2003
DOI: 10.1016/s1365-1609(02)00134-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantifying topography and closure deformation of rock joints

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
21
0
2

Year Published

2004
2004
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
21
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…It is worth noting that the restrictions of the model we developed, as mentioned in section 2, the elastic parameters of rocks will be reduced after acidrock reaction, and these changes cannot yet be described quantitatively using a unified theory (Joel and Pournik, 2011), so the variation of elastic parameters in the model depend on which type of acid system is employed. On the other hand, the mechanical behavior of contacting surfaces has been studied by explicitly modeling the behavior of asperity contacts, mainly includes the normal and shear behavior (Xia et al, 2003), Which induce elastic deformations and inelastic frictional sliding separately, the latter may cause the crushing of asperity (Misra and Marangos, 2014). One study showed that the total contact surface is always proportional to the mechanical load under certain closure stress (Persson, 2001).…”
Section: Results and Discussionresultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is worth noting that the restrictions of the model we developed, as mentioned in section 2, the elastic parameters of rocks will be reduced after acidrock reaction, and these changes cannot yet be described quantitatively using a unified theory (Joel and Pournik, 2011), so the variation of elastic parameters in the model depend on which type of acid system is employed. On the other hand, the mechanical behavior of contacting surfaces has been studied by explicitly modeling the behavior of asperity contacts, mainly includes the normal and shear behavior (Xia et al, 2003), Which induce elastic deformations and inelastic frictional sliding separately, the latter may cause the crushing of asperity (Misra and Marangos, 2014). One study showed that the total contact surface is always proportional to the mechanical load under certain closure stress (Persson, 2001).…”
Section: Results and Discussionresultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to tribology, assuming that deformation of asperities of discontinuities under compressive load is linear-elastic, nonlinear characteristics of discontinuities under normal load can be reflected by the modification of the quantity and contact area of asperities. This kind of research was carried out by experts at home and abroad, including Swan, Sun Matsuki, Xia et al [13][14][15][16]. The model brought forward by Swan was effective only in smaller stress range, but unsuitable in overall range.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kulatilake et al [11] mentioned significant impacts on the calculated fractal parameters from the input parameter values used in each method, for 2D profiles, and investigated the accuracy of fractal parameters estimated using different methods. Xia et al [12,13,23] presented a study for quantifying both the joint topography characteristics and the load-closure deformation of a rock joint under normal compressive loading condition. This method greatly increases the density of the collected data, the accuracy of the measurements and provides repeatability of results.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%