Due to the complexity of rockburst phenomena and the difficulties of on-site experiments [18; 19; 20] and numerical results [21], laboratory experiments have always been an important means for many scholars to study rockburst, the experimental types of which include uniaxial, biaxial, and triaxial rockburst experiments, physical model experiments, split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) experiments, strain rockburst, and impact rockburst physical simulation experiments. [PERSON] et al. [22] and [PERSON] [23] studied the mechanism of rockburst from the perspective of energy through uniaxial compression experiments and proposed that rockburst will occur when the energy releasedafter the failure of rock mass mechanics balance is greater than the energy consumed. [PERSON] [24] studied the crack propagation law in rock during rockburst through biaxial compression experiments. [PERSON] et al. [25] carried out AE experiments of the granite rockburst process under true triaxial loading conditions and preliminarily revealed the temporal and spatial evolution characteristics of AE of precursory information of rockburst. At the same time, the effects of intermediate heat treatment temperatures on rockburst damage were considered [26]. To investigate the influence of joints on the rockburst process in the surrounding rock of deep tunnels, a free-face true-triaxial test was conducted on the rockburst of the jointed surrounding rock of a tunnel [27]. To study the influence of structural planes on rockbursts in the rock surrounding deep tunnels, a series of true triaxial compression tests were carried out on 100 mm \(\times\) 100 mm \(\times\) 100 mm red sandstone specimens [28]. Based on the development of traditional rockburst model materials, [PERSON] et al. [29] developed a rockburst model material containing quartz sand, barite powder, and other components to meet the Rockburst Tendency Index and brittleness evaluation index by carrying out an orthogonal design method and sensitivity analysis. Models of experiments at three different scales of the problem were presented, with small and large amplitude waveforms recorded around a deep-level mining tunnel in a synthetic rockburst experiment [30]. The strain rate dependency of dynamic tensile strength of Laurentian granite is investigated by the aid of different experimental methods, i.e., Hopkinson bar experiments and split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) experiments. A new destressing pattern is introduced, which is successfully capable of transforming the stress states ahead of a tunnel face, reducing the rockburst potential [31]. Spalling tests based on the split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) technique were conducted to study some aspects of dynamic rock fracturing in tension at high strain rates and the role a sacrificial layer plays in combating dynamic rock failure [32]. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [33] developed a similar material that can qualitatively demonstrate the phenomenon of rockburst, which is composed of epoxy resin and 3-5% hardener. Considering the comprehensive factors such as rockburst causes, stress sources, and time [15; 34]. [PERSON] [35] improved the classification of strain rockburst and impact rockburst and independently designed a 1G strain rockburst experimental system [15], an impact rockburst experimental system [34], as well as a 2G strain rockburst experimental system and carried out related research. The results indicated that under dynamic disturbance, stress variation on the structural surface in a deep rock mass may directly give rise to a rockburst [36]. However, there are also problems in the opening shape of specimens such as circle, rectangle, and so on, lithology such as sandstone, granite, and so on, stress path, and loading method from the engineering background. It is rarely reported in the literature to study the instability and failure process and law of the cracked surrounding rock of the horseshoe-shaped tunnel through laboratory experiments, and then the development of slab buckling rockburst.