A Benchmark Experiment to Assess Factors Affecting Tilt Test Results for Sawcut Rock Surfaces

From the earliest studies on the topic, plane sliding techniques, usually known as tilt tests, have shown contradictory features. On the one hand, they reflect on a small-scale basic principles regarding definition of the friction angle and can reproduce conditions very similar to those of the sliding of blocks on rock slopes; furthermore, tilt angle results agree with friction angles derived from shear and pull tests (Hencher 1977; Muralha 1996). On the other hand, the literature includes several reports of erratic results and it is recognized that even apparently smooth surfaces are actually rough at the microscopic level (Hencher and Richards 2015). Thus, adhesion and textural interlocking may contribute to the variability and the nonreproducibility of tilt test results. A number of authors have carried out simple tilt tests in the past, and several examples illustrate the above-mentioned arguments. Thus, Hencher (2012) observed extreme variability in the results of tilt tests; Nicholson (1994) found that friction angles for sawcut Berea sandstone in direct shear tests varied by 12.5 , despite great attention paid to sample preparation and reproducibility; Coulson (1972) demonstrated that the friction angle of planar surfaces of rock varied with surface finish; Krahn and Morgenstern (1979) reported similar variation for surfaces prepared in different ways and with different surface finishes; and Kveldsvik et al. (2008) found that the basic friction angle for a rock slope, derived from tilt testing of core, varied between 21 and 36.4 . These great differences in measured tilt angles are mainly attributed to different surface finishing and to wear of the rock contacts (Pérez-Rey et al. 2015, 2016), although other reasons, such as testing and ambient conditions, cannot be ruled out. Mehrishall et al. (2016) revealed that the residual friction coefficients of grinded joint surfaces and of rough rock surfaces were almost identical. This manuscript contains interesting findings in rock mechanics practice, derived from large efforts to test the same rocks under different conditions and different laboratories. At the same time, this manuscript presents part of the work which will be used to prepare a Suggested Method on Tilt Testing. It is published in the form of a Technical Note, although its length exceeds what is generally accepted for this type of publication.

[1]  Farrokh Nadim,et al.  Alternative approaches for analyses of a 100,000 m3 rock slide based on Barton–Bandis shear strength criterion , 2008 .

[2]  L. Alejano,et al.  Considerations on the Laboratory Estimate of the Basic Friction Angle of Rock Joints , 2014 .

[3]  S. Hencher Discussion of Alejano, Gonzalez and Muralha (2012) , 2012, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[4]  M. Sharifzadeh,et al.  An Experimental Study on Normal Stress and Shear Rate Dependency of Basic Friction Coefficient in Dry and Wet Limestone Joints , 2016, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[5]  S. R. Hencher,et al.  Assessing the Shear Strength of Rock Discontinuities at Laboratory and Field Scales , 2015, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[6]  Glenn A. Nicholson A Test is Worth a Thousand Guesses - A Paradox , 1994 .

[7]  D. H. Kim,et al.  The Application of Normal Stress Reduction Function in Tilt Tests for Different Block Shapes , 2016, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[8]  J. Coulson Shear Strength of Flat Surfaces in Rock , 1972 .

[9]  Leandro Alejano,et al.  Rock Engineering and Rock Mechanics: Structures in and on Rock Masses , 2014 .

[10]  Norbert R. Morgenstern,et al.  THE ULTIMATE FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE OF ROCK DISCONTINUITIES , 1979 .

[11]  D. Cawsey,et al.  A SIMPLE SLIDING APPARATUS FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF ROCK JOINT FRICTION , 1976 .

[12]  J. Ruiz,et al.  Measurement of the basic friction angle of planar rock discontinuities with three rock cores , 2019, Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment.

[13]  Leandro R. Alejano,et al.  Comparison of Different Techniques of Tilt Testing and Basic Friction Angle Variability Assessment , 2012, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[14]  L. Alejano,et al.  Effect of Time and Wear on the Basic Friction Angle of Rock Discontinuities , 2015 .

[15]  Resat Ulusay,et al.  Assessment of basic friction angles of various rock types from Turkey under dry, wet and submerged conditions and some considerations on tilt testing , 2016, Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment.

[16]  Leandro R. Alejano,et al.  Response by the Authors to S. R. Hencher’s Discussion of the Paper “Comparison of Different Techniques of Tilt Testing and Basic Friction Angle Variability Assessment , 2012, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.

[17]  L. Alejano,et al.  The Role of Tilting Rate and Wear of Surfaces on Basic Friction Angle Testing , 2016 .