ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

Breakage and shear behaviour of intermittent rock joints

C. Gehle*, H.K. Kutter
Rock Mechanics Group, Department of Geology, Mineralogy and Geophysics, Ruhr-University Bochum, D-44780 Bochum, Germany Accepted 3 April 2003

Abstract The breakage and shear behaviour of intermittent rock joints have been investigated in a series of direct shear tests with a new shear device, specically designed for this purpose. The tests have been performed on specimens of rock-like material or hard rock, ! chelon arrangement along respectively, incorporating idealized non-persistent joints, made up of a number of short cracks in an en-e the central shear axis. The shear behaviour of such a joint constellation has been found to be composed of different phases. The rst phase of shearing is that of the actual rupture, initiated by the formation of wing cracks, starting from the existing cracks and growing into the material bridges, and concluded by the generation of additional new fractures connecting the initial cracks in the zone between the wing cracks. The second phase of shearing is characterized by friction processes and volume increase in the then continuous shear zone. Finally, the third phase of shearing, reached after large shear displacements, is determined by sliding processes inside the strongly fractured shear zone. In a large number of shear tests the geometrical parameters of the discontinuous joints as well as the loading conditions have been found to inuence the activated shear resistance in each phase of shearing to a noticeably different extent. The orientation of the initial cracks and the normal stress, however, have been identied as the most inuential parameters. Depending on the test conditions, an initially discontinuous rock joint can activate the largest shear resistance not just before rupture but in one of the two subsequent phases of shearing as well. The mechanisms which govern the different shear phases could be identied as (1) tensile rupturing, (2) rolling and sliding friction of dilatant joint zones and (3) sliding within the joint lling composed of brecciated material. r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
! chelon arrangements; Shear strength; Successive failure; Direct shear tests; Phase of Keywords: Discontinuous rock joints; Material bridges,En-e shearing; Models of shear mechanisms; Indirect tensile strength; Rolling friction; Brecciated shear zone

1. Introduction It is well known that discontinuities of different kinds and origins play a dominant role in the failure process of rock and rock masses. Especially the lower strength of a rock mass is caused by the presence and arrangement of rock joints separating in parts the rock mass. This decisive inuence of discontinuities in rock is the reason that their features are of such great interest in rock mechanics research. Close observations reveal that not only discontinuities in solid rock, such as microcracks and grain boundaries, but also joints and faults in a larger scale rock mass are
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-234-297513; fax: +49-234-3214120. E-mail address: christof.gehle@web.de (C. Gehle). 1365-1609/03/$ - see front matter r 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S1365-1609(03)00060-1

of only limited extension [1]. There are only few cases where cause and location of failure of a rock structure are limited to a single discontinuity. Usually several discontinuities of limited size interact and eventually form a combined shear plane where failure takes place [2]. So, besides the discontinuities themselves, the regions between adjacent discontinuities, which consist of strong rock and are called material or rock bridges, are of utmost importance for the shear strength of the compound failure plane [3,4]. As the exact size and location of such rock bridges inside the rock mass are hardly accessible to observation and therefore unknown, they are usually neglected in rock mechanics design [5]. One claims to be on the safe side since the rock bridges are thought to produce a strength reserve, as they have to be broken rst before failure can take place along the newly separated plane [6]. In some approaches the rock

ARTICLE IN PRESS
688 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

bridges are taken into account by an additional cohesional strength increase [3,7]. Apart from the problem of limited information concerning the exact geometrical arrangement of discontinuities and material bridges, there exists a hardly less important lack of understanding about the kind and process of breakage and failure of a discontinuous shear plane, consisting of weak or separated as well as intact sections [4]. The failure process of such discontinuous joints has been investigated so far only to a limited extent (see references in [8]). Previous experimental studies based on uniaxial or biaxial tests on specimens with inserted, mostly parallel cracks and rock bridges between them concentrated on the initial phase of growth and coalescence of cracks [918]. Failure in these tests usually occurred simultaneously with the coalescence of the cracks or the bisection of the rock bridges, respectively. The strength of the completed discontinuity, which would correspond to the residual strength of the broken specimen, has usually not been measured, although some results indicated that its magnitude could be signicant or even of paramount importance [19]. Discontinuous joints are often assumed to consist of parallel and laterally displaced separate joints. These so! chelon arrangements have often been obcalled en-e served in situ [20]. After failure of the rock bridges the combined joints resembled stepped, through-going discontinuities. Direct shear tests on regularly stepped joints can, therefore, be employed to gain a better understanding of the residual shear strength of formerly discontinuous joints [2126]. Depending on the inclination of the asperity teeth such joints can possess high shear strength (e.g. [21]). However, this shear strength can only be guaranteed for limited shear displacements because overriding and shearing of the asperities cause a permanent change of the discontinuitys appearance, resembling more and more a fault [24]. Finally, the stepped discontinuity is levelled out and the shifted rock fragments of the former asperities are ground and compacted to a ne rock mill [27]. Sliding inside this rock mill takes place in the nal stage of the shearing process of a formerly discontinuous joint. The shear resistance is then governed by the composition, state and thickness of the brecciated lling [2729]. However, these descriptions of the complete failure process of discontinuous joints are mainly inferred from various kinds of tests that were mostly not designed for the purpose of characterizing the whole failure process of such discontinuities. It has been decided therefore to perform a series of direct shear tests on specimens with discontinuous joints, which would cover the entire shear process. Not only the types of mechanisms, which govern the shearing process, should be shown, but it also should be found out which of them determine shear strength maxima. The role of various parameters

inuencing shear resistance, mainly geometry and loading conditions, should additionally be explored.

2. Test program For that purpose direct shear tests have been planned on specimen slabs incorporating a number of parallel ! chelon arrangement along the central cracks in an en-e shear axis. These tests have been performed in an especially designed shear machine which complies with the requirements that were found to be indispensable in a preliminary test series in conventional shearing devices (see [8]). Consequently, the shear boxes were provided with a high stiffness and with only one degree of freedom for the lower shear box in the horizontal direction and for the upper one in the vertical direction, corresponding to a shear displacement or dilation, respectively. Unwanted rotations and uncontrolled loading conditions could be prevented this way. The second main requirement comprised the possibility to permanently observe the cracking process in the sheared specimens. Therefore, the shape and arrangements of the shear boxes permitted free access to front and back sides of the specimens. The new shear machine is shown in Fig. 1. The choice of the measuring devices and a servo-control unit allow the performance of direct shear tests not only with constant normal load (CNL) but also with constant normal stiffness (CNS). The latter corresponds to the loading condition at which the

Fig. 1. Shear machine.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 689

dilation of a rock joint is restricted by the surrounding rock (near underground openings) or by some support measures such as rock anchors (e.g. [30]). A multitude of test conditions could be simulated this way. The slab-shaped specimens (250 150 50 or 30 mm, respectively) consisted of pure gypsum (Hartformgips) or strong limestone. A particular problem was the production of well-dened initial cracks in the specimens. The cracks in rock had to be saw cuts with consequently unreasonably large widths. Cracks in the articial rock material gypsum could be produced in a more realistic manner. This has been achieved by putting thin metal strips into the liquid gypsum and removing those after the setting of the plaster had started or was completed. The exact description of the procedures can be found elsewhere [8]. Different kinds of open or healed cracks could be produced this way. Unfortunately only the frictional properties of open cracks could be dened with sufcient reliability. Additionally, cracks with a grease coating have been produced, which correspond to joints with a clay lling or coating reducing the local shear strength. Many different geometrical crack arrangements (up to now only two-dimensional joint constellations) could be easily produced by means of an adjustable casting device. The series of direct shear tests could thus be divided into those that investigated separately the inuence of the geometrical parameters crack angle i; scale and degree of separation (l =e; with crack length l and crack distance e) (see Fig. 2), the inuence of different crack types and conditions, the inuence of normal loading as well as of the kind of loading (CNL versus CNS), and nally, the inuence of different model materials [8]. Normal and shear force (N and T ; respectively) as well as dilational and shear displacement (v and u; respectively) have been continuously recorded during each shear test. Normal and shear stresses (s; t) as well as the rate of dilation (n=arctan Dv=Du) have been calculated afterwards. In order to obtain the true shear

strength the additional effects of up- and downward sliding due to dilation or compaction of the shear zone have been eliminated by subtraction, i.e. tcorrected stan[arctan(t=s2n]. The results have eventually been plotted in illustrative graphs with t and u; tcorrected and u; t and s as well as tcorrected and s as coordinates. Testing has so far been restricted to two dimensions, whereas cracks and joints in situ are more or less arranged in three dimensions. This does not mean that two-dimensional testing would not be realistic or even irrelevant because the joint-rock bridge-elements in rock masses are often locally quasi-two-dimensional. Furthermore, after the rupture of the rock bridges shearing takes place on quasi-plane shear zones which are similar to those in two-dimensional tests. As one will see, this post-rupturing shear phases turn out to be of great importance for the shearing behaviour of intermittent rock joints. Nevertheless, it should not be neglected that there is recent experimental evidence for additional specic rupturing mechanisms of 3-D intermittent joints [31,32].

3. Test results A total of 131 direct shear tests have been performed on specimens with discontinuous joints. All tests are displacement-controlled and therefore reveal the shear behaviour of the joints way beyond the initial breakage. The displacement- or strain-control was chosen in order to record the whole shearing behaviour of an initially intermittent joint and to avoid interferences with the shearing device which are often common with stresscontrolled tests. The maximum shear displacement at the end of each test is 65 mm, amounting to 26% of the length of the shear plane. This means that it is usually greater than the distance between two adjacent initial cracks (often e 50 mm). This maximum shear displacement proved to be too small to bring the shear zone to a steady residual state, but large enough to guarantee the record of the essential features of the shearing process of discontinuous joints. The shearing process of a discontinuous joint constellation begins, as one would expect, with the formation of new fractures which eventually transect the material bridges and lead to a through-going discontinuity. Thereafter, it continues with shear displacements taking place along the joint. The nal form of such an initially non-persistent discontinuity, reached after large shear displacements, is that of an intensively broken and brecciated shear zone. Whereas this rough description of the shear process holds true for any joint constellation or shear test variation, the recorded individual test results rst seemed to be more confusing and their explanation rather difcult (e.g. Fig. 3). The shear resistance of such

Fig. 2. Shear specimen with discontinuous joint. Denition of the geometrical parameters.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
690 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

discontinuous joints proved to be extremely variable during the entire shear process. In addition, no clear pattern or systematic difference could be easily discovered at rst glance in the records of the different kinds of tests. The key for understanding has been found when attempts were made to identify several phases of the shear process, each of them being characterized by a distinct shear mechanism. In spite of all differences, every shear test can be sub-divided into three such distinct phases of shearing. The rst phase of shearing is that of the actual rupture. It is initiated by the formation of wing cracks, starting from the existing cracks and growing into the material

Fig. 3. Examples of records of two different tests (normal stress sE1 MPa). Above: shear stress t versus shear displacement u; below: dilation v versus shear displacement u: Note that scaling of u-axis is logarithmic. Dark curve: test 1212 a (i 60 ; l 40 mm; e 50 mm); bright curve: test 0911 a (i 30 ; l 20 mm; e 25 mm).

bridges, and concluded by the generation of additional new fractures connecting the initial cracks in the zone between the wing cracks. Both cracking incidents are linked with a sudden loss of shear resistance, as evident from the t2u graph (the crack incidents in the examples of Fig. 3 happen to coincide (see explanation in Section 4)). The complete separation of the material bridges is obtained with the second incident. The second phase of shearing is characterized by friction processes and volume increase in the shear zone. These phenomena are visible when one observes the specimens sides. But they are also evident from recorded results where they are revealed by measured dilation and by quasi-horizontal levels in the t2u graphs. This second phase of shearing has a certain duration and may be divided in sub-phases. The most important sub-division can be made between periods when the initial cracks are still or again open and those when they are closed. In most cases, this second phase of shearing ends with a clear reduction of shear resistance, caused by a veritable volume decrease or contraction. Finally, the third phase of shearing is reached after large shear displacements. Then reshaping of the shear zone comes to an end. The shear resistance reaches again a high level. This nal phase is determined by sliding processes inside the strongly fractured shear zone. The measured shear resistance in this phase is still slightly inuenced by small non-zero and variable dilation rates since the shear displacements at the end of the shear tests are not sufciently large to reach the nal stable stage. The systematic characterization of the complete shearing process can be illustrated by an idealized shear curve (Fig. 4a), where the three phases of shearing are accentuated. The maximum shear resistance in each phase of shearing is marked with SR1, SR2 or SR3, respectively. Only these maximum shear resistances (SRs) have been chosen to represent each test in the comparison of the shear resistances in the three phases or of those of different testing conditions. A more detailed look at the beginning of that idealized test record (Fig. 4b) shows that additional characteristic

Fig. 4. (a) Idealized shear test record and (b) beginning of idealized shear test record. Shear stress t is shown to vary systematically with growing shear displacement u:

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 Table 1 Short denition of the nomenclature of the used shear resistances Shear resistance SR0 SR1a Denition SR, measured at rst fracturing Occurs simultaneously with brittle fracturing; mostly leads to the formation of wing cracks; usually greatest SR1 SR at concluding breakage incident causing formation of a continuous discontinuity Characterized by dilation; initial cracks are open Characterized by dilation (and friction); initial cracks are closed; usually greatest SR after breakage Maximum SR after large shear displacements, i.e. after the formation of a shear zone lled with rock mill 691

SR1b SR2a SR2 SR3

points can be distinguished. The earlier mentioned initial two different fracture incidents can be recognized by a sudden drop in strength and are marked by SR1a and SR1b. Moreover, shearing in the second phase can be earmarked by SR2a, when initial cracks are open, and SR2, when they are closed. Finally, a last signicant point in the curve is SR0, the moment when the rst fracturing occurs and the initial, linearly elastic shear behaviour of the discontinuous joints ends. A summary of the selected shear resistances is given in Table 1. The reason for the above-mentioned difculty with a systematic interpretation of the complex shear behaviour is the fact that, depending on the joint constellation, the phases of shearing may overlap. For example, SR2a is often found to occur before the conclusion of the rst phase, i.e. before the nal separation of the rock bridges. Apart from that, the values of different SRs may vary considerably, so that certain shear resistances possibly dominate the entire shear process. One of the most important results of the shear test series is, however, that depending on the test conditions any of these different shear processes can be the dominating one. Consequently, each SR can be the maximum one and hence represent the shear strength of the discontinuous joint. Therefore, none of the shear processes can be neglected. Determination of the shear strength of discontinuous joints thus turns out to be quite a complex task. Two issues shall be discussed in the following chapters. First, the shearing mechanisms are examined in detail. Then some aspects are presented concerning the different parameters of inuence which have been investigated in the test series. For a closer look on the results readers are referred to [8].

shear displacements (B1/10 mm) rst fracturing occurs and causes the shear behaviour to deviate from linearity (SR0). This crack initiation is for the most part audible, but not always visible with the naked eye. The visible cracks are always short wing cracks growing from the initial cracks. Since the same kind of wing cracks develop and grow also at the rst breaking incident marked by SR1a, both SR0 and SR1a can be dealt with together, the temporary loss of shear strength at SR1a being the only decisive difference between them. At the rst breaking incident (SR1a) wing cracks grow visibly from all of the initial cracks and reach far into the adjacent rock bridges. However, they very seldom connect the neighbouring cracks. Instead, two wing cracks originating from neighbouring cracks often enclose most of the rock bridge and nearly cut out a rock fragment. The shape of that rock fragment depends on the constellation of the initial cracks and the location, course and length of the wing cracks. Depending on the orientation of the initial cracks, determined by the crack angle i; wing cracks grow either towards the adjacent or towards the more distant tip of the neighbouring initial crack (Fig. 5). If they grow towards the adjacent tip (15 pip 45 ), they are of a curved shape and the cut fragments turn out to be rounded, which will be shown to have some importance later in the shearing process. For the most part the wing cracks start from the crack tips, but at certain joint constellations they can also grow from the sides of the initial cracks. By the way, wing crack initiation from an initial crack has always been simultaneous and point-symmetric at both sides, respectively, tips of the cracks. An attempt has been made to check with the help of numerical modelling existing hypotheses of fracturing against the measured results. The Displacement

4. Discussion of shear mechanisms At the beginning of shearing the behaviour of a discontinuous joint is a linearly elastic one. After minute
Fig. 5. Wing cracks grown at the rst breakage incident (a) crack angle i 15 and (b) crack angle i 45 :

ARTICLE IN PRESS
692 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

Discontinuity Method (DDM) program FRACOD2D from Fracom Ltd. [33] has been used for this purpose. This program models crack propagation under far-eld normal and shear stresses. The employed propagation criterion is the so-called F-criterion, being a variation of the method of maximum energy release rate (Gcriterion) [34]. With this criterion, the energy release rate of an incremental prolongation of the crack at its tip is calculated for each propagation direction. Crack prolongation is assumed to result from pure shear or pure normal tension. Both energy release rate components are related to a respective critical energy release rate and added up thereafter. Crack propagation is possible when the sum of these related components exceeds unity and it takes the direction in which this sum reaches a maximum. The actual propagation direction implicitly reveals whether crack propagation is mainly caused by tension or shear, respectively [33,34]. The numerical calculations with FRACOD2D show good agreement between measured and calculated results in the range of crack angles 90 pip0 and 60 pip90 (Fig. 6). Some discrepancies can be contributed to different loading conditions in test and model (for further details see [8]). The cause of wing crack initiation and propagation is always local tension. It has also been shown, that wing crack propagation stops inside the rock bridges and does not reach the adjacent initial crack. Complete bisection of the rock bridges could not be simulated, which is in agreement with the observations. At some joint constellations, however, clear discrepancies appeared between test and model (see 15 pip 45 in Fig. 6). In these cases the numerical calculations overestimate the shear resistance before crack propagation. The reason for this was found out to be the inability of the model to allow crack

propagation at places other than the crack tips. In reality, the wing cracks do not initiate at the tips, but at the sides of the cracks when the shielding effect of the neighbouring crack causes tensile stress relief or compressive stress increase at the crack tips. The numerical calculations produce maximum tensile stresses parallel to the cracks just at these places. These tensile stresses are of the same magnitude as the tensile strength. The numerical program should therefore be sufciently improved by the introduction of an additional tension criterion. More fractures occur after the generation of wing cracks, leading eventually to nal rupture of the rock bridges (at SR1b). This is usually accomplished by new cracks running quite straight from one tip of an initial crack to the opposite tip of the next crack. As a result the rock bridges enclosed by the wing cracks are bisected in the middle (Fig. 7). Only in some rare cases wing cracks are directly involved in the breaking of the rock bridges. A successful numerical simulation of the breakage of rock bridges denitely requires realistic modelling of the exact path of the wing cracks. Since this could not be successfully achieved with sufcient precision by FRACOD2D, further interpretation of the numerical calculations has been restricted to a qualitative evaluation. However, it could be clearly demonstrated that the new cracks develop along the axis of the rock bridges. High compression acts parallel to these axes and tension normal to them, the latter being responsible for the (start of) cracking (Fig. 8). A simple analogue model has been derived that uses the similitude between shapes and loading of the rock bridges and those of specimens in Brazilian tests (Fig. 9, also see [8]). It can be effectively shown this way that all cracking in the shear process is caused by tension and should therefore be modelled

Fig. 6. Comparison of measured and modelled shear resistances associated with the growth of wing cracks (SR1a).

Fig. 7. Connecting cracks grown at the concluding breakage incident (a) crack angle i 15 and (b) crack angle i 45 :

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 693

accordingly. No shear cracking must be taken into account. Even horizontal cracks in a row do not grow as shear cracks, but also as a result of tension. Another phenomenon that could be shown by numerical modelling is that either one of the shear resistances SR1a and SR1b might dominate. If SR1b is clearly smaller than SR1a, then separation of the rock bridges may occur simultaneously with the formation of wing cracks. If both SRs do not differ greatly, slight differences in the test performance can cause great

Fig. 8. Principal stresses and crack growth in rock bridges calculated with FRACOD2D. Dark stress bars mean tension, bright ones compression. The pointed lines show the course of the observed connecting cracks.

differences in the test results since the moment of nal rupturing and the shape of the secondary cracks then vary considerably. The second phase of shearing, characterized by the dilational behaviour of the joint, starts when fracturing has provided sufcient kinematic freedom to allow larger displacements. This kinematic freedom is usually reached not alone after the separation of the rock bridges, but already by the growth of the wing cracks. The cut-out rock fragments are free to rotate after the formation of wing cracks. The initial cracks are still or again open. The shear resistance SR2a now becomes effective. At this stage the rst phase of shear failure often has not yet ended. Since rotating movements (Fig. 10) cause only a small resistance, most of the SR2a originates from the dilational component of the displacement. This can be rather substantial and SR2a is therefore quite high. For example, SR2a is usually the largest shear resistance in the case of a negative crack angle. Sometimes the rapid increase towards SR2a hides the perception of SR1a at wing crack propagation. The initial cracks eventually close (Fig. 7a) after the total rupture of the joint, or alternatively, contact between the two sides of the joint is established with the generation of newly created cracks (Fig. 7b). The resulting joints resemble now sawtooth proles. The effective shear resistance should therefore correspond to that of joint models with this kind of geometry. The simplest of these models is that of Patton [21]. There the shear strength is given by t s tanF i; 1 where i is the inclination of the saw teeth and F is the angle of friction. F is presumed to be the angle of sliding friction that can be determined by tests with at and smooth rock joints. However, as mentioned above, in the beginning of the second phase of shearing some rock fragments start to rotate. These fragments continue to rotate even after the closing of the initial cracks (Fig. 11). Not sliding on the inclined asperities, but in fact rotation of some load-carrying rock fragments characterizes the shearing process and leads to shear resistances signicantly smaller than those calculated with Pattons or similar (e. g. [22]) formulas. The reason for that is the fact that rolling friction is smaller than sliding friction. The actual frictional resistance is a

Fig. 9. Model with Brazilian test analogy.

Fig. 10. Rotating mechanism of the rock bridges in the second phase of shearing (crack angles i 45 ).

ARTICLE IN PRESS
694 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

Fig. 12. Corrected angles of friction in the 2nd phase of shearing as a function of crack angle i:

Fig. 11. Photographs of specimens with crack angle i 30 during the course of the 2nd phase of shearing. Note that the initial cracks are closed or in contact, respectively. The change in the shape of the rotating rock fragments (compare photo below with the one above) is directly noticeable at the shear resistances.

Fig. 13. Transition from second to third phase of shearing (a) asperities surmounted and (b) crushing of rock fragments. Joint with crack angle i 30 :

combination of rolling and sliding friction as well as of resistances resulting from repeated cracking. Its magnitude can be calculated by rewriting Pattons formula in the form fcorrected arctant=s i: 2

Because of the elastic distortion of the saw teeth, i should be better replaced by the dilation rate n: The corrected friction angles have been found to lie between 6 and 16 for SR2a and between 10 and the sliding angle 40 for SR2 (Fig. 12). They depend particularly on size and shape of the rock fragments. Especially those fragments that are cut out and rounded by curved wing cracks will be the cause for particularly small shear resistances.

Although given models tend to overestimate the shear resistances in the second phase of shearing, SR2 can nevertheless attain a signicant magnitude and exceed all other SRs. Moreover, it is often effective during a large interval of shear displacements. Therefore, it is regrettable that there exists not yet a reliable method for quantifying these parameters. The exact estimation of this important shear resistance is impeded by the fact that SR2 varies strongly as a result of tiny uctuations of the locations of secondary cracks. Secondary fracturing occurs during the quite long second phase of shearing and damages the rock in the near vicinity of the actual joint. The foregoing dilation creates cavities allowing further rearrangement of the cut-out fragments. This leads nally to a contraction of the shear zone. Then breakage and crushing of smaller and smaller fragments accelerate. Eventually a thick shear zone of crushed rock results (Fig. 13). Continuous

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 695

sliding within this shear zone completes the shear process. The now measured shear resistance SR3 is only slightly inuenced by volume changes, yet these volume changes still lead to varying shear resistances up to the end of a test. Beyond this small contribution of the dilation rate mainly the sliding friction angle of the brecciated lling characterizes SR3: t s tanffbreccia ng: 3

It is worth noting that this friction angle of the dry breccia differs from the sliding friction angle of a at and smooth rock surface of the same rock type. The breccias of both materials used in the tests, gypsum and limestone, show sliding friction angles which are even larger than those of the solid material surfaces. Under certain circumstances SR3 can thus even surpass the preceding shear resistances. It is obvious that the effect of weathering agents like water should further change the properties of such a broken shear zone.

5. Inuence of test conditions The large quantities of test parameters investigated in the test series as well as the complexity of the various results go beyond the scope of this paper. The interested reader is referred to [8]. Here only the most signicant outcomes shall be presented. The crack angle i turns out to be the most inuential one of all investigated geometrical parameters (see Fig. 2). In a test series this angle has been varied in steps of 15 , with the distances between the midpoints of the cracks e remaining constant. Shear resistances in the case of a negative crack angle are generally higher than in the case of a positive angle, whereby small absolute values of i are the cause for maximum or minimum shear strength, respectively (Fig. 14). Hence,

small variations of the inclination of nearly horizontal cracks are of enormous consequence on the shear strength of a discontinuous joint. This follows from the fact that crack tips under shear load have one side under compression and one under tension. The interconnection between the cracks is then impeded or facilitated depending on which side the adjacent crack lies. As a consequence differently shaped rock fragments are formed with negative or positive crack angles. Negative crack angles cause high dilation rates and very high SR2a values, whereas positive ones keep SR2a small, but produce a higher SR2. In each shear phase, however, the maximum shear resistance is inuenced in a different way by the crack angles (just as it is inuenced by other test conditions). Fig. 14 shows the SRs resulting from direct shear tests on discontinuous joints as a function of the crack angle i; other test conditions remained constant. It can be seen in this diagram that, depending on the crack angle, each SR (except SR0) may be the largest for that specic joint conguration. Moreover, the shear resistances in the earlier phases of shearing are those which are inuenced most by the crack angle, whereas SR3 remembers only slightly the initial joint constellation. Finally, Fig. 14 also shows that the maximum shear resistances at positive crack angles between +15 and +45 are particularly small, so that such joint constellations appear to be especially critical ones. Other geometrical parameters have been found to be of a lesser signicance. The distance between neighbouring cracks leads only then to a greater change of the shear resistance, when the crack constellation is changed from underlapping to overlapping (i.e. when l =e changes from values smaller than unity to higher ones; see e.g. Fig. 15). Overlapping cracks (with positive crack angles) coalesce already under small shear loads and the magnitudes of SR2 and SR3 are then larger than that of SR1.

Fig. 14. Compilation of all SRs (t) as a function of crack angle i (ve initial cracks with distance e 50 mm; sE1 MPa).

ARTICLE IN PRESS
696 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

so that there higher normal stresses actually reduce SR1a. The effect of normal stresses on SR1b can also be derived from the above-mentioned model of cross tension inside a loaded rock bridge. The inuence of the normal stress on the shear resistances in the second phase of shearing is apparently an unsystematic one. The normal stress s has different effects on the shear resistance of a joint as can be seen from Pattons formula t s tanfcorrected n;
Fig. 15. Inuence of the degree of separation on the shear resistances. The degree of separation is expressed by the ratio of crack length to crack distance.

Fig. 16. Inuence of normal stress on shear stress in different phases of shearing. Crack angle i 30 :

The scale effect has been investigated by means of comparative shear tests with a joint constellation with halved crack lengths and distances. No signicant effect has been found to result from scale. However, the earlier presented model concepts for the different SRs do suggest such a scale effect during the two rst phases of shearing (SR1 and SR2). A reason for this discrepancy can be found in the small range of scales tested, in the rather limited number of tests as well as in the scattering of results. The greatest inuence on the shear behaviour of discontinuous joints next to that of the crack angle is that of the normal stress. However, this inuence is different for each type of shear resistance (Fig. 16). The inuence in the rst phase of shearing depends on the extent to which a higher normal stress changes the maximum tensile stress at the crack tips into a compressive one. The restraining effect of normal stress on crack propagation depends therefore on the crack angles. Open cracks with a certain inclination develop tension at their tips at the application of normal stresses,

s is not only a factor of proportionality, but effects at the same time fcorrected s and ns; since both are functions of s: Both parameters change in a different way: the inuence of rotating fragments on friction is restricted by higher normal stresses and fcorrected therefore increases, but dilation n is restrained. Nevertheless, the largest increase of shear resistance with growing normal stress occurs in the second phase of shearing (e.g. see Fig. 16). In the last phase the normal loading also signicantly inuences SR3. Attention should be paid to the fact that the cohesional intercept of all kinds of the SRs seen in t2s diagrams is signicantly smaller than the geometrically proportionate cohesion of the solid material in the rock bridges (corresponding e.g. to ca. 2 MPa for discontinuities tested for Fig. 16). Nevertheless, even after the breakage of the rock bridges there is still an apparent cohesion (in SR2 or SR3) due to the effect of decreasing dilation with increasing normal stress. The most important consequence of the inuence of normal stress is that SR1 becomes more and more insignicant at higher stresses in comparison to the other shear resistances. Vice versa, the fracturing of rock bridges can be of importance near free surfaces where loads are generally small. As far as the normal loading with constant stiffness (CNS) is concerned one has to take into account the dilational behaviour of the discontinuous joint. Noticeable dilation is measured not until the second phase of shearing whereas the third phase is preceded by considerable contraction. Hence, the shear resistances SR1a and SR1b are hardly inuenced by this loading condition while SR2 is increased and dominates the shear process. In the end phase, SR3 may be too small to be identied in the shear record. All the above-mentioned factors of inuence have also been observed qualitatively in tests with limestone specimens. Their tensile strength is more than 21 2 times higher than that of gypsum; SR1 therefore increases accordingly. Similarly, the shear resistances in the second phase of shearing increase, since limestone has a higher stiffness and therefore produces higher dilation rates. Moreover, the rock fragments are cut out in a different way, often resulting in smaller and more slender pieces. The mixed friction angle fcorrected of the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 697

limestone joints is correspondingly larger. Since sliding in the third phase of shearing takes place within the brecciated rock and each breccia has different shear properties, SR3 is also expected to be different. However, in this particular case the friction angles of breccia of gypsum, respectively, limestone are quite similar. The results gained from only two different materials are not sufcient to allow generalization of the material inuence (for the two last phases of shearing). Finally, it has been found that a coating of grease on the surfaces of the initial cracks usually has no inuence on the shear behaviour of discontinuous joints. The reasons are the rotational mechanism in phase 2, which had already reduced the effective friction angle, and the vast volume of crushed rock in phase 3, in which the grease practically disappears. In addition the effect of a few other parameters has been investigated in a few special tests. For example, it has been examined if it is of importance that the joint is or is not already continuous at the beginning of the test. For this purpose the rock bridges have been cut manually before testing. This led not only to the lack of the rst phase of shearing, but the now formed rock fragments had other shapes and were not any more characterized by (similarly rounded) wing cracks. The shear resistance of the second phase therefore turned out to be higher. Another direct shear test has been performed on a monolithic specimen. This specimen broke at shear stresses not appreciably higher than those causing the failure of discontinuous joints with negative open cracks. This suggests that the shear strength of joints with open cracks approaches the upper limit of the strength of arbitrary joints, although joints with closed initial cracks might show a different shear behaviour in detail. Other investigations emphasize that caution must be paid when dealing with the model material gypsum. A changing quality of the solid material of the specimen or not easily noticed differences in the constitution of the crack surfaces can enormously inuence the results. However, the above-presented results and conclusions are free from these disturbing incidental effects. All tests mentioned previously have been performed on discontinuous joints composed of several equally orientated parallel cracks. Such ideal joint constellations are simplied models for those which can be found in a rock mass. Real joint constellations may incorporate more irregular joint-rock bridge-elements. Hence, the question arises how the shear behaviour of such a real joint can be characterized best. The very rst step towards an answer has been found in a direct shear test performed on a joint composed of different single cracks with a crack angle of 30 , 0 or +30 , respectively (Fig. 17). The shear behaviour of this complex joint differed from that of a joint with cracks of only one

Fig. 17. Specimen with crack angles of three different inclinations (i 30 ; 0 and +30 , respectively).

inclination. However, parts of the shear reaction are quite obviously dominated by cracks with a certain orientation. For example, the unbroken rock bridges near or between the negatively oriented cracks carry most of the shear load after wing cracks have propagated from favourably oriented cracks with i 0 and 30 : Up till breakage of these bridges the shear curve of this combined joint resembles that of a joint with 30 oriented cracks. Similarly, after breakage of all rock bridges, the joint slides up along the 30 oriented cracks. The shear resistances of the combined joint therefore show some similarities but also some discrepancies with the known resistances of the idealized joints. Although this behaviour is far from being sufciently understood, it seems that most inuence in combined joints is exerted by the strongest cracks and rock bridges. The shear strength of combined joints in the rock mass, whose exact arrangement is usually not well known, but whose shear strength can possibly be estimated by means of the most frequent or typical joint elements, should actually tend to be higher than normally assumed.

6. Summary and conclusions The breakage and shear behaviour of discontinuous joints have been investigated by means of direct shear tests with a new shear device. These tests reveal that shearing of such joints is characterized by several mechanisms, each responsible for a special kind of shear resistance. Three phases of shearing can be identied. The characteristic or maximum shear resistances in these phases are called SR1 to SR3. The rst phase of shearing is that of actual rupture, initiated by the formation of wing cracks (at SR1a), starting from the existing cracks and growing into the material bridges, and concluded by the generation of additional new fractures connecting the initial cracks in the zone between the wing cracks (at SR1b). The complete bisection of the material bridges is then obtained. The second phase of shearing is characterized by friction processes and volume

ARTICLE IN PRESS
698 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700

increase in the shear zone. Depending on whether or not the initial cracks are open, the shear resistances representing the levels in the shear curves are called SR2a or SR2. Finally, the third phase of shearing, reached after large shear displacements, is determined by sliding processes inside the strongly fractured shear zone. Here SR3 is the measured resistance. These shear resistances corresponding to different shear mechanisms depend in various ways on the test conditions. Each can be the maximum shear resistance, so none of the shear mechanisms may be neglected. Of all parameters investigated the inclination of the cracks inside the discontinuous joint and the normal stress are found to have the dominant effects on the shear strength. Their inuence varies from phase to phase due to the different shear mechanisms. Each shear mechanism has been investigated in detail. Failure of the rock bridges by wing and connecting cracks could be shown to be a tensile one. Frictional resistance after completion of the initially discontinuous joint is not caused by sliding only, but by rotation and further breakage as well. The nal shear process is characterized by sliding within the rock breccia, into which the rock has been transformed by intensive cracking and crushing. Several models of the shear behaviour have been presented. The most important conclusion from the presented results is the fact that not only one but several shear mechanisms are responsible for the shear strength of a discontinuous joint. Most previous models suggested for the evaluation of the shear strength of discontinuous rocks are usually based on one shear mechanism only or entirely empirical and are therefore not suited for the representation of the complete shear process. It appears to be realistic that the fracturing of rock bridges by wing and connecting cross-tension cracks can be simulated by suitable numerical models in the near future. These models must include a failure criterion based on critical tension at the crack tips (i.e. through well-known fracture mechanics approaches) as well as along the crack boundary or inside the rock bridge. This approach has the advantage over other recently presented numerical models [11,35,36] that the required rock properties (e.g. tensile strength) can be determined by means of standard rock mechanics tests instead of using some merely empirically adjusted parameters. The shear resistances SR2a and SR2, effective after the breakage of the rock bridges, unfortunately cannot be easily modelled up to now since the important contribution of rolling friction in the shear zone is as yet not fully understood. Further efforts should be undertaken to investigate this complex interrelation between rolling, sliding and cracking. Modelling with distinct element methods (DEM) might prove to be a promising approach.

To round up the study, exemplary slope analyses have been performed [8] to investigate the signicance of these new results, concerning the shear resistances of discontinuous joints, with respect to the failure process of a rock slope with non-persistent joints. An idealized vertical slope comprising many parallel cracks of only one inclination has been assumed for this purpose. These short cracks are presumed to play the same role as the cracks in the tested specimens and to be arranged exactly like those. The slope can fail along many discontinuous joints, which are assumed to be straight (see Fig. 18). It has been investigated which of the possible failure planes would be the critical one and by which shear mechanism or SR it is characterized. This has been repeated for slopes with cracks of any orientation. It has been found by extrapolation of the test results that the most critical slopes are those with cracks falling towards the slope face with a0 15230 (Fig. 19). This is remarkable since these cracks are inclined at an angle smaller than 40 , which is the angle of sliding friction of the cracks, i.e. a continuous joint of the same inclination would not be considered to be subject to a risk of failure. Another outcome of this analysis: SR1a often turns out to be the decisive shear resistance in cases with cracks falling into the slope face (a0 o90 ). The small normal stresses in slopes are mainly responsible for that. But even if one would ignore the shear resistances at breakage (SR1a and SR1b), for example because the rock bridges are assumed to be already separated, the risk of failure of the slope does not increase considerably. Remembering that in most slopes groundwater is an important factor which increases the driving forces and decreases the retaining ones, respectively, it is to be expected that cracking and dilation in the course of the rst shear displacements efciently leads to drainage of the slope and thus to the stop of failure. The resisting forces then correspond to the SRs in the last phases of shearing of the critical discontinuous joint or failure plane.

Fig. 18. Idealized slope geometry. Here only two of several possible straight failure planes are shown given for limited joints with inclination a0 :

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 699 [2] Committee on Fracture Characterization and Fluid Flow, et al. Rock fractures and uid ow. Contemporary understanding and applications. Washington, DC: National Academic Press, 1996. [3] Jaeger JC. Friction of rocks and stability of rock slopes. ! otechnique 1971;21:97134. Ge [4] Einstein HH, Veneziano D, Baecher GB, OReillly KJ. The effect of discontinuity persistence on rock slope stability. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1983;20(5):22736. [5] Glynn EF, Veneziano D, Einstein HH. The probabilistic model for shearing resistance of jointed rock. Proceedings of the 19th US Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Stateline, Nevada, 1978. p. 6676. [6] Stimpson B. Failure of slopes containing discontinuous planar joints. Proceedings of the 19th US Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Stateline, Nevada, 1978. p. 296302. [7] Jennings JE. A mathematical theory for the calculation of the stability of slopes in open cast mines. Planning Open Pit Mines, Proceedings of the Symposium on the Theoretical Background to the Plannings of Open Pit Mines with Special Reference to Slope Stability, Johannesburg, 1970. p. 87102. . chen mit [8] Gehle C. Bruch- und Scherverhalten von Gesteinstrenna dazwischenliegenden Materialbrucken . (Breakage and shear behaviour of rock joints with intermittent material bridges). Schriftenreihe des Instituts fur . Grundbau und Bodenmechanik der . t Bochum, Th. Triantafyllidis (ed), Heft 33, 2002 Ruhr-Universita [in German]. [9] Zhao YH, Liang HH, Huang JF, Geng JD, Wang R. Development of subcracks between en echelon fractures in rock plates. Pure Appl Geophys 1995;145:75973. [10] Horii S, Nemat-Nasser S. Brittle failure in compression: splitting, faulting and brittleductile transition. Phil Trans R Soc Lond 1986;319(1549):33774. [11] Reyes O, Einstein HH. Failure mechanism of fractured rock. A fracture coalescence model. Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Rock Mechanics vol. 1, Aachen, Germany, 1991. p. 33340. [12] Shen B, Stephansson O, Einstein HH, Ghareman B. Coalescence of fractures under shear stress experiments. J Geophys Res 1995;100:597590. [13] Bobet A, Einstein HH. Fracture coalescence in rock-type materials under uniaxial and biaxial compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(7):86388. [14] Sagong M, Bobet A. Coalescence of multiple aws in a rockmodel material in uniaxial compression. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2002;39:22941. [15] Wong RHC, Chau KT. The coalescence of frictional cracks and the shear zone formation in brittle solids under compressive stresses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(34):335. [16] Wong RHC, Chau KT. Crack coalescence in a rock-like material containing two cracks. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(2):147 64. [17] Wong RHC, Chau KT, Tang CA, Lin P. Analysis of crack coalescence in rock-like materials containing three awsPart I: experimental approach. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38:90924. [18] Ma J, Du Y, Liu L. The instability of en-echelon cracks and its precursors. J Phys Earth 1986;34:S14157. [19] Lajtai EZ. The inuence of interlocking rock discontinuities on compressive strength (model experiments). Felsmech Ingenieurgeol 1967;5:21728. ! chelon [20] Olson JE, Pollard DD. The initiation and growth of en e veins. J Struct Geol 1991;13:595608. [21] Patton FD. Multiple modes of shear failure in rock. Proceedings of the First International Congress on Rock Mech, ISRM, Lisbon, vol. 1, 1966. p. 50913. [22] Ladanyi B, Archambault G. Simulation of shear behavior of a jointed rock mass. Proceedings of the 11th Symposium on Rock Mech, AIME, New York, 1970. p. 10525.

Fig. 19. Analysis of slope safety. Above: Calculation of factors of safety; below: Inclination of the appropriate failure plane.

Finally, the analysis shows that the inuence of the orientation of the limited cracks inside the slope exists but is not excessive. The factor of safety of the slope uctuates not more than by a factor of two with changing crack orientations, indicating limited strength anisotropy. One could argue therefore that an empirical approach which does not explicitly take into account anisotropy, but is based on rock classication (i.e. [37]), might be justied in such cases. It is to be added that the presented results can nd reasonable use also in other rock mechanics applications like the failure of rock samples, the failure of discontinuous joints near deep tunnels or caverns (where normal stresses are signicantly higher than in rock slopes) or in earthquake engineering. Further considerations in this matter are mentioned in [8].

Acknowledgements The study was partially supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft). The experiments were conducted with the help of G. Hegener.

References
[1] Pollard DD, Aydin A. Progress in understanding jointing over the past century. Bull Geol Soc Am 1988;100:1181204.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
700 C. Gehle, H.K. Kutter / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 40 (2003) 687700 [30] Indraratna B, Haque A, Aziz N. Shear behaviour of idealized ! otechnique inlled joints under constant normal stiffness. Ge 1999;49(3):33155. [31] Dyskin AV, Germanovich LN, Jewell RL, Joer H, Krasinski JS, Lee KK, Roegiers J-C, Sahouryeh E, Ustinov KB. Some experimental results on three-dimensional crack propagation in compression. In: Rossmanith HP, editor. Mechanics of Jointed and Faulted Rock. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema, 1995. p. 916. [32] Germanovich LN, Ring LM, Carter BJ, Ingraffea AR, Dyskin AV, Ustinov KB. Simulation of crack growth and interaction in compression. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress on Rock Mechanics, ISRM, Tokyo, vol. 1, 1995. p. 21926. [33] Shen B. FRACOD 2D. Two dimensional fracture propagation code. Users manual, Fracom Ltd. 2001. [34] Shen B, Stephansson O. Modication of the G-criterion for fracture propagation subjected to compression. Eng Fract Mech 1994;47(2):17789. [35] Tang CA, Lin P, Wong RHC, Chau KT. Analysis of crack coalescence in rock-like materials containing three awsPart II: numerical approach. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38:92539. [36] Bobet A. Fracture coalescence in rock materials: experimental observation and numerical predictions. Sc.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1997. [37] Hoek E, Brown ET. Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1997;34(8):116586. [23] Kutter HK. Rotary shear testing of rock joints. Proceedings of the Third International Congress on Rock Mech, ISRM, Denver, vol. II-A, 1974. p. 25462. [24] Pereira JP, de Freitas MH. Mechanisms of shear failure in articial fractures of sandstone and their implications for models of hydromechanical coupling. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1993;26(3):195214. [25] Kodikara JK, Johnston IW. Shear behaviour of irregular triangular rock-concrete joints. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1994;31(4):31322. [26] Kusumi H, Nishida K, Suzuki T. Shear behaviour of joint roughness with two types of asperities. In: Barla G, editor. Proceedings of the EUROCK 96. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema 1996. p. 12734. . nderlichkeit des Restscherwiderstandes von [27] WeiXbach G. Die Vera . chen (Variability of the residual shear resistance Gesteinstrenna of rock joints). Bochumer geologische und geotechnische Arbeiten, Heft 1, 1979 [in German]. [28] Huang X, Haimson BC, Plesha ME, Qiu X. An investigation of the mechanics of rock jointsPart I. Laboratory investigation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1993; 30(3):25769. [29] de Toledo PEC, de Freitas MH. Laboratory testing and parameters controlling the shear strength of lled rock joints. ! otechnique 1993;43(1):119. Ge