13.08.2013 Views

Rock Mechanics.pdf - Mining and Blasting

Rock Mechanics.pdf - Mining and Blasting

Rock Mechanics.pdf - Mining and Blasting

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Figure 4.44 Controlled normal<br />

force (a, c) <strong>and</strong> controlled normal<br />

displacement (b, d) shearing modes.<br />

SHEAR BEHAVIOUR OF DISCONTINUITIES<br />

the time a shear displacement corresponding to point 1 in Figure 4.43b is reached, a<br />

normal stress of n = A will have been acquired, <strong>and</strong> the shear resistance will be that<br />

given by the –u curve for n = A at u = u1. As shearing progresses, the shear stress<br />

will increase according to the dashed locus 0–1–2 in Figure 4.45c. If the discontinuity<br />

is initially compressed to point 3 in Figure 4.45b by a normal stress n = A, <strong>and</strong><br />

shearing then occurs with no further normal displacement being permitted (i.e. v = a<br />

throughout), then the –u curve followed will be that given by the locus 3–4–5–6<br />

in Figure 4.45c. Note that, in both cases, considerable increases in shear strength<br />

accompany shearing without dilatancy, <strong>and</strong> that the –u behaviour is no longer strain<br />

softening as it was for constant normal stress tests. This helps explain why limiting<br />

dilation on discontinuities by rock bolt, dowel <strong>and</strong> cable reinforcement (Chapter 11),<br />

can stabilise excavations in discontinuous rock.<br />

4.7.4 Influence of scale<br />

As was noted in section 3.3, discontinuity roughness may exist on a number of scales.<br />

Figure 3.10 illustrated the different scales of roughness sampled by different scales of<br />

shear test. For tests in which dilation is permitted, the roughness angle <strong>and</strong>, therefore,<br />

the apparent friction angle, decrease with increasing scale. For tests in which dilation<br />

is inhibited, the influence of scale is less important.<br />

Barton (1973) proposed that the peak shear strengths, of joints, , in rock could be<br />

represented by the empirical relation<br />

= ′ n tan<br />

<br />

JRC log 10<br />

JCS<br />

′ n<br />

<br />

+ ′ <br />

r<br />

(4.35)<br />

where ′ n = effective normal stress, JRC = joint roughness coefficient on a scale of<br />

1 for the smoothest to 20 for the roughest surfaces, JCS = joint wall compressive<br />

strength <strong>and</strong> ′ r = drained, residual friction angle.<br />

127

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!