The Shear Behavior of Bedding Planes of Weakness Between Two Different Rock Types with High Strength Difference

Importance of Tensile Strength on the Shear Behavior of Discontinuities

“…According to Ghazvinian et al (2009), the difference between the shear strength of certain profiles with different compressive strengths is observed due to the difference in the basic friction angles. As there is no considerable difference between the basic friction angles of the mortars used in this study (Table 2), the shear strengths of a profile with constant roughness and various compressive strengths were found to be similar to each other under low normal stresses.…”

“…Since, in the present work JRC is a constant, a variation of JRC values from previous research by Ghazvinian et al (2009) was used. As mentioned, five profiles were used from previous research with different JRC values (16.01,11.44,9.96,8.8,and 7.01), three different materials with different compressive strengths (11.88,16.65,and 19.17 MPa), and concrete with a compressive strength of 41.2 MPa.…”

“…But there is a lack of literature on the shear behavior of DDJCS under CNL conditions. Recently, Ghazvinian et al (2009) investigated the condition for high strength difference between materials of rock joint walls. In this research, the shear behavior of discontinuities possessing identical and different joint wall strengths was investigated, with an emphasis on the effect of tensile strength on the shear response of the discontinuities.…”

Shear Behaviour of Rock Joints Under CNL and CNS Boundary Conditions

“…As mostly rock joints are non planar and reinforcements are provided to the rock joints to increase the stability, hence a more representative behavior of joints would be achieved if shear behavior is investigated under CNS boundary conditions. Conventional equipment used by different scholars (Newland and Allely 1957;Patton 1966;Goldestin et al 1966;Ladanyi and Archambault 1970;Barton 1973;Byerlee 1975;Yang and Chiang 2000;Saiang et al 2005;Ghazvinian et al 2010) in previous days fails to explain correctly the shear behavior of rough and reinforced rock joints because of the limitation of boundary conditions, these equipment work under CNL boundary condition only. The shear strength model proposed by them based on these studies fails to predict shear strength correctly because of the limitation of boundary conditions.…”

Tropical sandstone degradation with time : case study in Kota Kinabalu Sabah, Malaysia

“…The shear strength of a discontinuity with infill is governed by the thickness of the infill, the material properties of both infill and the discontinuity walls, the roughness of the discontinuity and shape and height of asperities on the discontinuity walls, and the stress condition on the discontinuity. Several studies have been done to determine the influence of infill and roughness on discontinuity shear strength (Amin et al, 2008;Archambault et al, 1990;Bandis, 1990;Barton, 2013;Barton, 1973;Barton & Choubey, 1977;Ghazvinian et al, 2010;Hack, 1998;Hencher & Richards, 1989;Indraratna et al, 2010;Indraratna et al, 2011;Karami & Stead, 2008;Kulatilake et al, 1999;Kulatilake et al, 1995;Papaliangas et al, 1993;Papaliangas et al, 1990;Patton, 1966;Pereira, 1990;Phien-wej et al, 1990;Seidel & Haberfield, 1995;Ulusay & Hudson, 2007;Yang et al, 2001;Zare et al, 2008). Various strength criteria for discontinuities were determined of which Barton's inter-block shear strength (Barton et al, 1974) and the sliding angle following the sliding criterion (Hack & Price, 1995) are used in this study to show the influence of dissolution and precipitation of iron on shear strength.…”