随着煤炭资源开采逐渐向深部转移，“三高一扰动”的影响愈加明显，特别是高水平构造应力下开挖卸荷导致的冲击地压灾害、采空区失稳等灾害频繁发生，严重影响了煤矿的安全生产；为了保证深部煤层的安全开采，急需开展深部矿井在高水平应力下煤岩卸荷力学特性及其能量演化规律研究，为矿井安全高效开采和灾害预测预警具有重要意义。本文以彬长矿区某矿冲击倾向性煤岩为研究对象，采用现场调研和室内试验及理论分析相结合的方法开展研究工作。主要内容以及结论是：

（1）通过现场调研发现，彬长矿区发生冲击地压灾害的主要因素包括：煤层冲击倾向性、高水平构造应力、开挖卸荷作业及开采深度和进度等。根据冲击地压灾害显现特征分析，得到彬长矿区发生冲击地压灾害是由于煤层处于高水平构造应力场和煤层具有冲击倾向性作为基础内因，开采卸荷是诱发的主因。

（2）完成了彬长矿区该矿高水平应力下煤岩冲击倾向性测定试验和三轴加载压缩试验。试验结果表明：该煤层具有强冲击倾向性特征；煤层强度与构造应力呈一次函数增长；煤岩由拉伸破坏过渡剪切破坏模式，弹脆性特征明显；声发射b值垂直式突降现象可作为冲击地压发生的前兆信息。

（3）完成了不同围压和不同卸荷速率下煤岩卸荷试验。应力梯度是导致巷道围岩变形破坏的重要影响因素之一；卸荷速率对围岩径向扩容变形的影响更大，塑性应变围压柔量与损伤程度呈一次线性增大趋势，即掘进推进速度对开挖掘进过程中诱发冲击地压可能性更大。煤岩破断角与围压呈负相关；煤岩由剪切张拉复合破坏向剪切破坏过渡，端部形成应力集中，在煤层尖端应加强监测预警和重点防控；煤岩声发射信号均呈现出“增加-回落-增加”的变化趋势，可作为煤岩卸荷损伤状态的判断依据；声发射b值随卸荷量的增加断崖式下降更明显，由此可作为冲击地压灾害的前兆信息，在微震监测出现大量信号频率区域及时进行预警。

（4）研究表明：能量耗散和释放是导致冲击地压灾害发生的本质原因之一；卸荷速率越快，应变能的释放越快，诱发冲击地压灾害现象越剧烈。总能量变化率与卸荷速率呈现正相关；应力跌落段的能量变化率涨幅速率是峰值前卸荷能量变化率的数倍。总应变能和弹性应变能与初始损伤程度呈正相关；弹性能储存率与水平构造应力呈正比例关系；同赋存环境条件下，开采进度与弹性能储存率呈正相关；表明在高水平构造应力条件下，工作面推进速度及施工进度是诱发冲击地压灾害最主要的原因，因此调整施工开挖进度或者采用合理施工步骤，可减缓或降低冲击地压灾害的发生。

（5）基于能量耗散理论建立了煤岩卸荷损伤本构模型。试验数据表明：该损伤本构模型是合理的，可以很好的描述冲击倾向性煤岩在高水平应力下应力跌落段前的应力-应变关系和卸荷扩容变化；煤岩极限储存能量与水平构造应力呈正比例关系；加载和卸荷极限储存能量相差不大，该结论可为进一步深入讨论冲击地压发生的能量判别提供一定的参考价值。

With the gradual transfer of coal resources to the deep, the influence of ' three high and one disturbance ' is more and more obvious, especially the frequent occurrence of rock burst disaster and goaf instability caused by excavation unloading under high level tectonic stress, which seriously affects the safety production of coal mine. In order to ensure the safe mining of deep coal seams, it is urgent to carry out research on the mechanical characteristics of coal rock unloading and its energy evolution law under high-level stress in deep mines, which is of great significance for safe and efficient mining and disaster prediction and early warning. In this paper, the rockburst prone coal rock of a mine in Binchang mining area is taken as the research object, and the research work is carried out by combining field investigation, laboratory test and theoretical analysis. The main contents and conclusions are as follows :

Through field investigation, it is found that the main factors of rock burst disaster  in Binchang mining area include : coal seam burst tendency, high level tectonic stress, excavation unloading operation and mining depth and progress. According to the analysis of the characteristics of rock burst disaster, it is concluded that the occurrence of rock burst disaster in Binchang mining area is due to the high level tectonic stress field of coal seam and the burst tendency of coal seam as the basic internal cause, and the mining unloading is the main cause.

（2）The impact tendency test and triaxial loading compression test of coal rock under high level stress in Binchang mining area were completed. The test results show that the coal seam has the characteristics of strong impact tendency ; the strength of the coal seam and the tectonic stress increase in a function ; the coal rock transits from tensile failure to shear failure mode, and the characteristics of elastic brittleness are obvious. The vertical sudden drop phenomenon of acoustic emission b value can be used as the precursor information of rock burst.

（3）The unloading tests of coal rock under different confining pressures and different unloading rates were completed. The stress gradient is one of the important factors leading to the deformation and failure of the surrounding rock of the roadway. The unloading rate has a greater influence on the radial expansion deformation of surrounding rock, and the plastic strain confining pressure compliance and damage degree show a linear increase trend, that is, the advance speed of excavation is more likely to induce rock burst during excavation. The fracture angle of coal rock is negatively correlated with confining pressure. The coal-rock transitions from shear-tension composite failure to shear failure, and stress concentration is formed at the end. Monitoring, early warning and key prevention and control should be strengthened at the tip of the coal seam. The acoustic emission signals of coal and rock show a trend of ' increase-fall-increase ', which can be used as the basis for judging the unloading damage state of coal and rock. The b value of acoustic emission decreases more obviously with the increase of unloading amount, which can be used as the precursory information of rock burst disaster, and early warning can be carried out in time in the area with a large number of signal frequency in microseismic monitoring.

（4）The research shows that energy dissipation and release is one of the essential causes of rock burst disaster. The faster the unloading rate is, the faster the release of strain energy is, and the more severe the rock burst disaster is. The total energy change rate is positively correlated with the unloading rate. The increase rate of energy change rate in the stress drop section is several times that of the unloading energy change rate before the peak. The total strain energy and elastic strain energy are positively correlated with the initial damage degree. The elastic energy storage rate is proportional to the horizontal tectonic stress. Under the condition of the same occurrence environment, the mining progress is positively correlated with the elastic energy storage rate ; it shows that under the condition of high level tectonic stress, the advancing speed of working face and construction progress are the main causes of rock burst disaster. Therefore, adjusting the construction excavation progress or adopting reasonable construction steps can slow down or reduce the occurrence of rock burst disaster.

（5）Based on the energy dissipation theory, the unloading damage constitutive model of coal rock is established. The experimental data show that the damage constitutive model is reasonable and can well describe the stress-strain relationship and unloading expansion change of coal rock with burst tendency before the stress drop section under high level stress. The ultimate storage energy of coal rock is proportional to the horizontal tectonic stress. There is little difference between loading and unloading limit storage energy. This conclusion can provide some reference value for further discussion on the energy discrimination of rock burst occurrence.

[1] 康红普, 徐刚, 王彪. 我国煤炭开采与岩层控制技术发展40a及展望[J]. 采矿与岩层控制工程学报, 2019, 1(02): 7-39.

[2] 齐庆新, 李宏艳, 邓志刚, 等. 我国冲击地压理论、技术与标准体系研究[J]. 煤矿开采, 2017, 22(01):15+26.

[3] 钱鸣高等. 矿山压力与岩层控制[M]. 中国矿业大学出版社, 2010.

[4] 谢和平, 高峰, 鞠杨, 等. 深部开采的定量界定与分析[J]. 煤炭学报, 2015, 40(01): 1-10.

[5] 周志豪, 王华宁, 蒋明镜. 岩石化学风化力学特性的宏微观定量关联[J/OL]. 同济大学学报(自然科学版): 1-9[2024-04-03].

[6] 金解放, 黄方博, 赵康艳, 等. 高水压高应力岩石声波传播频域特性试验研究[J/OL]. 岩石力学与工程学报: 1-19[2024-04-03].

[7] 刘平, 刘泉声, 夏明锬, 等. 孔洞形状对层状岩石力学特性影响的FDEM数值模拟研究[J]. 中南大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 55(02): 595-606.

[8] 由爽, 李飞, 纪洪广, 等. 高应力高水压下深部花岗岩力学响应联动机制[J]. 煤炭学报, 2020, 45(S1): 219-229.

[9] 陈文华, 黄火林, 马鹏. 超高应力作用下锦屏二级水电站深部岩体变形特性试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2015, 34(S2): 3930-3935.

[10] 夏开文, 王峥, 吴帮标, 等. 流固耦合作用下深部岩石动态力学响应研究进展[J]. 煤炭学报, 2024, 49(01): 454-478.

[11] 陈兴周, 白亚妮, 陈莉丽, 等. 高渗压与循环加卸载环境下开挖卸荷岩体力学特性试验研究[J/OL]. 岩土工程学报: 1-9[2024-04-03].

[12] 方士正, 李炜煜, 杨阳, 等. 静水压状态下深部岩石动态压缩力学行为及能量耗散特征试验研究[J]. 振动与冲击, 2023, 42(06): 280-288.

[13] Huang L S ,Ding L X ,Lv G Q , et al. Grain-based modeling study of time-dependent mechanical behavior of brittle rocks in deep underground caverns based on the stress corrosion model [J]. Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 2024, 162117-130.

[14] 王乐华, 徐健文, 陈灿, 等. 非贯通双节理砂质板岩加卸荷力学特性及裂纹扩展机制[J/OL]. 土木与环境工程学报(中英文): 1-10[2024-04-04].

[15] 范浩, 王磊, 王连国. 不同应力路径下层理煤体力学特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(02): 385-395.

[16] Xie H ,Lu J ,Li C , et al. Experimental study on the mechanical and failure behaviors of deep rock subjected to true triaxial stress: A review[J]. International Journal of Mining Science and Technology, 2022, 32(05): 915-950.

[17] Hu Lihua,Yu Liyuan,Ju Minghe,Li Xiaozhao,Tang Chun’an.Effects of intermediate stress on deep rock strainbursts under true triaxial stresses[J]. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering.Volume 15 , Issue 3. 2023. PP 659-682.

[18] Li Zhaolin, Wang Lianguo,et al. Mechanical Behavior and Fracture Characteristics of Rock with Prefabricated Crack under Different Triaxial Stress Conditions.[J]. Minerals.Volume 12 , Issue 6. 2022. PP 673-673.

[19] 李夕兵, 宫凤强. 基于动静组合加载力学试验的深部开采岩石力学研究进展与展望[J]. 煤炭学报, 2021, 46(03): 846-866.

[20] 谢和平, 高明忠, 付成行, 等. 深部不同深度岩石脆延转化力学行为研究[J]. 煤炭学报, 2021, 46(03): 701-715.

[21] 张俊文, 宋治祥. 深部砂岩三轴加卸载力学响应及其破坏特征[J]. 采矿与安全工程学报, 2020, 37(02): 409-418+428.

[22] 王红英, 张强. 围压对锦屏深埋大理岩力学特性影响研究[J]. 应用基础与工程科学学报, 2019, 27(04): 843-853.

[23] 谢良涛, 严鹏, 卢文波, 等. 不同开挖方式下深埋大理岩岩爆发生范围预测[J]. 振动与冲击, 2019, 38(06): 31-39.

[24] 张培森, 许大强, 颜伟, 等. 应力-渗流耦合作用下不同卸荷路径对砂岩损伤特性及能量演化规律的影响研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45(02): 325-339.

[25] 王志亮, 汪大为, 汪书敏, 等. 循环冲击下大理岩的损伤力学行为及能量耗散特性[J/OL]. 爆炸与冲击: 1-16[2024-04-04].

[26] Jun Y , Qiang Z , et al. Experimental and DEM simulations of the mechanical properties of rock under freeze-thaw cycles[J]. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 2023, 2- 11.

[27] 谢和平, 彭瑞东, 鞠杨, 等. 岩石破坏的能量分析初探[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2005, 24 (15): 2603-2608.

[28] 赵忠虎, 谢和平. 岩石变形破坏过程中的能量传递和耗散研究[J]. 四川大学学报江程科学版), 2008, 40 (02): 26-31.

[29] 张志镇, 高峰. 受载岩石能量演化的围压效应研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2015, 34 (01): 1-11.

[30] 梁昌玉, 李晓, 王声星, 等. 岩石单轴压缩应力-应变特征的率相关性及能量机制试验研究:中国科学院地质与地球物理研究所2012年度(第12届)学术年会[C], 北京, 2012.

[31] 范勇, 卢文波, 王义昌, 等. 不同开挖方式下即时型和时滞型岩爆的孕育特征比较[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2015, 34 (S2) : 3715-3723.

[32] Zhao G, Dai B, Dong L, et al. Energy conversion of rocks in process of unloading confining pressure under different unloading paths[J]. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 2015, 25 (5): 1626-1632.

[33] Wang K, Zheng J, Zhu K. Analysis of deformation failure characteristics and energy of anthracite under two kinds of stress paths[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2015, 36: 259-266.

[34] Huang D, Li Y R. Conversion of strain energy in Triaxial Unloading Tests on Marble[J]. nternational Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2014, 66: 160-168.

[35] 陈宗基, 傅冰骏. 应力释放对开挖工程稳定性的重要影响[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 1992 (01): 1-10.

[36] 董方庭, 宋宏伟, 郭志宏, 等. 巷道围岩松动圈支护理论[J]. 煤炭学报, 1994 (01) : 21-32.

[37] 钱七虎. 深部岩体工程响应的特征科学现象及“深部”的界定[J]. 东华理工学院学报, 2004 (01): 1-5.

[38] 汤杨. 三轴压缩荷载作用下岩石时效特征研究[D]. 重庆: 重庆大学, 2018.

[39] 黄达, 谭清, 黄润秋. 高应力强卸荷条件下大理岩损伤破裂的应变能转化过程机制研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2012, 31(12): 2483-2493.

[40] 许文松, 赵光明, 孟祥瑞, 等. 真三轴加卸载岩体各向异性及能量演化机制[J/OL]. 煤炭学报: 1-14[2023-03-14].

[41] 谢和平, 鞠杨, 黎立云. 基于能量耗散与释放原理的岩石强度与整体破坏准则[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2005(17): 3003-3010.

[42] 刘晓辉, 郝齐钧, 吴世勇, 等. 准静态应变率下的煤岩非线性力学特性[J]. 煤炭学报, 2019, 44 (5): 1437-1445.

[43] 李海涛, 宋力, 周宏伟, 等. 多加载速率影响下煤强度的非线性演化机制试验研究及应用[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2016, 35 (S1) : 2978-2989.

[44] 贾楠, 吴超, 罗周全, 等. 动力扰动下采空区围岩非线性响应演化特性分析[J]. 爆破, 2016, 33 (03): 10-16.

[45] 汪斌, 朱杰兵, 邬爱清, 等. 高应力下岩石非线性强度特性的试验验证[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2010, 29 (03) : 542-548.

[46] 汪斌, 朱杰兵, 邬爱清, 等. 基于损伤控制方法的大理岩非线性剪胀特性试验研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2015, 36 (04) : 981-987.

[47] 陈岩. 采动影响下岩石的变形破坏行为及非线性模型研究[D]. 北京: 中国矿业大学(北京), 2018.

[48] 胡云华. 高应力下花岗岩力学特性试验及本构模型研究[D]. 湖北: 中国科学院研究生院(武汉岩土力学研究所), 2008.

[49] 尹光志, 代高飞, 万玲, 等. 岩石微裂纹演化的分岔混沌与自组织特征[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2002(05): 635-639.

[50] 姜永东, 鲜学福, 尹光志, 等. 岩石应力应变全过程的声发射及分形与混沌特征[J]. 岩土力学, 2010, 31(08): 2413-2418.

[51] 张志镇, 高峰. 单轴压缩下岩石能量演化的非线性特性研究[T]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2012, 31(06): 1198-1207.

[52] 周辉. 矿震孕育过程的混沌性及非线性预测理论研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2000, 19 (06): 813.

[53] 薛锦春, 李夕兵, 刘志祥. 基于混沌理论的矿山边坡岩体变形规律与安全预警系统[J]. 中南大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 44 (06) : 2476-2481.

[54] 赵瑜, 张建伟, 院淑芳. 基于突变理论的地下厂房围岩稳定性安全评价[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2014. 3(S2): 3973-3978.

[55] 蒋斌松, 韩立军, 贺永年. 深部岩体变形的混沌预测方法[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2005 (16): 2934-2940.

[56] 秦四清. 斜坡失稳的突变模型与混沌机制[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2000 (04) : 486-492.

[57] 侯公羽, 牛晓松. 基于Levy-Mises本构关系及Hoek-Brown屈服准则的轴对称圆巷理想弹塑性解[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2010, 29(04): 765-777.

[58] 侯公羽, 牛晓松. 基于Levy-Mises本构关系及D-P屈服准则的轴对称圆巷理想弹塑性解[J]. 岩土力学,2009, 30(06): 1555-1562.

[59] 刘立鹏, 汪小刚, 贾志欣, 等. 锦屏二级水电站大理岩复杂加卸载应力路径力学特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2013, 34(8): 2287-2294.

[60] 李新平, 肖桃李, 汪斌, 等. 锦屏二级水电站大理岩不同应力路径下加卸载试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2012, 31(5): 882-889.

[61] 黄达, 谭清, 黄润秋. 高应力强卸荷条件下大理岩损伤破裂的应变能转化过程机制研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2012, 31(12): 2483-2493.

[62] 吕颖慧, 刘泉声, 江浩. 基于高应力下花岗岩卸荷试验的力学变形特性研究[J]. 岩土力学, 2010, 31(02): 337-344.

[63] 杜佳慧, 李文璞, 冯国瑞, 等. 基于双剪统一强度准则砂岩真三轴卸荷损伤本构模型研究[J/OL]. 岩石力学与工程学报: 1-11[2024-03-15].

[64] 张尧, 李波波, 许江, 等. 基于能量耗散的煤岩三轴受压损伤演化特征研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2021, 40(08): 1614-1627.

[65] 谢和平, 鞠杨, 黎立云. 基于能量耗散与释放原理的岩石强度与整体破坏准则[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2005, 024(017): 3003-3010.

[66] 马振乾. 厚层软弱顶板巷道灾变机理及控制技术研究[D]. 北京: 中国矿业大学, 2016.

[67] 煤和岩石物理力学性质试验规程: GB/T 23561-2009.

[68] SHCHERBAKOV I P, KUKSENKO V S, CHMEL A E. Acoustic emission accumulation stage in compression and impact rupture of granite[J]. Journal of Mining Science, 2012, 48(4): 656-659.

[69] 陈卫忠, 吕森鹏, 郭小红, 等. 脆性岩石卸围压试验与岩爆机理研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2010, 32(06): 963-969.

[70] 陈煜朋, 姜文忠, 秦玉金, 等. 煤的孔隙分布特征研究理论与方法综述[J]. 煤矿安全, 2021, 52(03): 190-196.

[71] 纪洪广. 混凝土材料声发射性能研究与应用[M]. 北京: 煤炭工业出版社, 2004.

[72] RAOMV M S, LAKSHMIK J P. Analysis of b-value and improved b-value of acoustic emissions accompanying rock fracture[J]. Current Science, 2005, 89(9): 1577-1582.

[73] GUTENBERG B, RICHTER C F. Frequency of earthquakes in California[J]. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 1994, 34(4): 185-188.

[74] SAGASTA F, ZITTO M E, PIOTRKOWSKI R, et al. Acoustic emission energy b-value for local damage evaluation in reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic loadings[J]. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2018, 102(MAR.1): 262-277.

[75] RAO M, LAKSHMI K. Analysis of b-value and improved b-value of acoustic emissions accompanying rock fracture[J]. Current Science, 2005, 89(9): 1577-1582.

[76] 董陇军, 张凌云. 岩石破坏声发射b值的误差分析[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2020, 37(8): 75-81.

[77] 邱士利, 冯夏庭, 张传庆, 等. 不同卸围压速率下深埋大理岩卸荷力学特性试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2010, 29(09): 1807-1817.

[78] 黄润秋, 黄达. 高地应力条件下卸荷速率对锦屏大理岩力学特性影响规律试验研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2010, 29(01): 21-33.

[79] 胡云华. 高应力下花岗岩力学特性试验及本构模型研究[M]. 中国科学院武汉岩石力学研究所.

[80] 邓华锋, 王哲, 李建林, 等. 卸荷速率和孔隙水压力对砂岩卸荷特性影响研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2017, 39(11): 1976-1983.

[81] 李天斌, 王湘锋, 孟陆波. 岩爆的相似材料物理模拟研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2011, 30(S1): 2610-2616.

[82] VERMEER P A 1998. Non-Associated Plasticity for Soils,Concrete and Rock [M]. Springer Netherlands.

[83] 刘俊. 高应力高水压下砂岩加卸荷力学特性及其对深埋隧道稳定性影响研究[D]. 重庆大学, 2018.

[84] 陈卫忠, 吕森鹏, 郭小红, 等. 脆性岩石卸围压试验与岩爆机理研究[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2010, 32(06): 963-969.

[85] 刘晓辉. 不同应变率下煤岩破断规律与能量释放特征研究[D]. 四川: 四川大学, 2017.

[86] 刘晓辉, 郝齐钧, 胡安奎, 等. 准静态应变率下单轴煤岩特征应力确定方法研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2020, 39(10): 2038-2046.

[87] 谢和平, 鞠杨, 黎立云, 等. 岩体变形破坏过程的能量机制[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2008(09): 1729-1740.

[88] Huang D, Li Y. Conversion of strain energy in Triaxial Unloading Tests on Marble[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics&Mining Sciences, 2014, (66): 160-168.

[89] 徐婕. 煤矿深部砂岩卸荷特性及岩爆预测方法研究[D]. 武汉大学, 2017.

[90] ORTLEPP W D, STACEY T R. Rockburst mechanisms in tunnels and shafts[J]. Tunnelling&Underground Space Technology. 1994 (9): 59-65.

[91] 唐礼忠, 王文星. 一种新的岩爆倾向性指标[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报, 2002 (21): 874-878.

[92] 尚彦军, 张镜剑, 傅冰骏. 应变型岩爆三要素分析及岩爆势表达[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,32: 1520-1527.

[93] Fengqiang Gong, Yunliang Wang, Qi Wang. Peak-strength strain energy storage index for evaluating coal burst liability based on the linear energy storage law [J]. Geohazard Mechanics,Volume , Issue, 2023, (2): 153-161.

[94] 谭强. 不同深度赋存应力环境的锦屏大理岩动态力学响应研究[D]. 四川: 四川大学, 2019.

[95] 谢和平. 岩石、混凝土损伤力学[M]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学出版社, 1990.

[96] Yang S,Xu P,Ranjith P G. Damage model of coal under creep and triaxial compression[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics&Mining Sciences, 2015, (80):337-345.

[97] 曹文贵, 方祖烈, 唐学军. 岩石损伤软化统计本构模型之研究[J]. 岩石力学与工程学报,1998(06):628-633.

[98] 周辉,李震,朱国金, 等.基于岩石统一能量屈服准则的硬岩损伤模型[J]. 岩土力学, 2016, 37(03): 609-615+624.

[99] 张超, 曹文贵, 王江营. 考虑损伤阈值影响的岩石脆-延性转化统计损伤本构模型研究[J]. 水文地质工程地质, 2013, 40(05): 45-50+57.