Damage model for jointed rock mass and its application to tunnelling

Swoboda, G.; Shen, Xin; Rosas, L.

doi:10.1016/s0266-352x(98)00009-3

Cited by 53 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This definition facilitates the adaptation of the damage concept within the theory of elasticity or in any other theory associated with classical continuum mechanics. The coupling of elasticity with damage models has been investigated by a number of researchers and references to these studies can be found in the works by Sidoroff (1980), Mazars (1982), Chow and Wang (1987), Mazars and Pijaudier-Cabot (1989a,b), Lemaitre and Chaboche (1990), Lemaitre (1992), Krajcinovic (1996), Swoboda et al (1998) and Eskandari and Nemes (1999). In keeping with the approach proposed by Mazars and Pijaudier-Cabot (1989a), the damage is assumed to be elastic, scalar isotropic and only the elastic parameters are assumed to be altered by damage.…”

Section: Continuum Damage Mechanicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stationary damage modelling of poroelastic contact

Selvadurai

2004

International Journal of Solids and Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Continuum Damage Mechanicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stationary damage modelling of poroelastic contact

Selvadurai

2004

International Journal of Solids and Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is often used to define the damage in rock mass geometrical damage theory [10,11,21]. But its deficiency is obvious, in which only the joint geometrical property such as its length and dip angle is considered, while its mechanical one such as its shear strength is not included in Eq.…”

Section: A Damage Constitutive Model For Rock Mass With Macroscopic Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But how to accurately define these two coefficients also becomes a new problem. However, Swoboda et al [11] introduced the material constant H d (0 ≤ H d < 1) to consider the effect of joint contact on the stress transfer, and now the method to determine it is mainly by experience.…”

Section: A Damage Constitutive Model For Rock Mass With Macroscopic Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But up to now, nearly none of the existing studies on rock mass damage mechanics considers the co-effect of the two kinds of damage on rock mass. For example, Kawamoto et al [10] and Swoboda et al [11] only considered the effect of the macroscopic flaw on the rock mass mechanical behavior and adopted the secondorder damage tensor to reflect the anisotropy in rock mass caused by it, which does not consider the effect of the mesoscopic flaw in the rock blocks cut by joints. Likewise, Grady et al [12] and Taylor et al [13] only considered the effect of the mesoscopic flaw on the rock mass mechanical behavior and defined the damage variable as the function of the microcrack density.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Now the existing study on rock mesoscopic damage mechanics is often based on the statistical damage constitutive model [16,17], which is well developed. However, the study on rock mass damage constitutive model is comparatively not enough, because the most existing studies mainly adopt the damage tensor to describe the anisotropic damage in the rock mass caused by the joints [10,11], in which only the joint geometrical property such as its length and dip angle is considered, while its mechanical property such as the shear strength is not. So, it is obvious that this definition method for the damage tensor has some deficiency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Damage Constitutive Model for Rock Mass with Nonpersistently Closed Joints Under Uniaxial Compression

Liu

Zhang

2015

Arab J Sci Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of the rock mass, both the macroscopic flaws such as joints and the mesoscopic flaws such as microcracks affect the strength and the deformational behavior of rock mass. Existing models can either handle any one of them alone, and a model which can consider the co-effect of these two kinds of flaws on rock mass mechanical behavior is not yet available. This study focusses on rock mass with nonpersistently closed joints and establishes a new damage constitutive model for it. Firstly, the damage model for the intact rock which contains only the mesoscopic flaws is introduced. Second, the expression of the macroscopic damage variable (tensor) which can consider the joint geometrical and mechanical properties at the same time is obtained based on the energy principle and fracture theory. Third, the damage variable based on coupling the macroscopic and mesoscopic flaws is deduced based on Lemaitre strain equivalence hypothesis, and then the corresponding damage constitutive model for rock mass with nonpersistently closed joints under uniaxial compression is set up. Finally, the test data for the intact rock under uniaxial compression are adopted to validate the proposed model. A series of calculation examples verify that the proposed model is capable of presenting the

show abstract

Microplane damage model for jointed rock masses

Chen

Bažant

2014

Num Anal Meth Geomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents a new microplane constitutive model for the inelastic behavior of jointed rock masses that takes into account the mechanical behavior and geometric characteristics of cracks and joints. The basic idea is that the microplane modeling of rock masses under general triaxial loading, including compression, requires the isotropic rock matrix and the joints to be considered as two distinct phases coupled in parallel. A joint continuity factor is defined as a microplane damage variable to represent the stress-carrying area fraction of the joint phase. Based on the assumption of parallel coupling between the rock joint and the rock matrix, the overall mechanical behavior of the rock is characterized by microplane constitutive laws for the rock matrix and for the rock joints, along with an evolution law for the microplane joint continuity factor. The inelastic response of the rock matrix and the rock joints is controlled on the microplane level by the stress-strain boundaries. Based on the arguments enunciated in developing the new microplane model M7 for concrete, the previously used volumetric-deviatoric splits of the elastic strains and of the tensile boundary are avoided. The boundaries are tensile normal, compressive normal, and shear. The numerical simulations demonstrate satisfactory fits of published triaxial test data on sandstone and on jointed plaster mortar, including quintessential features such as the strain softening and dilatancy under low confining pressure, as well as the brittle-ductile transition under higher confining pressure, and the decrease of jointed rock strength and Young's modulus with an increasing dip angle of the joint.This leads to the following basic relation between the macrocontinuum stress tensor and the microplane stresses of the rock mass: MICROPLANE DAMAGE MODEL FOR JOINTED ROCK MASSES Figure 12. The normal stress on the microplane μ = 7 versus axial strain: (a) p = 10 MPa, (b) p = 30 MPa, (c) p = 60 MPa, and (d) p = 100 MPa. Figure 13. The shear stress on the microplane μ = 7 versus axial strain: (a) p = 10 MPa, (b) p = 30 MPa, (c) p = 60 MPa, and (d) p = 100 MPa. MICROPLANE DAMAGE MODEL FOR JOINTED ROCK MASSES

show abstract

Damage model for jointed rock mass and its application to tunnelling

Cited by 53 publications

References 16 publications

Stationary damage modelling of poroelastic contact

Stationary damage modelling of poroelastic contact

A Damage Constitutive Model for Rock Mass with Nonpersistently Closed Joints Under Uniaxial Compression

Microplane damage model for jointed rock masses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About