## 1 Introduction  
The rockburst disaster is a kind of process in the underground engineering system in which the surrounding rock body is suddenly destroyed, which releases the accumulated elastic potential energy in the rock body. Scholars suggest that the rockburst can occur unexpectedly, the rock body could be severely damaged in the process, and the rock plate may speed away, causing grave consequences such as roof collapse, deformation, and spalling in the underworkings [1]. It can also cause serious disasters, equipment damage, and casualties. Different degrees of rockburst disasters have occurred in many countries, such as South Africa, China, US, Russia, Chile, Japan, Germany, Canada, Norway, Sweden, etc. It can also occur in different fields, such as geological engineering, underground mining engineering, water conservancy, hydropower, etc. [2; 3; 4]. Geological weaknesses could play a larger role at shallower sites where mining-induced fractures are not important [5]. A rockburst disasters is actually a dynamic fracture of rock cracks under complex stress fields [6; 7; 8; 9], for example, the model of a coupling analysis was established to investigate the influence of fractured rock mass and seepage-damage effect [10; 11]. In the field of mine, rockburst disaster is closely related to buried deep and surrounding rock nature. The probability of the occurrence is enhanced by the deep-buried high-stress areas and hard rock. However, the rock dynamic disasters of the monitoring and early warning technology, such as rockburst, are still a key scientific and technical problem that the rock mechanics community must be committed to solving [12; 13; 14]. The laboratory rockburst simulation test plays a significant role in understanding rockburst mechanisms, analyzing the rockburst phenomenon, and establishing the rockburst warning model. The high-stress environment of rock was a necessary condition for the rockburst disaster. Thus, in order to successfully simulate the occurrence of the rockburst, it is very significant to control the load of a rock. Some scholars identified the maximum principal stress as the main factor inducing rockburst, and they conducted the way of the uniaxial loading and unloading to simulate stress concentration during the test. From example, [PERSON] et al. [15] analyzed a cylindrical phyllite specimen's rockburst proneness by uniaxial compression tests. [PERSON] et al. [16] used sandstone samples in a uniaxial compression test to observe rockburst precursor information. [PERSON] et al. [17] analyzed the mechanism of rockburst induced by spalling damage with similar materials uniaxial compression tests. Uniaxial compression tests were conducted using cylindrical samples to investigate the process of rockburst induced by spalling [18]. Other scholars have concluded that the combined action of maximum principal stress and intermediate principal stress could better simulate the stress condition when a rockburst disaster occurs. For example, biaxial compression tests were performed on granite specimens to investigate the rockburst mechanism [19]. [PERSON] et al. [20] conducted biaxial compression experiments on sandstone specimens with three different lateral stresses to study the impact of the in situ stress on the rockburst process and failure characteristics. [PERSON] et al. [21] applied biaxial compression tests on granite samples with the prefabricated hole to investigate the rockburst process under horizontal stress conditions. Nonetheless, principal stress and intermediate stress cannot disclose the internal stress state of rock mass when a rockburst occurs. The triaxial stress state where the maximum principal stress exceeds the critical value was recognized by scholars as the external factor leading to the rockburst disaster. Rockburst disasters are difficult to predict accurately. The prediction measure of rockburst disasters can be divided into long-term trend prediction and short-term warning.