Effect of joint sets on the strength and deformation of rock mass models

Yang, Zon-Yee; Chen, J.M.; Huang, Tsan‐Hwei

doi:10.1016/s1365-1609(98)80024-5

Cited by 93 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yang et al 1998;Kulathilake et al 2001;Singh et al 2002;Ranjith et al 2004;Kumar and Das 2005;Tiwari and Rao 2004;Ramamurthy and Arora 1994;Wasantha et al 2011). In general, the variation of strength versus joint orientation revealed by the vast majority of these studies is consistent with the 'sliding plane of weakness' model proposed by Jaeger et al (2007) (Eq.…”

Section: Effect Of Joint Orientation On Rock Mechanical Behaviorsupporting

confidence: 76%

“…A number of research studies have been reported in the literature which incorporate joint geometrical properties in describing rock mechanical behavior (e.g. Singh et al 2002;Ramamurthy and Arora 1994;Yang et al 1998;Wasantha et al 2011Wasantha et al , 2012aWasantha et al , 2014b. To thoroughly understand the mechanical behavior of rock masses, it is also important to understand the fracture development process leading to failure upon loading.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do joint geometrical properties influence the fracturing behaviour of jointed rock? An investigation through joint orientation

Wasantha

Ranjith

Zhang

et al. 2015

Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Failure of brittle rock is often progressive and understanding the fracture development process within rock masses is important to identify the precursors of failures. Joints in rock masses influence the fracture progression behavior and we studied the influence of joint orientation on fracture progression in jointed rock. Undrained triaxial tests were conducted on 54 mm diameter and 108 mm high intact and singly-jointed sandstone specimens. The joints in jointed specimens were made rough (joint roughness coefficient = 10-12) and embedded in six different orientations-0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°and 90°-and three different combinations of confining and initial pore-water pressures were considered (confining pressure/pore-water pressure = 4/1, 10/4 and 25/10 MPa). An acoustic emission (AE) monitoring system was employed during all tests to monitor the fracture development within the test specimens. The post-failure patterns of specimens displayed three different failure mechanisms-shearing through intact material, sliding along the joint and a mixture of both shearing and sliding-depending on the joint orientation and confining pressure. The fracture progression behavior of the specimens showed a strong correlation with these failure mechanisms. Intact specimens and specimens with joints oriented at 0°, 30°, 90°failed by shearing. Nevertheless, the AE patterns of intact specimens and specimens with 90°-oriented joints contrasted with those of specimens with joints oriented at 0°a nd 30°. Specimens with joints oriented at 60°failed by sliding with a constant rate of acoustic event generation starting from the beginning of deviatoric loading. A mixed failure mechanism was observed for specimens with joints oriented at 45°and 75°. While the characteristics of both sliding and shearing failure were observed from the AE patterns of both 45°and 75°orientations, the shearing failure component of the 75°case was found to be a result of experimental limitations rather than real behavior. Finally, we propose a family of typical AE curves to assist with the characterization of the fracture progression behavior of jointed rock by taking confining pressures and failure mechanisms into consideration.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Joint Orientation On Rock Mechanical Behaviorsupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do joint geometrical properties influence the fracturing behaviour of jointed rock? An investigation through joint orientation

Wasantha

Ranjith

Zhang

et al. 2015

Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are two constellations for a rock mass which has two joints with different strength parameters: (I) one joint is weaker in all strength parameters (series 2-4 in Table 1) and (II) strength parameter have different relations to each other (series [5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Constellationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various analytical, numerical and empirical methods are suggested in order to take into account the influence of discontinuities on the mechanical behavior of jointed rock [1][2][3][4][5][6]. In the past several decades, a lot of lab tests with samples containing a single or multiple joint sets under confined and unconfined conditions have been implemented to investigate the joint orientation effect [7][8][9]. With the ongoing development of computer based simulation techniques, more sophisticated models have been developed in recent years and it is possible to incorporate more aspects into the simulations [10][11][12][13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of the Mohr-Coulomb Yield Criterion for Rocks with Multiple Joint Sets Using Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua 2D (FLAC2D) Software

Chang

Konietzky

2018

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The anisotropic behavior of a rock mass with persistent and planar joint sets is mainly governed by the geometrical and mechanical characteristics of the joints. The aim of the study is to develop a continuum-based approach for simulation of multi jointed geomaterials. Within the continuum methods, the discontinuities are regarded as smeared cracks in an implicit manner and all the joint parameters are incorporated into the equivalent constitutive equations. A new equivalent continuum model, called multi-joint model, is developed for jointed rock masses which may contain up to three arbitrary persistent joint sets. The Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion is used to check failure of the intact rock and the joints. The proposed model has solved the issue of multiple plasticity surfaces involved in this approach combined with multiple failure mechanisms. The multi-joint model was implemented into Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua software (FLAC) and is verified against the strength anisotropy behavior of jointed rock. A case study considering a circular excavation under uniform and non-uniform in-situ stresses is used to illustrate the practical application. The multi-joint model is compared with the ubiquitous joint model.

show abstract

“…Numerous previous studies have investigated the mechanical properties of a jointed rock mass through uniaxial or triaxial compression tests (Yang et al 1998). The uniaxial compression strength (UCS) and Young's modulus of the Danba schist at different dip angles were studied via uniaxial compression tests (Chu et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinct element modeling of strength variation in jointed rock masses under uniaxial compression

Wang

Duan

Elsworth

et al. 2015

Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rock masses exhibit strong anisotropy due to the structure of fracture networks embedded within the mass. We use a particulate discrete element method to quantitatively investigate the effect of spacing and inclination angle of the joints on anisotropic strength under uniaxial compression. In all of the numerical models, the intact rock masses are represented by the bonded particle model, and the joint planes are simulated by the smooth-joint model. Observations are made of the evolving stress-strain curves relative to the distribution and orientation of micro fractures. Apparent from this is that: (1) for the same fracture spacing, the strength and deformation parameters of jointed rock masses change in a ''U'' shaped curve when plotted against an increase in the inclination angle of the joints. The maximum value occurs at the inclination angles of 0°and 90°, and the minimum value occurs at an inclination angle of 40°or 50°; (2) for the same joint spacing, the failure mode of the jointed rock mass with different joint inclinations can be classified into three categories: splitting tensile failure, shear sliding failure along the joint surface and mixed failure of the two modes above; (3) for the same joint inclination angle, the normalized compressive strength and normalized elastic modulus both increase with an increase of the normalized joint plane layer spacing.

show abstract

Effect of joint sets on the strength and deformation of rock mass models

Cited by 93 publications

References 10 publications

Do joint geometrical properties influence the fracturing behaviour of jointed rock? An investigation through joint orientation

Do joint geometrical properties influence the fracturing behaviour of jointed rock? An investigation through joint orientation

Application of the Mohr-Coulomb Yield Criterion for Rocks with Multiple Joint Sets Using Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua 2D (FLAC2D) Software

Distinct element modeling of strength variation in jointed rock masses under uniaxial compression

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About