COLE POLYTECHNIQUE

Shear strength of discontinuities

FDRALE DE LAUSANNE
E P F L - LM R

1. Rock behaviour modelling

Shear strength of
discontinuities 2. Plane smooth joint

3. Idealised rough joint

J. Abbruzzese, V. Labiouse

LMR
LABORATOIRE DE 4. Real rough joint
MCANIQUE DES ROCHES
Rock mechanics

Shear strength of discontinuities Rock behaviour modelling

E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

1. Rock behaviour modelling A rock mass is a complex natural system

constituted by:

g a solid matrix (composed by minerals),

2. Plane smooth joint whose characteristics mainly depend on its
origin and interaction with physical and
chemical agents;
3. Idealised rough joint g discontinuities : any cessation of continuity
into the rock mass (such as joints, shear
zones, bedding planes, fractures) originated
4. Real rough joint by physical, chemical, geological and
geomorphological factors.

1
 Rock behaviour modelling Shear strength of discontinuities
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

At shallow depths, where stresses are low,

the behaviour of a rock mass is highly
1. Rock behaviour modelling
influenced by the discontinuities.

In these conditions, rupture of the intact 2. Plane smooth joint

mass hardly happens and the rock failure is
controlled by sliding on the discontinuities.
3. Idealised rough joint
For stability analyses: necessity to
evaluate the factors that control the shear
strength of the discontinuities 4. Real rough joint

Plane smooth joint Plane smooth joint

E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

Hypothesis: = tan
n plane and smooth joint surface 2 > 1 2
1 > 0 1
0 0
0 1 2 n
Observed mechanical behaviour:
Stress vs. strain diagram Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion
n shear stress quickly increases
with deformation level, until a 2 > 1 - Linear friction model without cohesion: c* = 0
maximum value is reached; 1 > 0 - Failure criterion (pure friction): = n tan
then, such value remains 0
approximately constant Peak strength equal to residual strength

No dilatancy

2
 Shear strength of discontinuities Idealised rough joint (Patton, 1966)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

Hypothesis:
1. Rock behaviour modelling
n regular saw-tooth
roughness (asperities with
inclination i);
2. Plane smooth joint
Observed mechanical
p
behaviour: r
1 >> 0
3. Idealised rough joint n Shear stress quickly reaches a 0
peak value. Then, increasing
the deformation level, the
1
4. Real rough joint shear stress stabilises to a 0
residual value d

Dilatancy Sliding and dilatancy for low normal stresses

E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R
p
When a shear stress is applied on a rough Low normal stresses:
surface joint, sliding occurs by climbing if the applied normal stress n r
1 >> 0
the asperities: remains below a critical value n,crit 0
- to trigger a slide, it is at first required the upper rock block slides
that the shear stress is capable to remove on the joint surface by climbing
p 1
the embedding condition due to the the asperity angle (in i direction) 0
asperities on the contact surface; r d
- the stress to apply is consequently 1 >> 0
higher than on a smooth surface. 0 r
the peak strength during sliding p
r
The shear strength of the joint
1 p = n tan ( + i) r
will consequently increase; 0 the residual strength after sliding c* p
The material (rock) will expand d r = n tan r + i n,crit n

3
Shearing of asperities for high normal stresses Idealised rough joint (Patton, 1966)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R
p p
High normal stresses: Low normal stresses:

if the applied normal stress n is r

1 >> 0 p = n tan ( + i) n n,crit r
1 >> 0
above the critical value n,crit 0 0
the asperities are sheared and the Friction angle ( + i)
Dilatancy d
upper rock block moves almost
1 No cohesion 1
horizontally (no dilatancy) 0 0
d High normal stresses: d

r p = n tan r + c* n n,crit r
the peak strength before shearing p p
r r
p = n tan r + c* r Friction angle r r
No dilatancy
the residual strength after shearing c* p c* p

Cohesion c*
r = n tan r + i n,crit n with n,crit the critical normal stress + i n,crit n

Idealised rough joint (Patton, 1966) Shear strength of discontinuities

E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R
p
Given:

= friction angle on asperities surface r

1 >> 0
1. Rock behaviour modelling
r = friction angle on the joint surface 0

it can be assumed: 2. Plane smooth joint

1
= r 0
d

The residual strength after the shearing r 3. Idealised rough joint

p
of the asperities is: r
r

r = n tan r c* p 4. Real rough joint

+ i n,crit n

4
 Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
Hypothesis:
n the joint surface presents an
irregular roughness (asperities
with variable inclination i);
Observed mechanical behaviour:
n progressive rupture of the
asperities and some dilatancy
n The Mohr-Coulomb criterion is
not fully applicable to describe
the relation between shear
strength and normal stress.
Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
Bartons empirical model:
JCS
p = n tan JRC log10 + r
n
p = peak shear strength
n = applied normal stress
JRC = Joint Roughness Coefficient
JCS = Joint wall Compressive Strength
r = residual friction angle
Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R
p
Bartons failure criterion
r
Laboratory results obtained Test performed on a gneiss sample
by means of a shear testing
machine.
The test is performed
keeping a constant applied
d normal stress.
The circles represent the
p peak value of the shear
r
r strength, while the crosses
describe the residual strength
level.
n
Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R
Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC)
JCS
p = n tan JRC log10 + r
n
JRC is a number varying in the interval 0 20 and represents
the relevance of roughness in defining rocks shear strength
(smooth surfaces: JRC = 0; very rough surfaces: JRC = 20).
JRC can be estimated by:
1. comparing the real profile of the asperities with standard
p
r profiles
r
2. performing a tilt test
3. measuring length and amplitude of the asperity profile
and using a graphic correlation with JRC.
n
5
 Real rough joint (Barton, 1973) Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC) Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC)

1. Comparing the real profile of the Roughness profiles and 2. Tilt test
corresponding JRC values
asperities with standard profiles - rock sample constituted by two parts
separated by a joint;
- Barton comb is used on site - the sample is placed on a plane, slowly
to reproduce the real roughness tilted until sliding between the parts occurs;
profile; - the angle of inclination is measured;
- the obtained profile is - JRC is calculated by means of the
compared with the standard equation: 1
profiles; JCS n0 = h cos2
JRC = ( r ) log10 normal stress in situ on a
n 0
- a value of JRC is assigned to
surface inclined by .
evaluate the joints roughness.

Real rough joint (Barton, 1973) Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC) Joint wall Compressive Strength (JCS)

3. Measure of asperity profiles JCS
p = n tan JRC log10 + r
n
length and amplitude
JCS represents the compressive strength of the joint,
- the length of the asperity profile is
measured on the wall of the joint itself.
measured;
- the maximum amplitude of the
JCS can be estimated by:
asperity profile is measured;
- a graphic correlation allows to 1. comparing the alteration degree of the joint with the
determine the corresponding value of degree of alteration of the rock;
the Joint Roughness Coefficient. 2. performing on site measures with the Schmidt rebound
hammer.

6
 Real rough joint (Barton, 1973) Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)
E P F L - LM R E P F L - LM R

Joint wall Compressive Strength (JCS) Joint wall Compressive Strength (JCS)
1. Comparison between degrees of 2. Schmidt rebound hammer
alteration
The Schmidt rebound
The degree of alteration of the joint is compared to the one of hammer is used in field
the rock. The value of JCS is then determined by means of a observations to evaluate
relation with the compressive strength of the intact rock. the Joint Compressive
Strength. Depending on the inclination of
Degree of alteration of the joint surface: the hammer, the measure allows to know
- equal to rock: JCS = c (rock) the Schmidt hardness. This parameter is
- slighly higher than rock: JCS = 0.5 c (rock) combined with the unit weight of the rock
- much higher than rock: JCS = 0.1 c (rock) to obtain the value of JCS.

Real rough joint (Barton, 1973)

E P F L - LM R

Bartons empirical model:

JCS
p = n tan JRC log10 + r
n
- the first term in parentheses represents the dilation angle
(contribution of dilatancy to the shear strength)
- the more the joint surface is altered, the lower is the value of
JRC and JCS and (as a consequence) of p
- the less the joints surfaces are embedded, the lower is the
value of JRC (and p)
- higher values of JRC give high dilation angles