Wasantha, PLP, Ranjith, PG & Xu, T 2013, 'UDEC and RFPA2D simulations on the influence of the geometry of partially-spanning joints on rock mechanical behaviour', in PM Dight (ed.), Slope Stability 2013: Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and Civil Engineering
, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 697-705, https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_rep/1308_46_Wasantha
The Authors used Universal Distinct Element Code (UDEC) and two-dimensional Rock Failure Process Analysis (RFPA2D) programs, which use the Discrete Element Method (DEM) approach and the Finite Element Method (FEM) approach, respectively, to simulate the mechanical behaviour of rock-like materials with partially-spanning joints in different geometries. The results from the two programs were compared with the results of an experimental study, conducted on cement-mortar specimens with partially-spanning joints in different geometries, in order to evaluate the feasibility of the two programs in simulating the mechanical behaviour of rock-like materials with partially-spanning joints.
Three different partially-spanning joint geometrical properties, i.e. joint location, orientation and trace length, were considered in numerical simulations using both UDEC and RFPA2D and the experimental study. For partially-spanning joint location, both numerical programs produced reasonably consistent results with experimental results for the variation of Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) against joint location, especially for higher values of joint location. However, considering the overall variation of UCS against joint location we proposed that the joint location is of negligible influence on the UCS of the rock. Variations of UCS against partially-spanning joint orientation for the experimental work and UDEC simulations were observed to match very closely, whereas RFPA2Dresults have underestimated the UCS for all joint orientations. The selection of continuously yielding joint constitutive model for the joints in UDEC simulation, which is more representative of the joints used in the experimental study, can perhaps be the reason for the more accurate replication of experimental results using UDEC. Moreover, both numerical simulations verified the result observed in the experimental study in which the UCS of test specimens is minimal when the partially-spanning joint is orientated at an angle of 45°. The strain distribution characteristics obtained from both numerical programs generally agreed. The fact that when the joint is oriented in 45° angle, the influence from the joint on failure of rock is maximum and with increasing and decreasing joint orientations from 45°, the contribution from the joint for the rock failure is less. The UCS of test specimens was observed to decrease linearly with increasing joint trace length from the results of the experimental study, and the results of numerical simulations from both numerical programs showed a reasonably good agreement with the experimental results. According to the strain distribution characteristics of the experimental and numerical simulation results from both programs, relatively longer partially-spanning joints can significantly influence the failure of test specimens, whereas samples with relatively shorter partially-spanning joints fail with considerable rupture in the intact material. Finally, we can conclude that, while both numerical approaches are capable of satisfactorily simulating mechanical behaviour of rock-like materials with partially-spanning joints, UDEC (DEM approach) with its more versatile features can provide more promising results.
Brown, E.T. (1970) Strength of models of rock with intermittent joints, Journal of Soil Mechanics, Foundation Division, Vol. 96(6), pp. 1935–1949.
Brown, E.T. and Trollope, D.H. (1970) Strength of model of jointed rock, Journal of Soil Mechanics, Foundation Division, Vol. 96(2), pp. 685–704.
Cai, M. and Horii, H. (1993) A constitutive model and FEM analysis of jointed rock masses, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science and Geomechanics Abstracts, Vol. 30(4), pp. 351–359.
Choi, S.K. (1992) Application of the Distinct Element Method for Rock Mechanics Problems, Engineering computations, Vol. 9(2), pp. 225–233.
Gong, Q.M., Jiao, Y.Y. and Zhao, J. (2006) Numerical modelling of the effects of joint spacing on rock fragmentation by TBM cutters, Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, Vol. 21(1), pp. 46–55.
Ingraffea, A.R. and Heuze, F.E. (1980) Finite element models for rock fracture mechanics, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, Vol. 4, pp. 25–43.
Ishida, T., Chigira, M. and Hibino, S. (1987) Application of the distinct element method for analysis of toppling observed on a fissured rock slope, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, Vol. 20(4), pp. 277–283.
Kawamoto, T., Ichikawa, Y. and Kyoya, T. (1988) Deformation and fracturing behaviour of discontinuous rock mass and damage mechanics theory, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, Vol. 12, pp. 1–30.
Kulatilake, P.H.S.W., Ucpirti, H., Wang, S., Radberg, G. and Stephansson, O. (1992) 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, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, Vol. 25(4), pp. 253–274.
Kulatilake, P.H.S.W., Malama, B. and Wang, J. (2001) Strength predictions for jointed rocks in confined and unconfined states, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol. 38, pp. 641–657.
Ladanyi, B. and Archambault, G. (1972) Evaluation de la resistance au cisaillement d’un massif roheux fragmente, in Proceedings 24th International Geological Congress, August–September 1972, Montreal, Canada, pp. 249–260.
Min, K.B. and Jing, L. (2004) Stress dependent mechanical properties and bounds of poisson’s ratio for fractured rock masses investigated by a DFN-DEM technique, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol. 41(3), pp. 431−432.
Ramamurthy, T. and Arora, V.K. (1994) Strength predictions for jointed rocks in confined and unconfined states, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science and Geomechanics Abstracts, Vol. 31, pp. 9–22.
Sun, J. and Wang, S. (2000) Rock mechanics and rock engineering in China: developments and current state-of-the-art, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol. 37(3), pp. 447–465.
Tang, C.A. and Kaiser, P.K. (1998) Numerical simulation of cumulative damage and seismic energy release during brittle rock failure – Part I: fundamentals, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol. 35(2), pp. 113–121.
Tang, C.A., Liu, H., Lee, P.K.K., Tsui, Y. and Tham, L.G. (2000) Numerical tests on micro-macro relationship of rock failure under uniaxial compression, Part I: effect of heterogeneity, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol. 37(4), pp. 555–569.
Wasantha, P.L.P., Ranjith, P.G., Viete, D.R. and Luo, L. (2012) Influence of the geometry of partially-spanning joints on the uniaxial compressive strength of rock, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, Vol. 50, pp. 140–146.
Wasantha, P.L.P., Ranjith, P.G. and Viete, D.R. (2013) Study of mechanical behaviour of rock with non-persistent joints using distinct element model analysis, Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, unpublished.
Weibull, W. (1951) A statistical distribution function of wide applicability, J. Appl. Mech., Vol. 18, pp. 293–297.
Xu, T., Ranjith, P.G., Wasantha, P.L.P., Zhao, J., Tang, C.A. and Zhu, W.C. (2013) Influence of the geometry of partially-spanning joints on mechanical properties of rock in uniaxial compression, Engineering Geology, unpublished.
Yang, Z.Y., Chen, J.M. and Huang, T.H. (1998) Effect of joint sets on the strength and deformation of rock mass models, Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., Vol. 35(1), pp. 75–84.
Yu, T.T. (2011) The extended finite element method (XFEM) for discontinuous rock masses, Engineering Computations, Vol. 28(3), pp. 340–369.