This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Aritra Banerjee M.Tech (Geotech.) (1st Year) Enrolment No: 12521006
• • • • • • Introduction Proposed Initiation of the Damage Process Approaches for Analysis of Damage Process Cohesion Loss due to Damage Process Proposed Criterion for Damage Initiation Conclusion
– So. Castro proposed that under high compression. the presence of jointing has little effect on the initiation of the damage process as compared to low in-situ stress zone. • In 1996. lab test on intact specimens can be used to assess initiation of rock damage. – Also. stress-induced damage processes begin around the opening – by nucleation and growth of extension fractures within intact rocks.Introduction • Fracture in compressive stress field is of great concern. 3 . • Our understanding of the damage and failure processes in brittle rock masses in deep excavation has improved in the last 2 decades.
Introduction (Contd. 4 . • For studying extension fracturing. Kaiser and Kim. spalling (or brittle failure) dominates over shear failure. Canada. • Damage initiation (DI) criterion is developed and verified by analysing excavation response at Neutrino Observatory in Sudbury. several theoretical micromechanical models are reviewed. found that depending on rock confinement.) • In 2008.
Proposed Initiation of Damage Process • Moderately Jointed Rock Mass – consist of rock containing upto 4 sets of discontinuities having – low persistence. • Damage onset is controlled by – inherent strength properties of intact rock and – their relationship to the magnitude and orientation of induced deviatoric stresses. • Classified as Good Quality. movement of wedges and discontinuities. RMR values > 70 or Q value >20 • At greater depth (high in-situ stresses). – not generally interconnected. have minor effect on damage initiation. but closely spaced. 5 . due to lack of kinematic freedom.
• Extension Fracturing – exhibits clean surfaces (no shear displacements) – nucleate from stress concentrators – forms at low angle (< 10°) – is sensitive to changes in the magnitude and direction of major principal stress(s1) (Castro .Proposed Initiation of Damage Process (Contd.1996).) • Extensive investigation and literature reviews suggest that initiation of damage process is dominated by – Nucleation – Propagation of extension fractures. 6 .
pore. – Empirical Approach • empirically match the field observations recorded around deep South African tunnels. 7 . • applies fracture mechanics principles to mathematically estimate the local stress distribution around the existing crack. or grain boundary).Approaches for Analysis of Damage Process • 2 Approaches: – Micromechanical Approach • considers growth of individual extension fractures from an existing stress concentrator (existing discontinuity.
Fig : Examples of crack models used to study the nucleation of extension cracks 8 .Micromechanical Approach • Several crack models have been used to explain the onset of cracking on a microscopic scale.
) Fig : Examples of crack models used to study the nucleation of extension cracks 9 .Micromechanical Approach (Contd.
Micromechanical Approach (Contd. Fig: Sliding and Open Crack Models 10 . • Both models can predict the initiation of damage due the growth of extension cracks (or wing cracks) from local indirect tensile stress concentrations around the tips of stress concentrators.) • Sliding and the open crack models are the ones most commonly used.
prediction in uncracked state).e.Micromechanical Approach (Contd. as shear deformation is resisted at high in-situ stresses. So.) • Difference b/w these 2 models: – Sliding crack model • estimates the induced principal stress around an inclined crack before the nucleation of extension cracks. – Open crack model • extension crack growth occurs when local st > intrinsic cohesive reserve or resistance of the rock material (i. • Open crack models were found to better represent extension fracturing at the field scale. friction is considered. 11 .
s3) at that point. where a (> 3. – The driving force is linearly proportional to the local principal stress difference.Micromechanical Approach (Contd. generally) is a constant for a given stress concentrator shape and orientation. extension cracks nucleate when the induced st > a critical value (depends on material property). – Induced st at a point is driven by a linear function of (s1 .) • Considerations for DI Criterion: – Rock is heterogeneous material • consisting of anisotropic crystals and structural weakness at all levels. – Under compressive loading.as3). expressed as (s1 . 12 . – Open crack model (assumption).
13 .Micromechanical Approach (Contd. – In addition to this geometric effect on the induced stresses.neglected in sliding models • cannot simulate growth of extension cracks that do not close under stress and/or are approx. stress level (ssc) at which stable crack growth occurs in UCS tests is proportional to 3 to 5 times the tensile strength. – Open Crack Model: Cohesion component of the intact rock is fully mobilized at the onset of damage or crack initiation. – As per Trollope's model (1968). aligned to direction of s1. depending on n. • In brittle rocks.): – Co-axial Stress . • For the nucleation of extension cracks s1 > (6 to 10) times s3. the major principal stress has to exceed the cohesion reserve of the material.) • Considerations for DI Criterion (Contd.
1980) or. 1979). Degree of fracturing. f (3s 1 field s 3 field ) sc 14 . • For D-shaped tunnels.4 m wide square or D-shaped tunnels and ore pass system in gold mines of S. shows that – extension fracturing is controlled by major principal far-field stress.A.25 to 0.2 sc (Hoek. Brown. max stngt > 0.4 sc • By Back-analysing 20 km of tunnels (Wiseman.Empirical Approach • Observations from 3 .. – Onset of rock mass damage starts when: • s1 field > 0.
but locally the continuity is gradually lost • because the bonding between grains or particles of the rock is gradually broken.Cohesion Loss due to Damage Process • Loss of cohesion – overall integrity is maintained. • Macrofracture formation changes the internal structure of the rock mass and degrades its cohesion reserve. 15 . • Fracture initiation & damage accumulation processes cause a reduction of the intrinsic cohesion of the intact. compression tests on coarse-grained Wombeyan marble. • Verified by lab. by applying temperature stresses. hard rock.
) Fig :Triaxial test results on intact and granulated Wombeyan marble (Gerogiannopoulous.Cohesion Loss due to Damage Process (Contd. Brown 1978) and Hoek-Brown (1988. 2002) 16 .
17 . a gradual loss of cohesive strength occurred by – decreasing the cohesion reserve from the intact rock to a residual value without mobilizing the frictional component.Cohesion Loss due to Damage Process (Contd. • Damage initiation occurred when the load first exceeded about 30 to 40% of the Lac-du-Bonnet granite peak strength.) Loss of Cohesion due to Cyclic Loading • By applying a compressive cyclic loading in the Lac-duBonnet granite specimens.
• Hypothesis : with stress rotation. reopening of existing cracks and the nucleation and propagation of new cracks in different directions will cause a decrease in Brazilian tensile strength (Gramberg. 18 .Cohesion Loss due to Damage Process (Contd. 1989).) Loss of Cohesion due to Brazilian tests • A stress rotation research project was started at the Geomechanics Research Centre at Laurentian University in Canada.
• Brazilian Tensile strength reduced by 20% for Granite samples and 15 – 20% for Norite samples.Cohesion Loss due to Damage Process (Contd.) • Types of stress rotation (both. again stressed to failure at 0° (Granite & Norite) . Stress rotation in 1 direction – 0° to 90° diametral loading. 2. 19 . Stress rotation in 2 directions – preloading from 0° to 90° and 90° to 0° (Norite). diametral loading every 22.5°): 1.
20 .Loss of Cohesion due to Brazilian tests (Contd.) Fig: Brazilian tensile strengths for granite and norite samples with and without pre-loading.
Cohesive reserve and tensile strength decreases with damage initiation. Cohesive reserve is directly proportional to ssc. 21 . Lab tests on intact specimens can give valid information b. • Salient Features: a. d. Extension crack nucleate when st > critical stress (comp. e. loading) st is driven by a linear function of (s1 – s3).Proposed Criterion for Damage Initiation • Onset of damage in high in-situ stressed and low confinement condition for jointed rock mass is dominated by development and propagation of extension fractures. c.
) • Kaiser (2008) and Martin & Christiansson (2009) – a tri-linear or S-shaped (linear) failure envelope best represents the rock mass behaviour. Fig: Tri-linear behaviour of rock mass 22 .Proposed Criterion for Damage Initiation (Contd.
Canada. McCreath. – average ssc = 76 MPa (34 % of sc) ( Castro.Proposed Criterion for Damage Initiation (Contd. • Successfully predicted depth of DI zones in 2070 m deep Sudbury Neutrino Observatory cavern area. Martin & Read (1996) for analysing rock mass around Mine-by Test Tunnel at AECL. – has been used earlier by Tresca (1864). ssc is in the range of 25 % to 40 % of sc (Bruce. 23 • Criterion of the form (s1 – s3) = a critical constant . • ssc can be estimated using UCS with strain gauges. 1996). (s1 – s 3 ) s sc where. 1966). S.A.) • Proposed zones of rock mass damage initiation can be estimated by . Wiseman(1979).
• Estimation of areal extent and depth of potential DI zones assists the design of openings excavated in a moderately jointed. • Lab tests on intact specimens can give valid information • DI criterion can be applied to elastic numerical analysis to identify potential DI zones around deep openings. presence of jointing has little effect on initiation of damage initiation process. 24 . at SNO.Conclusion • Field experience showed that – extension fracturing is dominant in damage initiation within the intact rock in a moderately jointed rock mass. – Also. highly stressed brittle rock mass.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.