Use of the distinct element method to perform stress analysis in rock with non-persistent joints and to study the effect of joint geometry parameters on the strength and deformability of rock masses

SummaryTo use the distinct element method, it is necessary to discretize the problem domain into polygons in two dimensions (2 D) or into polyhedra in three dimensions (3 D). To perform distinct element stress analysis in a rock mass which contains non-persistent finite size joints, it is necessary to generate some type of fictitious joints so that when they are combined with the non-persistent joints, they discretize the problem domain into polygons in 2 D or into polyhedra in 3 D. The question arises as to which deformation and strength parameter values should be assigned to these fictitious joints so that they behave as intact rock. In this paper, linear elastic, perfectly-plastic constitutive models with the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion, including a tension cut-off, were used to represent the mechanical behaviour of both intact rock and fictitious joints. It was found that, by choosing the parameter values for the constitutive models as given below, it is possible to make the fictitious joints behave as intact rock, in a global sense.a)For both the intact rock and the fictitious joints, the same strength parameter values should be used.b)A joint shear stiffness (JKS) value for fictitious joints should be chosen to produce a shear modulus/JKS ratio (G/JKS) between 0.008 and 0.012 m.c)A joint normal stiffness/JKS ratio (JKN/JKS) between 2 and 3 should be chosen. The most appropriate value to choose in this range may be the Young's modulus/G value (E/G) for the particular rock. Some examples are given in the paper to illustrate how to use the distinct element method to perform stress analysis of rock blocks which contain non-persistent joints and to study the effect of joint geometry parameters on strength and deformability of rock masses.

[1]  Z. Bieniawski.  Determining rock mass deformability: experience from case histories , 1978 .

[2]  Richard E. Goodman,et al.  CLOSURE ON A MODEL FOR THE MECHANICS OF JOINTED ROCK , 1968 .

[3]  B. Ladanyi,et al.  Simulation Of Shear Behavior Of A Jointed Rock Mass , 1969 .

[4]  Z. T. Bieniawski,et al.  The significance of in situ tests on large rock specimens , 1975 .

[5]  Z. T. Bieniawski,et al.  The effect of specimen size on compressive strength of coal , 1968 .

[6]  R. Goodman.  Introduction to Rock Mechanics , 1980 .

[7]  Edwin T. Brown,et al.  Strength of Models of Rock with Intermittent Joints , 1970 .

[8]  B.H.G. Brady,et al.  Hybrid distinct element-boundary element analysis of jointed rock , 1986 .

[9]  H. R. Pratt,et al.  The effect of speciment size on the mechanical properties of unjointed diorite , 1972 .

[10]  P. Cundall.  A computer model for simulating progressive, large-scale movements in blocky rock systems , 1971 .

[11]  Herbert H. Einstein,et al.  Characterizing rock joint geometry with joint system models , 1988 .

[12]  Nicholas Anthony Lanney,et al.  Statistical description of rock properties and sampling. , 1978 .

[13]  F. Heuźe,et al.  Scale effects in the determination of rock mass strength and deformability , 1980 .

[14]  Herbert H. Einstein,et al.  MODEL STUDIES ON MECHANICS OF JOINTED ROCK , 1973 .

[15]  N. Barton,et al.  A heated flatjack test series to measure the thermomechanical and transport properties of in situ rock masses (heated block test) , 1982 .

[16]  P. Cundall,et al.  FORMULATION OF A THREE-DIMENSIONAL DISTINCT ELEMENT MODEL - PART II. MECHANICAL CALCULATIONS FOR MOTION AND INTERACTION OF A SYSTEM COMPOSED OF MANY POLYHEDRAL BLOCKS , 1988 .

[17]  P. A. Cundall,et al.  FORMULATION OF A THREE-DIMENSIONAL DISTINCT ELEMENT MODEL - PART I. A SCHEME TO DETECT AND REPRESENT CONTACTS IN A SYSTEM COMPOSED OF MANY POLYHEDRAL BLOCKS , 1988 .

[18]  E. T. Brown,et al.  EMPIRICAL STRENGTH CRITERION FOR ROCK MASSES , 1980 .

[19]  P. Kulatilake.  Estimating Elastic Constants and Strength of Discontinuous Rock , 1985 .