling is a well-
known phenomenon in rock mass. Depending on the input
wave produced by explosive action or high-velocity impact
and the material behavior, the spalling result may be quite
different.
Spalling is a difficult dynamic damage and fracture
problem where, on the micro-level, material damage is
dynamically initiated, grows, and through coalescence
generates a macro-crack which may ultimately lead to
failure of the structural component or the structure itself.
Spalling involves the ejection of target material either in
the form of a single slab, often called a spall, or in the form
of a spray of fragments or debris. When optimal throw of the
blasted material is required, tailored spalling via tailored
pressure pulse versus time relationship of the detonating
explosive is feasible. On the other hand, if adequate
protection against the occurrence of a spall (or debris),
ejected with high velocity from the bench face, may be
assured by the use of weaker buffer plates or zones next to
the bench face.
REFERENCES
Asay, J.R. & Shahinpoor, M. (Eds) 1993 High Pressure
Shock Compression of Solids (Springer-Verlag).
Atkinson, B.K. (Ed.) 1987 Fracture Mechanics of Rock
(Academic Press).
Goldsmith, W. 1960/2001 Impact (Dover Publ., New York).
Bangash, M.Y.H. 1993 Impact and Explosion Analysis
and Design (Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford).
Cooper, P.W. 1996 Explosives Engineering (J.Wiley &
Sons, New York).
Davison, L., D.E. Grady & M. Shahninpoor 1996 High-
Pressure Shock Compression of Solids II. Dynamic
Fracture and Fragmentation (Springer-Verlag, New York).
Drumheller, D.S. 1998 Introduction to Wave Propagation
in Nonlinear Fluids and Solids (Cambridge University
Press).
Grady, D.E. 1988 The spall strength of condensed
matter. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 36 (3):353-384.
Grady, D.E. & Kipp, M.E. 1995 Experimental measurement
of dynamic failure and fragmentation properties of metals.
Int. J. Solids Structures 32:2779-2791.
Graff, K. F. 1975/1991 Wave motion in elastic solids
(Dover Publ., New York).
Griffith, A.A. 1920 The phenomena of rupture and flow in
solids. Phil Trans. Roy. Soc. London, A221:163-198.
Hopkinson, B. 1914 A method of measuring the pressure
produced in the detonation of high explosives or by the
impact of bullets. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A213, 437-456.
Irwin, G.R. 1957 Analysis of stress and strains near the
end of a crack traversing a plate. J. Appl. Mech. Trans.
ASME 24:361-364.
Fragblast-8
 Jahsman, W.E. 1974 Reflection and refraction of weak
elastic-plastic waves. J. Appl. Mech. 41:117-123.
Kipp, M.E. & D.E. Grady 1996 Experimental and
Numerical Studies of High-Velocity Impact
Fragmentation. In: High-Pressure Shock Compression of
Solids II Dynamic Fracture and Fragmentation (Eds.
Davison, L. et al.) (Springer-Verlag).
Kolsky, H. 1963/2001 Stress waves in solids (Dover
Publ., New York).
Meyers, M.A. 1994 Dynamic Behavior of Materials (J.
Wiley & Sons, New York).
Rinehart, J.S. 1975 Stress Transients in Solids
(Hyperdynamics, Santa Fe, NM, USA).
Rinehart, J.S. & Pearson, J. 1964 Behavior of metals
under impulsive loads (ASM, Dover).
Rossmanith, H.P. (Ed.) 1983 Rock Fracture Mechanics
(CISM Course # 275, Springer-Verlag, Vienna-New York).
Rossmanith, H.P. 2002 The use of Lagrange diagrams in
precise initiation blasting. Part I: Two interacting
blastholes. Fragblast 6:104-136.
Rossmanith, H.P. 2004 What you always wanted to know
about blast waves in blocky benches (ISEE Conference
Proceedings, New Orleans).
Fragblast-8 Santiago Chile, May 2006
Rossmanith, H.P., Xu Chongfeng, R.E. Knasmillner, and
J.L. Wegner 1993 Effect of stress waves on pre-
damaged interfaces in rock mass. In: Proc. of Rock
Fragmentation by Blasting 4 201-210, (H.P. Rossmanith,
Ed.), (A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam).
Rossmanith, H.P. & Fourney, W.L. 1982 Fracture initiation
and stress wave diffraction at cracked interfaces in
layered media: I.- Brittle-Brittle-Transition. Rock
Mechanics 14:209-233.
Seaman, L., Curran, D.R., Kanel, G.I., Razorenov, S.,
Utkin, A., & Antoun, T. 2003 Spall Fracture (Springer-
Verlag, New York).
Wieghardt, K. 1907 ber das Spalten und Zerreien
elastischer Krper. Z. Mathematik und Physik. 55(1-2):60-
133 (English translation by H.P. Rossmanith (1995) On
the splitting and cracking of elastic bodies. Fatigue and
Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct. 12(12):1371-1405)
Zhurkov, S.N. 1965 Kinetic concepts of the strength of
solids. Int. J. Fract. Mech. 1(4):311.
Zukas, J.A. 1991 Impact Dynamics (Krieger Publishing
Company, Malabar, Florida).
103