1

Lecture 5
Shear Strength of Discontinuities
2
Priest and Hudson (1976)
Spacing of Discontinuities
Classification of
Discontinuities
Spacing
For sedimentary rock, it shows a probability density
distribution that can be approximated by the negative
exponential distribution function:
spacing mean x
frequency ity discontinu mean
x
where
e x f
x
=

=

) (
1
) (

3
Correlation of Spacing of Discontinuities with RQD
Priest and Hudson (1976)
4
Roughness of Discontinuities
Small-scale
Intermediate-scale
Large-scale
Classification of
Discontinuities
Roughness
Need to distinguish between
small-scale surface irregularity
(or unevenness) and large-
scale undulations (or waviness)
of a surface
5
At shallow depth, where stresses are low, failure of the intact
rock material is minimal and the behaviour of the rock mass is
controlled by sliding on the discontinuities.
6
Relationship between the peak shear strength
p
and the normal stress
n
can be represented by the Mohr-Coulomb equation:
Where
c is the cohesive strength of the surface and is the angle of friction

r
is the residual angle of friction.
Testing of sawn or ground rock surfaces on 50 mm x 50 mm sample
Basic friction angle
b
:fundamental to the understanding of the shear strength of
discontinuity surfaces
Roughness component is then added to this basic friction angle to give the
effective friction angle which is site specific and scale dependent
7
The undulations and asperities on a natural joint surface have a significant influence on
its shear behaviour.
Shear tests on 'saw-tooth' specimens
Surfaces move up the inclined faces, causing dilation (an increase in volume) of the
specimen.
8
Shear strength of Patton's saw-tooth specimens:
Where,

b
is the basic friction angle of the surface and i is the angle of the saw-tooth face.
At low normal stresses - shear displacement is due to sliding along the inclined
surfaces.
At higher normal stresses - the teeth will tend to break off, resulting in a shear
strength behaviour which is more closely related to the intact material strength
than to the frictional characteristics of the surfaces.
Changes in shear strength with increasing normal stress are gradual rather
than abrupt.
Barton et al (1973, 1976, 1977, 1990)
JRC is the joint roughness coefficient
JCS is the joint wall compressive strength
9
JRC - estimated by comparing (visually) the appearance of a
discontinuity surface with standard profiles
10
Relationship between J
r
in the Q system and JRC (Barton, 1987)
11
Estimation of JRC from a simple tilt test (Barton and Bandis, 1990)
Faces are tilted under one surface slides on another

=
n
10
b

JCS
log

JRC

n
may be as low
as 0.001MPa
12
13
Field
estimates of
JCS
14
15
Influence of scale on JRC and JCS
As the scale increases, the effective roughness of
the surface (JRC) decreases
16
Influence of scale on JRC and JCS
Scale corrections for JRC (Barton and Bandis (1982)), extensive testing of joints
JRC
o
and L
o
(length) refer to 100 mm laboratory scale samples
JRC
n
and L
n
refer to in situ block sizes.
Scale corrections for JCS
JCS
o
and L
o
(length) refer to 100 mm laboratory scale samples
JCS
n
and L
n
refer to in situ block sizes.
17
Shear strength of filled discontinuities (soft filling material such as clay gouge)
Shear strength can be reduced drastically when part or all of the surface is not in intimate contact
Comprehensive review of the shear strength of filled discontinuities was
prepared by Barton (1974)
18
19
20
21
Measure depth to joint surface from a
straight line at regular 100mm intervals
22
JRC subscript 500 = JRC
corrected to length of 500
cm (average sheeting joint
block size)
13.9
o
11.8
o
2-26
o 2
nd
Order
Asperities
2.7
o
3.3
o
2-15
o 1
st
Order
Asperities
STD
Deviatio
n
Mean Range
23
Analysis of Schmit Hammer Data on Sheeting Joints and Intact Rock Surfaces
24
25
Direct Shear Tests for
Sheeting Joints (Grade
II/III)
26
Direct Shear Tests for
Sheeting Joints (Grade
IV/V/Infill)
27
Strength of Sheeting Joints at Field Scale
Four Empirical Methods are Assessed:
Note:
J
r
= 2 to 2.5 for smooth and undulating to slightly rough and undulating joints
J
a
= 1.5 to 3.0 for altered joint walls with disintegrated rock or silty sand coatings

n
= 0.13 MPa for a 5m thick slab of rock resting on a sheeting joint

base
= 39, based on the sawn cut surface tests
51
0
to 68
0
62
0

r
= 35
J
a
= 1.5 3.0
Bartons (1994)
'
peak
= tan
-1
( J
r
/ 6000.
r
-2.4
)
50
0
to 63
0
55
0
JRC = 5
JCS = 40 MPa

n
= 0.1 to 0.2 MPa

r
= 35
i = 2
0
to 15
0
Barton-Bandis Equation
'
peak
= [JRC.log
10
(JCS/
n
)+
r
+i]
i=First order roughness (large-scale
waviness)
JRC.log
10
(JCS/
n
)=Second order
roughness
34
0
to 59
0
46
0
J
r
= 2 - 2.5
J
a
= 1.5 3.0
Bartons (1994)
'
peak
= tan
-1
(J
r
/J
a
)
41
0
to 54
0
46
0
'
base
= 39
0
i = 2
0
to 15
0
Patterns (1966)
'
peak
= '
base
+ i (local asperities)
'
peak
Range
'
peak
Mean
Parameters Formula
28
Sheet jointing in granite. These features, sometimes referred to as onion skin
joints, are the result of exfoliation processes during cooling of the granite.
29
30
Hoek and Bray (1974)
Back Analysis of Sau
Mau Ping Rock Slope
Failure
31
Instantaneous cohesion c
i
and Instantaneous friction angle
i
Conventional factors of safety against sliding are expressed in terms of the Mohr-
Coulomb cohesion (c) and friction angle ()
Relationship between shear strength and normal stress is more accurately
represented by a non-linear relationship such as that proposed by Barton (1973).
Means for estimating the equivalent cohesive strengths and angles of friction from:
For a range of normal stress values
32
Instantaneous cohesion c
i
and Instantaneous friction angle
i
Lower limit for
n
when
Upper limit for
n
when
33
Select Hoek-Brown m and s values for Grade IV/V rock by matching the
shear strength envelopes from the direct shear tests in page 25
m =0.12 and s =0.0001 gives best fit value of peak shear strength
The instantaneous c' = 100 kPa and '
base
=40
0
for 5m thick block
34
Infill Strength based on Triaxial Tests (for thick soil infilling)
c' = 0 kPa and '
peak
=40
0
to 44
0
for the
infill material
35
Upper Bound '
peak
=63
0
for Grade I/II Rock to
Rock contact joints and
microfractured zones
To
Lower Bound '
peak
=40
0
for joints with significant
infills