Modelización de la anisotropía

de los macizos rocosos

Dr. Alejo O. Sfriso

Universidad de Buenos Aires materias.fi.uba.ar/6408 asfriso@fi.uba.ar
SRK Consulting (Argentina) latam.srk.com asfriso@srk.com.ar
AOSA www.aosa.com.ar asfriso@aosa.com.ar

Isotropía, anisotropía, ortotropía

Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

• Isotropía: mismas propiedades Axial

en todas las direcciones Radial
(rocas ígneas intactas) Circunfe-
• Ortotropía: dos o tres ejes rencial
ortogonales de simetría es.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Material_ortótropo
(algunas rocas sedimentarias)
• Anisotropía: propiedades
diferentes en diferentes
direcciones

2
Aliviadero Caracoles

1
 60 Z. Gao, J. Zhao / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 57–69

z 3.2. Hardening law

(a) σz
θ =0 σ1
y The following evolution law for H i
σ2
x Gch f
θ σ3 dH ¼ hdLir H ¼ hdLi
Hpr
ðM f # HÞ

θ = 60 where rH denotes the evolution directio

θ = 300
I I σ2 than or equal to zero; dL is a loading
σ1 Macauley bracket with hxi = 0 when x
II II
Estrategias de modelización III III
σ3
ch is a positive constant. Following Li an
et al. [13], we introduce the following f
for the effect of fabric anisotropy on th
de anisotropía θ = 240
σx
σ3 θ = 120
σy
f ¼ exp½#kðA þ 1Þ'
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

Medio continuo
• Anisótropía elástica / elastoplástica
• Juntas difusas
• Interfases distribuidas
• Interfases explícitas
• Mesomecánica (SRM)
θ = 180 σ1
where k is a positive model parameter. E
σ2 is a decreasing function of A. This is
observations that, under otherwise id
(b)
sponse of a soil becomes softer as the m
tion deviates away from the direction
with this change) [42,59]. Note that in
compression with the axis of deposit
Anisótropo compression direction, A = #1, such th
of this shear mode makes it suitable to
model calibration, which will be discus
Experimental observations [1,58] sh
is gradually weakened due to the deve
Isótropo tion, which leads to significant degrada
ing the post peak stage. In the prese
relation between the rate of de-bondin
(Gao & Zhao 2012)
strain increment is assumed,

Modelos de contacto/bloques dr0 ¼ hdLir 0

where
• UDEC/3DEC (
(c) r0 ¼
#mðH=M f Þ2000 r0 for r0 > 0
• PFC 0 for r0 6 0
where r0 denotes the current triaxial t
• Slope model rial and m is a non-negative model para
law ensures that r0 is always less than o

3
• SRK: Frack_Rock (Gibson) cess of de-bonding proceeds steadily w
reaches zero. It is assumed that elastic
(Gibson 2016)
de-bonding in this evolution law. Since
ial tensile strength r0i is determined
state of cemented sand (see the case
shown in Fig. 2), the term (H/Mf)2000 is u
rate to become very small before the p

Fig. 1. (a) Definition of the angle h and partition of the deviatoric plane under the
3.3. Dilatancy and flow rule
true triaxial test condition (after [46]); (b) the yield surface in the three-
dimensional space and (c) the yield loci in the deviatoric plane.
Dilatancy relation is the cornerstone
sand. To incorporate the effect of bon
into the dilatancy of sand, we propose t
tion based on the work by Li and Dafa
tests if both the stress direction and the fabric orientation are set to
align in the same fixed coordinate, such as the cases shown in depv d1
D ¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ¼ R ðM p dC dF
Fluencia anisotrópica 2=3deij deij expð hdLiÞ
p p
Fig. 1a, the yield surface can be plotted as shown in Fig. 1b (the yield
surfaces do not cross the origin of the coordinate system due to the
existence of bonding) and Fig. 1c (yield loci in the deviatoric plane where depv is the plastic volumet
dentro de la mecánica del continuo
with different values of hardening parameter). The isotropic failure
surface is shown in the deviatoric plane in comparison with the
(¼ depij #depv dij =3) is the plastic deviato
positive model parameter; Mp is the pha
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

anisotropic one. Note that in Fig. 1a we denote the angle between tio measured in conventional triaxial c
the current stress state with the vertical stress axes in the deviatoric ded samples. The role of the denomina
plane by h, and the deviatoric plane is partitioned into three zones the volume change, especially when
Los modelos de plasticidad simples son isotrópicos
as shown in Fig. 1a. The same convention will be followed in the
subsequent sections.
the sample is sheared to the critical sta
deviatoric strain will not be limited. As
(p.ej. Mohr-Coulomb o Hoek-Brown)

Las discontinuidades agregan mecanismos adicionales de

deformación anisotrópica (modelos de juntas difusas)

2
 Incremental Incremental
displacements Shear strains
γ= 0, c=1, φ=0
E1 = E2
γ= 0, c=1, φ=0
E1 = E2

Modelling Rock in Plaxis

Fluencia anisotrópica
dentro de la mecánica del continuo
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

• No hay “distancia” entre discontinuidades: siempre

“existe” una discontinuidad en la posición desfavorable
Jointed Rock
• Limitación en model,
2D: sólo 2D Example
Jointed
es válido Rock model, 2D Example
si las discontinuidades
son normales al modelo
α = 0° α = 30°
1 Jointed Rock model, 2D Example
nted Rock model, 2D Example 1

α1= 30° (Waterman 2010) (Waterman 2010)

Plastic Plastic
points points
Incremental Incremental
Incremental Inc
Plastic Plastic Shear strains She
points displacements points displacements

Incremental Incremental
Incremental Incremental
5
displacements γ= 0,Juntas
c=1, φ=0horizontales
Shear strains
displacements
Juntas
γ= 0, c=1, φ=0 inclinadas
Shear strains
E1 = E2 E1 = E2

= 0, c=1, φ=0 γ= 0, c=1, φ=0

1 = E2 E1 = E2

Discontinuidades explícitas
CG2 - Buenos Aires, Argentina - Octobre 2010
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

CG2 - Buenos Aires,Superficies

Argentina -pre-definidas
Octobre 2010en el modelo 5
con propiedades resistentes propias
Jointed
Ventajas Rock model, 2D Example
α•1= Fallas
30° y otras estructuras bien
ted Rock model, 2D Example
caracterizadas, no “promediadas”
° • Ablandamiento (de discontunuidad)
no induce dependencia de la malla
Desventajas
Plastic
• Requiere caracterización mecánica points
Incremental
• Modelización
Plastic difícil de superficies
Incremental
Shear strains
points displacements
curvas y/o con puentes
Incremental
de roca
Incremental
6
displacements γ= 0, c=1, φ=0 Shear strains (SRK Consulting, Severin 2012)
E1 = E2
= 0, c=1, φ=0
1 = E2

3
 demonstrate that the assignment of ubiquitous joint orientations at the zone level (from a known
joint-orientation distribution) results in realistic rock mass behavior and can yield properties that are
consistent with empirical techniques. The methodology detailed by Clark (2006) has been extended
to FLAC3D to allow for the characterization of strength anisotropy and sample scale effects.
Within the Subiquitous constitutive model, both matrix and joint properties are specified (see Fig.
1). In order for the UJRM testing methodology to be practical and honor existing rock mechanics
relations, it has been assumed that the matrix and joint properties can be derived directly from the
intact or SRM testing results. By modifying these input strength parameters, the calibration of
Young’s Modulus, unconfined compressive strength (UCS), tensile strength and the softening
behavior of different sample sizes, in different loading directions have been completed. In addition,
SRM failure mechanisms within the UJRM samples also have been honored through the monitoring
of progressive matrix degradation, joint slip and joint dislocation. An example of the damage
propagation behaviors within a UJRM sample can be seen through the progressive degradation of
matrix cohesion and ubiquitous joint-failure plots at various stages of UJRM UCS sample loading –
Discrete Fracture Network
illustrated in Figure 2.

(introducción)
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

7
(Sainsbury 2008)
Figure 1. UJRM model: matrix and joint Figure 2. Stages of damage within a UJRM specimen.
properties.

2.2 Establishment of a standard UJRM laboratory testing environment

To date, SRM testing has been performed on one sample size that has been subjected to one stress-
path loading condition that simulates the expected stress path in situ. This has made the material
properties derived from this technique specific to one application. As discussed in Mas Ivars et al.
(2008), the SRM methodology has been developed further to achieve calibration of the rock mass
(a) in three opposing loading directions, and (b) at a number of different scales. This ensures that the
material properties derived from the technique are not specific to one particular stress path and may
Modelos discontinuos:
2
bloques en contacto
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

Mecánica del continuo dentro de cada bloque

Teorías de contacto entre bloques
Ventajas
• Puede propagar fracturas
(en contactos pre-definidos)
• Permite modelar localización
de deformaciones
Desventajas
• Bloques elásticos: puede bloquear
• Bloques elastoplásticos: alto costo
computacional
8 (SRK Consulting, Severin 2012)

4
 Modelos discontinuos en gran
escala: Chuquicamata Pared Oeste
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

UDEC model showing lithology, discontinuities and PFC2D model showing toppling on major
anual pit geometries. (Lorig and Calderón, 2002) structures (Cundall, 2007)

SLOPE MODEL model showing toppling on major structures (LOP, 2009)

9
(Silva et al 2015)

El problema de la interpretación
de los resultados
Modelización de anisotropía en macizos rocosos

Macizo rocoso Juntas difusas

FS = 1.65 FS = 1.17

DFN en FLAC3D
10 FS = 0.97 (SRK Consulting, Severin 2014)