Geomechanics and Engineering

Techno-Press (테크노프레스)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparing the generalized Hoek-Brown and Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria for stress analysis on the rocks failure plane

  • Mohammadi, M. (Department of Mining Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman) ;
  • Tavakoli, H. (Department of Mining Engineering, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman)
  • Received : 2014.09.11
  • Accepted : 2015.03.31
  • Published : 2015.07.25
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Determination of mobilized shear strength parameters (that identify stresses on the failure plane) is required for analyzing the stability by limit equilibrium method. Generalized Hoek-Brown (GHB) and Mohr-Coulomb (MC) failure criteria are usually used for obtaining stresses on the plane of failure. In the present paper, the applicability of these criteria for determining the stresses on failure plane is investigated. The comparison is based on stresses on the real failure plane which are obtained from the Mohr stress circle. To do so, 18 sets of data (consist of principal stresses and angle of failure plane) presented in the literature are used. In addition, the values account for (VAF) and the root mean square error (RMSE) indices were calculated to check the determination performance of the obtained results. Values of VAF and RMSE for the normal stresses on the failure plane evaluated from MC are 49% and 31.5 where for GHB are 55% and 30.5, respectively. Also, for the shear stresses on failure plane, they are 74% and 36 for MC, 76% and 34.5 for GHB. Results show that the obtained stresses and angles of failure plane for each criterion differ from real ones, but GHB results are closer to the empirical results. Also, it is inferred that results are affected by the failure envelope not real failure plane. Therefore, obtained shear strength parameters are not mobilized. Finally, a multivariable regressed relation is presented for determining the stresses on the failure plane.

Keywords

References

  1. Al-Ajmi, A.M. and Zimmerman, R.W. (2005), "Relation between the Mogi and the Coulomb failure criteria", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 42(3), 431-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2004.11.004
  2. Balmer, G. (1952), "A general analytical solution for Mohr's envelope", Proceedings of American Society of Test Materials, 52, 1260-1271.
  3. Benz, T. and Schwab, R. (2008), "A quantitative comparison of six rock failure criteria", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 45(7), 1176-1186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2008.01.007
  4. Colmenares, L.B. and Zoback, M.D. (2002), "A statistical evaluation of intact rock failure criteria constrained by polyaxial test data for five different rocks", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 39(6), 695-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1365-1609(02)00048-5
  5. Coulomb, C.A. (1776), "Sur une application des regles maximis et minimis a quelques problems de statique, relatives a l'architecture", Acad. Sc.i Paris Mem. Math. Phys., 7, 343-382.
  6. Das, S.K. and Basudhar, P.K. (2009), "Comparison of intact rock failure criteria using various statistical methods", Acta Geotech., 4(3), 223-231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-009-0088-1
  7. Fu, W. and Liao, Y. (2010), "Non-linear shear strength reduction technique in slope stability calculation", Comput Geotech., 37(3), 288-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2009.11.002
  8. Heyman, J. (1972), Coulomb's Memoir on Statics, Cambridge University Press, London, UK.
  9. Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. (1980), Underground Excavations in Rock, Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, London, England.
  10. Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C. and Corkum, B. (2002), "Hoek-Brown failure criterion", Proceedings of the 5th North American Rock Mechanics Symposium and the 17th Tunnelling Association of Canada Conference NARMS-TAC, Toronto, Canada, July.
  11. Jimenez, R., Serrano, A. and Olalla, C. (2008), "Linearization of the Hoek and Brown rock failure criterion for tunnelling in elasto-plastic rock masses", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 45(7), 1153-1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2007.12.003
  12. Labuz, J.F. and Zang, A. (2012), "Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion", J. Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 45(6), 975-979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-012-0281-7
  13. Liu, H.Y., Kou, S.Q., Lindqvist, P.A. and Tang, C.A. (2004), "Numerical studies on the failure process and associated microseismicity in rock under triaxial compression", Tectonophysics, 384(1-4), 149-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tecto.2004.03.012
  14. Mogi, K. (1929), Experimental Rock Mechanics, Balkema, London, England.
  15. Mohr, O. (1900), "Welche Umstande bedingen die Elastizitatsgrenze und den Bruch eines Materials?", Zeit des. Ver. Deut Ing., 44, 1572-1577.
  16. Pariseau, W.G. (2007), "Fitting failure criteria to laboratory strength tests", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 44(4), 637-646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2006.09.006
  17. Parry, R.H.G. (2005), Mohr Circles, Stress Paths and Geotechnics, Taylor & Fransis, New York, NY, USA.
  18. Pincus, H. (2000), "Closed-form/least-squares failure envelopes for rock strength", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 37(5), 763-785. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1365-1609(00)00011-3
  19. Ramez, M.R.H. (1967), "Fractures and the strength of a sandstone under triaxial compression", Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 4(3), 257-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(67)90010-1
  20. Shen, J., Priest, S.D. and Karakus, M. (2012), "Determination of Mohr-Coulomb shear strength parameters form generalized Hoek-Brown criterion for slope stability analysis", Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 45(1), 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-011-0184-z
  21. Yang, X.L. and Yin, J.H. (2010), "Slope equivalent Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters for rock masses satisfying the Hoek-Brown criterion", Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 43(4), 505-511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-009-0044-2

Cited by

  1. New Method to Design Coal Pillar for Lateral Roof Roadway Based on Mining-Induced Stress: A Case Study vol.2018, pp.1687-8094, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4545891
  2. Limit Analysis of Active and Passive Mechanisms of Shallow Tunnels in Nonassociative Soil with Changing Water Table vol.18, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001167
  3. A phenomenological modelling of rocks based on the influence of damage initiation vol.78, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-019-8172-9
  4. Influences of seepage force and out-of-plane stress on cavity contracting and tunnel opening vol.13, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2017.13.6.907
  5. A hybrid MC-HS model for 3D analysis of tunnelling under piled structures vol.14, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2018.14.5.479
  6. Roof failure of shallow tunnel based on simplified stochastic medium theory vol.14, pp.6, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2018.14.6.571
  7. Catastrophe analysis of active-passive mechanisms for shallow tunnels with settlement vol.15, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2018.15.1.621
  8. Strength and failure characteristics of the rock-coal combined body with single joint in coal vol.15, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2018.15.5.1113
  9. Space-Time Distribution Laws of Tunnel Excavation Damaged Zones (EDZs) in Deep Mines and EDZ Prediction Modeling by Random Forest Regression vol.2019, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6505984
  10. A numerical stepwise approach for cavity expansion problem in strain-softening rock or soil mass vol.18, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2019.18.3.225
  11. Upper-bound limit analysis of soils with a nonlinear failure criterion vol.57, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2018-0513
  12. Progressive failure and friction motion characteristics of contact surface of composite rock mass vol.303, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202130301037
  13. Effects of interface angles on properties of rock-cemented coal gangue-fly ash backfill bi-materials vol.24, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.12989/gae.2021.24.1.081