Rock Mechanics for Industrx, Amadei, Kranz, Scott & Smeallie (eds) 1999 Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5809

ISBN 90 5809 052 3

Experimental study on the mechanical behavior of single joint under a
constant x/o loading condition and its application to mechanical modeling
H.Yasuhara, K. Kishida, H. Fujii & T. Adachi
Department of Civil Engineering, Kyoto University, Japan
ABSTRACT: Although the joint element method can be applied to numerical analyses of jointed rock masses,
the effort in data preparation involving the joint parameters, the constitutive law, and the number of joints is
increased. To overcome this difficulty, the equivalent continuous model is applied instead of the joint element
method. In this study, focus is placed on the mechanical parameters, normal stiffness k, and shear stiffness k,.
The relationship ofk, and k, (Goodman 1984) is measured in this study by constant r/a loading tests. Then,
the results are used to determine the material constants of the equivalent continuous model.
l INTRODUCTION
Recently, the need for both rock and underground
structures, such as tunnels, dam foundations,
underground powerhouses, and underground caverns
for storing oil, gas, compressive air, and radioactive
waste, has been increasing. Since these structures are
usually constructed in a jointed rock mass, the
mechanical properties of the jointed rock mass
should be grasped precisely. In a discussion on the
mechanical properties of jointed rock masses, one of
the most important tasks is to understand the
mechanical behavior of the joints. The mechanical
properties of rock joints can generally be described
and determined by two mechanical parameters,
namely, normal stiffness k, and shear stiffness k.
The normal stiffness and the shear stiffness are
determined through uniaxial compressive tests and
direct shear tests on rock joints, respectively.
Goodman (1976), Barton (1976), Bandis (1980), and
Bandis et al. (1981) carded out uniaxial compressive
tests and direct shear tests on rock joints, and
presented methods for estimating the normal and the
shear stiffness.
In this study, loading tests are conducted in
consideration of the joints and the loading direction
against the joints. That is, by changing the loading
direction against the joints, the mechanical behavior
of the joints can be observed under various
combinations of normal stress and shear stress on
the rock joints. It is thought, therefore, that the
mechanical behavior of a jointed rock mass can be
practically discussed in terms of excavation and
construction.
In order to perform experiments and discuss the
relationship between the joint stiffness (k and k)
and the loading direction against the joints, a new
testing apparatus has been developed. A constant
loading condition can be applied to the joints using
this apparatus. Thus, the tests described in this paper
are called constant daloading condition tests.
2 CONSTANT r/a LOADING CONDITION
TESTS
2.1 Specimens
In order to investigate the mechanical behavior of
joints, specimens that contain a single joint are
employed in the loading tests. The specimens used
in this research are rectangular prisms for which
there is a cross section of 42 x 42 mm and a height of
80 min. The specimens contain a single joint, which
is located at the center (lengthwise) of each
specimen and is approximately aligned on the
horizontal plane, as shown in Figure 1. The
specimens are made of mortar. The combination
ratio of cement: sand: water is 1: 2: 0.65. The
curing age in water is 28 days. Cylindrical
specimens are also prepared under the same
conditions (the same combination ratio and curing
age) and are employed in the uniaxial compressive
tests so as to investigate the mechanical properties of
the material. From the uniaxial compressive tests on
the cylindrical specimens, the uniaxial compressive
strength and Young's modulus are found to be 28.9
MPa and 3.02 x 10aM/a, respectively.
In order to discuss the influence of the natural
415
! 2 = 42 mm
! 1 = 42 mm
h = 80 m
Figure 1. Specimen.
Table I The value of JRC and the order of the loading
angles.
Specimen JRC 0 degree 15 derees 30 derees 45 derees
A 12.61 0 0 0 0
B 13.07 0 0 0 0
C 16.68 0 0 0 0
joint surface roughness, three kinds of natural joint
surface roughness are chosen through recovered core
samples. Aer choosing the natural joint surface
roughness, impressions are made of them. Using
these impressions, reproduced mortar specimens are
then created. The impressions are made of Silicon
rubber (TSE350, made by Toshiba Silicon).
Variations in joint surface roughness contained in the
samples made it possible to carry out many types of
constant r/loading condition tests.
Before performing the tests, measurements of the
joint surface roughness are taken with a non-contact
type of laser-scan micrometer which is situated on a
three-dimensional stage, a 3-D Roughness Profiler
(Tanimoto and Kishida, 1995). Data acquisition is
fully automated by a computer, and each joint
surface roughness is measured at 0.5 mm intervals.
A bird's-eye view of the measured joint surface
roughness is shown in Figure 2. Based on the digital
data of joint surface roughness, Barton's JRC (Joint
Roughness Coefficient) (Barton, 1973) in each
specimen is calculated using the relationship
between JRC and Z2 (Tse and Cruden, 1979). The
calculated JRC value for each specimen is presented
in Table 1.
The relationship between the loading direction
and the joint of each specimen is shown in Figure 2
The value of 0 formed where the joint inclination
and the loading direction cross each other, and it is
defined as the loading angle in this paper. These
three specimens have been previously set up in
various degrees of loading angle 0, and then the tests
have been started. The order of the loading angles
used in this research work is also presented in Table
1.
2.2 Testing apparatus and an outline of the tests
The testing apparatus is shown in Figure 3. Each
specimen is separated into upper and lower parts by
the rock joint. The upper part is completely fixed to
the loading frame, while the lower part can move
freely in both vertical and horizontal directions. The
linear-value displacement transducer (LVDT) fixed
on the loading frame measures the vertical and the
horizontal displacements of each specimen (v and h,
respectively), and the strain of the intact rock parts is
measured by the strain gauge. Since the strain of the
intact rock is measured at the lower and the upper
parts (a and b, respectively), the total displacement
of intact rock u,,, can be calculated using this stress
Compressive load P is worked through the load cell.
Figure 4 illustrates the image of the specimen
deformation and the measuring parameters. Since
compressive load P can be broken down into normal
and shear directions on the rock joint, the tests are
assumed to be a kind of direct shear test under a
constant r/crloading condition.
As mentioned above, the upper part of the
specimen is completely fixed and the lower part of
the specimen can move freely in both vertical and
horizontal directions in the device developed in this
research work. Thus, the main purpose is to apply
the load to the rock joint under various loading
angles. In other words, the influence of the
relationship between the loading direction and the
(a) SpecimenA (b) Specimen B (c) Specimen C
Figure 2. Bird's-eye view of the natural joint surface roughness.
416
!i?- %'.. L VDT
I .157''{... (vertical)
LUST
I -'.::.. " '2:2:22:2:2:2:2;2'22: : 2 :'.i.:i.:.:.:.:. :2:2:2:2:2:2:2:'.:2.2: i .i4.2,i "
'":: Load cel
Fige 3. Testing appams.
P
le
Joint
P(Load )
Figme 4. e relationhip bemeen e jolt inclination d
e loading dkecfion
joint inclination can be discussed, and the
mechanical properties of the rock joint of each
specimen can be determined under various loading
directions.
In this study, tests are performed with four types
of loading angles, namely, 0, 15, 30, and 45 degrees,
as described in Table 1. The 45-degree loading angle
is the maximum because of the limit for this testing
apparatus. Five steps of cyclic loading and
unloading are performed under the stress control
method, as shown in Figure 5. The loading level
increases, step by step, and the maximum load for
each step is determined until the normal stress on the
rock joint reaches 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 MPa,
respectively. The loading velocity in the vertical
direction is 2.0 MPa/min.
8
6
' 4
z
2
0 2 6 12 20 30
Time [mitt ]
Figure 5. Loading pattern
3 RESULTS OF THE CONSTANT r/or LOADING
CONDITION TESTS
3.1 Deformation of intact rock parts
In this section, the deformation of intact rock parts is
discussed through the constant r/crloading condition
tests. As mentioned above, uniaxial compresslye
tests were performed using cylindrical specimens,
and the results were described such that Young's
modulus and Poisson's ratio were 1.39 x 104 MPa
and 0.174, respectively.
On the other hand, Young's modulus obtained
through the constant r/or loading condition tests is
measured to be 1.59, 1.70, 2.25, and 1.82 x 104MPa
on the 0, 15, 30, and 45-degree loading angles for
Specimen A. It is confirmed that Young's modulus,
obtained through the constant r/or loading condition
tests, is larger than that obtained through the uniaxial
compresslye tests. The same tendencies can be
confirmed for Specimens B and C. Since the
specimens in the constant r/or loading tests are
covered with steel and are laterally fixed, as shown
in Figures 3 and 4, Young's modulus yields larger
measurements. When applying Young's modulus
obtained through the constant r/crloading tests to the
numerical simulation of a jointed rock mass,
therefore, this trend must be considered.
3.2 Deformation of the rock joints
In performing the constant der loading condition
tests, both the vertical and the horizontal
displacements along the testing device can be
measured through LVDT. And, the vertical load can
be measured through the load cell. The purpose of
the tests is to clarify the mechanical behavior of the
rock joints through these data. Then, the load and the
vertical and the horizontal displacements are
transformed into normal and shear directions on the
rock joints, and the mechanical behavior of the rock
417
Uintact = a + b
Figure 6. Measuring parameters.
joints is discussed. First of all, the calculating flow
of the stress and the displacements on the rock joints
are described in the following.
The displacements of the rock joints are
described using normal and shear displacements Ujn
and u, respectively, as shown in Figure 6, and they
are calculated by the following equations:
uj, = vcosO- hsinO- Uintact
(1)
ujs = vsinO+ hcosO (2)
where v and h are the vertical and the horizontal
displacements measuring LIT, respectively, and 0
is the loading angle. On the other hand, the normal
and the shear stress on the rock joints (rr and r,
respectively) can be calculated by the following
equations:
PcosO
a- (3)
PsinO
r- (4)
where P is the applying load and A is the joint
contact area. The relationship, which is formed
between the Equations (3) and (4), is r/rris equal to
tanO. In this study, therefore, the tests are carried out
under a constant r/rr loading condition on the rock
joint of each specimen.
Since the joint contact area changes with the
performance of the tests, the area can be calculated
as the following equation:
A = l,(l: - (5)
where l and 12 are the lengths of the specimens
shown in Figure 1. The stress - displacement curves
of both the normal and the shear directions on the
rock joint are described in Figure 7.
4 MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF TI-[E ROCK
JOINTS
Based on the results of the constant drr loading
condition tests, the mechanical properties of the rock
joints are discussed. Considering the mechanical
properties of the rock joints, the normal and the
shear stiffness must be determined. In this section,
therefore, the normal and the shear stiffness of the
joints are determined, and the mechanical properties
of the rock joints and the relationship between the
normal and the shear behavior of the rock joints are
discussed.
4.1 Estimation of the normal stiffness
First of all, the determination of normal stiffness kn
is introduced. Figure 7(a) shows the results of the 0-
degree loading angle test. Since the loading angle is
equal to 0 degrees, only the normal stress - normal
displacement curve on the rock joint can be obtained.
The traditional method for determining normal
stiffness kn closely resembles the normal stress -
normal displacement curve to a function. And, the
tangential gradient of the approximate function is
calculated so as to determine the normal stiffness kn.
In order to calculate the value of kn, therefore, the
approximate functions of the normal stress -joint
normal displacement are described. Bandis (1980)
and Brown & Scholz (1986) presented, respectively,
the following empirical equations:
b
Ujn -- + C ( a, b, c: constant ) (6)
a+&
Ujn = a + ptn rr ( a, ,8: constant )
(7)
Equations (6) and (7) are then applied to the results
and normal stiffness k, is determined. In Figure 7(a),
a permanent deformation can be confirmed for each
loading and unloading cycle. The permanent
deformation for the first loading and unloading cycle
is larger than that of the other cycles. This is the
reason why the influence of the contacting joint
surface roughness under the initial condition occurs
in the first loading and unloading cycle. In the other
cycles, each permanent deformation is almost
constant and each tangential gradient of the
unloading curves is almost equal. The normal
stiffness is represented by the elastic behavior of the
normal deformation of each rock joint. Therefore,
418
8
4
2
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Joint displacement [mm]
(a) The loading angle; 0 degree
Normal direction .:.
10 - - ........ Shear direction
4
2
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Joint displacement [mm]
(b) The loading angle; 15 degrees
.,/ /////...,Z.. ' 5...::i::'> 5q:",.,z '
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Joint Displacement [mm]
(c) The loading angle; 30 degrees
8
2
: [ ......... Shear direction I
" "!) ' . . :...
...--' ?3' .O..'
.......... ,..."5;5'.
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Joint Displacement [mm]
(d) The loading angle; 45 degrees
Figure 7. The stress - displacement curves of both the normal and the shear directions on the rock joint (Specimen A)
the normal stiffness is determined using the
unloading curve in the final loading and unloading
cycle. In the case of the approximation of Equation
(7), a higher correlation coefficient (R = 0.998) can
be obtained. When Equation (7) is applied to the
results, the normal displacements grow to an
unlimited value if the normal stress becomes infinity.
However, this behavior is not realistic because the
normal displacement of a rock joint is actually finite
and a maximum joint closure exists. In the case of
the approximation of Equation (6), a higher
correlation coefficient (R = 0.999) can also be
obtained. If the normal stress becomes infinity,
Equation (6) converges the value (b + c) and the
maximum joint closure can be obtained. Therefore,
it is thought that Equation (6) is more accurate than
Equation (7) in resembling the normal stress -
normal displacement curve. In Equation (8), normal
stiffness kn is determined in order to calculate the
tangential gradient of the normal stress - normal
displacement curve on the rock joint using Equation
(6).
k.- act _ (a + or) 2 (8)
d ttjna.b
8
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Joint normal displacement [mm]
Figure 8. The normal stress - normal joint displacement
Equation (8) shows that normal stiffness k, is a
function of the normal stress o:
Figure 8 presents the normal stress - normal
displacement curves for a rock joint in the final
unloading cycle. The curves are obtained through a
O-degree loading angle test. Since the curves are
similar to each other, the difference in specimens,
namely, the difference in joint surface roughness, is
not clearly shown. It is thought that the normal
deformation of the rock joint and/or normal stiffness
kn does not depend on the shape of joint surface
roughness. Some samples of the normal stiffness kn,
419
Loading
angle
delFee) a
0 2.02
15 1.60
30 1.93
45 2.93
Table 2. The normal stress (at a = 2.0 MPa) and the values ofa by and c
SpecimenA Specimen B Specimen C
b c ( x 104 MPa) a b c ( x 104 MPa) a b c
0.163 0.132 4.74 1.43 0.340 0.147 2.80 1.97 0.144 0.164
0.390 0.108 2.52 3.54 0.368 0.168 2.36 2.10 0.452 0.125
0.487 0.091 1.18 3.58 0.358 0.176 2.43 4.38 0.347 0.261
0.239 0.108 3.46 0.943 0.107 0.005 3.74 1.63 0.180 0.030
10 4 MPa)
4.80
2.15
2.67
4.48
Table 3. The shear stiffness of the rock joints.
degrees 30 degrees 45 degrees Direct shear test
Specimen (lx5103 MPa) ( x 103 MPa) ( x 103 MPa) x 103 MPa)
.4 9.65 6.85 6.13 3.52
B 9.46 7.84 4.65 4.12
C 3.64 4.98 3.28 3.42
( x 10 )
3.5 ''' I''
-I'-'
i'"'"":
. - - 4S-degree .....
"1 ! ' ..:4
.......
.....
0 ', ,,, i,,, ,,, ,,
2 4 6 8 10
Joint no stross [MPa]
Figure 9. The normal stifflless of each loading angle.
determined by Equation (8), are presented in Table 2.
In this case, the condition of the determination is set
at or= 2.0 MPa. Table 2 also presents the values for
a, b, and c in Equation (6).
Next, the results of the constant z'/cr loading
condition tests on a 15-degree loading angle are
shown in Figure 7(b). Both the normal stress -
normal joint displacement and the shear stress -
shear joint displacement curves are shown by the
solid line and the broken line, respectively. Applying
Equation (6) to the results of the normal stress -
shear joint displacement curves, a higher correlation
coefficient (R = 0.999) can also be obtained. In this
case, the values of a, b, and c are different than those
determined in the O-degree loading angle test. It is
confirmed that the loading angle affects the normal
deformation of the rock joint. And, it is thought that
the shear behavior contributes to the poor
correlation.
In the case of the 30 and 45-degree loading angle
tests, the stress -joint displacement curves of both
the normal and the shear directions on the rock joint
are shown in Figures 7(c) and (d), respectively.
Applying Equation (6) to the unloading normal
stress - normal joint displacement curves in the final
cycle, a higher correlation coefficient (R = 0.999; 30
degrees and 0.998; 45 degrees) can also be obtained.
And, different values for a, b, and c are calculated in
each case. As mentioned above, it is also confirmed
that the loading angles affect the normal deformation
of the rock joint.
The normal joint stiffness - normal stress
relations for each loading angle test are shown in
Figure 9. It is easily confumed that the normal
stiffness depends on the normal stress and increases
with increments in the normal stress. And, it can be
noticed that the normal stiffness decreases with
increments in the loading angles, except for the case
of the 45-degree loading angle.
Based on the results, normal stiffness k,
decreases with increments in the loading angle. With
increments in the loading angle, shear behavior
occurs and the contact condition of the joint surface
roughness becomes unstable. That is, since the
asperties of the joint surface roughness do not
engage smoothly, the limited allowance of the
deformation in the normal direction is clearly
appeared. On the other hand, k, on the 45-degree
loading angle increases compared with k on the 30-
degree loading angle. In the case of the 45-degree
loading angle, the dilation occurs with the shear
behavior, parts of the normal deformation on the
rock joint divide the dilation, and the normal
stiffness increases. The turning point is when the
dilation begins to affect the normal deformation on
the rock joint, and this phenomenon cannot be
grasped in detail with this apparatus.
4.2 Estimation of the shear stiffness
The broken lines in Figures 7(b), (c), and (d) show
the shear stress - shear joint displacement curves for
each loading angle. The permanent deformation of
the shear deformation is larger than that of the
normal deformation. Shear stiffness ks is determined
using these curves. First of all, the loading curves in
the initial cyclic loading are extracted until the shear
stress reaches 2.0 MPa, and the straight line is
estimated by the least-squares method. Finally, shear
stiffness ks, which is the gradient of an
approximately straight line, can be determined.
Table 3 shows shear stiffness ks. It is generally found
that shear stiffness ks varies inversely with.the
420
1.5
0.0 ,o, ' -' :. - -o- ,. . o- c -o . 3 - o - ~ ,.t
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Shear displacement [mini
Figure 10. Results of the direct shear tests on rock joints.
loading angle. This is the reason why the shear
displacement depends on the compressive pressure
in the normal direction. If the normal stress becomes
higher than the shear stress, it is hard for it to deform
in the shear direction. In other words, it is thought
that the shear displacement is larger under a higher
loading angle, such as 45 degrees, than the shear
displacement under a lower loading angle, such as
15 degrees.
Table 3 also presents the shear stiffness through
direct shear tests on rock joints using the same type
of specimens. Examples of the results of the direct
shear tests using Specimen A are shown in Figure 10.
In Figure 10, the shear displacement - shear stress
relation under various constant normal confining
conditions is described. The shear stiffness is
determined by the curve being extracted until the
peak shear stress. In Table 3, the shear stiffness
through the direct shear tests is almost in agreement
with that through the 45-degree loading angle test.
5 CONCLUSION
In order to understand the mechanical behavior of
rock joints, two mechanical properties of rock joints,
namely, k, and ks are taken for examination in this
study. To grasp the mechanical behavior of the rock
joints and the relationship between the combined
joint stiffness (k, and ks) and the loading angle
against the joints, the new testing apparatus, which
can be applied to a constant dry loading condition on
the rock joints, has been developed.
The results show that the joint stiffness varies
according to its dependency on the loading angles.
The tendency of the joint stiffness can be
qualitatively grasped under certain loading angles,
such as 0, 15, 30, and 45 degrees. And, the normal
joint stiffness can be determined as a function of the
normal stress. The normal behavior can be affected
by the dilation along the shear behavior due to
increments in the loading angle. On the other hand,
the shear stiffness can be determined using the shear
stress - shear joint displacement curves during the
initial cyclic loading. With increments in the loading
angle, the shear stiffness is closely associated with
that obtained through direct shear tests.
REFERENCES
Bandis, S.C. (1980): Experimental studies of scale
effects on shear strength and deformation of rock
joints, Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Leeds, UK;
Bandis, S. C., Luresden, A. C. and Barton, N. R.
(1981): Fundamentals of rock joint deformation,
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Science & Geomechanics Abstract, Vol.
20, No. 6; 249 - 268.
Barton, N. R. (1976): Rock Mechanics Review: The
shear strength of rock and rock joints,
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Mining Science & Geomechanics Abstract, Vol.
13; 255 - 279.
Brown, S.R. and Scholz, C.H. (1986): Closure of
rock joints, J. of Geophysical Research 91035 );
4939 - 4948.
Goodman, R.E. (1976): Methods of geological
engineering in discontinuous rocks, West
Publishing Company.
Goodman, R.E. (1984): Introduction to Rock
Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons; 135.
Tanimoto, C. and Kishida, K. (1995): Quantitative
determination of rock joint roughness by 3-D non-
contact type profiler and the maximum entropy
method, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
J.S.C.E., No. 511/IH-30; 57- 67. (in Japanese)
Tse, R. and Cruden, D. M. (1979): Estimating joint
roughness coefficients, International Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Science &
Geontechanics Abstract, Vol. 16; 303 - 307.
421