Tunnelling Fem

NUMERICAL
~rrTHIN
SIMULATION
OF
EXCAVATIONS
JOINTED ROCK OF INFINITE EXTENT
by
ALEXANDROS
I.
SOFIANOS
(M.Sc. ,D.LC.)
May
1984
A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor

of Philosophy of
the
University of London
Rock Mechanics Section,

R.S.M.,Imperial College,
London,
SW7 2BP.
-2-
Abstract
The subject of the thesis is the development of

the behaviour of stratified and
program to study
jointed rock masses around
excavations.
The rock mass is divided into two regions,one which is, supposed to
exhibit linear elastic behaviour,and the other which will include
discontinuities that behave inelastically. The former has been
simulated by a boundary integral plane strain orthotropic module,and
the latter by quadratic joint,plane strain and membrane elements.The
two modules are coupled in one program.Sequences of loading include
static point,pressure,bodY,and residual loads,construction and
excavation, and quasistatic earthquake load.The program is
interactive with graphics. Problems of infinite or finite extent may
be solved.
Errors due to the coupling of the two numerical methods have been
analysed. Through a survey of constitutive laws,idealizations of
behaviour
and
test
results
for
intact
rock
and
discontinuities,appropriate models have been selected and parameter

ranges identified.The representation of the rock mass as an
equivalent orthotropic elastic continuum has been investigated and
programmed.
Simplified theoretical solutions developed for the problem of a

wedge on the roof of an opening have been compared with the computed
results.A problem of open stoping is analysed.
-3-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The
author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of all members
of the Rock Mechanics group at Imperial College to

its
full
financial
this
work,
and
support by the State Scholarship Foundation of
Greece.
Furthermore thanks are due to:
Dr.
J.O.Watson,for
his
supervision
of
this
study,and
fur
introducing me to the boundary element method.

Dr. J.W.Bray,for discussions.
Professor E.T.Brown for useful commments.
Professor
R.E.Goodman
and
Dr. Nicholas Barton for providing me
with useful information.

Dr. A.M. Crawford for his supervision during
the
first
year
of
this work, and his friendship.

Messrs S.Budd and T.Sippel,for suggestions on programming.
Mr. J.A.Samaniego,for his friendship and exchange of ideas.
Last
but
not
least I whish to express my thanks to my wife for
her patience during the hard period of the study, and to
my
for dealing with all my interests during my absence from home.
mother
-4TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
11
NOTATION AND CONVENTIONS
14
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
20
CHAPTER 2 - NUMERICAL MODELLING OF JOINTED ROCK
23
2,0
Distribution of stresses and displacements
23
2.1
The continuum
24
2,2
2,3
2.4
2,5
2.1.1 Mechanical properties
24
2,1.2 Simulation
26
Discontinuities - A literature survey
34
2,2,1 Mechanical properties
34
2.2,2 Simulation
39
The joint element
47
2,3,1 The element
47
2,3,2 The constitutive law
50
2,3,3 Iterative solution
63
2.3.4 Examples
72
Change of the geometry
77
2.4.1 Excavation
77
2.4.2 Construction
79
Types of activities
80
-5Page
CHAPTER 3 - THE ELASTIC REGION
81
3.0
General
81
3.1
Equivalent elastic properties of a jointed rock
3.2
ma~s
82
3.1.1 Three orthogonal sets of joints
82
3.1.2 Two oblique sets of joints
84
Implementation of the direct boundary integral method
86
3.2.1 The integral equation for the complementary

function
3.3
87
3.2.2 Kernels U and T
89
3.2.3 Isoparametric element
91
3.2.4 Nodal collocation
93
3.2.5 Numerical integration
95
3.2.6 Rotation of axes
96
3.2.7 Particular integral
97
3.2.8 Infinite domain
98
103
Example
CHAPTER 4 - COUPLING REGIONS WITH CONTINUOUS AND

DISCONTINUOUS DISPLACEMENT FIELDS
107
4.0
General
107
4.1
Symmetric coupling
108
4.2
Validation
110
4.3
Inherent errors
125
4.3.1 Causes of errors
125
4.3.2 Examples
130
-6Page
CHAPTER 5 - STABILITY OF AN OVERHANGING ROCK WEDGE
IN AN EXCAVATION
142
5.0
General
142
5.1
Idealised behaviour
142
5.1.1 Symmetric wedge
144
5.1.2 Asymmetric wedge
161
5.2
Numerical solution
169
5.2.1 Symmetric wedge
170
5.2.2 Asymmetric wedge
182
CHAPTER 6 - APPLICATION OF THE PROGRAM TO ORE STOPING
188
CHAPTER 7 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
200
APPENDIX 1 - Description of input for program AJROCK
206
APPENDIX 2 - Overall structure of the program
231
APPENDIX 3 - Additional information relevant to Chapter 3
233
A3.1
Orthotropic kernels
233
A3.2
Integration of kernel - shape function products
A3.3
over an element containing the first argument
243
Particular integral
248
APPENDIX 4 - Estimate of error due to the assumption of

continuous tractions at nodes
252
APPENDIX 5 - Graphs for estimating the stability of a wedge

in a tunnel roof.
REFERENCES
254
279
-7-
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
CHAPTER 2
Fig. 2.1
Eight node serendipity element
Fig. 2.2
Axes for transverse isotropy and global cartesian
27
system
29
Fig. 2.3
Sign convention for internal forces
29
Fig. 2.4
Isoparametric three node membrane element
31
Fig. 2.5
Peak shear strength
36
Fig. 2.6
Peak shear strength
37
Fig. 2.7
First joint element
43
Fig. 2.8
Three dimensional joint elements
43
Fig. 2.9
Isoparametric quadratic joint element
48
Fig. 2.10 Failure criteria and parameters
51
Fig. 2.11 Load history effect on current peak shear strength
55
Fig. 2.12 Normal stress vs normal strain law
57
Fig. 2.13 Shear strain vs shear stress
58
Fig. 2.14 Three dimensional sketch for
,a,
Fig. 2.15 Dilation vs shear strain law for the two models
60
62
Fig. 2.16 Iterative process (for compression) - Joint 1,

no dilation
65
Fig. 2.17 Iterative process - Joint 2 without dilation
66
Fig. 2.18 Iterative process - Joint 1 with dilation
67
Fig. 2.19 Iterative process - Joint 2 with dilation
68
Fig. 2.20 Iterations for simple examples
71
Fig. 2.21 Strain softening joints (examples)
73
-8-
Page
CHAPTER 3
Fig. 3.1
Three orthogonal sets of joints
83
Fig. 3.2
Two oblique sets of joints
83
Fig. 3.3
Conventions for kernel arguments
90
Fig. 3.4
Isoparametric boundary element
92
Fig. 3.5
Coordinate systems H,V and 1,2
92
Fig. 3.6
Integration over remote boundary
99
Fig. 3.7
Initial meshes for the examples of Section 3.3
Fig. 3.8
Boundary element region subjected to gravitational

field
Fig. 3.9
104
105
Plane strain and joint elements subjected to

gravitational field
106
Fig. 4.1
Square block in tension
111
Fig. 4.2
A circular hole under pressure
111
Fig. 4.3
Hole within infinite rock mass modelled
CHAPTER 4
by boundary elements only

Fig. 4.4
113
Hole within infinite rock mass modelled

by boundary and finite elements
113
Fig. 4.5
Tension of a long plate
116
Fig. 4.6
Lined opening
119
Fig. 4.7
Excavation of a circular tunnel
122
Fig. 4.8
122
Fig. 4.9
Various methods to determine the limiting values

of tractions at the two sides of a corner
126
Fig. 4.10 Two boundary element regions
131
Fig. 4.11 Circular disc
131
-9Page
134
Fig. 4.12 Square block modelled by 32 boundary elements

Fig. 4.13 Square block modelled by boundary and
134
plane strain elements
138
Fig. 4.14 Large problem with boundary and finite elements

CHAPTER 5
143
Fig. 5.1
Wedge idealization
Fig. 5.2
Symmetric wedge - Friction angle greater than
Fig. 5.3
Symmetric wedge - Friction angle less than
Fig. 5.4
Examples for very low stiffness ratio joints
151
Fig. 5.5
Behaviour of a symmetric rigid wedge
152
Fig. 5.6
Effect of intact rock flexibility
154
Fig. 5.7
Models for elastic wedge
155
Fig. 5.8
Stress redistribution
159
Fig. 5.9
Asymmetric rigid wedge
162
145
149
Fig. 5.10 Oblique wedge
167
Fig. 5.11 Wedge with rotation
167
Fig. 5.12 Symmetric flexible wedge within rigid rock
171
Fig. 5.13 Symmetric elastic wedges within elastic

rock; a=20
175
Fig. 5.14 Example of stress redistribution in a

symmetric wedge
Fig. 5.15 Asymmetric wedge
181
183
-10-
Page
CHAPTER 6
Fig. 6.1
Stope and drive geometry
189
Fig. 6.2
Stope,drive,and surrounding rock discretization
189
Fig. 6.3
Initial mesh
193
Fig. 6.4
Gravitational loading
194
Fig. 6.5
Excavation of the drive
195
Fig. 6.6
First level ore excavation
196
Fig. 6.7
Second level ore excavation
197
Fig. 6.8
Third level ore excavation
198
APPENDICES
Fig. Al.1
Boundary element convention
213
Fig. Al.2
Plane strain element convention
219
Fig. Al.3
Joint element convention
219
Fig. A2.1
Flow chart of program AJROCK
232
Fig. A3.1
Lines on which the orthotropic kernel U is undefined
240
Fig. A3.2
Analytical integration of a logarithm - polynomial

product over a straight line element
Fig. A3.3
244
Spiral method used for the determination of

the diagonal terms of matrix
244
-11-
LIST OF TABLES
Page
CHAPTER 2
Table 2.1
Shear strain regions
59
Table 2.2
Two plane strain and two joint elements
74
Table 2.3
One plane strain and three joint elements
76
CHAPTER 3
Table 3.1
Integration of kernel shape function products

over an element containing the first argument
Table 3.2
95
Displacements at the nodes of a brick (example)
103
Table 4.1
112
Table 4.2
Circular hole modelled by boundary
CHAPTER 4
elements only
Table 4.3
Circular hole modelled by boundary and

finite elements - Displacements at nodes
Table 4.4
115
Tension of a long plate modelled by

asymmetric mesh
Table 4.7
114
Tension of a long plate modelled by

symmetric mesh
Table 4.6
114
Circular hole modelled by boundary and finite

elements - Stresses within plane strain elements
Table 4.5
114
117
Lined circular tunnel with full adhesion

on interface
123
Table 4.8
Lined circular tunnel with free slip on interface
123
Table 4.9
124
Table 4.10 Prescribed values in finite and boundary elements
129
-12-
Page
Table 4.11 Equivalent nodal forces and displacements
for various particular solutions
132
Table 4.12 Equivalent nodal forces given by use of

stiffness matrices K' .K
1,(K1)T
Table 4.13 Square block modelled by 32 boundary elements
132
135
Table 4.14 Square block modelled by finite and

boundary elements
136
Table 4.15 Stresses at centres of plane strain elements

of large problem for KA=O
139
Table 4.16 Stresses at centres of plane strain elements

of large problem for K
A=l
140
CHAPTER 5
Table 5.1
Symmetric almost rigid wedge within

infinitely stiff rock
Table 5.2
Symmetric elastic wedge within rigid

surrounding rock
Table 5.3
176
Symmetric elastic wedge within elastic rock,

without excavation sequence
Table 5.4
1=35
0 ,a
2=
50
184
Asymmetric wedge surrounded by rigid

rock; a
Table 5.7
179

rock; a
Table 5.6
177
Symmetric elastic wedge within elastic rock,

with excavation sequence
Table 5.5
172
0
1=20
,a
2=
50
185

rock; a
1=35
o ,a
0
2=20
186
-13-
Page
CHAPTER 6
Table 6.1
Material properties
190
Table 6.2
Discretization
191
Table 6.3
Activities
191
APPENDICES
Table A3.1
Determination of function arctan
241
Table A3.2
Integrals I
for isotropy
243
Table A3.3
Integrals I
for orthotropy
245
Table A3.4
Analytically evaluated integrals of kernels U

g
n
n
246
-14-
NOTATION
AND CONVENTIONS
The following notation is used unless defined otherwise

A
Support force in Chapter 5
A
s
Cross sectional area
Strain shape function
BO
Ratio of residual to peak strength at very low

normal pressure
BE
Boundary element region
Transformation matrix from tractions to equivalent

nodal forces
In Chapter 5 equation coefficient matrix
Elasticity matrix
In Chapter 5 strength parameter
Young's modulus
Compliance
Fr
Frequency of joints in a set
FS
Factor of safety
Shear modulus
Horizontal coordinate
In Chapter 5 horizontal force
In
Identity matrix of order n
Jacobian matrix
In Chapter 5 force
JCS
Joint compressive strength (same as q )
JRC
Joint roughness coefficient (similar quantity to
Stiffness
KA
Ratio of horizontal to vertical stress
Length ; In Chapter 5 base length of wedge
In Chapter 5 strength parameter
i)
-15Shape function
In Chapter 5 normal force
Equivalent nodal force

In Chapter 5 resultant force
Pr
Persistence of joints
External nodal force
Radius
Traction - displacement stiffness matrix

In Chapter 5 shear force
Scf
Stress concentration factor
Kernel function
TO
Tensile strength of wall rock
TR
Coordinate transformation matrix
Kernel function
Vertical coordinate
V
mc
Maximum closure for a joint
Work
In Chapter 5 Weight
Solution vector
Load vector
Nodal displacement
In Chapter 5 wedge angle
body force
b.
Boundary element i
In Chapter 5 non-dimensional support force
c. .
lJ
Coefficient of the free term
Total displacement
d(b,e):
External node number of node e of boundary element b
Internal node number for boundary elements
-16-
In Chapter 5
angle
Internal finite element nodal force
Acceleration of gravity
height
In Chapter 5 the height of the wedge
height to free surface
Dilation angle
Joint element i
k
Joint normal stiffness

Joint shear stiffness
m.
Membrane element i
Normal direction to a surface
nG
Number of Gauss points
Pressure at the free surface

Plane strain element i
Unconfined compressive wall strength
r
Distance between the first and the second argument of

the kernel
Tangential direction to a surface
So
Cohesion
Traction on a surface
Given tractions on a boundary
Displacement component(in shear direction if direction

not specified)
Displacement component in normal direction
Dilation rate
Weight function
First argument of the kernel
Second argument of the kernel (or coordinate)
(or coordinate)
-17z
Depth of excavation
Boundary
Difference operator
Stress component ij due to a unit force in direction k
Total potential energy
Addition operator
Domain
Acceleration
Angle
Engineering shear strain
6..
lJ
Kronecker delta
Virtual displacement operator
6(x)
Dirac's delta
Strain
Scaled coordinate
Second curvilinear coordinate
Angle between axes Hand 1

Angle between two joint sets
Square root of (-1)

Lame constant
Lame constant
Poisson's ratio
First curvilinear coordinate
Very low stress
'IT
Ratio of length of circle circumference to diameter
Density
Unit weight (peg)
Stress ; in Chapters 2 and 5 , normal stress
-18-
cr'
Effective stress
cr
Unconfined compressive strength of unweathered rock
Shear stress
Peak shear strength, (same as
Residual shear strength , (same as
Friction angle
Basic friction angle of unweathered dry smooth surface
Residual friction angle
Angle of frictional sliding resistance along the

contact surfaces of the teeth
angle
Superscripts
c
Complementary function
Particular integral
Initial
Transpose
-19CONVENTIONS
If A is any alphabetical symbol,then
A
Matrix
Vector
(A)HV
Components of
A in HV coordinate system
(A)12
Components of
A in 12 coordinate system
(A)sn
Components of
A in sn coordinate system
(A\y
Components of
A in xy coordinate system
The coordinate systems used are :

H,V
Horizontal and vertical axes
1,2
Axes 1 and 2 parallel with the principal axes for orthotropy
s,n
n is axis of sYmmetry for transverse isotropy and

s is axis parallel with the strata
x,y
General Cartesian coordinate system
The repeated index summation convention is used.

Units
Any consistent set of units may be used by the program.The following
set of units is used unless otherwise specified:
Quantity
Unit
Length
mm
Force
Stress
MPa
-20-
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
The aim of this study is to simulate the behaviour of fractured
rock masses near underground excavations in hard rock. This requires
modelling of intrinsic structural features such us joints, bedding
planes, faults, etc. in the near field, and the rock mass equivalent
continuum behaviour in the far field, where appropriate boundary
conditions should also be satisfied.
The constitutive law parameters for the various materials
involved, used as input by the models,
are usually given by
laboratory tests.These data may not be representative of the

deformability of the rock in place,
since scale effects are
important, and in-situ measured parameters would be more

appropriate. In view of the difficulties involved
in the
determination of a large number of parameters, additional

assumptions are often made, in order to reduce their number.
Apart from representing the fractured rock mass by an equivalent
continuum, special numerical techniques have recently been developed
in order to model properly discontinuous behaviour. Among these
techniques,the one presented by Goodman et al., which is a finite
element formulation, appears capable of properly modelling the true
mechanical characteristics of a fractured rock mass. in which no
topological change of contacts between rock blocks occurs.
Modelling of the exterior problem, that is the imposition of
appropriate boundary conditions to the near field can be achieved by
a boundary integral formulation over the far field.
The present work is an extension of Goodman's original
development, in order to allow for discontinuous behaviour between
-21-
quadratic boundary and/or finite elements in plane strain problems,

and to take into account the effect of the far field. The program
developed is interactive and is supported by graphical facilities.
In Chapter 2 is presented a literature survey on the behavioural
models for the materials, and appropriate numerical methods,
available for the representation of discontinuous rock in the near
field. The quadratic joint element, and its behavioural models
chosen to simulate the discontinuities are described in the latter
part of the chapter.
Chapter 3 deals with the far field.
This is taken to be
homogeneous linear orthotropic elastic. The equivalent orthotropic

properties of the rock mass are derived from the individual
properties of the intact rock and its discontinuities. Then the
boundary integral method used for the formulation of the system of
equations is described. The integration of the kernels of the
integral equation over a boundary tending to infinity is examined.
In Appendix 3 is provided additional information for this Chapter.
There, new numerical techniques are shown, for the evaluation of
integrals of the kernels over elements of which the first argument
is a node.
Chapter 4 deals with the complete problem. In the first part the
symmetric coupling method is used to couple the two numerical
methods. Then validation of the combined code is presented. by
analysing various problems, for which numerical or analytical
solutions are known.In the last part, inherent errors due to the
implementation of the coupling are identified and illustrated by
simple examples. In Appendix 4,
discontinuous tractions is evaluated.
the
error due
to known
-22-
In Chapter 5. the specific problem of the stability of a wedge in

a tunnel roof. subjected to a horizontal stress field is presented.
Initially closed form solutions are derived for symmetric and
inclined wedges on the basis of principles developed by Bray. The
importance of parameters not included is investigated. Then the
various wedge configurations are analysed numerically and the
results correlated with the closed form solution. In Appendix 5,
graphs showing the analytical solution of the symmetric wedge are
presented.
In Chapter 6 the application of the algorithm is illustrated to

an underground excavation problem, in which the stability of an
overhanging wedge is reduced due to shadowing.
Finally in Appendices 1 and 2 are presented a description of

input data and a description of the overall structure of the
program.
-23CHAPTER 2 - NUMERICAL MODELLING OF JOINTED ROCK

2.0 Distribution of stresses and displacements
Discontinuities are a fundamental characteristic in rock. The parameters characterizing its discontinuous behaviour are many and not well
known,and an appropriate behavioural model is complex.Quantitative results are usually obtained from continuum. elastic models.Maury(I970) showed that stress concentrations develop in the heart of the rock mass,
which can cause large deformations and failure,as well as making the rock
impervious through closure of the fissures and change seepage forces completely.These stress concentrations cannot be evaluated using elastic
models.His suggested experimental stress analysis method based on photoelastic and interferometric models with friction between strata was suitable for layered ground.
Working on a biaxial compression rig Ergtin(I970),demonstrated photoelastically that the stress distribution in a rock mass with joints
that slip or separate or have voids may be complicated.Stresses might
be tensile or compressive and concentrations up to many times that of
the applied compressive stress. The displacements for various angles of
orthogonal sets of joints (continuous or staggered) were, measured by Gaziev and Erlikhman(I97I) on a model test for foundations.They calculated
the stresses corresponding to the above displacements,and equivalent moduli of elasticity,and compared the stress distribution to the measured
one (strain rosettes) and found great discrepancies increasing with the
degree of discreteness.Rotation and jamming caused tensile stresses in
separate blocks of the foundation. Interaction between blocks were examined by Chappell(I979).Slip,rotation,and constraints controlled the load
transmission pattern of the discrete model. The material mass was conceived as a structure with a finite number of redundancies,progressively
~
reduced as hinges form within the mass, till the material becomes a mechanism and collapses.
-24-
The main parameters determining the stress and displacement distribution

pattern are:
a. Directions of joint systems defining the anisotropy.
b. Type of discontinuity, shape of blocks and their arrangement in the
rock system.
c. Characteristics of joint contact surfaces.
d. Shear strength of joints.
e. Deformability and strength of intact rock.
f. Type of loading, or interaction between rock and structure.
g. Number of rock blocks in direct contact with structure.
2.1 The continuum.

By continuum we mean the parts of the structure on which the displacements are continuous, and hence the strain finite.Parts of the structure that have been modelled as continuous,are the intact rock and the
structural elements as timber, steel ribs with wall or liner plates,rock
bolts and concrete lining placed within forms or pneumatically.
2.1.1. Mechanical prpperties.

Attention is restricted to deformability only.
Intact rock.
Extensive literature exists on the elastic properties of intact rock.
These data have been summarised by Kulhawy (1975) and Hoek and Brown (1980).
Two types of Young's moduli appear;the modulus of the deformation which is
a secant one and a modulus of elasticity which is an initial tangent one
and hence greater than the former. Values range between I and 100 GPa.Highest values are for plutonic igneous rocks, intermediate values are for
clastic sedimentary rocks and non foliated metamorphic rocks,and lowest
for volcanic igneous rocks as tuff.Poisson's ratios vary between 0.02 to
-25-
0.73 with an average of 0.20.Variation with stress of elastic modulus

under triaxial conditions is small for hard crystalline rocks, but significant for porous clastic or closely jointed rocks. The Poissonsratio varies with stress level.
Another important factor is anisotropy, i.e. variation of the rock
modulus with direction. The deformational behaviour of schistous rocks (Loureiro,(1970)) in laboratory experiments was found well described by a
transversely isotropic idealization. In situ tests on greywake indicated
the likelihood of similar behaviour.
The variation of the elastic modulus with direction for granites
Peres, (1966)) was found to be adequately represented by the formula
x2/A2ty2/B2tZ2/(i=I, E=x2ty2tz2, which is an ellipsoid.The maximum anisotropy varied from 1.25 to 2.54.The same investigation for sedimentary
and metamorphic rocks ( Peres) (1970)) showed the need for a higher
.
order equatlon
222222224224.
of the form;x /1 ty /m tz /n txz /p ty.z /q =1 ,whlch
is a quartic.
Structural material
The mechanical characteristics of the various materials are well defined and may be found in appropriate codes as
GPIIOor~DIN~I045:::forr;cQR-
crete,BS 449 for steel and BSCP 112 for timber. They may be found also in
hand-books as Kempe's Engineers year book, Morgan-Grampian book publishing
Co. Ltd and Beton Kalender, W.Ernst und Sohn,issued annually.The elastic
modulus of
shot crete for various projects (Hoek and Brown, (1980)) ranged
between 17.8-35.9 GPa i.e. in the same range as the intact rock.Its value
is usually between 2I~7 GPa (Hoek and Brown,(I980)) with Poisson's ratio
0.25
The Young's modulus for steel sets or rock bolts is 207 GPa
-262.I.2.Simulation.
Intact rock will be simulated with plane strain elements,and concrete lining and rock bolts with membrane elements.
2.I.2.I.Plane strain element.
An eight node serendipity element is used. The element and the shape
functions are shown in fig.2.I.The strain displacement matrix for node i
is given by:
a/ax
B.=
a/ay
-J.
0
=J-
N.
J.
a/aya/ax
~ra/a~lN.
la/a~
J.
(2.1)
N= (I 2Nl' I 2N2' , I 2N8 )
(2.2)
B= (~'~2".""~8)
(2.3)
The Jacobian matrix is
J=~a.x/a~
ax/an
ay/a
J=
ay/an
GNi/a~'Xi aN/a~'.YiJ
aN./anx.
J.
J.
,i=I,2, ,8
(2.4)
aN.J. /an- y.J.
The inverse Jacobian becomes

-L
J-
~~/ax
a~/ay
-aY/a~J
x].
bay/an
= (l/detJ)
an/ay
-ax/an
an/d
ax/a~
The constitutive law is transverse isotropy.In three dimensions the

law is given by:
-V2/E2
Os
-V/E 2 0
on
oz
E:
E:
-V2/E 2
1/E
E:
-V/E I
-V/E 2
l/E l
lEI
-V/E I
=
Ynz
1/G
Ys z
l./G I
Ysn
1/G 2
(2.6)
nz
SZ
sn
where the axis of symmetry is n,subscripts 1 describe behaviour within

the isotropy plane sz,subscripts 2 describe behaviour within the aniso-
-27-
-7
'5
'8
Element
Node coordinates
in
~, 11
Node
plane.
~i
-I
I
I
I
4
5
6
7
8
11i
-I
-I
-I
-I
-I
I
I
Mapping
Shape functions
Corner nodes N~=0.25(1+E,;E,;.)(H1111.)(E,;';:.+n11.-1),i=1,3,5,7
~
Midside nodes
N~~ =0. 50( (E,;~1 ~(l -+E,;.- E,;.~ ). (1-11 2) +n~~. (1 -n-n
.)(1_/:,"2
-1
~
, 5..=2 ,4.6,8.
Figure 2.1 Eight node serendipity element (Owen & Hinton 1980)
-28-
tropy planes sn,zn and G is dependent i.e. G

'(1+ v
i)).If axis z
1=E1!(2
1
coincides with the axis of the excavation, the relation for plane strain
becomes (Zienkiewicz,I977)
(E:)
.... sn =(D)
- sn (0) sn ,ndE1!E2,m=G2!E2
N
If axis slis inclined to x at an angle
a (Fig.2.2),then
a rotation of
axes is needed for D,

(D) =TT.(D) .T
- xy - sn-
os2a
T= sin
-
sin2a
2a
cos
2a
"
-2sin&cosa
sina-cosa
-sina'cosa
"
~sina~osa
2,
(2.8)
2,
cos a-sin a
where T the engineering strain coordinate transformation matrix

=T (E:)
.... sn ,... xy
i. e .(t: )
Imposing static equilibrium

K'a+f=Q
-/\,,..,..
nGnG
K, .> [1 J1B:D'B.'detJ'd~n =L LT'(~ .n ). ,-w w
1J
- 1 - 1 ---1 - ,., J
1 1 P q 1J P q
T~ ,=B:"D~B.~detJ
p q
1J "'1 -
"'J
The integration above has been performed numerically using a Gaussian

quadrature formula. The internal forces f are given by (Fig. 2.3) :
f=fb+fs+f O
(2.12)
where b denotes body forces,s surface tractions, and 0 initial stresses.

T
1 1
nGnG,
fb,=(P "P ')b= J J N,'b'detJ'd~dn =LLQ,(~ .n )'ww
(2.13)
1
X1
Y1
- 1 - 1 1
11.. 1 P q
P q
Q'. =N. - b-de t-I
p q
1
For gravitational loading b is given by

b=- r:g , (0,1) T
For quasistatic earthquake loading with -a ,-a accelerations,b is
x
y
b=pg-(a,a)
(2.15)
-29-
s axis on isotropy plane

n axis of symmetry for transverse isotropy
Figure 2.2 Axes for transverse isotropy and global cartesian system
t: trac"tions
initial stresses
b:
one element
y
acceleration of gravity
Figure 2.3 Sign convention
for internal forces.
-30-
The nodal force at node i due to distributed tractions on surface

f
~t.-tt
.=(p .,P .) = !.N..

Xl Yl T
s r: 1
Sl
l1rax/a~J
is
(2.16)
t~La y/a~
The nodal force due to residual stresses is

T :J,.J,. T
T
.,P ')0= ~~
JJ B.-(o 0,0 O,T 0) -J'd~ dn
fO'=(P
1
Xl Yl
~1
X
Y
xy
(2.17)
The external loads at node i are

Q.=(p .,P .) T
1
Xl
(2.18)
Yl
All integrations are implemented numerically.A two point Gauss formula is used,Le . 2 points for the edges,4 points for the area.It is
interesting that when only one element is used with 3
constraints, ,
the stiffness matrix becomes singular.Zienkiewicz(I977) gives the following explanation:

There are 13 degrees of.freedom and there are 4(Gauss points)X3
(stress components per Gauss point)=12 independent relationships.
Because the former are more than the latter)the structure behaves as a
mechanism.For more than one element the number of Gauss points increases
more rapidly than the number of nodes and the problem ceases to exist.
2.I.2.2.Membrane element.
The characteristic of a membrane iSJit is thin and stresses do not
vary accross the thickness.A thin shell or disc transmitting stresses
normal to their cross section only)are examples of bodies exhibiting
membrane action.In the plane strain problem under consideration.)the
concrete lining or any rockbolts evenly distributed along the axis of
the excavation,may be considered as line membrane bodies transmitting
stresses within their line.For the lining,expansion joints are assumed
so that plane stress conditions exist (the effect of
~oisson's
neglected). The element is three node isoparametric(Fig.2.4).

Geometry.
Three nodes define the position of the element as
ratio is
-31-
=a u s /as
Element
a =E't
.~
1;=-1
Mapping on line
~=O
g=+1
e
3
0-/2, -1/8)
~
1.0
Figure 2.4 Isoparametric three node membrane element.
-32-
x=(x,y) =N.x.=N.(x.,y.)
11111
The shape functions
~are
defined on line
in Fig.2.4.
The first derivatives of the shape functions are

(2.20)
The displacements are defined from
u=(u ,u ) =N.a.=N.(a .,a .),

i=1,2,3.
x y
1
1
1
Xl yl
The mapping of line s of the element to line
(2,21)
~
is through the Jacobian
J(~)=ds/d~=dx/d~)2+(dy/d~)2)1/2
(2.22)
(d/d~) x=(d/d~)
(2.23)
N.x.=N.x.
1
The direction of line s is defined from
The strain is defined as the
~hange
in length per unit length of an
infinitesimal element.
E=(d/ds) xT.(d/ds) u= J-2.(x:.N:).N~.a.
J
The strain. displacement matrix
is defined from
~=(Bl,B2,B3)
E=Ba
(2.25)
(2.26)
B.=J-2.(X:.N~).N~
(2.27)
~=(al,a2,a3)
(2.28)
J
T
The constitutive law is given by
Imposing static equilibrium

T
T
T
oa
Q+fOu bdV = fOE odV
..., ....
Substituting for U,E,O from 2.21,2.26,2.29 we get
oaT.Q+foaT.NT.b.dV = foaT.BT.(E.B.a+o ).dV
.........
r-
-.,
/'ftJ,w
N""J
Ka+f=Q
IV
I"'J
The stiffness matrix eomponent K.. relating nodes i and j of one

lJ
element is given by,
-33-
T T
T T
nG T T
K.. =EA JB.B.ds=EAJB.B.Jd t,;=E'Ao E(B.B.Jow)
J.J
J.
J.
p= 1
J.
- (2.33)
The internal forces due to body forces b and initial stresses are
f=fb+f O
(2.34)
f =A'JNToboJ'dt,;
= b'A'L:(NT'J'w)
S
S
~
P
(2.35)
Nb
b=_pg(O,I)T or b=pg(a ,a )T
x y
T
f =A JB a . J' dt,;
=
nG
a . A. L: (B . J w)
(2.36 )
P
ASis the unff'orm'. thickness of the membrane.For rock bolts Asis the sum
,..0
of
nel.
the
,."
0 p~l '"
cross sectional areas of the bolts per unit length of the tun-
2 to 5 point Gaussian quadrature formulae are used in the program.
2.1.2.3 Other compatible elements not included in the program.

Beam elements to model steel ribs are compatible as are also fluid
elements to simulate water drag forces and flow.AII solid elements may
be made plastic by changing the appropriate modUk to accept post yield
behaviour.
-34-
2.2 Discontinuities - A literature survey.

The variation of strength with direction may be termed strength anisotropy.If this variation is continuous, the anisotropy may be termed continuous,if not it is termed discontinuous.Continuous strength anisotropy
for rock has been investigated by Jaeger (1960), McLamore and Gray(I967)
and others.A special case of discontinuous anisotropy,is a rock isotropic
in strengthJcut by a continuous joint set (Jaeger (I960)).His theory was
named the plane of weakness theory.Bray (1967) investigated discontinuous
strength anisotropy with one, two, six and multiple joint sets.In the last
cape
if the strength of the joints is the same or continuously varied
with angle,the strength may be modelled as continuous. This work deals with
discontinuous strength anisotropy exhibited in a rock mass cut by sets of
joints, cleavage, or crushed fault zones,to form the planes of weakness.The
strength of the intact rock is assumed not to be critical. The discontinuities are assumed to play the dominant role in the collapse and deformational behaviour of the excavation. Many sets of them will give the rock a complex fabric.
2.2.1. Me chanical pr:<>?p.erti.es.

It is argued that experimental results obtained on isolated rock joints
can be used effectively in the models.Joints may be filled or unfilled.
Filled joints with thickness of infIlling material of more than twice the
height of the asperities, have the properties of the infilling material.
Their behaviour falls in the context of soil mechanics and they will not
be further considered. Unfilled joints have been found to have the following characteristics:
a. Tension cannot be carried in the normal direction.
b. Shear strength is a function of normal stress and material properties
parameters.
c. Elastic behaviour is exhibited within the yield envelope.
-35-
2.2.1.1.
Shear strength
The first successful
model for the shear strength of a joint was
conceived by Patton (1966).He concluded that,

a. Failure envelopes for rough joints are curved.
b. Changes in the slope of the failure envelope reflect changes in
the mode of failure.
c. Changes in the mode of failure are related to physical properties
of the irregularities along the failure surface.
His first model (Fig. 2.5) is a bilinear envelope,fitted to the curved
ones.The joint surface is idealised as a saw tooth
moae~,the
teeth being
inclined at an angle i.At high stresses the teeth are assumed to break.
He stressed the need for a curved envelope to reflect the multiple modes
of shear failure.Ladanyi and Archambault (1970) proposed a curved failure
envelope for the peak strength.ln Fig 2.6 the law is shown. The law is used
in the program and will be dealt in detail in section 2.3.2 Ladanyi and
Archambault (1980)having more results from laboratory tests adjusted some
v).
constants into their failure equation (power constants for a
and
s
They derived also avaryingi Patton law (Fig. 2.5).The prediction of strength in biaxial tests was also investigated.Jaeger (1971)
suggested~ava-
rying cohesion law (Fig. 2.5).A general criterion for rough joints was
developed by Barton(1971,1973,1974).lt is in the form(Fig. 2.6)
1
T/an=tanJRC) .logI0(JCS/an)+$b)
For
, O.01<a/JCS<I. 0
(2.37)
a/JCS>I.0 a Mohr Coulomb failure criterion was suggested.
The joint roughness coefficient(JRC) can be taken as

20
for rough joints
10
for smooth undulating joints
Class A.
5 for smooth nearly planar joints
Class B.
Class C (foliation and bed-
ding joints).
for smooth planar joints.
The basic friction angle $b
normally falls between 25
o and
35
and can
-36-
Patton's Law
low stress T p=otan(,..+i)
high stress Tp=sO+otan<l>O
1
a
,"
,/
Jaeger's Law (varying cohesion)
/
/
(
T p =S'
0 i-e
-b<J)
,/
+ tan<l>O
"
a
,,
Patton's Law with varying i
101<loi
T =a-tan ( +i)
p
1.1
tani=( 1- (a lOT) O.25).tani

o
i ~J30
O
Figure 2.5 Peak shear strength.
-37-
~adanyi
Tp
and Archambault
=(o(l~ )(v+tan )+0. 'T ) / (I - ( I - a. ).v.tan )

.r
s O
s
L r
.
s
k
v=(1-0/(TP
.tam ' a. s =1-(1-0/(naT))
o
T))
v=O
a. s =1 for
a/a? 1.0n
Barton's Law.
in Region II
TJ On =t an (J RC.l og1 0 (J CS,u n)-I<1> b)

in Region III
T-pO n=tan(JRC'log I 0(OI- 03)/On ~ b)

in Region I
straight line
qu and JCS are the same
a I axial stress at failure
a 3 confinement
Figure 2.6 Peak shear strength.
K=4,L=I.5
-38-
be taken 30
varies from
if not known.The joint wall compressive strength(JCS=qu )
for unweathered joints to 0.25-0
If the dilation angle at peak i
for weathered ones.
and the maximum dilation angle i
at
extremely low normal stress are known, then the formula might be written
t
T/on =tan9d'-i 0 )-(ip Ii 0 )+i 0 )

No significant scale effect exists for peak shear strength of tension
joints. Scale effect is significant for displacements.
t
For o/JCS<O.OI Barton(I976) suggested a straight line to zero.A curve

with normal tangent at
n =0 seemed also appropriate.For high
stresses
i.e. o/JCS>I.O he assumed that confinement was of importance and hence

JCS was no
longer
appropriate.He introduced in his formula instead of
Jes, 01-03 where 1 is" the axial stress at failure and

This formula reduces to the previous one for
3 the
confinement.
3=0 in which case
0I=JCS.
Barton and Bandis(I982) concluded that the shear strength and shear
stiffness reduce with increase of the block size. This may be used for the
scaling of laboratory tests,when no rotational or kink band deformations
occur.Krsmanovic(I967) conducted a series of direct shear tests in sandstone, conglomerate and limestone and determined the initial and residual
shear strength of the discontinuities in hard rock. The parameter
t
n=Tp/Tult was plotted for various displacements and found to be as high as

10 for small normal stresses(0.3MPa).For higher normal stresses the ratio tended to I.O.The effect of normal stiffness on the shear strength
of the rock was examined by Obert,Brady,and Schmechel(I976).
2.2.1.2 Deformability.
The deformability of joints has been discussed by Goodman(1970,1974,
I977).He proposed a hyperbolic compression curve,a constant stiffness
or constant peak displacement model for shear and a model for dilation.
These models will be dealt in section 2.3.2.Celestino(I979) performed
cycled tests on artificial specimen joints with very regular geometric
form.Hungr and Coates(I978) studied the relation of deformability of
-39-
joints to rock foundation sett1ements.Wa1sh and Grosenbauch (1979) modelled the compressibility of fractures.Swan (1983) showed the functional relationship between .norma1 stress,norma1 stiffness and true contact area.
Estimates for in situ joint deformation parameters are given by Barton (1972,
1980) ,BandiS'et al(1983) ,and Barton et a1 (1983).
2.2.2.
Simulation
Four approaches have been investigated to select the simulation method

used.
a. No tension and laminar elements
b. Discrete elements
c. Displacement discontinuity elements
d. Joint elements
2.2.2 . 1. No tension and laminar elements.

Zienkiewicz,Va11iapan and King (1968) used no tension elements to
simulate rock behaviour. This technique was used first for concrete. The
laminar element is a thin no tension element used in composite materials.
An eight noded plastic plane strain e1emeht(Pande,(1979)) with length
several thousand times its thickness might also be used to simulate
joint behaviour.
2.2.2.2.
Discrete elements
These are suitable for closely spaced joints in hard rock.The joint deformations overshadow the intact rock deformations and the intact rock may be
considered rigid. The block centroids having only three degrees of freedom
-40-
determine the geometric position of the block, thus reducing the size
of
the problem.Further,no stiffness matrix factorization is performed as the solution is sought through successive relaxations. The method is suitable for
large movements and changes of contacts. Two methods are used to find a static equilibrium position.
Dynamic relaxation (Cundall (1971), Vargas (1982)) inputs incremental forces
at the joints,which are transformed to incremental forces and moments at
the centroids of each block. The displacements
time domain,by
then are followed in the
integrating the accelerations (- acting force/block inertia).
New contact forces will correspond to the displacements,and
a new cycle be-
gins.New contacts may arise and others will cease to exist. The cycles will
continue till a stable position is attained.,
Static relaxation (Stewart, (I98n) is similar to the well known Hardy Cross
method for the solution of frames in statics with relaxation. Small increments of force must be used in order to follow large displacements. This
method is better
than
the previous one as far as computer time is con-
cerned.
It is argued that any type of constitutive law may be used by the methods.
2.2.2.3.
Displacement discontinuity (D.D.)
The method is especially suitable for dealing with cracks (Roberts and
Einstein, (1979)) and slit like openings.It is based on the
solution
to the problem of a constant discontinuity in displacement over a finite

line segment in the x,y plane of an infinite elastic body,derived by Crouch
in I976.Any distribution of relative displacements between opposing sides
of a segment may be discretized by displacement discontinuity elements.
The displacements and stresses at any point are the sum of the displacements
or stresses due to all displacement discontinuities.Although usually constant
D.D elements are used
(Crouch and Starfield (1983)), higher order elements
-41have also been used(Crawford and Curran, (1982)).

The system of algebraic equations is formed by considering the
boundary conditions for
each element.
>
--\
- +
Ddn =u-u
n n
If tractions are prescribed,
ti=A~j.Di
If displacements are prescribed,
i_Bij Dj
u - d d
If mixed conditions eXist,Jthe .above equations may be rearranged to

form a system of linear equations with b
the known quantities,
The displacement discontinuities are defined in the sketch above and

can be written in vector form
where s,n is the local coordinate system;-/+ indicates the side of

the element;i,j are nodal points;and A~j ,B~j are boundary influence
coefficients for the tractions and the displacements respectively.
Ddmust be computed first. Tractions and displacements will be computed
by substitution of Dd into 2.39 and 2.40.In this sense it is an indirect

boundary integral method, where instead of fictitious forces we have fictitious displacement discontinuities.
-42-
2.2.2.4.Joint element.
The joint element is a linkage element between faces of blocks.
It was developed by Goodman,Taylor ,and Brekke(I968).Their model shown
in Fig.2.7 is afour noded two dimensional element.Two independent components for stress and strain exist i.e a
'l
and e , .Applying stann s
dard finite element procedures,the stiffness matrix becomes,

2k
-.
-k
2k ri
2ks
kn
K= L
-2k s
-k n
o
o
2~
-k s
-k
-2k s
-2kn
-2kn
-k s
-k n
0 -2k n
-2ks
o
o
where k
-2~
and k
-~
are functions of
~
n
, , and the load history.

s
This joint could model adequately features such as failing

in tension or shear,rotation of blocks,development of arches and to a
certain extent the collapse pattern of structures.The element was extended then to three dimensions(Mahtab and Goodman, (1970)) as shOvffi
in Fig.2.8.The no tension element technique has been compared to the
joint element one by Heuze et al.(I97I) for the case of borehole jack
deformability tests.Goodman and Dubois(I97I,I972) coupled shear and
normal stresses by introducing dilational properties to the joint element.Thus roughness that increases the strength of the joint was introduced as a factor affecting deformability.The constitutive
matrix~
has become full. The constitutive law for dilatancy was formulated by
transforming
E for
an assumed smooth plane parallel to the direction
of the asperities.For a smooth plane
D= [ks
-0
0]
n
~Ois
diagonal and given by,
-43-
. t Cp
y.n
x,s
1
f-
1.0 [
bottom
L/2-+- L/2-*
N
4=0. 5-x/L
1=N
_______
Figure 2.7, First joint element (Goodman et al.1968)
6_-----------:7'i
2
x
:t
Figure 2.8 Three dimensional joint elements (Mahtab & Goodman 1970)
-44-
By rotating the coordinate system by an angle i,~ becomes

2i
2
sini-cosi'(k s -kn _
[k cos i+ k 'sin
T
D=TR'
s
. TR=
s
n
2
2.J. - 0
k
sini-cosi' (k -k )
k -cos J. t k. san
n
s n
n
s
01
ss
k
[ k .9'
fi
kj'
sn
k,
ns
=k
sn
The solution may be approached either by a variable stiffness method

or a load transfer one.A constant energy perturbation would speed convergence but would not always converge.It is argued that if the
stif~
fness matrix is to be altered at each iteration, it would be only slightly more expensive to modify the load vector as well. Thus the load
vector
wo~ld
be modified as for the load transfer method,whereas the
stiffness would be modified so that the energy spent would not change.
In the case
in which k
and k exist and the variable stiffness

ns
sn
technique is used,D will become asymmetric during solution , and if
a symmetric solver is used it will need symmetrization.
Stiffnesses may be determined experimentally according to their
definitions,
k ss:(aT/aU)
k .=(aO/av) , k =(aT/dV) , k, =(ao/au) (2.46)

nn
sn
ns
A machine in Prof.Muller's laboratory at Karlsruhe,Germany can determine directly these coefficients by doing controlled normal and shear
displacement,direct shear tests. Usually these coefficients are determined indirectly from controlled normal stress-direct shear tests.
Numerical simulation of crack initiation of a biaxially loaded
sand plaster plate with two perpendicular joint sets
(De Rouvray and Goodman, (I972J showed the sUitability of the method
for parametric study.Ghabousi,Wilson and Isenberg(I973) developed a
joint element by defining the displacement degrees of freedom at the
nodes of the element to be the relative displacements between opposing
sides of the slip surface. This technique according to the authors,overcomes numerical difficulties associated with high joint stiffness.
-45Let us consider the following one dimensional problem in the sketch

to illustrate their approach.
t~
The stiffness matrix is

e
K=
-kj
(2.47)
ke + kj
- kj
;-~
For large kj/ke J this matrix becomes ill conditioned.lf now the unknowns
are changed to be ub and
~u=u t
-ub ,and a=
[
~ ]
~
, t hen
u=(ut,ub)T=a.ul=a.(~u,ub)Tand
,
I
TIT
K'u=K'a'u =(Ko'a)'u =P, (a 'Koa)'u =a'P
,-J
-,..,
_"'_"',..,
_~
t"'J
(2.48)
""",_,..J
The new stiffness matrix avoids the previous problem. It is given by

IT.
! =~ .~.~=
rke+kj
ke
ke}
2ke
For the two dimensional case they considered they defined

where
14 and 04 are the 4X4
a as
unit and zero
matrices respectively. The housekeeping of the global stiffness matrix

becomes more complicated.
Goodman(I975) included a two dimensional joint element program in his
book.Desai,{pesai,(1977) ) used 3-D curved joint(interface) elements
for the solution of foundation problems.Sharma,Nayak and Maheshwari
(1976),in analysing a rockfill dam took account of interfacial sliding
by using quadratic joint elements at the interfaces.Goodman and st.John
(1977) elaborated the use of F.E. for the analysis of discontinuous
rocks. They included a new type of joint element with three degrees of
freedom instead of the four of the previous linear element, the relation
between stress and strain being now,
-46k
= a
!::J.u
!::J.v
(2.50)
The element behaves as a linear element in the normal direction, and as

a constant one in the shear direction(i.e. it cannot accept change in
length).M
of
is the moment about the centre caused by the linear variation

O
a ,!::J.w is the rotation of the element caused by the linear variation
of !::J.v.The rotational stiffness k =k 'L 3/4,where L the length of the

W n
element.Hittinger and Goodman(I978) presented a computer program for

stress analysis which included linear type joint elements with constant
shear stiffness. Their program has been the basis for the joint element
module developed here.
A comprehensive rock discontinuity model has been developed by Roberts and Einstein(I978),that can treat the entire behavioural history
of a rock discontinuity without dilation.Ke Hsujun.(I979,I98I) used joint
elements,non linear material properties and load cycling.Heuze(I979)
illustrated. the significance
of dilation in the analysis of jointed
structures. The increase in the shear stiffness and the normal stress
of a joint,subjected to transverse restraint during shearing were shown
to be of great importance. This would also increase its shear strength.
Heuze and Barbour(I98I,I982) presented a new model for axisymmetric interraces, such as found in shaft and footing design.A new model for dilatational effects was also included.VanDillen and Ewing(I98I) discussed
a new version of BMINES,a static three dimensional non-linear program
with joint elements,whose constitutive relations are posed in terms of
plasticity the.ory;i.e. dilation is considered to be plastic strain in
the normal direction and slip is taken to be plastic shear strain.A non
associated/flow rule allows slip and dilation to be specified separately.
Desai It al (1983,1984) presented a thin layer element.
Carol and Alonso(I983) presented an isoparametric quadratic joint element
using a constant peak shear displacement law and dilation.
-47-
2.3.The joint element.

2.3.1.The element.
This is a quadratic isoparametric element, the shape functions and
the sign conventions for which are shown in Fig.2.9. The coordinates of
the middle line nodes are defined in terms of those of the interface element nodes by
x =0.5(x(1)+x(2
..1
-
(2.51)
The coordinates at any point in the middle line may be calculated as

x(/:")=N.(/:").x.
, i=i,2,3.
':>
1 ':> -1
The coordinates at any point of the boundary of the element may be

calculated similarly.The relative movement between the faces of the
element at node 1 in the xy plane is given by,
Li~1=(LiulfLivl)T=(U(2)-u( 1) ,v(Z) -v( lT=

=
r-L
0 1
-1
0] (U(1),v(1),U(2),V(2T=
T'~al
<,
T' (-1 2,1J

=
For all three nodes
Lia=(Lial,Lia2,Liaa)
~
-
.""
6x1
- -12Xi
a=(al,a2,aa)
......
The relative displacements at any point are

@
xy
N.=
1
=(Liu
.ty )T=N.Lia.=N.T'
a.=N.a.
1
-1
1 -1
1-1
_N. 0 N. 0]
[ 0 -N. 0 N.
1
(2.57)
The jacobian determinant is given by
J=ds/d~= 1dx/d~)2+(dy/d~)2)= 1N~x.)2+(N~y.)2)
1 1
where N is the derivative of N with respect to

The direction of s is defined from
dx/ds=(dx/d~) (d~/ds)= J_1'N~ (~)x.

-
""1
,i=1,2,3.
-48-
x ( s ) =x :N . (E,;)
1
i= 1, 2,3.
(2) .
(1)
Element
Shape functions
1.0
N1 =0. 5~ (~-l)
1
E,; =-1
E,; =0
N 2 =1. ......"c- 2
~Sign
conventions for stresses
and strains.
Figure 2.9 Isoparametric quadratic joint element.
-49The coordinate transformation matrix is
dX d S
/
E= L-dY/dS
dy/ds
(2.60)
dx/ds
The strain is defined as

s=(s ,s )=(i.O/t)(lm,~v)T=(1.0/t)R(tm,~v)T=(1.0/t)-RN.a.=
s n
Sn".,.
xy
- J. - J.
=B.-a.
(2.61)
-J. -1
where B the strain displacement matrix of the joint and t the thickness
of the joint.We accept constant thickness of the joint and t=i.o
The constitutive law can be written in the form,
T
do=d(T,O)
=D'ds=D-B'da
,.
- -
12=
r;s
G
ns
for constant D the relationship becomes,
(2.62a)
sn
k .}
k..
nn
(2.62b)
Imposing static equilibrium by equating the virtual work of the external
forces to the work of the internal forces,
Of}?' ,g=J o~ T- g -ds
= fOaTBT'(Oo+D-B.a)-ds=
- ---
T T
..
foaT'BT'Oo-ds + foa -B -D-B-a'ds

fo=fBT.Oo-ds
K=fBTDB-ds
-
---
-+
-Q=fo+Ka
".
where f o the initial loads and K the stiffness matrix.
Integration is performed numerically as,

nG
nG T
f 0= ~ (B"'='Oo .J w)
K= ~ (B -D'B'J'w)
-
P-l - -
- P-l -
- -
The order of the Gaussian quadrature formula used is between 2 and 5.

In the first iteration D is constant within an element and hence the
polynomials are of degree 5.The exact answer can be obtained with 3
points of integration.After the first iteration ,the state determination
is performed at the Gaussian points.Since the
matrix varies continu-
ously along the joint in a form differing from a polynomial ,the stiffness matrix would not be computed exactly,although a better approximation would be obtained by a higher order formula.
-50Any unbalanced stresses at the Gauss points after the state determination has been computed,are transformed to unbalanced nodal forces as,
(2.65)
where superscripts e and r denote,due to elastic solution, and real values due to constitutive relation for the same strain, respectively.
2.3.2. The constitutive law.

The joint element is completely non-linear, with two independent
non-associated flow rules for normal stressvs normal strain, shear
stress vs shear strain.It also includes dilation that couples shear
to normal strain, accounting for roughness. The testing of compatibility
of displacements vs stresses through the constitutive law is called
state determination.Normal stress vs normal strain is no tension elastic
for compression. Shear stress vs shear strain is elastoplastic.Flow is
determined by the direction of the joint and the dilation law.
The peak shear strength is given by an envelope relating peak shear
strength to the normal stress.Two types of joint models are available.
Both models have the same shear stress-shear strain behaviour.
2.3.2.1. Shear strength (Fig.2.IO)
Peak shear strength of joint I.
Ladanyi and Archanbault's(I970) failure criterion is used.The
shear strength of the joint is assumed to be the sum of four separate
strength components,SI,S2,S3,S4.The three first components assume no
shearing occurs. From static and limit equilibrium we have,
N-cosi+S'sini=V
\
Nt
(2.66)
~P.\V
i
""""'''''
-51-
Joint!
Ladanyi & Archambault
lI?~.l;~perc+T;rU -per-c )
perc depends on time history
qu
1.0
v/tani
dilation rate v=dy/dx
o.a k-----------=:::===--+-shear area ratio c, s= 'f.I:iA/A

s ' as
1.0
- ... - - - _ . - - - - -
---~_"":"
__:":'_~--~-
Joint2.
Mohr Coulomb-Patton
1.0
Residual to peak
relation
1.0
Figure 2.10
_'l!'lf~11.:1re criteria
and param eters.
o/qu
-52-
From kinematic consideration we get

b.v/ !:m=tani
External and internal work is given by
W. =Sb.u
ext
W.w t=Nb.v+P'b.u/cosi=N(b.v/b.u)~u+(N+Stani)tan~b.u
'
U
Equating external to internal work done i.e.W.~nt=Wex t,we have,
For an irregular surface we put tani=v,i.e. an average dilation rate.

(2.68)
where f an average friction angle for different irregularity orientations.
050.
It can be taken f~U~ 30
For high loads complete shearing of the
asperities occurs,and the strength of the discontinuity becomes the same
with the strength of the rock(brittle ductile transition,Mogi(I966)).
The strength of the rock is given by Fairhurst(I964),
, m=(n+1.0)0~(2.69)
O)
However the two modes occur simultaneously before the transition point
1'P=q (i.O-n-o/q )0.5(m_LO)/n , n=q /(-T
is reached , the total peak being partially due to overriding and partially due to shearing of asperities.If As the portion of surface A over
which the asperities are sheared off and as=As/A,a linear interpolation
between the two modes a =0 and a =i.O is performed, i.e.
s
s
S=(S1+S2+ S3)' (1.0-a s)+S 4 as
(2.,70)
oO\O-a Hv+tan )+a 'q .(1.0+n.o/qu)0.5 (m-1.0)/n
SUs u
(2.71)
1.0-(1.0-a )v.tan
s
f
For a s and v an exponential interpolation is made between two extremes
o/q =0
u
o/q >1.0
a =0
s
a =1.0
v=tani
v=O
a =1.0-(1.0-o/q )k 1
kl=1.5
v =(1.0-o!q )k2
k2=4.0
(2.72)
In all the above formulae,qu has been used instead of 0T as suggested
-53-
. (1 0 (0/q '(}.25)1075
.
by Goodman.The new formulae for a s = ( 0/ q u ) 0. 75 ,V=
t ana
u)
0
suggested by Ladanyi and Archambault(I980) have not been implemented.

The degree of interlocking factor n might be useful to be incorporated
in the program.It affects qu and 0T by modifying them to become qun,
0Ton respectively.
Peak shear strength of joint 2.(Figo2.IO)
This is a mixed Mohr-Coulomb,Patton failure criterion.
The Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion is TP=S o+O.tan$jJ
The Patton law is : TP=ootan($jJ +i)
for
-o<-q
TP=q tan($ +i)+(O-q )otan$ , -o>-q

u
jJ
u
r
u
The mixed criterion then becomes:
TP=sO+ootan($r+i)
for
-o~-qu
TP=SO+q otan($ +i)+(O-q )otan$

u
r
u
r
(2.75)
for
-o>-q
This model is characterized by 4 parameters so,q ,$ ,io

u r
r
Residual shear strength T

Very little is known on the variation of residual shear strength
r
T with
n .It is known that for high confining pressure,peak strength
equals to residual,i.e. for
-o>-q
+Lr=TP
At very low confining pressure Tr/TP=B ,where O1.0
u
If the peak shear strength has been attained and shearing continuous,
some asperities will break;depending on the normal stress and shear displacement.Thus for a new load the peak shear strength cannot again be
given by the previous relations unless modified.In the program the new
peak shear strength is taken to be given by the following relation,
TPk=percoTP+(1.0-perc)oTr , perc=(Tpk_Tr)/(TP_T r)
(2.77)
where TPklies on the raIling part of the shear stress vs shear strain
-54-
curve.It must be acknowledged that the incomple.teness of the model might

be misleading in some cases.Say for example a small normal stress is
first applied on
the joint
with a small shear stress that causes
slip to occur.Asperities are overriden but very few broken.Nevertheless

perc might become zero and for higher normal stresses strength w.ill be
moving on the residual envelope which underestimates the strength being
uneconomical-On the other hand,if at very high normal loads some slip
occurs so that perc say becomes 0.9 , almost all high stepped asperities
will have been broken.If then the normal load is reduced, the prototype
would be able to attain only residual stresses,whereas the model would
predict much higher stresses. In Fig.2.II. the effect of load history
due to strain softening is illustrated,as conceived by the author,as
a multiple S shaped curve, that should be modelled in terms of distribution of asperity steepness;i.e. in the functions of a
and
v.
Curve 1 is due to partial shearing at stress LeveI o.s Cur-ve 2 is due to

further partial shearing at stress level 0'2.This has not been programmed
but might be an important point for further investigation.
For good
behaviour of the model,elastic behaviour of the joint is
required if reversal of the load is expected as for initial consolidation and then excavation.The model for monotonic loading would underestimate the strength of the prototype,whereas for reversed loading
might overestimate its strength. These problems cease to exist if strain
softening is not occuring before the final load step.It might sometimes
be reasonable to work with residual values for shear strength, which are
the long term values for shear strength for soft rocks as is suggested
for fissured clays.By reducing TP so that TP_T r becomes small, the error
is also becoming smaller.
-55-
eak stren th
residual stre
th
Curve 2
I
qu
Expected prototype peak shear strength- -
--
model
Figure 2.11 Load history effect on current peak shear strength.
-562.3.2.2. stress vs strain.

Normal stress vs normal strain. (Fig.2.12)
Joint I
The law is a hyperbolic curve used first by Goodman(1975).
vm=-Vmc ["vo 0
(2.78)
["t is a negative very small stress
V is the
mc
0 is the
0
V is the
m
The tangent
maximum strain(positive) that can be attained from 0=[,,1.

negative initial stress.
negative minimum closing strain for 0=0
stiffness is given then by,
k -=dO/d =OO~V ~(V ...s .)-2 C.,.1.0)'(_1-.0)=02/(Q,'V )

n
nn .
m m nn'
me
(2.79)
Joint 2
The law is a trilinear compression curve used by Goodman et al.(1978)
The normal stress
vs normal strain space has been divided into three
regions,
<.V -V
+
nn m me
0=
V-V
m mc <nn<V m +
0=00+k n nn
(2.80)
V~
+ 0=0
m nn
V is defined here as the positive strain from 0= 0 to o=O,and is
m
0
given by,
Vm=-0 0 /k n
(2.81)
Shear stress vs shear strain. Fig.2.13.

An elastoplastic multilinear relationship has been adopted between
shear stress and shear strain.Strain softening and hysteresis loops are
simulated with this law. The shear strain axis has been divided into 5
regions determined by the strains rn'pn'pp'rp that are the points
at which negative or positive,peak or residual strains are first attained. They are defined from the formulae below.
-57-
O.
Vm(-'
.Jol:.----+Vmc( +)
-)
Region II
=Vm..'OnO/ (Vm...nn)
no
Vm=-Vmc"'~rh.
JointI - Hyperbolic compression curve

Region I infinite stress
Region III zero stress
a
Vmc(+)
;=-t
Vm(+
e:nn
Region II
a :OnO+kn.*e: nn
Vm=-OnO/k
.
n
,
7,......
I
II
III
Joint2 - Trilinear compression curve
Figure 2.I2 Normal stress vs normal strain law
-58-
e pk=tP
k/
ks
rPk=TP.'perc+ T r (i-perc)
Shear stress vs shear strain Law.
The shear stiffness is taken zero if T is outside the elastic range.
Figure 2.13. Shear strain vs shear stress.
-59E =TP/k
pp
s
peak, positive
E =M'E
residual,positive
rp
E:
pn
=-E:
M=4.0
peak, negative
pp
E =-E
rn
pp
residual, negative
rp
E =TPk/k reduced peak positive due to strain softening

pkp
s
E =-E
pkn
pkp
Table 2.1.
I
reduced peak negative due to strain softening
Shear strain regions

2
Region Min. strain Max.strain
Name
E
rn
negative
residual
II
E
rn
E
pkn
negative (T -T )/(E: -E )
p r
rn pn
falling
III
E
pkn
E
pkp
elastic
IV
E
pkp
E
rp
positive (T -T )/(E -E )
p r
pp rp
falling
E
rp
_..-
--
shear stress (T)
al.ope Id s)
positive
residual
-T
-T
pk
+d '(E -E
)
s s pkn
k 'E
S
T +d '(E -E
)
pk s s pkp
T
r
During the simulation of excavation or loading,having arrived at a

stable position (E
Sl
,Tl),after a number of iterations,this point will
represent the end of the load step.A new load step then will be applied
and a movement from (E
Sl
,T l) will occur which
must be compatible with
the constitutive law illustrated in the figure.A number of displacements

will be tried then through iterations,that. will always refer to (E
Sl
,T l)
till a new stable position is arrived.As can be seen, u/. is the plastic
~
strain plus the initial strain due to residual stresses and u
is the
elastic strain at the end of a load step.In Fig.2.I4 a 3-D view of E

s'
T and 0 is illustrated, for a linear shear strength envelope and no strain
softening.If E lies in the elastic range,we move on the elastic plane from
s
o to A.Otherwise we move on the plastic plane from B .Note the shift
of the elastic origin.
-60-
,,/"
,-/
,/
"
/
/
"
,-
,/
"
"
"
,/
,"
"
/
/
plastic plane
o
T=k s,,~
P
T = ;\0
defines elastic plane

defines plastic plane
Figure 2.14 Three diQensiona1 sketch for s,T,O
-61-
2.3.2.3. Normal strain vs shear strain (dilatancy).Fig.2.I5.

The normal strain is assumed to be comprised of two components,
nn
being independent of shear strain and dependent on normal stress and

ns dependent on shear strain and secondarily and indirectly through
shear strain to shear stress. The normal strain may thus be written
e = +
n nn ns
Dilation refers always to the initial shear strain which for reversed
loading might give unrealistic behaviour.It depends on normal stress
and shear strain. The equation is as follows
ns
=a.tani
e ns =a. t.ani r
for
for
<
s r
~
S
The two models have different functions for a.

Joint 1 assumes variation for a. such that dilation is the same as the
dilation used in the derivation of the failure criterion, i.e.
a.=(i.O-o/q )4
u
for
o/q <1.0
u
a.=0
for
o/q u~i.o
a.=1.0-o/q u
for
o/q <1.0
u
a.=0
for
o/q
(2.85a)
Joint 2 assumes for a.

(2.85b)
~1.0
This is not consistent with the failure equation assumption of constant

iJfor o/q <1.0 and i=O}for o/q >1.0.Nevertheless the bilinear failure
u
u
envelope is an approximation to a curved one and the variation of a.
used would be both physically as well as numerically more suitable.
Dilation}as a normal strain depending on normal and shear
stres~
should introduce cross terms in the stiffness matrix.

st.John(Goodman and St.John, (197 7)) ,suggested a diagonal constitutive
matrix and correction for dilation in the next iteration to avoid asymmetry of the matrix.Physically this can be explained as preventing all
the dilatancy on the adjacent elements applying external compressive
-62-
Ens
dilation
p=TP. /k s
e r=4. 0- p
maxns=r" a.tani
a-tani
s
shear strain
1.0
a =v/tani
O. a
L-----
..:::::::====_L
La
0.0
=_
o /qu
Joint1
a
1..0
O. a
'--------------=:::::..I:-....--_e0.0
La
o /qu
Joint2
Figure 2.15 Dilation - shear strain law for the two models.
-63stresses to the joint and in the next iteration withdrawing these stresses.In the approach used the idea of preserving the diagonality of the
constitutive matrix has been kept, but the diagonal components will be
modified as will be explained in the next section.
2.3.3. Iterative solution.

Application of the loads is through a sequence of load phases,henceforth called activities and which correspond to an actual work phase,
as an excavation of a hole,or the installation of rock bolts.
The load corresponding to each activity is applied proportionally in a
number of steps,which have been chosen to be between 3 and 5,as suggested by Hittinger et al.(loc.cit.). Within each step an acceptable
solution, i.e. a displacement field compatible with the stress field,is
found,through a number of iterations.Hittingeret al.(loc.cit) suggested 5 iterations per step.In the problems run we allowed sometimes a
maximum of 16 iterations per step for convergence to be achieved.
A check is made at the end of each iteration, whether all the unbalanced
loads, i.e. the difference between the loads at each node,found by the
elastic solution and those that can actually be carried by the structure for the same displacement, are less than a certain threshold which
has been chosen to be between 1 and 5% of the expected load at the nodes.If the answer is positive,we proceed to the next step;otherwise we
proceed to the next iteration.If the number of iterations exceeds the
maximum number of iterations allowed, the analysis stops,and the diagnostic "The solution does not converge" is printed, indicating failure
of the structure.
The notion of iteration,step,activity and load sequence may be
written in set terminology as,
iteration~
where
step
activity C load sequence
is the symbol of
11
is .a subset or identical of".
-64-
A variable stiffness approach is used.The analysis is path independent

for iterations,but path dependent for load steps.After each iteration
the incremental displacements,strains,and stresses corresponding to
the elastic solution are added to the total displacements,strains and
stresses.Any unbalanced loads are added
to the load vector for the
next iteration.
2.3.3.1. Normal stress vs normal strain.(Fig.2.I6,2.I7)

A new shooting point is sought for the next iteration and the unbalanced loads are added to the load vector.If no dilation exists the
approach is:
i.Joint closing and normal stress compressive.
The new shooting point is defined as a point with the same displacementJbut with an applied stress such that the tangent from the point
to the constitutive law curve touches the curve at the existing stress
level. The slope of the tangent is the new normal stiffness. The unbalanced normal stress then becomes,
~N=-(DELV-VREAL)D22
ii.Joint opening or normal stress not compressive.

The new shooting point is defined as the point on the constitutive law
curve with the same strain. The normal stiffness then is defined as the
tangent at this point. The unbalanced stress then becomes,
~N=SIGMA-SIGM
The different definitions of the new shooting point in the above

cases are chosen to ensure the existence of that point.
2.3.3.2. Dilation.
If dilation is not zero,then the constitutive law curve will be
the one discussed previously augmented by the dilation, which will cause
a shift of the curve to the right(fig.2.I8 and 2.19).
-65-
o
J oint closing and
0<
(O,resid2)
\
Elastic system
shootin
\ \ ,.,
(SIGMA,DELV) ...., - - - \
oint.
(SIGM,VREAL)
/,
/'/
DfLN=(VREAL-DELV).D2
(STRESS,DELV) ~ - - new shooting point

VREAL=VM.(SIGM-RESID2)/SIGM
Jr
- - - - -~(SIGMA,DELV)
point on curve
new shooting point .
,,
, Elastic system.
SIGM=RESID2-VM/(VM-
Erti
J oint opening or
Figure 2.16 Iterative process(for compression)-
Joint~,no
0>
dilation.
-66-
J oint closing and
"-
"-
(SIGMA,DELV)
'\
'f"
0<
J GM, VREAL)
I'i-1~
I
(STRESS,DELV)
new shooting point
DELN
Elastic system
DELN
- ..LSIGMA,DELV)
/'1 - - _ _
(SIGM,VREAL)
(STRESS,DELV)
En n
Elastic system
OLD SHOOTING POINT

Joint opening or 0>0
Note : The stiffness in zone I is taken 10 4 -xksI

The stiffness in zone III is taken 10 -4-:'-x ks i
Figure 2.17 Iterative process(for compression)- Joint2~no dilation.
>-%j
1-"
::l
1-"
c+
II'
I-'
~
.....
c+
::r'
1-"
::l
c+
1-"
C-j
::l
........
1-"
fJl
fJl
CD
Ii
.a
Ii
1;'
fJl
fJl
CD
Ii
"0
<
CD
1-"
c+
Ii
Il'
CD
c+
00
l\)
CD
(J"Q
"
<,
<,
Joint closing.
I
,"
..k DILAT~
I
Klas.tic system.
Joint opening.
\
\
- -
--.,..
\ Elastic system.
DILAT
-,.
Eon
0'
I
-J
I-xj
.::s
~"
c+
P'
I-'
~.
p.,
~
c+
::r
I\)
c+
o
~"
::s
::s
..........
~"
til
til
(0
I-j
'"d
a
o
I-j
H)
,.-..
til
til
o
a(0
I-j
'"d
(0
<;
~"
c+
P'
I-j
(0
c+
<o
I\)
(0
~"
(JQ
1/
-;'
1/
/'
DILAT
--\/-
(SIGM,VREAL)
DELN ---.1.....
... DILN ;r-
-",
<K
~s(S]J;i~'L~D]LP _ _(SIGH,
Elastic system
"'Ella t"c system
(STRESS,DEL~)
+-.J/
DILN
DELN*
,.---
(SIGMA,DELvJ
Elastic system
J oint closing
---,-,~
i DILN
_~
I
1
I
~
Joint opening
~
DI AT
(STRESSiDEL~
r __' _ _
DILAT .........,
. I
DELN
(SlGM,VREAL)
IlRsr'frO~
~IGMA,DELV)
-*'
(STRESS DELV) I
~ DILAT
---+:--
ILN
-r - -
Elastic system~(C
I
I
co
0'
Do
nn
-69-
Joint 1..
The new shooting point is found now in a similar way on the augmented
curve. The stiffness matrix will now correspond to this augmented curve.
The total normal strain is the sum of one strain associated with normal
stress and one strain associated with shear displacement.
e = +
n nn ns
, e
ns
=(o/q -1.0)4. t an i .
us)
= min(
S
IE S 1, r )
(2.86)
The differential strains are calculated from,

dn =dun +dns
d
nn
=(d
nn
(2.87)
/do)do
d ns =(a ns /aO)dO+(ans /a s )(a s /aT)dT

The derivatives of strain are given by,
(ans/ ao)=(4/qu)o/qu)-i.0)3.tan i s=F di l
de /do=-f,,-eV /o2='1.0/D
nn
me
nn
d =(du/dT)dT + F dO
s
ns
The cross flexibility F
is given by,
sn
F
sn
=(a
ns
(2.90)
(2.91)
(2.92)
/a )(a faT)
s
s
and is zero for 1 1>

s
The tangential stiffness matrix relating the strain vector (d ,d ) T

s
n
to the stress vector (dT,do)T is the following:
du/dT
Dtang =
-1.
ns
(2.94)
a ns /do+d un /do
Diagonality as described by St.John is attained by putting F
= F =0 in
sn ns
the augmented stiffness matrix. The diagonal stiffness termS are given
by the inverses of the diagonal terms of equation 2.94.They are:

Dnnn
=D /(1.0+Dnn .Fd"l)
J.
D =dT/du
s
where Dun,Fdi l are defined in eqs.2.91,2.90. _
-70-
Joint 2.
The total normal strain is the sum of one strain associated with normal
stress and one strain associated with shear displaeement.
E =E +E
n nn ns
, E =atan i
ns
. s =(1.0-0/qu )-tan
i -E S
Enn =(0-00 )/kn

Working similarly as for joint i we derive the stiffnesses as
dEn Ido=i.O/kn -tan i
.s
/q u
=i.Ojk
n+Fd"l
~
(2.96)
Dn =do/dE n = kn /(1.0+kn -Fd"l)

~
(2.97)
Fdil=-tan i .Es/qu
(2.98)
E is given by eq. 2.87

s
The shear stiffness D =dT/du is unchanged.
s
2.3.3.3. Shear stress vs shear strain.

At the end of each step a shooting point is defined.If the shear
strain in the next step is in the elastic region then the stiffness
is ks;if not the stiffness is taken to be zero.This has been found beneficial for the problems analysed. The unbalanced shear stress is defined by
~S=TAU(computed)-TOR(on
the constitutive law curve).
Two simple illustrations of iteratively approaching an acceptable

solution are shown in Fig.2.20.The problem becomes more complex and
numerically slower if 0 and T vary simultaneously and the cross terms
become important.Very stiff joints might also create numerical problems.
-71T
To
-- d o -
Block
Shear strain iterations under constant 0
-- 00
k2
Block
Joir..t
Normal strain iterations under constant T
Figure 2.20 Iterations for simple examples.
-722.3.4
Examples.
The two following examples are to test the convergence process of

strain softening joint elements with or without dilation. The strain
softening parameter B has always been taken 0.5 and the residual friO
ction angle 10 O.Plane strain elements have also been used.Young's modulus has been chosen to be 100 and Poisson's ratio O.
a.Twoplane strain and two joint elements.
The discretization is shown in Fig.2.2la.The two plane strain elements Pl,P2 are prestressed, the former in the horizontal direction with
an initial stress -1 and the latter with a vertical stress.Joint elements j 1,j2 have been prestressed by an initial normal stress -1.
A stable situation was sought through a number of iterations for various material parameters of the joints and vertical stresses.Both joint
element models have been used.In table 2.2 the total displacements and
the maximum unbalanced 10ads(U.L) have been followed through the iterations.In rows 1 to 4 the joint element model 1 has been used,whereas
in row 5 the joint element model 2 has been used.In row 1 it can be
seen that although shear displacements are within the elastic range,
they fluctuate after the second iteration without further convergence.
This is due to the lack of cross stiffness components of the joint element stiffness matrix and the dominance of the shear displacements.
In row 2 a larger initial vertical stress a and a lower strength q
v
u
have been chosen so that the total displacements lie within the plastic
range of the shear stress vs shear strain curve, but the normal stress
does not exceed q .The same phenomenon observed in row l,was observed
u
also here.In row 3J q u has been chosen small so that the normal stress
exceeds q
and hence dilation and strain softening do not occur. The
problem converged in two iterations.In row 4 the dilation has been chosen to be zero but normal stresses did not exceed q .Shear displacements
u
-73-
%/
f
+,
L
13
xr
""..14
P2
12
#/
15
16
l.0
(a)
'"
j2
P1
1+
~L
2.0
(b)
Figure 2.21
Strain softening joints (examples)
;;f
-74-
Two plane strain and two joint elements.

0
E=100,v=0,BO=0.5,=10 ,OH=-l,ks =1.0,V mc =10.0,qu/TO=10.0,~l=0.025.
Comments
description Iteration Ver.disp. Max U.L.
row
Table 2.2
Model 1
0.487
0.438
Within elastic
q =100
u
. 50
l=
0.486
0.065
range.Fluctua-
0.509
0.481
0.067
0.068
0.507
0.481
0.061
0.068
o =-1
v
Modell
q =10
u
. 50
l=
v=-2
Model.l 0
q =1,l=5
u
(J =-2
v
M!jdel ~ 0
q =10,l=0
u
v =-2
4
5
6
tion of displacements due to

lack of k
sn
terms.
0.507
0.061
1
2
0.973
1.310
0.547
1.270
0.287
4
5
6
1.190
0.969
0.314
0.411
1.000
0.243
0.846
0.867
0.329
0.222
9
10
0.746
0.293
0.799
0.084
1
2
0.973
1.200
0.153
0.001
In plastic range,
and 0- beyond q
n
u
0.079
In plastic range.
Displacements
fluctuate due to
zero cross stiffnesses k
sn
,k
ns
0.973
0.278
In strain softening
1.370
range.
1.450
0.047
0.005
0
Model 2
qu =100,i=5
ov =-1 ' kn =1
1
2
0.485
0.756
0.027
0.794
0.003
0.176
In strain softening
range.
r=1.071
uP=0.267,u
-75were in the falling part of the shear stress strainoCUI"ve.Convergence

was achieved within three iterations.In row 5 the shear displacements
were in the falling part of the shear stress strain curve.Convergence
was achieved within three iterations.
This analysis showed that the lack of cross stiffness components might
cause apart from slowing down the convergence process,divergence of an
actually stable problem. As far as strain softening is concerned there
were divergence problems when we chose negative stiffness for tangent
stiffness.By defining the tangent stiffness to be zero when negative,
these problems were overcome.
b.One plane strain and three. joint elements.
The discretization is shown in Fig.2.2lb.The plane strain element
Pl was initially prestressed horizontally with a horizontal stress
0H=-l.The three joint elements jl,j2,j3were also prestressed with a
normal stress a =-l.A stable position was sought through a number of
n
iterations for various material parameters for both types of the joints.
In table 2.3 the vertical displacement and the maximum unbalanced
load within the top joint and the two side joints was followed through
the iterations.In rows 1 and 2 the joint model 1 was used with different values of
~l
so that the shear displacements of j oint elements jl
and j2 lie within or outside the elastic range. The number of iterations
needed for convergence is about the same showing at least for that example that dilation rather than plasticity or strain softening was the
main factor slowing down convergence.In row 3 the joint element model
2 has been used and convergence has been achieved within three iterations,illustrating the quicker convergence of joint model 2 compared
with joint model 1 due to the linear nature of the normal stress strain
and dilation laws of the former. This is reversed when the normal displacements are near the corners of the normal stress strain constitutive law of joint model 2.
-76-
Table 2.3
E=100,V=0,B
One plane strain and three joint elements.

O=O.5,$=100'OH=-1,On
row description Iter.
=-l,k =l.O,V =lO.O,q /T

me
u O=10.O,i=5?
s
Ver.displ.
Maximum Unbal.load
jl&j2
j3
Comments
Model 1
0.108
0.132
1.122
Within elastic
q =10
u
0.235
0.155
0.259
range.
t,;l=0.025
0.289
0.045
0.018
0.291
0.0097
0.000
Model 1
0.827
0.222
0.066
Always out of
q =10
u
2.140
0.258
0.093
the elastic
t,;l=l
4.460
0.114
0.149
range_the side
6.990
0.037
0.078
joints.
7.720
0.000
0.004
Model 2
0.658
0.603
0.000
Side joints
q =10
u
k =1.0
n
1.570
0.078
0.000
always in
1.690
0.003
0.000
plastic range.
-77-
2.4
Change, of the geometry.

Change of the geometry results from excavation,i.e. removal of
structural material,and construction, i.e. the addition of structural

material.Simulation in the program is achieved through addition or
subtraction of elements. The method used is similar to the one used by
Hittinger et al.(1978).
2.4.1 Excavation.
Previous work includes,Clough and Duncan(1969),and Christian and
Wong(1973).They used interpolation functions for the stress field with
higher continuity than those for the displacement field,to take account
of stress concentrations.In the program this has not been implemented
and results might not be satisfactory}if such stress concentrations
occur near the excavation surface. The quadratic nature of the model
and a finer mesh would compensate for this.
The air elements suggested by Desai
give ill conditioned stif-
fness matrices.
The method used is as follows:
a sNode s within the excavation area become inactive and f'Lxedv'I'hus
the number of d.o.f. is reduced and an identification array containing
the new number of each d.o.f. is formed.
b.Elements excavated but not lying on the excavation surface cease
to be active.
c.Elements excavated and lying on. the excavation surface,get zero
stiffness but continue to exist until the end of the activity,to unload their stresses on the excavation surface. This is achieved by calculating the equivalent nodal forces along the surface bounding the excavation,and applying them in the opposite direction to create a stress
free excavated surface.
-78-
These forces are calculated from,

nG
P=-fB:ads~- E (B~aJw)
~
- ~
p=l - ~
P
(2.99)
d.Add the incremental displacements, strains and stresses to the total ones.
e.lf there are unbalanced forces in the remaining elements iterate
with these forces as the load vector until convergence is reached.
All three types of finite elements,i.e. membrane, plane
strain~and
joint,may be excavated by this method. The boundary element region discussed in the next chapter has not been programmed to be excavated although it might be convenient sometimes.
Stress path dependency necessitates a number of steps of excavation in
order to obtain real deformation paths and to avoid numerical instability,i.e. in one activity (excavation) several load steps are used to
impose the load .The physical meaning of it is, "an excavation progres ...
ses in the direction of the tunnel axis;step by step more unloading
occurs as the problem transforms from three dimensional to two dimensional".
The condition of an element i.e. it exists or it is excavated,or it
lies on the excavation surface,is characterized by a flag IFLAG.The
information stored in the files for an element depends on the value of
that f'Lag s Lf' IFLAG is 0 the element exists.Tf it is I the element is
excavated but lies on the excavation surface.If it is 2 the element is
excavated. during this activity and lies not on the excavation surface.
If
it~greater
than or equal to 3 the element was excavated during a
previous activity.Some information always. remains for an excavated

element.
-79-
2.4.2.
Construction.
The method is as follows:

a.Nodes within the excavation become freed and/or new nodes are added.Thus the number of d.c.f. is increasedpan identification array containing the new number of each d.o.f. is formed and the displacement
vector is lengthened. The first option to free a fixed node is preferable as nodes can be numbered more efficiently.If the program is run
interactively and the eventual development of the mesh cannot be forseen then new nodes have to be added.
b.Elements will be added.If they are of the same type as the previous ones, they will be put in the same order of element type as the existing ones.New types will be added at the end. The small displacement
theory is used and the added elements will be computed with dimensions
corresponding to the undeformed states.Stresses will be computed for
incremental displacements after their placement.For joints, strains are
total relative displacements between opposite sides of the element.
Hence if a joint is half connected to previously fixed nodes(new mesh)
and now freed,and half to the old mesh,it will inherit an initial strain
which can be removed by adding an equal and opposite initial stress.
-80-
2.5.
Types of activities.
The aformentioned changes in geometry constitute important types
of activities treated in the program. Other types considered are gravitational loading,residual stresses ,pressure , concentrated forces and
quasi-static earthquake loading.Water flow drag and thermal effects
have been not considered. The loads considered have been combined in
four different ways to form four types of activities. They are:
a.Gravity,residual stresses and pressure,applied on each element.
b.Concentrated forces,applied on the nodes.
c.Activities a and b together.
d.Quas,istatic earthquake load,applied on each element.
Activity a is usually applied to consolidate the space,i.e. to
arrive at a situation where the stress field is the premining one.Care
must be taken during that stage that no plastic strains occur,or at
least that no strain softening occurs,as this stage is artificial and
plastic strains would alter the material properties.
When applying concentrated forces,it must be remembered that nodes
belong to quadratic elements and the stress distribution in the neighbourhood of the node would depend upon whether the node is midside or
corner.
Quasi-static earthquake load can be applied to all or to selected
plane strain or membrane elements. This type of loading is suitable for
limit equilibrium analyses also.
Due to path dependency(plastic behaviour) ,several steps are needed
for each activity,in order to obtain deformations approaching reality
and avoid such numerical problems as slow convergence and ill conditioning.
-81-
CHAPTER 3 - ELASTIC REGION

3.0 General,
The rock that lies at some distance from the excavation will
not undergo plastic strains ,neither it will exhibit large strains.
This region we intend to model as continuous and elastic.It must be
acknowledged that variability in initial stresses, orientation of
discontinuities,as well as other physical factors would cause this
region to be far from homogeneous,resulting in an increase of stiffness with depth.As a first approximation we assume each elastic
region to be linear
and homogeneous,with elastic properties those
of the rock mass near the excavation. The apparent elastic properties of a large volume of rock, containing discontinuity features
such as joints, schistosity planes,cleavage or bedding,will henceforth be called the equivalent elastic properties of the rock mass,
and will be dealt in Section 3.1.
The coefficients of a matrix that relates tractions to displacements for each such region is computed using a boundary element
program,discussed in Section 3.2.
The problems we intend to solve ,we assume to satisfy plane
strain conditions, the plane being perpendicular to axis 3.
-82-
3.1 Equivalent elastic properties of a jointed rock mass

We assume that the anisotropic rock material can be described
as orthotropic elastic. Two classes of discontinuity patterns can
be described this way. The first pertains to three orthogonal joint
sets with any deformational characteristics for each discontinuity
(Gerrard and Harrison(1970),Wardle and Gerrard (1972)~Ei$sa (1980),
HarrisonandGerrard (1972),Gerrard (1982 a,b,c,d),Pande and Gerrard
(1983) ).
The second pertains to two inclined sets of discontinuities
with the same material properties (Bray (1976)).
Other invesigators who have worked on the subject are Salamon
(1968),who assumed the rock mass to be transversely isotropic,and
Singh(1973) who dealt with discontinuous (staggered) joints,and investigated the problem in the context of composite material theory.
3.1.1 Three orthogonal sets of joints.

The equivalent properties of a rock mass crossed by three orthogonal sets of joints (fig. 3.1) b,d,f,that have normals parallel
to the axes 3,1,2, respectively,are given by the following formulae
(Gerrard (1982b):
Ela/El=l+Flld
E2a/E2=1+F22f
E3a/E3=1+F33b
~21a/v21=1+F22f
v31a/v31=1+F33b
v32a/v32=1+F33b
G12a/G12=1+F12d+F12f
-83-
material
r;
.~r::ff===1
material
I
,I./Fr f
'-,
.....' material b
Figure 3.1. Three orthogonal sets of joints.
joint 2
joint I
Figure 3.2. Two oblique sets of joints.
-84-
where subscript a denotes intact rock,and the denominators of the

left hand side of the equations are equivalent properties. The ad-
ditional non-dimensional compliances F.. k due to the joints are delJ

fined from the following formulae:
Flld=(Ela/knd)Frd-prd
F22f=(E2a/knf)-Frf-prf
F33b=(E3a/knb)-Frb-prb
F12d=(G12a/ksd)-Frd-Prd
F12f=(G12a/ksf)-Frf-Prf
where k,k are the normal and shear stiffnesses of the joints d,
n s
f,b, relating tractions to displacements,and Fr is the frequency of
the joints.We have introduced another multiplier to
the~terms,Pr,
to take account of the persistence of the joints. This parameter

lies between 1 and 0 and is
co~pletely
empirical.
3.1.2 Two oblique sets of joints.

Two sets of joints are assumed,intersecting at an angle 8.
(fig. 3_2)_ Bray(1976) showed that if the intact rock material is

isotropic and
cos 28.
where
1/Knl-l/Kn2+1/Ksl-l/Ks2
::"'1/~K::"'n-l--::"'1/~K::"'n-2-+=Kn-2-1""(~K-nl-~K~s-2~)1:~K~n-1""/""(K~n-2-~K-s--Cl)
K=k/Fr, and Fr the frequency of the joint, then the material
may be represented as an equivalent orthotropic elastic continuum.
-85-
If F .. ,F~. are the components of the compliance matrix for plane

J.J
J.J
strain for the,equiva.lent ortfio-tropic material and the isotropic

intact rock respectively,then according to Eissa (1980),
22a
1 [(l+COS 2n)2 sin 22n
(I-cos 2a)2
sin
]
,
F =- +
+
+
+ F11
11 4
K
K
K
K
sl
nl
n2
s2
tf
F =!- (....L - -L)-sin 22n + (-.L - ---.l.-)-sin 22a J +F 2 = F2l

l'
12 4 Kn2
Ks2
Knl
Ks l
.
F =!.[(1-COS2n) 2 + sin 22n +

22
K
n2
sin 22a
+
33=
n2
K
sl
K
nl
sin 22a
cos 22a
+
K
s2
K
s2
cos 22n
sin 22a
(l+cos 2a)2
+
K
sl
K
nl
+ FI
33
]+
F;2
(3.4)
where
The derivation of the formulae shows that they hold also for
orthotropic intact rock material, whose principal axes coincide with
the principal axes of the joint system. In that case the intact rock
compliances F~. will take their orthotropic values.
J.J
A special case arises if K

and K
From equation
nl=Kn2
s l=Ks 2
3.3 we observe that cos 28. can take any value,that is the equivaJ
lent continuum is orthotropic for any angle 8 . This can be concluded

J
also directly,due to the existence of three orthogonal planes of

symmetry. These planes are the two planes bisecting the joints and
the plane of plane strain. Thus,
a=8./2 , n=n/2 -8. +a = n/2 -a, 2-n = n - 2-a
J
SUbstituting to equations 3.4 we get,

Fl l=0_5 {(l-cos 2 rJI /K +sin 22a/K }+F'
n
s
11
F12=0.5- {(l/K -l/K )- sin 22 a }+ F'
n
s
12
.
2
F22=0.5-{(1+cos 2a)IKn+sin22a/Ks + F~2
F
33= (sin22a/Kn+cos22a/Ks) + F33
<3.6)
-86-
3.2 Implementation of the direct boundary integral method

The direct formulation of the boundary integral method is used
to develop a program for plane strain linear orthotropic elasticity
with quadratic boundary elements. The displacement and stress field
is divided into two components, the first called the complementary
function, that satisfies the homogeneous differential equation of
elasticity,and the second called the particular integral, which is
a particular solution of the differential equation and satisfies
the boundary conditions at infinity,if such conditions are imposed.
The total solution then would be the sum of the complementary function,the particular integral and the initial conditions. This may be
written as,
t cpo
u =u + u + u
(3.7)
where u and t are the displacements and the tractions,and superscripts t,c,p,o stand for total,complementary,particular and initial
respectively.
The differential equation for elastostatics in terms of displacements are those due to Navier for isotropy.
(3.8a)
where b is the body force,and A and ware the Lame constants. L*
is a linear differential operator. For general anisotropy the
equation would be of the form,
L*u=-b
L*
is
now a more general linear differential operator.
(3.8b)
-87-
3.2.1 The integral equation for the complementary function.

The complementary function satisfies the homogeneous equation
L*u=O
The boundary integral equation for that function may be obtained
from Betti's theore~ and the divergence theorem (Watson (1979)),or
distribution theory (Lachat (1975)) ,and is given by
J
J (U..J.J (x,y).t~(y)
T.. (x,y).u~(y)).dS = 0
J.J
J
Y
S+s(x!E)
where
x: the position vector of a point of the region and not at the
boundary.
y: the position vector of a point at the boundary.
S: the boundary surface.
S(XIE): the surface of an infinitesimal sphere around x with

radius E.
i,j: the directions of the first and second arguments of the
kernels respectively.
U.. : the singu1ar solution,that is the displacement at'y' on the
J.J
boundary in direction 'j',dueto a unit force acting at 'x'

in direct~on 'ire Note that U.. (x,y) is symmetric both in
J.J
arguments and indices for orthotropy,whereas for general anisotropy it is symmetric only in arguments,i.e U.. (x,y);:U .. (x,y).
J J.
J.J
T.. : the traction at 'y' on the boundary in direction 'j',due to

J.J
a unit force at 'x' in direction 'it.

The definition of U and T can be written in an algebraic form,
u~(y)=U.. (x,y).e.(x) , L*U=o
J
J.J
J.
t':(y)=T .. (x,y).e.(x)
J
J.J
J.
T=O(U).~
(3.10)
= T(n).U
(3.l1a)
-88-
where
'x'
e. (x)
a force acting at
is the Dirac's delta function
a(U)
the stress field due to displacement field U
the normal, unit vector,to the boundary
in the direction
tit
a differential operator which for isotropy is given by,

T(n) =A.B.~. + w~.2 + ]l.!;.yT
(3.llb)
From equation 3.9 we get the following equation, that is known

as Somigliana's identity.
(3.12)
u~(x)=fSU.. (x,y)t?(y)dS - fST . . (x,y)u?(y)dS
1
lJ
J
Y
lJ
J
Y
This equation may be used if the displacements at points within
the region are to be evaluated,after the values of t and u at the
boundary have been determined.
If
'x'
defines a point on the boundary,equation 3.9 may be used
but integration has to be performed on the surface S +s(xls) - s(xls),

where
sex Is)
is the part of the surface of the sphere with centre at

'x',and radius s ,that is contained within the region,
s(xls) : is that part of S contained within the sphere.

The integral equation is given by,
c .. (x).u?(x) + lim
lJ
J
s+O
fT .. (x,y).U:(y).dS =lim
lJ
J
Y s+O
s-s(xls)
Ju..lJ (x,y).t?(y).dS
J
s-s(xls)
(3.13)
The integrals are Cauchy principal values.The coefficients c .. (x)

lJ
are given by,
c .. (x) = lim f T.. (x,y).dS
lJ
s+O
Y
. s ( x IS )lJ
For a continuous tangent plane,
c .. =1/20 ..
lJ
J-J
where 0 .. the Kronecker delta.
lJ
(3.l4a)
(3.l4b)
-89-
3.2.2 Kernels U and T.

These kernels are defined by equations 3.10 and 3.11. The
convention for position of the indices and arguments is arbitrary,
and in this work the convention used by Watson(1979) has been retained. Banerjee and Butterfield (1980) have the indices and arguments of the kernels interchanged. These definitions are shown in
fig. 3.3. Kernel U being symmetric will be the same in both cases.
For isotropy and plane strain the kernels are given by Lachat (1975):
(x. -y . ) (x. -y . )
1
J
J}
{C3-4v)o .. log(-) + 1 1
2
4.'!T.E.(1-v)
1J
r
r
(l+v)
U.. (x,y)=
1J
1
x.-y.
T.. (x,y)=
.{(1-2.v).(n.(y).J J
1J
4.'!T.(1-v).r
1
r
+((1-2.v).o .. +2.
1J
r
n.(y).
x.-y.
1
1)
(x.-y.).(x.-y.)
x -y
1
1
J .J)en (y). s s}
r2
s
r
is the distance between points x and y. Kernel U can be seen
from the formula
to
be
symmetric in its arguments and indices.
The diagonal terms Eo log(l/r) ,whereas the off-diagonal terms are

pnoduct.s
of'
Kernel TEo l/r
the direction cosines of ;.

The first bracket is antisymmetric in its subscr-
ipts and vanishes for the diagonal terms. The second bracket is
symmetric.
The formulae and their derivation for orthotropy for kernels
U and T are shown in Appendix 3,section A3.l.
-90-
send
Watson(I979) convention
U . (x.y)
1J
T .. (x.y)
1J
Banerjee and Butterfield(I980) convention

G (y.x)
J1
F .. (y.x)
J1
U.. (x.y)=G .. (y.x)

1J
J1
T .. (x.y)=F .. (y.x)
1J
J1
Figure 3.3
Conventions for kernel arguments.
-91...
3.2.3 Isoparametric element

The boundary element is a three node isoparametric one
(fig.
. , 3.4). The tractions as well as the displacements are defined
by the same shape functions as the geometry. This is written as
x . (I;) = Na(l;) -x~
1
u. (I;) = Na(I;)_u~
1
(3.16)
t. (I;) = Na(I;)_t~
1
where subscripts i
superscripts
are the directions of orthotropy 1 and 2 and
are the nodes 1,2,3 of the element.
The shape functions are given by,

1(1;)
N
= (1/2)-1;-(1;+1)
2(1;)
N
= (1/2)-1;-(1;-1)
(3.17)
N3(1;) = 1-1;2
The derivatives
D of the shape functions with respect to I;
are
given by,
D1(1;) = I; + 0.5
D2 (1; )
= I;
0.5
(3.18)
D3(1;) = -2-1;
The Jacobian is given by
J(I;)=dS/dl;~{(dxl/dl;)2+ (dx
2/dl;)2}
= I{ (Da_x~)2+ (Da_x~)2}
(3.19)
-92-
Element
mapping of line S to line
~=-I
~=o
~=+I
Shape functions.
1.0
1.0
Figure 3.4
Isoparametric boundary element.

2
Figure 3.5
Coordinate systems H,V and-l,2.
-93-
3.2.4 Nodal collocation.

A system of simultaneous equations is written in terms of displacements and tractions at nodes of boundary elements,that apprcocimates
the boundary integral equation. We assume that the directions
for displacement and traction at all the points are parallel with
a global cartesian coordinate system,this being chosen to coincide
with the axes of orthotropy,if any such axes exist. The equations
of nodal collocation then become
p
c .. ( x a ) u.c( x a) + Lt
1J
J
b=l e=l
c( d(b,e))
u. x
=L
(3.20)
b=l
where
a
is the collocation point number,i.e a node number that can

take values in the closed interval (l,q).
the total number of nodes.
the total number of elements.
an element number.
a node of element b,i.e l,or 2,or 3.
d(b,e): is the global node number of local node number e of element b (l<d(b,e)<q).
The above equations can provide 2'q equations. The unknown quantities may be more than 2'q if there are unknown tractions with different values either side of the nodes,that is when sharp corners
exist at the nodes.Many workers have investigated the problem of
providing the additional equations needed and a treatise on the
subject can be found in Banerjee and Butterfield (1980).For the
-94-
purpose of this work we considered it was sufficient to assume that

non-specified tractions were equal either side of the nodes. Errors
introduced due to this assumption are discussed in Chapter
4.
In accordance with established practice,the units of stress

and distance for the purpose of construction of the system of equations are taken to be a modulus of elasticity and the greatest dimension of the mesh. The choice of distance ensures that matrix
of equation 3.22 is non-singular.
C( d(b,e))
u. x
.J
b=l e=l
p
=
3 t?(xd(b,e))
I I
b=l e=l
E
sc
J (u lJ
.. (x
sc
J (Tl.. J
(x y(t;:)tL )N
'
SC
(I=")
J s
(t;:).-dt;:=
L
sc
S
b
J(t;:)
)N (t;:).--.dt;:
e
,y(t;:))E
sc
(3.21)
sc
where the complementary functl0ns u and t have been scaled in the above
equation by L
sc
,that is the largest distance between nodes and E ,

sc
that is the first Young's modulus. The above equation may be written
in matrix form as,
uc
t
= -U'::::"
E
'"'"
T-L
sc
where u
sc
and t
.....,
respectively, and
the displacement and traction vectors for all nodes

T and U the matrices that contain the coefficients
of u: and t~ in equation 3.21J
-95-
3.2.5 Numerical integration.

The integrals of the kernel - shape function products of equation
using Gauss-Legendre quadra-
by
3.21 can be evaluated
ture formulae (G.L.Q.F),provideddue precautions are taken where the

a
integrand tends to infinity.If node x does not belong to the element
over which integration . is
performedJthe G.L.Q.F can be used direc-
tly for kernels U and T. Kernel components U

never tend to
12=U21
infinity as they are independent of r and hence again G.L.Q.F may
be used directly. Table 3.1 shows the way the integration of the kernels over an element is performedJif the node x
belongs to the ele-
mente
Table 3.1 Integration of kernel - shape function products over an

element containing the first argument
Kernel
order
l/r
U
l l,U22
U
12=U21
Nd{b,g)
order of
Nd{b,e)
a
at x
log{l/r)
1
a is middle node;
Integration over two
subelements
a is extreme node;
Integration over two
adjacent elements
a=d{b,e)
afd{b,e)
a=d{b,e)
ald{b,e)
spiral
G.L.Q.F
spiral
G.L.Q.F
analytic
+ G.L.Q.F
analytic*
+ G.L.Q.F
analytic
+ G.L.Q.F
analytic*
+ G.L.Q.F
G.L.Q.F
G.L.Q.F
G.L.Q.F
G.L.Q.F
,........--
---..... t>-...
a
!
a
d{b,e) d{b,e)
a
d{b,e)
....<'1
c=::mee
a
.... db;e
d'{b,e)
Note: An asterisk indicates that the use of only a G.L.Q.F suffices

The method of the spiral used to evaluate
the cofficients of
the analytic method used to calculate coefficients of

Appendix 3, Section 3.2. A four point G.L.Q.F is used.
T and
U,are shown in
-96-
3.2.6 Rotation of axes.

The coefficients of matrices U and T have been calculated in the
principal directions of orthotropy 1 and 2. A rotation of axes is necessary for tractions and displacements to be related in the horizontal,vertical coordinate system H , V.In the following we suppose values of
and
with subscripts
ring to the
are scaled. Also quantities within parenthesis
12
1,2
or
or
HV
denote that their components are refer-
H,V coordinate system. Then,
where
= U-1 T
0.25)
A second order tensor coordinate transformation is needed in order

to rotate the axes
1,2
by an angle
-8
,to
H,V_(fig. 3.5),
that is,
0.26)
where
TR
the vector coordinate transformation matrix. Then,

0.27)
Substituting 3.7 to 3.27 we get,

0.28)
-97-
3.2.7 Particular integral.

The particular integral for a distributed body force within the
region could be chosen to be,
u~(x)
1
f U.. (x,y)b.(y)dVol ,i,j

Vol lJ
J
H,V
This would entail the evaluation of volume integrals.or a uniform vertical body force _peg ,
- pegeh + p )
o
where Po is the vertical stress at level
(3.30)
hoJand
K the ratio of
A
horizontal to vertical stresseTh;j.s-satisfies the equations of equili-
brium and the boundary conditions in the far field,and so the displacements in the H,V system may be chosen to be,
(3.31)
where parameters
on of volume
in~rals
to
are independent of position. The evaluati-
is therefore avoided e
The values of the parameters and their derivation are shown in

Appendix 3,Section 3.3.
-98-
3.2.8 Infinite domain.

vfuen we deal with boundary element regions that extend to infinity,it would be convinient if the inl1gration of the kernels
U and
T with first arguments within the near field, over the remote
boundary could be avoided. Let us prove that the integrals over infinity,
I
lim f U.. (xa,y).t~(y).ds
l=
l.J
r-klof
i=1,2
j=1,2
(3.32)
lim f T.. (xa,y).u~(y).ds
2=
l.J
r-klof
r
a
x.
Let
in an infinite elastic body are independent of position of

us consider two points
dius
and
xO (fig. 3.6),within a circle of ra-
,and an outer boundary f
at a distance
r O from x 0 We
tha t con ta1.n

the comTa , TO, Ua , UO the t wo b y t wo ma tr1.ces
denote by
ponents
T..
l.J
and
U..
l.J
,with first argument of the kernels at xa or
and second argument of the kernel at r r . Then,

/::,T = Ta_ TO = (/::'r o- + t::,wo-- )T(r +8 /::,r , w+8 o/::,w)
1
2
dr
a_ uO
U
= (/::'r o.Q. +
)U(r+8 o/::,r , w+8 o/::,w)
'"
3
4
d
dr
where we have assumed

/::'r=r a -r
t::,w=w a -w
(3033)
dW
/::,wo~
/::,u
dW
T and
U to be functions of
wand
and
The orders of the individual terms of /::,T
and
/::,U
are,
r,and
-99-
>
1
Figure 3.6
Integration over remote boundary.
-100-
l1re-U
ar
aw
.1.. U E. o
aw
!1w
a
aw
l1T~
If
E' (l/r0)
U.34b)
(l/r~)
(l/r0)' hence
,liwe - U
Hence
U.34a)
-T[o-
But also
E o~-
(J.34c)
are equal to the singular solutions
T and U,then
hence,
lim
r
=0
I l1T eu:eds
o~ r r
l.J
lim
=0
I liU .. et:edS
l.J
Now let us consider the entire, elastic space within

force field acting within
rR
U.36)
rr
The total solution is the
and a
superposi~
tion of the effects of the individual forces. The displacements and

tractions due to
forces em ,acting at points
m, for
rO~' are
given by,
U.37)
Hence the integrals
\
become,
0
1U..
0eTk.eekeds
m m
m rr
l.J
= UO +
liU
m m
1 T.. eUk.eekeds
Noting that,
m
U
II and 1
rr
l.J
-101-
and from equation
3.36
that the integrals of
zero, the expressions for the intgrals
= I UijO_T kj0
rr
-I
1
1
1, 2
em-ds
k "
~T_UO and ~U_TO are

become,
0
IT J.J
. . -Uk'
J
rr
e~-ds
(3.40)
For an equilibrating force field,
em
=0
and the integrals become zero.

If the force field is non-equilibrating , then let us consider
the difference,
000
0.
= Li.m
I (U .. -Tk.-T .. -Uk.)-ekeds
J.J
J J.J
J
ro~ rr
where
e-
\' em
Matrix
A is antisymmetric.The diagonal terms hence are zero and the
non-diagonal terms in expanded form are given by,
We apply Betti's theorem for the fields due to unit force in

rection and
di-
2 direction. We note that,
I (Tl l-U2l + T12-U22)eds
rr
are the displacements due to field
due to field
multiplied to the tractions
2, and the displacements due to field
to the tractions of field

lye Hence,
1 ,on the
remote
2 multiplied
boundary respectiva-
-102-
J A12 - d S
rr
where
u ..
force in
J.J
is the displacement in j direction at

direction at
For orthotropy
due to a unit
x o_
o =u a =0
2l
u
12
and hence the integral
I 00 is zero_
If now the infinite body contains holes on which distributed nonequilibrating tractions exist,this body may be considered without
the holes,by filling them and applying additional tractions to the
infillJso that the displacements on the hole boundaries remain the
sameo(this is in accordance with the indirect boundary element formulation). Thus we arrive in the previous problem of a resultant force
within an infinite elastic body without holes for which the integral
lover
a boundary approaching infinity is zero.
00
-103-
3.3 Exampleo
A brick crossed by two oblique joints is subjected to self weight.
The displacements are calculated in two different ways.In the first
the body is assumed to be discontinuous and we model the discontinuities with joint elements and the intact rock with plane strain elementso(fig. 3.7). In the second the brick'is modelled as an equivalent
continuum,with boundary elements (fig. 3.7).
In both configurations,nodes 5,6,7 are fixed in both directions,and
the vertical faces are fixed in the horizontal direction. The material parameters are:
Intact rock
E.=lOO , v=O , pg=l.O
l.
Joints
k =20 , k =2.0 , Fr=0.57
n
s
The deformed shapes and
flow field of the brick are shown in
figures 3.8 and 3.9.In the last figure the stresses at the centres
of the plane strain elements are also shown.
In table 3.2,values for the displacements at nodes are shown.
Table 3.2 Displacements at the nodes of a brick

Node
Discontinuum
'\r
Equivalent continuum
u
'11:
-0.126
0.007
-0.111
-0.143
-0.155
-0.104
-0.100
-0.146
-104;"
~N~~~~eA~~S~LEMENT REGION SUBJECTED TOL~Ng~~~ITATIONAL ~E~Di.o_ID-1

ACTIVITY 0
17
UNITS
g 4
C\l
16
.,::....-------------------_...:...-_-~
5 6 7
f - - - - - - - 4. 0 0 -
------ 1
PLANE STRAIN AND JOINT ELEMENTS SUBJECTED TO A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD.1

INITIAL MESH
LENGTHS
_ = 1.0-10- UNITS
ACTIVITY 0
Figure 3.7 Initial meshes for the examples of section 3.3
24
-105-
SE~g~~~SR~E~~E"ENT REGION SUBJECTED TOL~Ng~~~ITATIONAL ~E~Di.0_l0-1

ACTIVITY 1
LOAD STEP I
ITERATION 1
DISPLACE"ENTS
UNITS
_= 1.0-10- 1 UNITS
A BOUNDARY ELE"ENT REGION SUBJECTED TO A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD.

FLOW FIELD
LENGTHS
.
_ = 1.0-10- 1 UNITS
ACTIVITY 1 LOAD STEP 1 ITERATION 1 DISPLACE"ENTS
__ 1.0_10- 1 UNITS
Figure 3.8
Boundary element region subjected to

gravitational field.
-106-
~~~~~M~~R~l~HAND JOINT ELEMENTS SUBJECl~2G~2SA GRAVITATION~LI~A~~g:1
ACTIVITY I
LOAD STEP I
ITERATION I DISPLACEMENTS
= 0.5-10- 1
UNITS
UNITS
~tS=EF~~~SIN AND JOINT ELEMENTS SUBJECl~2G~2SA GRAVITATION~LI~A~~g:1 UNITS

ACTIVITY I LOAD STEP I ITERATION I DISPLACEMENTS
_ = 0.5-10- 1 UNITS
t
PLANE STRAIN AND JOINT ELEMENTS SUBJECTED TO A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD.
STRESS FIELD
LENGTHS
_ = 1.0-10-0 1 UNITS
ACTIVITY I LOAD STEP I ITERATION I STRESSES
_ = 0.5_10
UNITS
Figure 3.9 Plane strain and joint elements subjected to

gravitational field.
-107-
CHAPTER 4 - COUPLING REGIONS WITH CONTINUOUS AND DISCONTINUOUS

DISPLACEMENT FIELDS
4.0 General
Finite elements, boundary elements as well as finite differences
have been identified for sometime now to have a common basis, and should
be used by engineers as allied tools rather than distinctly separate
methods.High stress concentrations or potential gradients,anisotropy,
infinite space,or large volume to surface ratio are areas where the
boundary integral method can be successful. On the other hand inhomogeneities,non-linearities and plasticity are areas where the finite
element method can be successful.
The idea of coupling boundary and finite elements is attributed
to Wexler in 1972 Jwho used integral equation solutions to represent
the unbounded field problem, the advantage being that this allowed for
the use of appropriate conditions to represent the infinite domain.
The first combination of the two methods in elastostatics is by Osias
in 1977,although for wave propagation problems the method was used by
Mei in 1975 by employing variational techniques. The idea developed by
Lachat(1975) of using interpolation functions to define the variables
along the elements allows for the combination of finite and boundary
elements without any loss of continuity. Shaw in 1978 used a weighted
residual procedure,so that a finite difference or finite element system of equations was obtained to describe the inner region of an infinite body,that was non-linear and inhomogeneous.He approximated the
outer region, that was linear and elastic,by deriving a boundary integral equation around the interface boundary of the inner and outer regions in terms of the dependent variable and its derivatives. This integral relation was a suitable boundary condition, with which to link
the finite difference or finite element approximation.
-108-
Brady(1981) was the first to use a combined method with finite and
boundary elements in rock mechanics. Beer(1982),by using his coupled
finite-boundary element
algorithmJs~owed
that although central proces-
sor time for using either only finite elements or coupled finite and
boundary elements was comparable, a significant
gain was made by the
latter in the real time spent by the user of the program.Lorig(1982)

coupled discrete and boundary elements to simulate the behaviour of
excavations within jointed rock.
The combination of finite elements and boundary elements may be

achieved in two ways.In the first, that will be used in this chapter,
the boundary element region is treated as a"finite element region and
can thus be easily incorporated into existing finite element computer
packages (Zienkiewicz,Kelly,Bettess (1977) ; Kelly,Mustoe,Zienkiewicz
(1979) ; Mustoe (1979) ; Zienkiewicz (1975. In the second, the finite element region is considered as a boundary element region.
4.1 SymmetriC coupling

The equivalent nodal forces for distributed tractions t on a finite element are given by,
~=-fN
Q=J~
T -
.t.ds = -J!
.~.ds.t =
-Ct
.!I.ds
This formula may be applied also for the boundary element region to
derive the equivalent nodal forces from the nodal tractions. By premultiplying then equation 3.28 by Q we get,
cS-u = C.t
or
where
K =CS
-1 - -
-109-
This stiffness matrix is derived without the use of a variational

principle and is non-symmetric.From energy considerations this is
inconsistent,as for various load paths leading to the same final load,
different energy requirements exist.Also finite element software usually assumes symmetric stiffness matrices.To generate a symmetric system of equations from the direct boundary integral procedure,we require the minimization of an energy functional (Kelly et al.(1979) of
the form,
IT =
where t
0.5.I r uC.tc.dr
Ir uC.~.dr
are the prescribed tractions on the boundary.
The physical meaning of IT is total potential energy,the first term on

the right handside is strain energy and the second term is work done
by the prescribed tractions. Discretization gives,
u = N.(~)u.
~
= N. (~).t.
~
, i=1,2,3
From Chapter 3 equation 3.27 we have,
= .~c
Substituting 4.4 and 4.5 into 4.3 we get,
where in equation 4.6 we have dropped the superscript c.

By minimizing IT with respect to u we get,
Kt.c
+ pc
= 0
(4.7)
where
(4.8a)
=
-Ct
(4.8b)
Substituting for tC,u...-c from,

~
-110-
we arrive at,
where,
Equation 4.10 is of the same form as the finite element stiffness

equation, and therefore -Kt and ,..,
pt can be assembled into the standard
finite element system of Chapter 2,as contributions from a new elemente
4.2 Validation
Validation of the program. is achieved through the analysis of
two series of problems. The first series consists of problems analysed
also by Mustoe(1979), so that a direct comparison with a similar program would be possible. In the second series the program is validated
further,by comparing the results with the known analytical solutions.
Series 1
a. Square block in tension
The block shown in fig.4.1
has been modelled as a boundary ele-
ment region,.and was subjected to tension. Young's modulus is 2.6 and

Poisson's ratio is 0.3. The expected displacements at node 5 are given by,
I-v 2 .L.t =1.4 , u =-v (l+v)

L t
x=- 0. 3
=T
E
."2.
x
x
y
(L the side of the

square)
The displacements given by the analytical solution, the program and
U
by Mustoe(1979) are shown in table 4.1.
-lll~
t =1.0
x
4.0
Figure 4.1
surrounding rock
a. Hole within infinite rock mass
1
Pe
b. Thick cylinder
Figure 4.2 A circular hole under pressure.
-112-
Table 4.1 Square block in tension

Analytical
Node
Program AJROCK
u
x
0
0.3
u
x
0
0.7
0.3
1.4
1.4
u
y
Mustoe(1979)
0.332
u
x
0
0.336
0.716
0.284
0.720
0.283
0.3
1.420
0.325
1.417
0.324
1.460
1.457
b. Circular hole within infinite space and internal pressure.

The solution for a thick cylinder subjected to internal and external pressures p. and p
J.
(Fig.4.2b) is given by Obert and Duvall
(1967). Assuming plane. strain, infinite domain and external pressure

zero,we get the solution for the problem shown in Fig.4.2a. The displacements and stresses at any point r are given by,
rr
R
= -0ee = _p J.. (_)2
r
For the particular example the Young's modulus is 2.6 and the Poisson's ratio is 0.3.The radius of the tunnel is 2.0 and the internal
pressure is 1. O.
First we model the problem with only boundary elements as shown in
fig.4.3 using 12 elements.The displacements at nodes 1,2,3,4 are
shown in table 4.2.
We then model the same problem with both boundary and finite elements as shown in fig.4.4. The displacements at various nodes are
shown in table 4.3.
In table 4.4 the stresses at the Gauss points and the middle point
of the plane strain elements are shown.
-113-
surrounding rock.
3
2
>
Figure 4.3 Hole within infinite rock mass modelled

boundary elements only.
V
by
rock.
......
.... 3 7_ _~~
;>
Figure 4.4 Hole within infinite rock mass modelled

boundary and finite elements.
by
-114-
Table 4 .. 2 Circular hole modelled by
boundary elements only ..
Program AJROCK
Analytical
u
x
0.. 000
0.. 950
0.. 000
1 .. 000
0.. 268
1 .. 000
0.. 268
0.. 500
0.. 823
0.. 475
0.. 823
0.. 475
0.. 707
0.. 733
0.. 733
0.. 733
0.. 733
u
x
1 .. 000
y
0.. 000
0.. 950
0.. 966
0.. 259
0..866
0.. 707
Node
u
x
Mustoe(1979)
Table 4 .. 3 Circular hole modelled by boundary and finite

elements.- Displacements at nodes ..
Program AJROCK
Analytical
Mustoe (1979)
u
x
u
y
u
x
0.. 000
1..010
0.. 000
1..003
0.. 000
0.. 966
0.. 259
0.. 962
0.. 258
0.. 965
0.. 259
0.. 866
0.. 500
0.. 876
0.. 506
0.. 867
0.. 501
0.. 707
0.. 707
0.. 704
0.. 704
0.. 707
0.. 707
25
0.. 800
0.. 000
0.. 797
0.. 000
0.. 794
0.. 000
26
0.. 693
0.. 400
0.. 690
0.. 398
0.. 688
0.. 397
37
0.. 667
0.. 000
0.. 650
0.. 000
0.. 653
0.. 000
38
0.. 644
0.. 173
0.. 654
0.. 175
0.. 651
0.. 174
39
0.. 578
0.. 333
0.. 563
0.. 325
0.. 566
0.. 327
40
0.. 472
0.. 472
0.. 479
0.. 479
0.. 477
0.. 477
Node
u
x
1..000
Table 4.. 4 Circular hole modelled by boundary and finite

elements - Stresses within plane strain elements ..
Distance
Analytical
Program AJROCK
arr =-0ee
arr
2.2113
-0 .. 818
-0 .. 820
0.822
2.. 7887
-0 .. 514
-0 .. 513
0.. 515
2.. 5000
-0 .. 640
-0 .. 638
0.. 637
aee
-115-
c. Tension of a long plate.

A plate of 64 units length(fig.4.5a) and 16 units width is subjected to uniform tension applied on face 2. Young's modulus is 2.6
and Poisson's ratio is 0.3. The movement in the x direction of face
4 is constrained. In fig. 4.5b the plate has been modelled by two
boundary element regions. In fig. 4.5c the plate has been modelled by
a finite element and a boundary element region. Finally in fig. 4.5d
the plate has been modelled with two boundary element regions that
form sharp corners on the interface at nodes A,D,and E. In table 4.5,
displacements for discretizations
b and c calculated-by the program
are compared with the analytical solution to the example.

Table 4.5 Tension of a long plate modelled by sy.mmetric mesh
Analytical
Node
discretization b
y
u
x
u
x
11.2
-1.20
11.2
discretization c
u
x
11.1
-1.21
11.2
-1.19
-0.90
11.1
-0.90
11.2
-0.91
11.2
-0.60
11.1
-0.59
11.2
-0.60
11.2
-0.30
11.2
-0.30
11.2
-0.30
11.2
0.00
11.1
0.00
11.2
0.00
22.4
-1.20
22.2
-1.23
22.2
-1.23
22.4
-0.90
22.3
-0.78
22.3
-0.78
22.4
-0.60
22.2
-0.56
22.2
-0.56
22.4
-0.30
22.5
-0.29
22.5
-0.29
22.4
0.00
22.2
0.00
22.2
0.00
-116-
yj
a.
(3)
(2)
16.0 (4)
J-
(1)
II
32.0
32.0
1\
64.0
I
I
A
I
..c
b.
H
I
D
r-E
..
-J
rI
I
I
I
G
H
c.
1)
;;'
","",
d.
J
K
Figure
4.5 Tension of a long plate.
-117-
In table 4.6 the displacements for discretization (d) ,calculated by

the program for various positions of node. D in the x direction (YD=-4),
are compared with results calculated by Mustoe(1979) and to the analytical solution.
Table 4.6 Tension of a long plate modelled by asymmetric mesh
x =40
D
x D=36
x =40
D
u
x
11.2
y
-1.2
12.13
u
x
x D=34
u
x =40
D
u
x
11.4
y
-2.29
u
y
-1.80
y
-1.15
11.18
Y
-1.19
-0.6
12.3
-1.67
-1.21
-0.52
12.12
-0.56
13.07
0.0
13.3
-1.00
-0.65
0.07
13.04
-0.05
14.00
0.6
14.3
-0.17
-0.09
0.66
13.98
0.64
11.20
1.2
11.4
0.13
0.61
1.27
11.16
1.24
16.80
-1.2
16.8
-1 .82
-2.15
-1.08
16.80
1.2
17.2
0.61
0.26
1.34
22.40
-1.2
22.4
-1.48
-2.57
-1.03
22.4
-0.6
22.5
-0.80
-0.19
-0.37
22.4
0.0
22.6
-0.24
-1.32
0.19
22.4
0.6
22.7
0.32
-0.76
0.75
22.4
1.2
22.7
0.98
-0.11
1.42
Node
Mustoe (1979)
Program AJROCK
Analytical
It can be seentha.t progra.mAJROCK rotates the plate,which can be

seen by the non-zero values for u
at the nodes C and J.This error
does not exist in Mustoe's results.If this rotation term is subtracted from the values of the other nodes on the same vertical line,the
results are reasonable.Nevertheless a vertical displacement of 1 at
node J,corresponds to a distributed vertical traction on face 2 equal
to 0.0025,that is an error in the applied traction of 0.25%.
-118-
Series 2
a. Lined circular tunnel within infinite space.
A lining rock system is examined. The rock medium is assumed to

be
homogeneousisotrop~c
and linearly elastic,and the lining material
is also assumed to be linear elastic with zero flexural stiffness.Two

extreme cases of interface conditions are considered.In the first case no slip is permitted and the lining is assumed perfectly bonded
to the rock mass.In the second case free slip is allowed between the
lining and the rock mass. The material properties are ,
Rock mass:
E=lO.O
v=0.20
Lining:
E t =20.0
c c
v =0.00
c
Interface (only second case):

k =1000.0
n
k =1.0
s
=0.0
The diameter of the tunnel is 2 and the thickness t
of the lining
is negligible.Two discretizationsare used as shown in fig. 4.6a and

4.6b. The rock mass has been discretized with boundary and plane
strain elements in fig. 4.6a or with only boundary elements in fig.
4.6b.The lining has. been discretized with membrane elements.In the
case of perfect bond, the lining is acting directly on the rock mass.
In the case of free slip at the interface,the interface is modelled
with joint elements.
-119-
surrounding rock mass
(a)
surrounding
~ock
(b)
Figure 4.6 Lined opening.
mass
-120-
The rock is assumed to be weightless and the overburden pressure p=

-1 and lateral pressure KA-p are applied in one load step)after the
hole has been excavated and the lining installed. In table 4.7 the
displacements for perfect bond at interface and three K ratios are
A
compared at three points on the liningJas computed by the program
for the two discretizationsJand as given by the analytical solution
(Poulos and Davies (1974)).
In table 4.8 the displacements at three points on the rock mass
at the interface are shown for free slip between lining and rock
mass.Poisson's ratio was chosen to be 0.20,0.00,' and 0.333.The other
material properties and dimensions were the same as for the fully
bonded case. The stress ratio K is chosen to be 0.5 and O. An anaA
lysis
for K
A=1,V=0.20
ring,displacements
is carried out also,and as no slip
isoccu-
are almost identical with those shown in table
4.7. For the discretization of fig. 4.6a displacements are shown

only f'or v =0.20.The analytical solution is given by the following
formulae:
u =0.5.(p/M).{(1+K ).(l-V).(l+( C-l)
)-4.(1-K) (1-V)2.cos 28}
A l - 2 v -C+l
A l-2-v
r
where
M=E(I-V)/{(ltv)-(1-2V)}
(D is the diameter of the tunnel)
These formulae
do not agree with the formulae 11.38 and 11.39 given
in Poulos and Davies (1968) ,derived originally by Hoeg(1968) and

which are not correct.
An important conclusion is drawn from the analysis of this problem,involving all the types of elements available to the program.
The order of the Gauss formulae used initially in the calculations
-121-
of this example is 4 for the boundary elements,2 for the plane strain
elements,5 for the joint elements and three for the membrane elements.
This causes the computed stresses within. the joints to fluctuate around a mean value within an element. and the analysis not to converge.Subsequently the Gauss formulae of the elements neighbouring the
joint were
chosen to be of similar order and the analysis converged
within two iterations.

For the discretization of fig. 4.6a, we reduced the order of the
Gauss formula for the joint elements to 3. For the discretization
of fig. 4.6b a four point Gauss formula was used for all the elements. In the former case the fluctuation almost disappeared, whereas in the latter it completely disappeared.
c. Excavation of a circular tunnel.

The displacements at the surface of a tunnel are given by Obert
and Duvall(1967) as,
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio are chosen to be 10 and 0.0.

The radius of the tunnel R is
1.The vertical stress field p
is taken
to be -1.0, the horizontal stress field p being zero. The rock to be

x
excavated is modelled by either 7 plane strain elements (fig. 4.7),
or 8 plane strain elements and a boundary element region (fig. 4.8)
The displacements obtained by the program for the two idealizations
before and after excavation, and those given by the analytical solution are shown for comparison in table 4.9.
-122-
surrounding rock.
B.E.
Figure 4.7 Excavation of a CirCU1;r'ttunnel(B.E.and 7 plane strain el.)
surrounding rock
B.E.
Figure 4.8 Excavation of circular tunnel(2 B.E. regions and 8 P.S.el.)
-123-
Table 4.7 Lined circular tunnel with full adhesion on interface
K
A
e
0
,0.5
u
x
0.0347
0.0379
u
x
u
y
0.0343
-0.0619
0.0013
-0.0608
0.0017
-0.0619
rr/~ 0
-0.1200
-0.1220
-0.1190
0.0565
-0.0399
rrt: 0
-0.0565
-0.0397
-0.0398
0
-0.0561
0
0.1320
-0.0563
-0.0397
0.1257
-0.0561
rr/4 0.0399
0
0.0
rr/L 0.0019
0
1.0
u
x
Discretization b
Discretization a
Analytical
-0.0398
-0.0564
0.1250
rr/4 0.0438
-0.0837
0.0422
-0.0819
0.0436
-0.0837
rr/2 0
-0.1821
-0.1880
-0.1820
Table 4.8 Lined circular tunnel with free slip on interface

Analytical
V
K
A
0.5
Discretization a
Discretization b
u
x
0.0500
rr/4
0.0350
-0.1060
0.0338 -0.1060
rr/2
-0.1500
u
y
u
x
u
x
0.0491
-0.1510
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.1670
rr/4
0.1180
-0.1650
0.1160 -0.1640
rr/2
-0.2330
0.1660
-0.2340
0.0537
rr/4
0.0380
-0.0978
0.0356
-0.0959
0.0368 -0.0977
rr/2
-0.1383
-0.1370
0.0512
0.0531
-0.1390
0.2
0.0
0.1590
0.1640
0.1638
rr/4
0.1158
-0.1557
0.1110
-0.1510
0.1140 -0.1550
rr/2
-0.2202
-0.2160
-0.2210
continued
-124-
Table 4.8 Continued.

Analytical
K
A
0.5
Discr. a
Discretization b
u
x
u
x
u
x
0.0528
0.0525
rr/4
0.0402
0.0919
0.0364
-0.0884
rr/2
-0.1260
u
y
-0.1260
.33~
0.0
0.1543
rr/4
0.1080
-0.1430
0.1070
-0.1420
rr/2
-0.2031
-0.2030
0.1540
Table 4.9 Excavation ofa circular tunnel

Before excavation
Analyt.
a &'b
u
x
u
x
o 0.0
u
y
u
y
0 0.0
After excavation
a
Analytical
u
x
u
y
u
x
b
u
0.1000 0.0000 0.,0988 0.000
u
x
0.0988 0.000
rr/8
0 0.0383 0 0.0383 0.0918 -0.115 0.0932 -0.116 0.0932 -0.116
rr/4
0 0.0707 0 0.0707 0.0707 -0.212 0.0698 -0.207 0.0698 -0.207
3rr/f:
o 0.0923
rr/2
0 0.1000 0 0.1000 0.0000 -0.300 0.0000 -0.293 0.0000 -0.293
0 0.0924 0.0381 -0.277 0.0386 -0.281 0.0386 -0.281
Note:
a
corresponds to the discretization of figure 4.7
corresponds to the discretization of figure 4.8
-125-
4.3 Inherent errors.

4.3.1 Causes of errors.
Some inherent errors have been determined to exist in the coupled model due to
i.
Discontinuous tractions at nodes
ii.
Symmetrization
iii. Dependent interpolants for u and t

iv.
Error in numerical integration
i. Discontinuous tractions at nodes

If discontinuous tractions exist at nodesJthen the
U matrix
is no longer square,the number of columns being greater than the

number of rows by a number equal to the additional tractions due to
the discontinuities. To make
U square a number of equations equal
to the number of the additional unknowns needs to be added to the

system. A treatise on the subject has been written by Mustoe (19791
in which six ways to make
U square are proposed as follows.
a. Take the tractions to be equal (fig. 4.9a) either side of the

node. This has been implemented in the program.We assumed that the
error tends to zero as the distance from the node increases.
b. Use the boundary interpolants on the two neighbouring elements
for the displacements to derive approximate expressions for the two
traction vectors at the corner in terms of the adjacent nodal displacements.This relation between t and u can be evaluated by proposing a corner finite element (fig.4.9b)
c. Alter the position of collocation so that extra equations may
be generated (fig. 4.9c). This method produces discontinuous tractions at the nodes,but does not account for the continuity of the
-126-
e1. (r-)
a.
Continuous traction assumption.
b. Corner finite element.
x are collocation points

c. Collocation points not at corner.
k
k
d. Gallerkin method weight functions.
e. Chaudonneret.
Shape functions for geometry

and displacements
Shape functions for tractions

f. Differing shape functions for geometry
and tractions.
Figure 4.9 Various methods to determine the limiting values of tractions

at the two sides of a corner.
-127-
stress tensor.It has been used successfully by Mustoe(1979).

d. Do a Galerkin weighting formulation. This method was suggested
by Mustoe.At the nodes of discontinuous tractions he used the two
parts of the shape function of that node over each adjacent element
as two separate weighting functions,to create the additional equations (fig.4.9d). This method is similar to method c.
e. Formulate two extra equations fom the continuity and symmetry
of the stress tensor, the invariance of the trace of the strain tensor
and an assumption for the variation of the displacements along the
boundary as found by Chaudonneret(1978). This method is similar in
concept with method b.
f. Use different order interpolants for tractions and displacements.Mustoe using the shape functions shown in fig. 4.9f obtained
a singular matrix
U.
A formula that evaluates the error due to the assumption of

continuous tractions at nodes of known discontinuous tractions is
derived in APpendix 4.
ii. Symmetrization
Let us take
~'and!l
t o ' be
the symmetrized and the non-
symmetrized stiffness matrices respectively. Then
where
T
K = -C S
-1
-
Subtracting the first equation from the second and noting that
K' = (1/2)(~1+~i)
we arrive at
T) c
c c -F c
(1/2) (-1
K -K
-1 u.... =fF... =F
... 1 ....
that is the error in the nodal forces found is proportional to
~l-~l'
-128-
which shows how far from symmetric matrix

the displacements u
~l
is,and proportional to
The violation of the convergence criteria must also be examined. The

first criterion states "no straining of an element is permitted to
occur when the nodal displacements are caused by a rigid body displacement".In order to ensure that the rows and columns of the matrix
K' for a finite region will sumtDzero,the following equations should
be satisfied.
.L:
K/
lJ
{Q.}= j=2A-l
1
0
=
L: 'K'. .
j=2A lJ
A=1,2, ,N/2
i=1,2, ,N.
N is the number of degrees of freedom

0
of the boundary element region.
Another equation requiring that rigid body rotations do not cause

strains should also be satisfied.For the case of infinite regions
these sums are not zero. Care must be taken if the error is to be
spread over the stiffness terms,that symmetry is retained.
The simplest way to achieve this might be to subtract the error from
the diagonal terms.
iii. Independent interpolants

The direct boundary integral procedure assumes independent
interpolants for u and t.This is not physically consistent (Kelly
et al.(1979,as definition of the boundary variation of onecompletely defines the other through the solution of the boundary value
problem. Therefore the resultant energy distribution modelled by
C
C
r- t- ar
(1/2)f u
cannot be correct.From that follows that the de-
rivativescHI/dl; are not calculated accurately and equation 4.7

contains an inherent source of error.In finite elements a similar
-129-
error exists,when we assume known the distribution of displacements

within the element. That is also not physically consistent as definition of displacements along the boundary completely defines the displacements in the interior of the element through the solution of
the boundary value problem. This may be summarized in table 4.10.
Table 4.10 Prescribed values in finite and boundary elements
..
Displ. at bound. traction at bound. Displ. intO'
Method
Boundary integral
prescribed
prescribed
Finite element
prescribed
prescribed
This error is probably a cause of the asymmetry of the directly

evaluated stiffness matrix K
1
iv. Error in numerical integration.
A four point Gauss-Legendre quadrature formula has been used in
the boundary integral module.As the functions to be integrated are
not simple polynomials,errors might exist due to incorrect integration.This error becomes particularly important if neighbouring elements are of different lengths (e.g. 1:4),in which case results might
be very inaccurate.
-130-
4.3.2 Examples.
Five example problems have been analysed to illustrate the magnitude of errors. The first two examples have no corners,so that errors are not due to corner effects. Examples c and d have corners,
but the shape functions are theoretically capable of modelling the
exact solution. The last example illustrates the errors due to great
discrepancy between paticular and total solutions.
a. Two boundary element regions

An infinite rock mass is divided by an imaginary circular contour into an outer and an inner region (fig. 4.10).A uniform vertical stress field of unit intensity is considered.Young's modulus is
taken to be 10 and Poisson's ratio O.A particular solution satisfying this field is applied to the external region.Two choices are
considered for the particular solution of the internal region.
Case 1 : The particular solution of the internal region is the
correct solution.
Case 2
The particular solution (uP,tP) of the internal region

is zero.
Theoretically both cases must give the same results. In table 4.11
the equivalent nodal forces and computed displacements for the two
p
cases are compared.The former are given by -K'.uP-P
,.... ,....
The displacements given by case 1 are exact.Displacements given by
case 2 are in error by less than 2%.The equivalent nodal forces for
the internal region should be zero as no body forces exist. Nevertheless the correct displacements correspond to non-zero equivalent nodal forces.
-131-
outer region
region
>
Figure 4.10 Two boundary element regions.
j
9
:>
H
7
Figure 4.11 Circular disc.
'\
-132-
Table 4.11 Equivalent nodal forces and displacements for

various particular solutions
Node 1
Function
Eq.nod.for.
Node 2
Node 3
Node 4
o -0.486
0.063
-0.759
0.069
-0.344
0.152
-0.315
Eq.nod.for.
int.region
case 1
o -0.030
~0.002
0.027
0.004
-0.021
~0.006
0.011
Eq.nod.for.
int.region
case 2
Displacem.
case 1
0.100
0.0924 0
0.0707 0
0.0383
Displacem.
case 2
0.0981 0.0003
0.0935 0.0003
0.0694 0.0002
0.0387
extvregf.on
both cases
Table 4.12 Equivalent nodalTforces given by use of stiffness

matrices !.' '~l'~l.
Case and
Node 1
Node 2
Node 4
Node 3
V
st.matrix
Case l,or
case 2 & K
l
-2.743
1. 956 -4.715
1.940
-1. 940
4.715 -1. 956
T
Case 2 & K 0
1
-3.442
1.688 -4.070
2.434
-2.434
4.070 -1.688
Case 2 & K'
-3.093
1. 822 -4.393
2.187
-2.187
4.393 -1.822
-133-
b. Circular disc.
A circular disc (fig. 4.11) in a state of plane strain of radius
l~Young's
modulus 1, and Poisson's ratio 0, is subjected to the
two following types of loading.

Case 1
Uniform unit pressure normal to the circumference
Case 2
Initial unit displacement normal to the circumference
The pressure is related to the radial displacement by the equation,
Inserting the known values for E,r,v we find p=u
at the circumfere-
nce,that is the equivalent nodal forces for both cases should be

equal. These nodal forces are given by ~,.~o - f
In case 1 the equivalent nodal forces are independent of K'

and are termed here the correct equivalent nodal forces. The equivalent nodal forces calculated for case 2,by using as stiffness matrix
K is calculated to be equal to the correct one.By using as stiffness
l
matrix~' or ~i the equivalent nodal forces differ from the correct

one. In the former case the discrepancy is about lO%.These results
may be seen in table 4.12. The displacements calculated in case 1
have a 2% error when compared with the analytical solution.
c. Square block modelled with 32 boundary elements

A square block (fig. 4.12) of side 8,Young's modulus 10,Poisson's ratio 0 ,and unit weight equal to 1 ,is subjected to various
particular solutions and boundary conditions. Two parameters of the
particular solution are varied. The height at which zero stresses
occur is taken to be 1 and 8,the latter value corresponding to the
correct vertical stress distribution. The ratio K of the particular
A
solution is taken to be 0,0.5 and l,the first value corresponding
to the correct lateral stresses.Face 1 is always restrained in the
-1.34-
(2)
8.0
(I)
>0-
f
If
8.0
Figure
4.12 Square block modelled with 32 boundary elements.
)'
8.0
l-
f-
8.0
~
/////
~7
a-
o:
Figure 4.13 Square block modelled with B.E. and P.S. elements.
-135-
vertical direction.Faces 2 and 4 are taken either free or restrained

in the horizontal direction.Face 3 is
always free. The node at the
lower left corner is always restrained in both directions.

In table 4.13 the maximum and minimum displacements of face 3
in both directions are shown for the various cases. The correct answer is 3.20 for the vertical displacement and zero for the horizontal displacement.
Table 4.13 Square block modelled by
. Uymax ~min
A uvmJ.n
Height K
32 boundary elements
~max
Face 2
Face 4
0.5 3.16
3.23
-0.0018
0.0100
fixed in H fixed in H
0.5 3.16
3.23
-0.0079
0.0106
free
fixed in H
0.5 3.20
3.20
-0.0130
0.0248
free
fixed in H
0.5 3.20
3.20
-0.0100
0.0141
loG 3.20
3.20
-0.0100
0.0100
free
fixed in H
0.0 3.16
3.23
-0.0100
0.0100
free
fixed in H
0.0 3.16
3.23
-0.0100
0.0100
0.0 3.20
3.20
0.0000
0.0000
free
free
The error in the vertical displacements for incorrectly chosen

particular solution is about l% .The same block with face 2 fixed
in the H direction and face 4 free is subjected to unit tension on
face 3.In that case the displacements in the vertical direction
fluctuate between 0,805 and 0.795,the correct answer being 0.8,that
is an error of 0.6%.
-136-
d. Square block modelled with boundary and finite elements.

A block (fig. 4.13) with the same dimensions and material properties as the block of example c
is discretized with 8 plane strain
elements and one boundary element region. The block is subjected to

gravitational loading. The ratio K of the particular solution is
A
taken to be zero. The height of the particular solution,at which zero
stress occurs is taken to be 8 and 0, the former corresponding to the
correct stress and displacement distribution.
The computed displacements are shown in table 4.14.
Table 4.14 Square block modelled

Height
by
finite and boundary elements
~m~
3.20
3.36
.
vmln
~m~
~min
3.20
3.23
0.1
-0.1
The large error in the .case in which the height is 0 is due to

the high value of the ratio of lengths of neighbouring elements,
especially near a corner, such as those on the top corners of the
boundary element region,where the ratio of the lengths of the
boundary elements is 2:l.These errors become of the order of the
previous example as soon as this ratio becomes close to l,and the
number of boundary elements increases.
-137-
e. Large problem.
The accuracy of the program is further tested by the analysis
of the large problem shown in fig. 4.14. The exterior infinite rock
mass is modelled as a boundary element region numbered BEl.The interior intact rock is modelled by three boundary element regions numbered BE
2,BE 3,BE4,
and 26 plane strain elements.
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio are taken everywhere 100000 and
o respectively. The
o
is
unit weight is 0.27-10- 4 and the depth of point
100000. The ratio of horizontal to vertical stress KA,takes
the values 0 and 1.In the case KA=l,no errors are expected due to
corners, whereas for KA=O the error due to corners is expected to be
very close to maximum.
The particular solution of the internal boundary element regiis varied,by varying the values of K and h of equa2,BE 3,BE4
A
O
tion 3.30 .Theoretically the results should always be the same, as
ons BE
the sum of the particular solution and the complementary function

should give always the same total solution.
In tables 4.15 and 4.16 the calculated stresses at the centres of
the plane strain elements for various particular solutions of the
internal boundary element regions are compared with the analytical
solution.In table 4.15 the ratio K of the infinite field (exterior
A
boundary element region BEl),and therefore of the total solution
is O.In
columns 3 to 7 the particular solutiomof the internal
boundary element regions are varied,by varying K and hO.In column

A
8,the calculated stresses at the same points are shown for the same
configuration, but by now modelling lines AA and BB with very strong
(=80
0)
and very stiff (k =k =1000) joint elements.

s n
-138-
Figure 4.14 Large problem with boundary and finite elements.
nuri
2.563
2.619
2.673
2.619
2.457
2.295
2.136
2.560
2.616
2.672
2.620
2.459
2.299
2.138
2.345
2.122
2.293
2.136
2.518
2.653
2.618
2.455
2.636
max
0.256
2.321
0.054
0.534
3.055
0.067
0.548
3.220
0.058
0.270
3.567
0.795
0.194
0.163
0.255
0.413
0.440
2.243
-0
0.077
2.279
2.413
0.016
3.097
2.248
6.561
IDJ.n
-0 .
0.018
0.007
6
K =0 h =107
A '0
in~ior
2.359
2.262
0.023
2.430
2.493
2.536
2.600
0.038
2.423
-0
. max
2.045
0.077
2.725
mJ.n
-0 .
2.674
2.565
2.620
2.507
2.448
2.506
2.449
2.505
2.394
2.450
-0 .
2.396
mJ.n
-0 .
5
K =0 h =106
K
'0
L A
A=0.5
h =510
4
2.315
3
K =0,
hA=10 5
2.341
Analytic
2.349
2.402
Point
Particular solution input for
2.771
3.722
3.792
4.743
2.194
2.409
2.337
2.229
2.261
2.294
2.136
2.456
2.619
2.674
2.619
2.453
2.510
2.566
2.347
2.401
6.617
3.816
mJ.n
-0 .
mJ.n
-0 .
Joints ,k =k =103
K
A=0.5
7
h = 10 K =0 h =10 5 S
A '0
a
of the tot.so1.is O.
A
boundary element regions
Table 4.15 Stresses at the centres of the plane strain elements of large prob1em.K
I-'
VJ
'-0
2.396
2.395
2.449
2.506
2.562
2.618
2.673
2.619
2.456
2.294
2.135
2.449
2.505
2.560
2.616
2.672
2.620
2.459
2.299
2.138
2.273
2.115
2.301
2.139
2.432
2.582
2.672
2.614
2.559
2.440
2.501
2.363
2.273
2.461
2.621
2.673
2.619
2.564
2.507
2.452
2.345
2.340
2.349
2.402
2.140
2.453
2.292
2.624
2.678
2.622
2.566
2.507
2.450
2.399
2.338
1.545
2.585
2.937
1.857
2.057
2.224
2.278
2.331
1.915
2.261
5.160
4.533
5.060
6.359
5.086
2.699
2.998
2.931
3.095
3.514
5.567
8.883
2.493
2.691
2.848
3.136
2.680
2.667
2.613
6.035
6.600
6.722
8.297
2.755
3.162
3.114
3.428
4.177
2.608
2.591
7.340
13.248
2.845
3.336
Table 4.16 Stresses at centres of plane strain elements of large problem. K of the total sol. is 1
A
Particular solution input for interior boundary element regions
t)
6
7
1.
'1
2
1
6
7
K
K
K
K
=l,h
=10
K
=l,h
A=1,hO=100000
A=0.5,hO=50000
A=0.5,hO=10000000 A
0
A
a=10
Point
Analytic
-0
-0
-0
-0 .
-0 .
-0 .
-0 .
-0 .
mln
max
mln
max
IDln
mln
IDln
"max
f-J
-l'-
-141-
In table 4.16,the ratio K of the infinite field is 1.In coA

lumns 3 to 7 the particular solution of the internal boundary element regions is varied by varying K and h
as in table 4.15.
A
O'
It can be seen that the stresses for particular solutions of
the interior boundary element regions near to the total solutions
are very satisfactory (columns 3 and 4). As the difference between
the particular solution and the total solution increases (columns
5 to 7),the results become less accurate,especially near sharp
corners.Hence care must be taken that the stresses due to theparticular solution and the total one are of similar order.
-142-
CHAPTER 5 - STABILITY OF AN OVERHANGING ROCK
~~DGE
IN AN EXCAVATION
5.0 General
The behaviour of a wedge in a roof of a tunnel is governed by
its geometry , the mechanical parameters of the joints forming the wedge,the stresses in the rock mass,and the flexibility of the rock
mass.In section 5.1,the main parameters that govern the mechanism
of failure are
identified~and
the forces that create limit conditions
are evaluated.In section 5.2 the above mentioned forces are computed
by the use of numerical models,which can take account of a greater
number of parameUrs,and tables are produced in which closed form
solutions are compared with more sophisticated numerical ones.
5.1 Idealized behaviour (Fig. 5.1)
The logic adopted in this section is due to Bray (1975),and allows calculation of the factor of safety of a rock wedge against failure,and the reinforcement required. The assumptions rnadeare:
The weight of the wedge does not act until after the excavation has been completed.
Blasting does not influence the forces acting on the joint.
No vertical forces act,other than the weight and the support
force (i.e. no initial vertical force ).
The procedure is as follows:
Assume that joints are initially infinitely stiff,so that the
rock mass may be regarded as continuous elastic and homogeneous.
Carry out an elastic analysis,to determine the stress in the
crown of the excavation.Follow the usual procedure,whereby the weight
of the rock in the immediate vicinity of the opening is ignored.
Take the stiffness of the joints to be reduced to values k s ,
small by comparison with the stifk and take both of these to be
n
fness of the rest of the rok mass,so that the intact rock including
-143-
Flexible joints
surrounding rock
w
Rigid wedge
Excavation roor
11----------------)1v
p
A
A
Figure 5. I Wedge ideal ization.
-144-
the wedge may be regarded as rigid.

Apart from the forces at the joints,the wedge will be acted upon by
its own weight WJ and
another applied force A (e.g. rock bolt in tension).
Let P be the resultant of
Wand
A ,i.e.
Find the magnitude of the force P
(5.1)
P=W-A.
acting in the same direction as
P and replacing it,which will cause the wedge to be in a state of limit

equlibrium.
Assume two independent failure criteria for the joints.

i. The tensile strength of the joints is zero.
ii. The shear strength of the joints is purely frictional.
The factor of safety may be defined here as;
FS=I+(A-A )/W=l+c-c
where
c=A/W,
CO=AO/W,
AO=W-P O
5.1.1. Symmetric wedge (Fig. 5.2)

Due to symmetrY,only the half wedge needsto be considered.The force
with which the surrounding rock acts on the half wedge,before softening of
the joint starts and Po is applied (stage l),is HO.lt is assumed at this
stage that elastic behaviour is exhibited.This necessitates that
After the joint deforms and Po is applied
a<.
(stage 2),the force with which
the surrounding rock acts upon the half wedge is J.

The initial conditions require;
NO=H(!cOS a , SO= HO-san a
For a.j oint without dilation, the following system of equations needs to
be solved.
-k .cos a
s
k .sin a
n
ol
-tan
cos a
sin a
-sin a
-cos a
S
N
H = HO
d
P O/2
sin a
cos a
0
0
0
(5.4)
-145-
Geometry and forces
~-
Force components
without dilation
Figure 5.2 Symmetric wedge - <ja.
Roughness
-146-
CoX= H0 .y
or in abbreviated form _.....
...
where rows 1,2 are the constitutive equations for the joint, row 3 is the
failure criterion and rows 4,5 the equation of equilibriumo
The solution of the matrix equation gives;
P
O/2=MoHO
H=P O/2 ocot

d=H osin
(~-a)
(~-a)/(Dok )
n
(5.5)
where
D=cos aocos
~ok
M=(cos2aok/k
s n
/k +sin aosin ~
n
+sin 2a)osin (~-a)/D
s
(5.6)
For a joint with dilationJthe two first rows of the matrix
equation 5.4
need to be modified. The normal displacement component is assumed to be

the sum of two components va and v
,where v d is a function of shear
displacement,that causes dilation due to roughness,
(5.7)
va is a function of the applied normal stress only.Its relation to the
vertical movement is given by
(5.8)
Thus in equation 5.4 we put instead of C
the value
24=knosina
C
(a-i)/cosi and resolve the system. This gives
24=knsin
P0/2=Mo HO
H=P 0/2 cot (~-a)
d=sin (~-a).HO/(kn.Docos i)
(5.9)
N=(cos'aocos iok /k +sin (a-L) -s i,n a) -cos ~.HO/(Docos i)

s n
S=(cosaa.cos i.k /k +sin (a-i).sin a)osin ~.HO/(D.cos i)
s n
-147-
where,
D=cos a-cos -k /k +sin -sin (a-i)/cos i
s n
(5.10)
M=(cos 2a-cos i-k /k +sin (a-i)-sin a)-sin (-a)/(D-cos i)
s n
For k <<Ie ,
S
Pa=2-Ha-sin (-a)-sin a/sin

i.e
(5.11)
Po is independent of the dilation angle i.Note that is the total
friction angle. The case with dilation includes the case i=O, i.e a joint
without dilation. The nondimensional ratio M=P / (2H
depends only on the
O
O)
mechanical properties of the joint and its geometry,and it will be used
frequently in this chapter.
The mean horizontal stress is given by
The weight of the wedge is given by,
The resultant force Po is given by,

or
P =W-AO=(1-c
O)-0.5.p-g-L-h
O
(5.14a)
P a=2-H0 -M=2-h-o HO M
(5.14b)
Equating the last two equations

(5.15)
By defining the stress concentration factor Scf as,
is
the depth of the excavation, equation 5.15 becomes,

l-c a=4- (a/L) -S cf-M
S cf depends on the geometry of the excavation and the
-148-
stress ratio K ' and may be assumed independent of depth for z/L > 3,
A
where we have assumed L of similar magnitude to the largest vertical dimension of the opening. This factor can be obtained directly from tables
(e.g
Eissa (1980),page 139), for various shapes,positions,and K

A
Equation 5.16 uncouples the various contributions to the carrying capacity
of the joint.
Friction angle
p <a
(Fig. 5.3)
If the previous equations are used,then a negative carrying capacity will

be required for limit equilibrium. This is because at the end of stage 1
we have passed the limit equilibrium and a negative force Po is required

to keep the force acting on the wedge by the surrounding rock on the failure envelope.If slip is allowed to occur,then row 1 in equation 5.4 is
no longer applicable making the system of equations indeterminate.If we
define N=N
' then no total movement occur-a, but plastic shear movenent of
the joint occurs . This will corespond to force P
omax
12
in the figure.
For N= 0 ,PO will. become zero, i.e for < a at least the whole weight
of the wedge must be supported.
Behaviour of. resistance force
P~
Graphs relating M to the angle a for various friction angles, stiffness

ratios,and dilation angles are shown in Appendix 5.They indicate that
the most important of the above mentioned parameters is the stiffness
ratio,whichis also the most difficult to determine.For very low values
of k/kn,M is no
liDnger. a monotone decreasing function of angle a.This
means that if wedges of various angles are considered,an angle may be

found, below which the resistance will become smaller.As an example let
us consider a wedge with constant base length L=lOxl03,k
Ikn =O.Ol,i=O,
=400,pg=27xlO- 6.The required horizontal stress at limit equilibrium becomes:
HO
=peg.L/(4 eM)=O.0675 eM.
-149-
1
1
h
~P
,1t
;(
Wedge
Force components
Displacement
VB
normal force
Figure 5.3 Symmetric wedge - <a
VB
horizontal force
-150-
Let us take the angle
to be
10~20~30~Then M'OHO ~ and
FS vary as
follows:
M
FS(OHo=0.355)
Ho
10 0
0.167
0.404
0.878
20 0
0.190
0.355
1.000
30 0
0.136
0.496
0.715
The factor of safety if no support force exists is given by)

FS=l-c o =Po/w =4M.oHO /(pg~) = HOM/0.0675
In column 4 in the table above the factors of safety for 0HO=0.355 are
shown. In the
diagram~Fig 5.4~the
behaviour of these three wedges is
shown. This has also been confirmed by the program and the results can be
seen
in table 5.1
For k S /kn ::::0
M=sina sin(-a)/sin
dM/da=(cosa sin (-a) - sin acos (-a/sin
For obtaining an extremum we put dM/da=O.This results in
tana=tan(-a) 'or a=/2
This can be seen geometrically(Fig. 5.5)as the path of point C on the
circumference of a, circle)at which the line OH
The maximum is achieved when the triangle COH
subtends an angle 180-.

becomes isoceles ,
i.e a=-a.Another extremum (minimum)can be identified in the graphs at

very small angles a.The curves tend to smoothen as k s /kn becomes larger
or becomes smaller. The distance between points C and B depends on the
sngLe
where) for
i=O,
e~arctan(k
/k cot a)
s n
For k s /kn #0- and a=O + e=rr/2 and M=P 0 / (2 H0 )=tan
M is zero.
For k !k =0 and .a=O
s n
This is because it is imp.ossible to achieve
-151-
Low
k. /k =0'.01
s n
Medium
e=arctan((k /k )cota)
os n
"i =3.2459
e =1. 5738
e
o
0
h=O.3308
H: Wedge with a=30 0

0
M: Wedge with a=20
L: Wedge with a=IO O
are lines for k /k =0
S
!l
Figure 5.4 Examples for very low stiffness ratio joints.
--,.,
.-: - - - - - - - I Pomax/2
~ " /;
-152-
.r:
"
I
I
/
I
I
I
_ -- _ Po/2
/
I
I
I
circle
e=arctank /k ) cota)
s n
Figure 5.5 Behaviour of symmetric rigid wedge.
-153-
a shear
for~e
through movement,and if there were non zero S lit would

o
be impossible to change it.Also No due to a=O would not change.

llexibility of the wedge
If the flexibility of the '..i rltact 'rock of the wedge is significant with
respect to the flexibility of the joint,then the stability of the wedge
is affected.Flexibility in the direction of the joint causes partial yield
of the joint surface before failure, decreasing thus the final load that
can be sustained.On the other hand flexibility in the horizontal direction
increases the stability
of the wedge ,because it acts to increase the
apparent normal flexibility of the joint and hence
increase the angle e.
This is illustrated in Fig. 5.6 .The simplest model that could reproduce
flexible behaviour of a wedge is shown in the upper part of figure 5.7.
A system of 10 simultaneous equations must be solved in the 10 unknown
quantities,ioe two values for each
N,S,H and one value for each R,dx'd y'
P The determination of k,k needs engineering

o
r n
jud~ent.If
the wedge
is assumed to fail simultaneously on the whole face,then the simpler

model shown in the lower part of the figure 5.7 may be appropriate.
The system of equations to solve the problem if dilation is excluded is,
1
a
a
1
-sin a
-cos a
-tan
<l>
-cos a
sin a
k sin a
s
k cos a
n
-kh
a
a
a
-k cos a
s
k sin a
n
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
1
sin a
os a
H
d
d
x
y
P0 /2
H0
a
a
a
(5.18)
or in abbreviated form, CX=H .y

-
0-
where the first two rows are the constitutive equations of the joint.
In row 3 is,the constitutive equation of the wedge.Row 4 is the failure
criterion.Rows 5 and
are the equilibrium equations.
-154-
Increarein wedge stability due to horizontal flexibility.
Decrease in wedge stability due to flexibility parallel to the joints.
Figure 5.6 Effect of intact rock flexibility.
-155-
Variation of stress along the joint.
Kinematiks
AH
Constant stress along the joint.
Figure 5.7 Models for elastic wedge.
-156-
Performing Gaussian elimination in Eq. 5.18 ,we get
a'
b'
c'+~
d'
f'
-d'
Solving
d
d
5.19
Po /2
x
5
= H0 - 0
0
P0 /2
we get
d'
d /d
-d ,2
(5.20)
-~~ +c')
-c' -f' -f' -~_

(5.21)
= -d' / (~ +c t)
a, , b' , c' , d' , f' ,r
where the parameters
have the following values:
a'=k-(-(k
/k )-sin a + cos a-tan ~)
n
. s n
b'=k -((k /k )cos a + sin atan ~)
n
c'=k -((k /k )sin 2a

n
s n
(5.22)
d'=k -(l-k /k )-sin a-cos a

n
f'=-k -(k /k cos 2a

n
s n
For
~=00
we get
c'-k -k
s n
and
d /d =d =0
Y x
P0
/2=H0
-f'-r /b'
5
which is the same equation as the first of equations 5.5 ,for the
stiff wedge.The enhancement in stability due to flexibility may be
shown by the ratio
P /p
o
Po /f5 0 ,
-------a'-d'-b'-c'-b'-~
d,2/f'+c'+~
=
f'
-a'-d'/b'+c'+~
-157-
The function,
a'-f'
+ b'-d' = -k s /kn -(tan
is negative for
$-COS
a - sin a)-k 2
n
>a.
Hence
(5.26)
<
b'
-f'
Also
f'
is negative, and
k /k < 1 Hence from

s n
5.24
a',b',c',d'
and
are positive for
5.26 we find that,
p j'p > 1
o 0
i.e.
the stability of the wedge increases due to the flexibility
of the wedge , if this model is appropriate.
-158-
Stress
redistribution Fig. 5.8
Let us assume a hydrostatic stress field not varying with depth and examine
the half. portion of a symmetric wedge.OA is the force on the joint
before excavation, which for the hydrostatic stress field would be normal
to the joint.We may propose that the stiffness of the excavated material
is reduced to zero but the stresses on the excavation face remain.
Thus no movement will have occured till now.Then,let us propose that a
traction is applied slowly on the.8xcavation surface in the opposite
sense to the existing tractions and
propor~ional
to them.If the joint
flexibility is very large by comparison with the flexibility of the rock

mass, the stress app.Lf.ed.: on the j oint will depend on the wedge movement
as stresses due to excavation will be redistributed outside the wedge
(path AD).On the other hand if the flexibility of the joints is zero
then an elastic solution without taking into account the. JOints would be
appropriate (path AB).In the case where the stiffnesses of the joint and
intact rock are of similar magnitude we may suggest that an intermediate
path is followed from A to C which would be a straight line if the
stiffnesses remain constant.
Let us consider the case
> a.By applying to the excavation face the
tractions that will make the force on the joint horizontal,we equilibrate the forces acting on the joint due to the vertical stress field, but
not the weight of the wedge.H
in Bray)s
whereas fora very flexible joint,H
theory corresponds to OB ,
corresponds to OD.Bray)s theory ac-
cepts that the joint now softens and from B we arrive at E' on the failure envelope at an angle
e,specified in Fig. 5.4. ,from the normal to
the joint.For the very flexible joint from D we continue to D' at the
same angle
e.
If the joint stiffness is of some significance, then we presume that we

will follow an intermediate path and meet the failure env.81ope at a point
-159-
Failure
D*
C*
E*
envelope
<1>< a
Figure 5.8
Stress redistribution.
..... .......
.....
F*
-160-
such as
values
C' .the (positive)carrying capacity being between the extreme

D~D* and
E'E*.
Thus we see that the joint carrying capacity depends on the relative
stiffness of the rock mass and joint. because this determines the relative position of the path. whereas e determines the limiting paths. As e
is always positive by definition. from point B we can not arrive at a
point such as
C '. by specifYing appropriate values for k s /kn
Nevertheless the assumption made by Bray seems very reasonable because

joint stiffness is not constant but reduces continuously.this being taken
into account implicitly by Bray
using two joint stiffness values.
In this respect. the introduction of a loosening factor

multiply H
LF which would
could be suggested,to bring point B at a point such as
It must be noticed here that in some cases,e.g.
E.
a small wedge in a large
opening,wedges may be subjected to much reduced horizontal stresses, that

might be also tensile, due to bending ,and point B might lie even to the
left of point
D.
Let us now consider the case
4>< a.In this case we meet the failure en-
velope before the force becomes horizontal at E' for infinitely stiff"
joints in the direction towards B,) corresponding to the elastic solution...
or D' for infinitely flexible joints.Again it is presumed that for joint
stiffness of the same order
AC
as the rock stiffness an intermediate path
will be followed,that would be linear for constant stiffness.Note
here that F'F*corresponds to P
max
/ 2 in Fig. 5.3 .This value we see re-
duces now even. for infinite.ly stiff joints to
E'E* which shows the signi-
ficance of the load path. (Points E',F' correspond to different distribu- tions of tractions around the excavation face.)
According to the stated logic, the plastic movement will start after we
\ve reached the line
~s
E'D' .In all cases we can propose for design
pu~~
a zero resistance of the joint,requiring only full support of the
-161-
wedge 10ad.We expect less plastic movement as we move from F' to D',
so this could be an indicator of potential explosive failure,especially if strain softening is anticipated.
A verification of these thoughts might be given by experimental test
results obtained by Crawford and Bray(1982),that show failure stresses
substantially lower than predicted by Bray's theory.
5.1.2 Asymmetric wedge.

Let us consider a rigid non-symmetric wedge in a horizontal tunnel
roof (Fig.5.9),within infinitely stiff rock.The forces acting on the
wedge faces are not equal and displacement will no longer be vertical.
A rotation that might also occur has not been considered. Two critical
stages exist; first yield and failure.
Before first yield, all deformations are elastic and at first yield
one face reaches yield.At failure both faces exhibit yield,but before failure one unyielded face exists.In the force component diagram
of Fig.5.9 the mirror image of the forces acting on face 2 is shown
together with..the forces acting on face 1. Vectors HoD
and H
are
oD2
the differences between the forces acting initially and those acting
at first yield.Joint shear and normal displacements are defined in
terms of wedge displacements as follows:
-sin
sin
cos
-cos
::}[::J
(5.27)
Let us suppose that face 2 yields first,as shown in the figure,while

face 1 remains elastic. The system of equations to solve is
-162-
1
I
I
I
/
/
-Force diagram.
Displacement components.
dx
Figure 5.9 Asymmetric rigid wedge.
-1631
o
o
a
0
1
-tan 2
sin a1 cos a -sin a -cos a
1
2
2
cos aI-sin a 1 cos a 2 -sin a
2
-k
-cos a
a
s1-sin 1
k
n1-sin a 1 kn1-cos a 1
-ks2 -cos a 2 -k
s2-sin a 2
k
n2-sin a 2 -kn2-cos a 2
sl
o
o
o
o
o
o
o Sl
o N1
a S2
a - N2
o
o
-1
cos
sin
=H o- cos
a
o
x
P
(5.28)
where the first four rows are the constitutive laws for the two joints,
row 5 is the failure condition on face 2,and the last two rows are
the equilibrium equations of the whole wedge.
Performing Gaussian elimination the system of equations becomes,
aY
bY
cY
dY
eY
fY
-1
rY
5
= H
P0
-0
0
Solving this system we get,

d
d
Y
x
(5.30)
d /d =-cY/d Y
x Y
SY=arc tan (-cY/dY)
where the parameters a Y to r Y are given by,
5
aY=kS 2-Cos a 2+kn2-sin a 2-tan 2

bY=k s 2-sin a 2-kn2-cos a 2-tan 2
cY= -(kn1-ks1)-sin aI-COS a 1 + (k n2-ks 2)-sin a
a
2-cos 2
dY=-ks1-sin~a1-kn1-cos2a1-ks2-sin2a2-kn2-cos2a2
2a ::'::L:k+d Y
eY=ksl -cos 2a1 +kn1 -sin~a 1 +ks2 -cos 2a+k
2n2 -sin 2
.
<
<
fY=(k
n1
-k )-sin a -cos a -(k -k )-sin a -cos a =-c Y

s I l l n2 s2
2
2
r~= sin (2-a2)/cOS 2
(5.31)
-164The angles e Y ' e Y are given by,

l
2
e Y = arc tan ((ksl/knl)cot (al+~))
1
~
e Y = arc tan ((k
(a -S))
2
s 2/kn2)cot
2
(5.32)
These angles are independent of the friction angles and can be used
to find graphically or analytically the yield force,if the failure
envelope is multilinear or non-linear.
The equations for al=a2'1=2,ksl=ks2,knl=kn2 give cY=O and
d =d /d =0 d =H rY/aY P =H .eY.rY/aY M=eY.rY/a Y
(5.33)
x x Y , Y 0 5
' 0 0
5'
5
which are the same as equation 5.5 for the symmetric wedge.
The ratio cY/d Y is a measure of the asymmetry of the wedge.If this is
small)then equation 5.33 may be applicable.
By interchanging the indices 1 and 2 we get values for P
cor-
responding to first yield on face 1.The lower value is to be chosen.

Usually the flatter face,that is the face with larger angle a,will
yield first.
Let us suppose now that face 2 has yielded first.It is assumed that
shear deformations on face 2 are plastic, but normal deformations continue to be elastic,so that their resultant lies on the failure envelope.Vectors D
e are the changes in forces acting in the two
lC l,D2 2
faces from yield until failure.To form the new system of equations,
corresponding to failure,we have to replace in equations 5.28 the
third row that corresponds to elasticity in the shear direction of
face 2 by an equation that specifies yield on face 1 at failure.The
system of equations then becomes:
-165-
-ksl cos a l
kslosin a l
Sl
sin a
knlosin a l
knlocos a l
N
l
cos a
S2
-tan <1>1 0
1
sin a
-tan <1>2
a
o0
kn 20sin a 2 -kn2 cos a 2
a
a
a
a
-1
cos aI-sin a
a
2-cos 2
a
cos a l -sin a l cos a
2-sin 2
l
a
a
d
x
P
0
Performing Gaussian elimination,
ef
d
0
ff
y
x
-1
f
r?
f
= H 0 r6
0
rf
7
(5.36)
Solving this system we get

d
d
-cf
d
H
f f f f
e od -c of a f off -e f b f c f b f -af d
f f f f "f f f f
dx/dy=(-c or
or6)/(d or
or 6)
5+a
5-b
Sf=arc tan (d /d )
x y
wh~re the parameters _af until T~ are "given by,
P
afodf_cfobf
a =kslocos al+knlosin alotan
bf=_k
osin a +k cos a otan 

sl
1 nl
1
1
cf=_(k -k )osin a cos a +k osin ao(cos a
a 0tan <1>2)
nl s I l l n2
2
2+sin 2
df=-kslosin2al-knlocos2al-kn2cos a 2 o(cos a 2+sin a 2 0tan <1>2)
ef=kslocos2al+knloSin2al+kn2oSin
ff=(k nl-ksl)osin alocos a
r~=Sin
l-kn2
(l-al)/cos <1>1
r~=sin a 20sin (2-a2)/cOS <1>2

r~=-cos a 2 0sin (2-a2)/cOS <1>2
N =H 0 0 cos a
2
2
(5.35)
af
a2~Sin a 2-cos a 20tan <1>2) (5.38)
ocos a
2o(sin a 2-cos a 20tan <1>2)
-166-
The angles e
f
f
f
' e are dependent on both friction angles. e is given
2
l
l
by,
The value P for failure

o
might sometimes be smaller than its value
for yield. This happens if the line joining the middle points of D
ID2
and C
is sloping downwards from D to C.This willcause a brittle tyIC2
pe
of failure when first yield occurs.If this line is sloping upwards
a ductile type behaviour happens, the horizontal distance between D and

C being a measure of the ductility. This ductility for a symmetric wedge is zero and hence we conclude that symmetric wedges always exhibit
brittle failure.
For an oblique wedge(Fig.5.10),two force components P
be considered.P
and P
must
is parallel to the wedge face and except for very
shallow excavations,is small by comparison with H and may be ignored.

o
is normal to the wedge face.Calculations may now proceed as for the
wedge with the face horizontal, but with a
l,a2
as shown in the figure.
This analysis has not been validated.

Apart from the symmetric wedge,the wedges might have an important
rotational component, which so far has not been taken into account.
The simplest idealization of the problem is the one shown.in fig.5.11,
where we assume contact points between the wedge and the surrounding
rock at nodes A,B,C,D .For failure to occur,yield must occur at all
four points. The ultimate load and displacement can be found by following successive yield happening at the nodes. The procedure is similar
to the one used for analysing the asymmetric wedge.A system of 12 equations in 12 unknowns must be solved each time.The unknowns are the
-167-
Figure 5.10 Oblique wedge.
(tan az-tan al)/2

h(tan az-tan al)/6
h-(tan az-tan al)/3
dy
Figure 5.1 I Wedge with rotation.
-168-
three displacement components d ,d ,d and two force components for

x y w
each of the four nodes. The equations are the three equilibrium equations of the wedge,the four constitutive equations relating normal force
to normal displacement and 5 equations from the 4 yield conditions
and the four constitutive laws relating shear force to shear displacement.
-169-
5.2 Numerical solution

A series of numerical analyses has been carried out to validate
and to give an insight of the applicability of the simplified solutions
proposed in the previous section. Various wedges with >a and i=O were subjected to progressively increasing distributed pullout loads.
This load was applied in steps of magnitude
~W=~cw.
The total load applied before failure has occured is P =(l-c )W.
o
From now on we drop the subscripts (0). The following subscripts are
used:
min
Value corresponds to the last converging step of the numerical

computation.
max
Value corresponds to the first non-converging step of the

numerical computation.
gr
Value is calculated analytically (from graphs of appendix 5)
Value is calculated numerically by the program.
th
Value has been calculated analytically from theoretical solution. (asymmetric wedge)
Value corresponds to yield
(asymmetric wedge )
Value corresponds to failure.
BS
The value of H has been calculated by an elastic solution,

o
in order to do the rest of the calculations analytically.

Ho
The value of Ho has been calculated by the program in order

to do the rest of the calculations analytically.
-170-
5.2.1 Symmetric wedge.

Two types of pullout test analyses were carried out. The first type of analysis consisted of wedges of varying flexibility, within an
infinitely stiff rock maas, subjected to a horizontal stress field. In
the second type of analysis the same wedges were considered to be embedded in a flexible rock mass. The stiffness of the intact rock varies
from very stiff to very soft thus introducing a new parameter not taken into account in the formulae of section 5.1.
Infinitely stiff outer rock mass.
The surrounding rock mass (Fig.5.12) is represented by the fixed nodes
1 to 17.The elastic wedge is modelled by 7 plane strain elements PI
to P7.The joints are modelled by eight joint elements jl to js' one
face of each of which is fixed to the surrounding rigid rock mass.
An initial horizontal stress is applied to the system together with
the weight of the wedge. Then additional distributed load proportional
to the weight of the wedge is applied in the vertical direction until
failure occurs. The horizontal stress is applied through an initial
stress within the joint and plane strain elements.
The angle a is taken to be 50 ,20 ,35 , the. friction angle is 400,

and the dilation angle i is 0.
In table 5.1 numerically cal.culated results for 9 almost rigid
wedges (E=5000 GPa) surrounded by rigid rock are shown and the calculated value of M in column 9,M =P /(2.H ) is compared with that
c c
0
predicted by the simplified theory of section 5.1,in column 10.
The stiffness ratio is taken to be 0.001,0.01,0.1 for each value of a.
The total force P is applied in up to 10 steps. The last converging
step is n,and P is the corresponding load. M. corresponds to P
n
m~n
n
and Mmax to Pn +1. M is given by
-171-
i
Vb
46
P2
36
42
41
P5
45
Js
2
PI
18
35
40
P4
44
34
17
Figure 5.12 Symmetric flexible wedge within rigid rock.(WDG series)
6900
0.071
0.197
0.145
0.150
0.190
0.II9
0.277
0.178
0.193
0.226
0.304
0.291
0.298
0.010
0.100
0.001
0.010
0.100
0.001
0.010
0.100
05
05
20
20
20
35
35
35
560
540
400
2940
2170
2180
19800
"
"
1.365658
"
"
0.814334
"
"
.10 4
0.207514
Bt
0.076
0.075
0.055
0.239
0.178
0.179
0.4II
0.144
0.062
Mmin
0.003
0.086
0.004
0.023
0.082
0.086
0.001
0.012
0.005
0.052
0.014
0.025
~c
0.274
0.202
0.203
0.479
0.167
0.093
Mmax
0.080
0.077
0.078
0.240
0.189
0.183
0.463
0.157
0.087
Mc
9
Mgr
10
0.080
0.078
0.078
0.241
0.190
0.183
0.463
0.158
0.087
Note that the meaning of the indices of that table is as follows:

min : Value corresponds to the last converging step of the numerical computation
max : Value corresponds to the first non-converging step of the numerical computation
c
: Value extrapolated from numerical result
gr : Value calculated analytically
0.247
0.242
0.241
3000
0.040
0.156
0.001
05
k s.Ikn
3b
3a
kn=IO,L=I OoI03, 0HO=0.42/cosa,kR=0.OI,0.IO,I.00. Series WDG___
0,i=00,
Symmetric almost rigid wedge within infinitely stiff rock.
E=50 oI0 5, $=40
Table 5.1
ments.
all joint ele-
simultaneous in
Failure was
Comments
II
I--'
I
I\)
....::l
-173-
The initial
horizontal stress is
The value of M lies between M. and M

and can be found by extrac
m1n
max
polation from.M . The stresses within the joint at the end of load
m1n
step n O(n) and L(n) do not vary along its length/due to the high rigidity of the intact rock. These values are known and shown in column
3 of the table. Then if
~d
is the additional movement needed to cause
failure,
Solving for k
~d,
The additional load then provided would be
The additional value for M would be given by,
The value of M is calculated from

c
Mc
= M.
+
m1n
~~
As can be seen from the table , computed (column 9) and theoretically

predicted (column 10) values of M are almost identical.
Validation for Mmi n can be made from the known o(n) and L(n) as,
Mmi n = p~tan a/(oHoL) = (TCOS a-osin a)/(oHocos a)
(5.47)
From the table we may observe that for values of k /k <0.01 the coms n
puted values of M are not
monotone decreasing functions of a,
which was also predicted by the theory of section 5.1 (also example
of figure 5.4).
-174-
The same three wedge geometries are analysed by the program again,
now
taking
the stiffness of the intact rock to have the realistic
value 100 GPa. The joint shear stiffnesses are taken to be 0.2,1.0,
and 2.0. The normal joint stiffness is taken to be 20. The rest of
the material parameters are taken to be the same as for the very rigid
wedge.
A horizontal stress field of -2.7 MPa is applied through initial
stresses within the plane strain and
joint elements. Then a load
is applied in steps of magnitude 6cW. The value of 6c is 1.

In table 5.2 the values of (I-c) characterizing the failure capacity
of the wedge as computed by the program (column 4) and as predicted
by the simplified theory (column 5) are compared. The value in column 4
cor-reaponds-, to the last converging step of the program. Thus the
correct value for (I-c) lies between (I-c) . and (I-c). + c. Due
m1n
m1n
to the lower flexibility of the intact rock, the values of stresses
along the joints were not constant,so that no extrapolation could be
performed. The relation between M and (I-c) is
(1-c)=40M
Elastic surrounding rock mass

The surrounding rock mass (Fig.5.13) is modelled by boundary elements,the nodes of which are numbered 32 to 59. The angle a is taken
to be 20 All combinations of three stiffness ratios and three Young's

moduli are examined.Two types of problems were considered.
In the first (Fig.5.13a) the hole already exists,and horizontal stress
is applied through initial stresses in the 8 joint elements and the
8 plane strain elements and through far field stresses in the boundary element region. A load proportional to the weight of the wedge is
then applied downwards until failure occurs. In table 5.3 the values
of (I-c) for the last converging step are shown in column 6 for com-
C/)
v.J
VI
CD
Ii
til
CD
f-J.
Ii
til
CD
3:
t""'
CD
/'V
II
ll'
Ii
f-J.
c+
til
ll'
I-'
CD
::r
f-J.
='
c+
I;
f-J.
O'Q
CD
til
P.
f-J.
c+
til
ll'
I-'
f-J.
Q
Ii
c+
CD
~ ~
.......
"%j
f-J.
O'Q
-1--10000
Hole.
blO
b9
ba
j I
54
b12
55
'"
63
P10
53
.....
60
It
Pa
P12
62
3I
2a
Pll
61
P9
P7
b6
40
58
b
j
ja
b1
32
59
L.
5 II
b2
j 7
IO
lit
P2, P3, P4
PI
b.Excavation sequence is performed.
~10000.~
51
50
49
4a
b7
region.
Boundary element
Elastic space;
a.No excavation is performed.
13737.
VI
I
I
.....
-..J
35
20
05
angle
0.10
0.01
0.05
0.10
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.01
0.2
0.05
0.10
2.0
1.0
0.05
0.01
k /k
s n
1.0
0.2
18
13
(I.O-c) .
mJ.n
3.20
3.16
3.12
9.64
8.60
7.60
18.52
13.92
6.32
(I.O-c) ex
0.080
0.079
0.078
0.241
0.215
0.190
0.463
0.348
0.158
M
gr
Note that the meaning of the indices of that table is as follows:

min : Value corresponds to last converging step of the numerical computation
gr : Value is calculated analytically< (graphs).
oHO =-2.7,E=100.103,p.g=27.10-~~c=I.0,=400,i=0.0,kn =20,L=10000,1.0-c=40.M
Table 5.2 Symmetric elastic wedge within rigid surrounding rock.
I-'
-:l
0'
ks
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
Test name
TAD
TAE
TAF
TBD
TBE
TBF
TCD
TCE
TCF
O.IO
1.00
1.00
I.OO
o.or
0.05
IO.O
IO.O
IO.O
IOO.
IOO.
IOO.
E4IO- 3
O.IO
0.05
O.OI
O.IO
0.05
O.OI
ks/kn
3.72
3.72
3.65
3.64
3.60
3.36
3.27
3.I5
2.87
HO
>I2
I3
>II
>I3
I3
II
I3
II
(I-c)min
0.24I
0.2I5
0.I90
0.24I
0.2I5
0.I90
0.24I
0.2I5
0.I90
Mgr
I3.28
II.85
IO.27
I3.00
II.46
9.46
II.68
IO.03
8.08
(I-c)gr
at low e Lem,
at low elem.
at low elem.
at low elem.
at bottom.
at the top.
at low elem.
at the top
at the top
Failure starts at
Indices "min" indicate that values are computed numerically and correspond to the last converging step.
Note: Indices "gr" indicate that values are computed from analytical solution (graphs)
Table 5.3. Symmetric elastic wedge within elastic rock , without excavation sequence.
O.
-6
0
a=20 , pg=27IO , ~c=I, =40 , i=OO, kn=20, h=I3737, L=IOOOO, W=I854
- Series TAD-TCF.
I--'
...:J
...:J
-178-
parison with the values predicted by the simplified theory,shown in

column 8.The horizontal stress acting before the vertical load is applied is shown in column 5. The value of (I-c)
gr
is computed from
l4.8l.(OH o -M gr )
In the second type of problem (Fig. 5.l3b) a nearly hydrostatic stress
field is created initially by applying far field stresses as well as
initial stresses in the 12 plane strain elements and the 10 joint elements. An excavation is then performed by removing elements P9 to
P12 and j9 to jlO so that a free face of the wedge is exposed.
Then a downward load proportional to the weight of the wedge is applied until failure occurs. In table 5.4 computed results are compared
with the results predicted by the simplified theory.
In column 5 are shown the average horizontal and vertical tractions
in the joints before excavation. In column 6 are average horizontal
tractions on the joint after excavation,assuming infinitely rigid joints and using elastic theory. In column 7 are the average horizontal
tractions acting on the joint after excavation, as calculated by the
program(the difference between columns 6 and 7 being due to the different flexibilities of the joints).In columns 8,9 and 10 are shown
the non-dimensional value.s of the failure capacity of the wedge as
calculated by the simplified theory(corresponds to column 6),as calculated by the simplified theory but with horizontal stress calculated from column 7(correct value of initial horizontal force),and as
calculated by the program respectively.
The values in columns 8 and 9 are calculated from the corresponding
tractions t in columns 6 and 7 and from values of M from column 7 in
table 5.3,from the formula
(I-c)
= l5.77-(t.M gr )
0.01
0.05
0.10
0.01
0.05
0.10
0.01
0.05
0.10
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
WAD
WAE
WAF
WED
WBE
WBE
WCD
WCE
WCF
3.52
3.69
3.51
3.46
3.46
3.42
3.42
2.98,1.47
3.12,1.67
2.97,1.68
2.93,1.68
2.93,1.73
2.89,1.72
2.88,1.72
100.
10.0
10.0
1.00
1.00
1.00
10.0
3.58
3.03,1.28
100.
BS
3.82
3.23,1.17
tH,t V
3.59
3.58
3.48
3.49
3.34
2.57
2.63
2.II
0.75
tHO
~c=I.O
12",14
13.60
II.59
13.00
10.42
13.26
13.15
10.36
11.33
II.90
13.0
bottom element
bottom element
bottom element
12.0
13.0
bottom element
12.0
bottom element
top element
8.0
11.05
11.0
bottom element
9.0
10.00
7.70
top element
7.0
7.15
12.13
13.40
top element
2.0
2.26
Failure starts
at
IIo44
(r-e)
-Series WAD-WCF.
. 10
II
(I-c)HO
(I-c)BS
h=I3737, 1=10000, W=I854,
100.
EOIO- 3
kn=20 ,
_.,,-
Note that indices,

BS indicate that values correspond to H calculated by elastic solution. The analytic solution is used.
Ho indicate that values correspond to HO calculated numerically. The analytic solution is used.
c indicates that values have been calcHlated completely numerically.
k;jk
s n
Test name
. 00 ,
1=
Symmetric elastic wedge within elastic rock , with excavation sequence.
a=20 o
, .pog=27IO -6 , =40 0 ,
Table 5.4.
f-'
<o
-...J
-180-
There is reasonable agreement between columns 9 and 10,but great discrepancy between columns 8 and 10 ,for high values of
E.
In fig. 5.14, the change of the force vector acting on the joint
of the wedge is shown for test run WAE referred to in table 5.4.
This may be compared with fig.5.8a. As we see, the path fromA to G
is linear and corresponds to the loading applied to create a stress
free surface.We continue loading,by apply:i.ng in steps load proportional to the weight of the wedge.We are moving again on a straight line
at 16 to the normal on the joint,that is greater than e=7.820
(e=arc tan k /k )cot a) ,which as discussed earlier in section 5.1
s n
is due to the flexibility of the rock.
The last converging step is at (1.52,0.45).Until that point minor
yielding occurs which does not deviate the line from linearity.After
that point partial and subsequently total yielding occurs which does
not allow the analysis to converge at G'.In fact the line bends,becoming
concave downwards and thus meeting the failure envelope at a
lower point and bringing the solution(column 10 of table 5.4) closer

to the predicted value(column 9).
Tests
WAD,liBD,WGD,WGE
when run at ten times the stress level
(at 1000 m depth) fail a.t ten times the pullout load (b,c=l,Q), indicating a paralle'l shift of the stress. path ccAGG' ,(Figs. :5.8 and 5.14).
-181-
,....
o
..
co
U"I
,....
co
I'
II
'I
/1
I
,....
'
l/"t
.
..
.
0
N
\D
/~
I
..
I I
\D
l/"t
e--:
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 5.14 Example of stress redistribution in a symmetric wedge(WAE)
-182-
5.2.2 Asymmetric wedge.

The program is
used to calculate the yield and failure loads of
various wedges within infinitely rigid surrounding rock.All possible

asymmetric permutations for a=5 0,200,35
0;
E=lOO,lO,l GPa; k =0.2,1.00,

s
2.00 are studied. The other parameters are taken to be
=40 0 , i=OO , k =20 , L=lO m.

n
An initial horizontal stress 0Ho=-2.7 is applied in the plane strain
elements. The initial stress applied in the joint elements to create a
of -2.7 MPa is calculated from O=OH cos 2a,
horizontal stress
T=OH -cos a- sin a, and is tabulated for the three angles a below.
50
20
35
0
0
o0
0.234
-2.679
0.868
-2.384
1.269
-1.812
The wedge is modelled by 8 plane strain elements PI to P8 and the joints
by
8 joint elements jl to j8' one side of each joint element
being fixed.In figure 5.15, the discretization of a wedge with a

and a 2=5
o
l=35
is shown.
In tables 5.5,5.6,5.7 the non-dimensional resultant forces at first

yield and failure,calculated from the numerical solution,are compared
with the predicted values calculated from the formulae developed in
section 5.1.2. Each table refers to one geometry,that is one pair of
angles a. In columns 4 and 5 the analytically calculated M parameters
for each angle are' shQ1Nll.ln column 6, the non-dimensional failure
capacity of the wedge
calculated from an average M assuming two
wedge parts separated by a vertical line and moving in the vertical

direction is shown.
(I-c)
gr
=(M
l gr
+M
2gr
Then
)
)e2eOH /(pege L)=20.(M
+M
l gr 2 gr
a
(5.50)
-183-
39
j~
.)
10
37
P4
15500
29
612740
12700
p6
31
7 34
35
P7
48
~-
P8
3
10000
8890
Figure 5.15 Asymmetric Wedge (WAS series)
33
pog=27
0IO
-6 ,l:!. c=0.20.
100
10.
10.
10.
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.10
o.or
0.05
0.10
o.or
0.05
0.10
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.080
0.079
0.077
0.080
0.079
0.077
0.080
0.079
0.077
19r
0.463
0.348
0.158
0.463
0.348
0.158
0.463
0.348
0.158
2gr
10.86
8.54
4.70
10.86
8.54
4.70
10.86
8.54
4.70
(I-c)gr
2.26
2.04
1.82
2.26
2.04
1.82
2.26
2.04
1.82
(I-cy)th
5.17
3.68
2.18
5.17
3.68
2.18
5.17
3.68
2.18
(I-cf)th
f)
8.20
7.80
4.60
5.00
2.40
5.00
3.60
1.80
(I-c
7.00
v)
2.00
2.00
1.80
2.00
1.80
1.60
(I-C
Note the following meaning of the indices used in this and the following tables of this chapter:
gr: Value has been calculated analytically (from the graphs)
th: Value has been calculated analytically from asymetric wedge solution
y : Value corresponds to yield
f : Value corresponds to failure.
100
0.05
1.0
EoI0 3
100
k/k
s n
0.01
0.2
middle joints.
ted in lower
Failure star-
j oint, elements
in upper m.iddIr
rFaf.Lure starts
Comments
0
E=IOOI0 3 ,1010 3 ,I 0103, <1>=40 ,i=OO, k =20,L=IOol0 3,a HO=2. 7,k =0.2,1. 0, 2. 0,h=I2700, W=I7I4. Series WAS
n
s
2
I
6
8
3
10
5
7
II
4
9
Table 5. 5 Asymmetric wedge surrounded by rigid rock; al=35 0 ,a2=050;
-l'--
co
I--'
k /k
s n
0.158
0.348
0.463
0.190
0.215
0.190
0.215
0.241
10.
10.
10.
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.01
0.05
0.10
0.01
0.05
0.10
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.2
1.0
2.0
0.241
0.241
100
0.10
2.0
0.463
0.348
0.158
0.463
0.348
0.215
100
0.05
1.0
0.158
0.190
M
2gr
100
M
Igr
0.01
E'I0 3
0.2
9.5
3.4
6.6
9.5
3.4
6.6
9.5
6.96
11.26
14.08
6.96
11.26
14.08
14.80
8.7
> 12.75
> 12.75
11.75
>12.75
11.25
6.75
10.25
7.75
6.6
7.1
11.26
5.00
8.10
r)
3.4
10
(I-c
9
(I-c )
y
(I-cr)th
5.1
(I-c )th
y
6.96
(I-c)gr
II
Comments
-6
0
0,a
p.g=27-IO , ~c=0.25.
Table 5.6 Asymmetric wedge surrounded by rigid rock. a 1=20
2=05 ;
0
E=IOOI0 3 ,10 0103,1 0103, =40 ,i=OO ,k =20,L=IO 010 3, 0HO=2. 7 ,k =0.2,1. 0,2. 0,h=22I50, W=299fl. Series WAS_.
n
s
00
\.J1
I-'
KOIO)
IOO
IO.
IO.
IO.
I.O
k s /kn
O.OI
0.05
O.IO
O.OI
0.05
O.IO
O.OI
0.05
O.IO
ks
0.2
LO
2.0
0.2
LO
2.0
0.2
I.O
2.0
LO
LO
IOO
IOO
0.080
0.079
0.078
0.080
0.079
0.078
0.080
0.079
0.078
19r
0.463
0.348
0.I58
0.463
0.348
0.I58
0.463
0.348
0.I58
2gr
IO.86
8.54
4.72
IO.86
8.54
4.72
IO.86
8.54
4.72
(I-c)gr
2.60
2.50
2.40
2.. 60
2.50
2.40
2.60
2.50
2.40
(r-e )th
y
5.50
5.IO
4.60
5.50
5.IO
4.60
5.50
5.IO
4.60
(I-cr)th
4.75
6.00
6.00
5.00
5.50
3.75
5.00
4.50
r)
4.00
(I-c
IO
(I-c )
y
II
Comments
Table 5.7 Asymmetric wedge surrounded by rigid rock; a 1=35 0 ,a2=20~; p g=27IO-6 , b. c=0.25.
0
3
3
E=IOOoI0 ,IooI0 .r- I0 3, =40 ,i=OO,k =20,L=IO I0 3, a HO=2. 7,k =0.2,L 0, 2. O,h= 9400,W=I269. Series WAS
n
s
-
o-
(X)
I--'
-187-
Equation ,5.50 has. been used by Goodman,Shi and Boyle(1982).In column

7
is shown the value for (I-c) when first yield occurs
calcula-
ted analytically from equation 5.30.In column 8 is< thevallle for O.-c)
when failure occurs as calculated analytically from equation 5.37.
In column 9 the value for (I-c) at which first yield occurs is shown.
In fact first yield occurs between (l-c
is applied in steps of magnitude
)-~c
and (I-c) as the load

y
~cW.
In column 10 the value for (I-c) at which the program last converges
is shown.Failure actually occurs between (l-c f) and
(l-cf)+~c.
As pointed out in section 5.1.2, (I-c) for failure might sometimes be

less than for first yield.In this case a brittle type failure is expected and first yield and failure are expected to occur simultaneously.In column 11 are comments on where failure started first.
There is a tendency for the factor of safety to increase with flexibility.Rotation of the wedge is an additional cause for the discrepancy between the simplified and the numerically calculated solutions.
First yield values for stiff wedges are a bit lower than predicted by
the simplified solutions, because yield does not occur simultaneously
at every point on one face. The flatter face of the wedge always yield
first and then fails.
-188-
CHAPTER 6 - APPLICATION OF THE PROGRAM TO ORE STOPING

In this chapter the computer program previously described is
applied to a stoping problem. The geometry is shown in Fig. 6.1. The
shaded area to the right of the figure represents the ore to be
excavated. The shaded area to the left of the figure represents the
position of a drive to be excavated before stoping starts.which is
used for access. Two joints (joint A and joint B) intersect over the
drive. Additional information on relative distances may be obtained
from Fig. 4.14.
The existing stress field is hydrostatic. The unit weight of
the rock mass is 27 KN/mm3 and the depth below ground level of the
floor of the drive or the stope is 100 m.
When the drive is excavated,the two intersecting joints form a
wedge, the stability of which depends on the material properties and
the horizontal stress field. Excavation of the ore then proceeds in
the stope from lower to higher levels,thus reducing the horizontal
stress field acting on the wedge. Thus the installation of struts
might be necessary in order to support the wedge.
The following set of units is
Quantity
Unit
Length
mm
Force
Stress
MPa
used~
The material properties assumed in the analyses are shown in

Table 6.1
-189-
Joint A
Joint
B.J
\
\
I ---
rI
I
to
III
en
+1
...
CD
+1
...
~L
",-~-10~
'\10
~\J 20
-F
Figure 6.1
I
"
"
Stope and drive georeetry.
39
60
3
Figure 6.2
13
17
23
27
Stope,drive and surrounding rock diseretizatiQn.
-190-
Table 6.1 Material properties

Structure
Rock mass
Joint
general
------model 1
E.1.
MPa
Vi
0
3
N/mm
qu
MPa
N/mm
0.27x10
0.2,0.1
V
mc
mm
cPr
degrees
40
degrees
------
-q /T
u 0
N/mm
s
s
Ps xg
, 30
, 5
0.05,1.0
--------- -------------MPa
1.0
------- - - - - - - - - - - - - 10
-
So
n
1.0,0.5
MPa
--
-4
20
BO
------- - - - - - -
strut
3
3
100x10 ,10x10
P.xg
1.
~l
model 2
Value
Unit
Parameter
0
3
200x10
MPa
2
mm /mm
N/mm
20
50,50x10
-3
10- 5
Whenever two values appear for the same parameter,the first is

used unless otherwise specified. The discretization of the various
structures is summarized in Table 6.2 and shown in Fig. 6.2. There
is a total of 187 nodes.
-191-
Table 6.2 Discretization

Model
Prototype
Symbol
Exterior boundary element region
Rock mass
BE
Interior boundary element regions
Intact rock
BE
26
Plane strain elements
Intact rock
20
joint elements
Discontinuities
membrane elements
Struts
The activities being simulated are shown in order of occurence

in Table 6.3.
Table 6.3 Activities
Activity
No
1
Gravitational loading
Excavation of drive
Geometry change
No of load
steps
1
P9 to P14 and
ju and j18
2a
Installation of struts
m to m
I
6
First level ore excavation
P19 and P20
Second level ore excavation
P2I and P22
Third level ore excavation
P23 and P24
Fourth level ore excavation
P25 and P26
Doubling the weight of the wedge
The number of load steps is chosen in an empirical way , within

limits suggested by Goodman (Hittinger and Goodman (1978)), larger
for activities that are intuitively predicted to cause large stress
redistribution. Results for problems ii. and iv. described below are
similar, when the number of load steps is doubled. These analyses
are not sensitive to the number of load steps,due to the brittle
-192-
type of failure
(almost elastic behaviour until failure).
Nevertheless,due to path dependency of any other systems analysed,it

is suggested that the number of load steps of each activity be
varied, so that the sensitivity of the system with respect to the
number of load steps may be determined.
Activity 2a is included in the following analyses , only where
specifically mentioned. A set of analyses with joints with dilation
was unsuccessful,as even for a maximum number of iterations equal to
30 the computation did not converge. This is attributed to the lack
of cross stiffness terms in the joint element.
In analysing the problem with joint model 1,the wedge does not
fail for any combination of
~r'
'
BO ' and
~l
In subsequent
analyses of the problem,Joint model 2 is used. The results are

summarized below.
i. k
s=O.l
, B =1 . 0 or 0.5. The wedge failed during the third

O
step of activity 2 (excavation of drive)

ii. k
s=0.2
, B =1 . 0 or 0.5. The wedge failed during the first

O
step of activity 6 (fourth level ore excavation). The case B =1 . 0 is

O
illustrated in Figures 6.3 to 6.8.
iii. Installation of struts. For very flexible initially
unstressed struts (A =50x10
s
-3
corresponding to rock bolts)
failure, that is separation of the wedge and the surrounding rock

mass occurs as in case ii., during the first step of activity 6,and
prior to failure the struts remained practically unstressed. Similar
behaviour is observed for stiff struts (A =50) without or with
s
initial prestressing, the initial prestressing force being equal to
60 percent of the weight of the wedge.
iv. E =10 , B =0 . 5 or 1.0. The wedge did not fail.
O
i
-193-
EFFECT OF SHADOWING ON A WEDGE IN A TUNNEL ROOF.

INITIAL MESH
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY 0
Figure 6.3 Initial mesh.
UNITS
-194-

DEFORMED MESH
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY I LOAD STEP I ITERATION I DISPLACEHENTS
__ = 2.0-10'
__ = 0.5_10
UNITS
UNITS
\ \ \ \ \ \ \111) 1111 I / / I
1 f
-,
-,
<,
-- <,
/ / /
/ I / / /
/
/
/'
III'
,''~,
I ,,,
.,
-... ..... --
/////
./ /' . ". .-
\'11 , ' ,
-- --_
_--- -
---------.---
, , _ .............
- -

FLOW FIELD
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY I LOAD STEP I ITERATION I DISPLACEHENTS
++
++
XX
++

STRESS FIELD
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY I LOAD STEP I ITERATION I STRESSES
Figure 6.4 Gravitational loading.
__ = 2.0-10'
__ = 1.0_10
UNITS
UNITS
-195-

DEFORMED MESH
LENGTHS
RCTIVITY 2 LOAD STEP 3 ITERATION 4 DISPLACEMENTS
\ \ \ \ \ \ '11/1111/
,
\,
'"
I
\
-,
I
\
I
\I
-A
-
c _
----_ ....
11/
UNITS
UNITS
_ ..
,.,
......
,/
- --
_-

FLOW FIELD
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY 2 LOAD STEP 3 ITERATION 4 DISPLACEMENTS
Xx
\~
++
-f--f-

STRESS FIELD
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY 2 LOAD STEP 3 ITERATION 4 STRESSES
Figure 6.5 Excavation of the drive.
UNITS
UNITS
-196-

DEFORMED MESH
LENGTHS
\ \ \ \ \ \ \1111111'
,
I
"
"
"
....
"I
I'
UNITS
UNITS
11/
/
/
/////
i ",'//////. .A
...-////
---_ - 4
...
,;~,."
..
too
.....
...-
_-
........................

FLOW FIELD
LENGTHS
UNITS
UNITS
~+
f-+/-

STRESS FIELD
LENGTHS
Figure 6.6 First level ore excavation.
UNITS
UNITS

DEFORMED MESH
LENGTHS
\ \ \ \ \ \ 1111/1111
I
,
"....
....
,,
,
1
\1
-A
UNITS
UNITS
I
/
/
/
""
/'
/'
. ,......
- ....
____ ,"',1"
...
.... ....
......-
--

FLOW FIELD
LENGTHS
X-t~-

STRESS FIELD
LENGTHS
Figure 6.7 Second level ore excavation.
UNITS
UNITS
-198-
EffECT Of SHADOWING ON A WEDGE IN A TUNNEL ROOf.

DEfORHED HESH
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY 5 LOAD STEP 2 ITERATION. DISPLACEHENTS
\ \ \ \ \ \ 111111111
-,
"-
....
,
I
-,
.....
\
\
/
I
I
/
UNITS
UNITS
/
1/ /
' I
-A
~,
.,,', .. . ,
- __ .- ...... ',"'11
,/
,/
.,/
.,/
, ... .... ....
.....-
--
EffECT Of SHADOWING ON A WEDGE IN A TUNNEL ROOf.

fLOW fIELD
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY 5 LOAD STEP 2 ITERATION. DISPLACEHENTS

STRESS FIELD
LENGTHS
ACTIVITY 5 LOAD STEP 2 ITERATION. STRESSES
Figure 6.8 Third level are excavation.
UNITS
UNITS
__
= 2.0-10'
__ = 1.0_10
UNITS
UNITS
-199The
aim
of
these
analyses
is
to
demonstrate
the
program. Nevertheless the following conclusions may be drawn:

a. In joint model 1, k
decreases rapidly,while k
remains
constant. Thus for similar initial parameters of joint models 1 and

2, the former estimates the wedge to be more stable.
b. Due to the brittle type of failure of the wedge, B
is
irrelevant to its stability.

c. The lack of cross stiffness terms for the joints may cause
divergence of the iterative calculation in large problems with rough
joints.
-200-
CHAPTER 7 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A computer program that simulates the behaviour of fractured rock

near underground openings is developed. Based on Goodman's original
joint element model t the following additional
features
are
incorporated.
(a) Quadratic joint element
(b) Exterior and interior regions modelled with boundary
elements
The
an~lytical
and numerical formulation of (a)
and (b)
is
described and comparisons are made with other solutions in order to

check the accuracy and to validate the program.
Finally the
developed codes are applied to determine the stability of a wedge in

a tunnel roof subjected to a horizontal stress field. Analytical
solutions are derived for this problem and graphs are drawn,relating
geometry and material properties for factor of safety equal to 1.
It is found that:
- The joint element is capable of modelling the behaviour of
discontinuities within rock.
Problems of computed stresses
oscillating along the joints are encounteredtwhen the order of

integration used in the joint and adjacent elements is different.
The way strain softening is implemented does not pose any serious
numerical problem. On the contrary the way dilation is programmed
poses serious problems in convergence, the reason being the lack of
cross stiffness terms in the joint elements t even though the effect
of dilation in the diagonal stiffness terms is added. For small
problems with dilationtusually convergence is achieved. This is not
so for the large problem of Chapter 6.
-201-
- The boundary element method is suitable in representing

realistically the boundary conditions of the near field.It is found
that no integration needs to be performed over the boundary
approaching infinitY,even if the forces acting on the rock are not
self equilibrating,as in the case of excavations.
Numerical techniques are developed,in order to evaluate the kernel
shape function product integrals over elements containing the first
argument of the kernel.
- The way symmetric coupling is implemented in the program causes

some error in the neighbourhood of sharp corners and at points of
known discontinuous tractions. Some other minor causes for error are
identified such as, symmetrization, assumption of independent
interpolants for displacements and tractions,ratio of length between
neighbouring elements large, (e.g. >4) , and particular solution for
the interior boundary element region in a higher order of magnitude
than the total solution.
- The stability of a wedge in a tunnel roof due to a horizontal

stress field is investigated analytically. This analysis is based on
the assumption that,before self weight and any additional support
force are taken to be active,the joints are infinitely stiff. Also
the wedge and surrounding rock is assumed to be rigid and the two
joint faces are assumed to fail simultaneously. The factors of
safety calculated by the program and by the analytical solution for
various wedge configurations are in reasonable agreement. For deeper
excavations,the factor of safety of the wedge is calculated to be
proportional to the depth. Nevertheless at higher depths,the
parameters will change,especially the stiffnesses
of
the
joints ,which will become much larger. Thus for great depths,it seems
-202-
more suitable to assume the joints infinitely stiff, and calculate

the factor of safety of the wedge,on the basis of stresses
calculated by an elastic solution. This will overcome the difficulty
in determining the joint stiffnesses and their variation.
The effect of the flexibility of the rock mass and the wedge on
the factor of safetyis found not to be consistently higher or lower
than that calculated by the analytical solution.Nevertheless all the
problems analysed showed an increase in the factor of safety with
flexibility.
The analytical solution can prove
useful
in
understanding the mechanism of failure, and identifying the range

within which the factor of safety lies, whereas the numerical one
may determine the factor of safety sufficiently accurately for
engineering purposes,if the properties of the joints are known.
Suggestions for further work

Further developments of this work are proposed here in three groups.
The first refers to work that needs to be done in order to make the
existing code more general. The second pertains to alternative
features that would improve the existing program. The last includes
some further suggestions.
Enhancement of generality
a. Infinite boundary elements: For very shallow excavations the
free surface of the ground must be modelled. If it suffices to model
this surface as a straight line free of traction, then the half
elastic space singular solution (e.g.Gerrard and Wardle (1973)) may
be used,for the derivation of the kernels for the exterior boundary
element region. Otherwise infinite boundary elements (Watson (1979))
should be used. These allow as well as having a ground surface of
arbitrary geometry and loading, more than one exterior boundary
-203-
element region,the interfaces of which extend to infinity. The

halfspace kernels are more expensive to compute.
b. Fluid elements: These are line elements,that simulate the
water flow through the fractures and the interaction with the rock.
Such elements have been used by Vargas(1982) to simulate the fluidrock structure interaction problem. This model might be useful in
solving problems such as seismic induced activity in reservoirs.
c. Heat deformation: This can be easily incorporated in the
existing finite elements,if the temperature within each element is
given.If the source of the heat is given, then the heat conduction
system of equations may be formulated,using
the
existing
descretization, to find the temperature within each element.

d. Non-linear or plastic plane strain elements: The use of such
elements may be found in Owen and Hinton(1980). An appropriate
failure criterion for rocks, such as the Hoek and Brown (Hoek and
Brown,(1980,and flow rule must be incorporated.
e. General anisotropy and extension to three dimensions: There
is no closed form singular solution for general anisotropy. The way
the boundary integral equation is formulated in this case may be
found in Wilson and Cruse (1978).
This might be useful
in
conjunction with an extension of the program to three dimensions.

The author's personal opinion is that this extension is necessary,
as underground excavations are rarely two dimensional.
Improvement of existing program

a. Refinement of the joint element: Cross stiffness terms must
be introduced in the joint elements,if rough joints are to be
modelled. The present method in which are assumed zero value cross
stiffness terms is unsuccessful in solving large problems. This
amendment will create non-symmetric stiffness matrices during
-204-
iterations, that must be symmetrized, if a symmetric solver (e.g.

Wilson et al.(1974
is to be retained. Also the constitutive
relations for the joint element should be posed in terms of

plasticity theory, were dilation is plastic strain in the normal
direction and slip is plastic shear strain. Strain softening must be
modelled in the same context.
b. Boundary element formulation: The system of equations is
formulated in terms of displacements and tractions. A non-symmetric
solver must be used and no symmetrization of the joint element
stiffness matrices needs to be performed during iterations, which
might result in fewer iterations. Improvements can be made in the
cost of solution of the system of equations,by performing
elimination of the unknowns at nodes that do not belong to the
interface with the non-linear region, prior to the simulation of the
activities.
c. Hermitian cubic elements: They may be used ,especially for
the three dimensional extension, as they are believed to be more
efficient than the quadratic ones. Hermitian joint and membrane-beam
elements may be developed and incorporated in the system.The
performance of Hermitian cubic plane strain finite elements needs to
be investigated.
d. Variable shear stiffness: The shear stiffness is known to
vary with stress level. This becomes very important for the analysis
of the wedge,discussed in Chapter 5,where the normal stress varies
continuously. Goodman (1974) has developed a constant peak shear
displacement model,which might be suitable.It is suggested that the
behaviour of the wedge be examined by using a model in which both
stiffnesses vary.
-205-
Further suggestions
a. Dynamic solution. This extension would permit the modelling
of fault propagation and attenuation of waves with distance. Three
dimensional modelling is needed for realistic results.
b. Fracture initiation or propagation.
c. Experimental data. There are insufficient or no data on the
following phenomena or properties.
Cross stiffness terms: Determination of these parameters would
require special strain controlled direct shear test machines.
Reversed loading: Celestino (1979) has performed a number of
tests on artificial specimens.
Model tests on a wedge in a tunnel roof: Crawford and Bray (1983)
conducted a series of experiments on artificial specimens. More
results are needed in order to understand the mechanism of failure
for the wedge.
-206-
APPENDIX 1
DESCRIPTION OP INPUT POR PROGRAM AJROCK

A1.1 Control cards and ordering of input deck
1. Heading card(A80)
Columns
1 - 80 Title card for program identification
2.Control cards
First card(4I5)
Columns 1 -
5 number of nodal points
6 -
10 number of element types
11 - 15 restart code
16 - 20 save code
Restart code:
initial problem
problem restarted
2
problem restarted and displacement reset to

zero
Save code
if saving of the results not required

control cards for restart will be saved in
disc
Second card(10I5)
Columns
1 -
5 Execution code
6 - 10 displacement printing code

11 - 15 blank
16 - 20 equation data printing code
21 - 25 graphical output code
26 - 30 mesh drawing code
-20731 - 35 fields drawing code

36 - 40 blank
41 - 45 frequency of graphical output
46 - 50 scaling code
Notes on second control card
Execution code : use 1 for a data checking run
Displacement printing code
incremental and total displacements are printed

only total displacements are printed
no displacements are printed
Equation data printing code :
print equation numbers and storage requirements

suppress printing
Graphical output code :
no graphical output
plots every load case
plots every 'n' steps
plots every 'n' iterations at every step
Note 'n' is the frequency given in col.41 - 45.

Mesh drawing code:
no mesh drawn
initial mesh only
initial and deformed meshes
Field drawing code:
no field drawn
stress field only
stress and flow field
-208-
Frequency of graphical output
every step/iteration
every nth step/iteration
Scaling code:
scales adjusted every plot

scales adjusted to first plot
scales given by user
Third card (2F10.0) (only if scaling code

Columns
2)
1 - 10 Displacement scale
(1 plot cm
scale x 1 length unit)
11 - 20 Stress scale
(1 plot cm = scale x 1 stress unit)
3. Nodal point information
See section A1 .2
4. Element information
Columns
1 - 5 Keyword
Keyword may be 'BELEM', 'FELEM', 'ENDEL' .

'BELEM' indicates following information pertains one boundary
element region. Read following information for the boundary element
region according to section A1.3 For each boundary element region a
new card 'BELEM' must be read.
'FELEM' indicates following information pertains to a finite
element region. Read following information according to section
A1.4
'ENDEL' indicates end of input pertinent to elements.
-209-
5. Activity parameters(A5.2I5,2F10.0)
Columns
1 - 5 code for load type

'GRAV ' : Gravity.residual stresses and pressure
loads only.
'NOD
Nodal point loading.
'EXC
Excavation.
'GRNOD': Gravity.residual stresses. pressure and

nodal point loads.
'CON
Construction.
'EQ
quasi static earthquake load.
6 - 10 number of load steps (default is 1)

11 - 15 maximum number of iterations allowed(default 1)
16 - 25 convergence criterion(force units per unit width)
(default is 10- 9 )
26 - 35 upper limit on unbalance (divergence criterion)
6
(default is 10 x convergence criterion)

6. Load information
A sequence of cards headed by an acti vi ty parameter card is
required for each activity. (The form of these data for each type of
activity is described in section A1.5.)
7. End of problem
Column
1 - 5 keyword
keyword may be :
'END
'for stopping the execution of the program
'NDATA' for allowing input for a new problem.
-210-
A1.2 Explanation of nodal point and boundary condition cards

Columns
1 - 5 keyword
keyword may be
'CAR
for cartesian coordinates to be read
'POL
'for polar coordinates to be read
'ORIG ' for origin shift from initial (0.0)

'FIX
'for fixing or freeing nodes
'ASSOC' for associating displacements of nodes

'ENDND' for ending this type of information
For keywords 'CAR
Columns
and 'POL
6 -. 10 number of last node of the group

11 - 20 H or R coordinate
21 - 30 V or phi coordinate
31 - 35 generator index KN
36 - 40 number of first node of the group
41 - 45 H or R coordinate
51 - 60 V or phi coordinate
61
65 H direction boundary condition
65 - 70 V direction boundary condition

If the index KN is zero no automatic generation of nodes is
performed and the last node is the node being specified.If KN is not
zero but the first node is zero.automatic generation proceeds with
first node the last node of the previous card. Automatic generation
creates intermediate nodes evenly distributed between the first and
the last node.with numbering incremented by KN.
The boundary condition codes are
-Zero or blank. to indicate that the nodal point is free to move
in that direction
-One,to indicate that the nodal point is fixed from displacing in
the indicated directions.
-211-
For keyword 'ORIG '

Columns 11
20 H coordinate of temporary origin
21
30 V coordinate of temporary origin
For keyword 'FIX

Columns
6
11
10 number of first node of the series

15 last node of the series
16 - 20 increment to the node numbers (default 1)

21 - 25 H direction boundary conditions
26 - 30 V direction boundary conditions
If the last node is blank or zero only the first node is
processed.
For keyword 'ASSOC'
Columns
6 - 10 number of first node of group A

11 - 15 number of first node of another group B
16 - 20 number of last node of group A
21 - 25 number of last node of group B
26
30 increment to the node numbers of series A

(default is 1)
If the last node of group A is zero only the two first nodes will
be associated.The sequence of keywords is suggested to be:
'CAR
','POL
','ORIG'
'ASSOC'
'ENDND'
The keyword may be left blank.In this case the previously defined
keyword is applicable.
-212-
A13 Boundary element region
Element card(A5.6I5)
column
.- 5 keyword
6 - 10 number of first element in a group
11 - 15 number of last element in the group
16
20 increment of node numbering (optional)
21 - 25 node
of first element (Fig.A1 .1a)
26 .. 30 node 2 of first element

31 - 35 node 3 of first element(intermediate).
The keyword is 'ELE ' or 'ELE C' .In the latter case it is presumed
that the elements read, form a closed contour;thus the last node of
the group is given the number of the first node of the group. If the
last element in a group is zero only one element is processed .If
node 3 is zero or blank, node 3 is calculated to be the mean value of
the extreme node numbers 1 and 2.
Material card (A5,7F10.0)
Column
-- 5 keyword
6 - 10 material type
If material type is 1 then material type is isotropic

If material type is O.then material type is orthotropic
For isotropic material'
Column 11 - 20 Young's modulus
21 - 30 Poisson"s ratio
For orthotropic material'
Columns 11
20 Young's modulus in direction
21
30 Young's modulus in direction 2
31
40 Young's modulus in direction 3
41 - 50 Shear modulus 12
-213-
(a) Element numbering
n>
outward
normal
<n
material
outward
normal
(t)
(-)
(b) Orientation of element
(c) Elasticity and global axes

Figure AI.I
Boundary element convention
-214-
51 - 60 Poisson's ratio 21
Oblique set of joints(A5,5F10.0)
Column
-. 5 'JOL
' (keyword)
6 - 15 angle 'a' of joints (Fig.3.2)

16 - 25 normal stiffness of joints
26- 35 shear stiffness of joints
36 - 45 frequency of joints
46 -. 55 factor accounting for the persistence or
staggering(default is 1)
The joints are assumed to have the same mechanical properties and
to be symmetrically inclined to the axes 1 and 2.
Orthogonal set of joints (A5.I5.4F10.0)
Column
- 5 'JOI
(keyword)
6 - 10 direction of the normal to the joint plane(1 .2.or

3. The out of plane direction is 3)
11 -- 20 normal stiffness of joint. (If omitted this is
assumed to be infinite.)
21 .- 30 shear stiffness of joint. (for the direction 3, this
value is irrelevant)
31- 40 frequency of joint spacing.
41 -. 50 factor that takes into account the effect of trace
length,persistence,etc.)
Orientation (A5.13I5.F10.0)
Column
-- 5
CUE ' (keyword)
6 - 10 cue elements for

"
each closed BE region with sign
-215-
65
70 (see for sign convention in Fig.A1 .1b)
70 - 80 angle in degrees from direction H to direction 1 .

(see Fig.A1.1 c)
Elements with initial conditions(A5.15I5)
Column
.- 5 keyword
5 - 10 number of elements
"
with given initial
75 - 80 conditionsThe keyword is either,

'DDE ' for given initial displacements.
or.
'TTE
' for given initial tractions.
Comment card (A5.A75).(obligatory)

Column
- 5 .L
, (keyword)
6 -- 80 comment
Initial loading
Columns
1 -- 5 keyword
If the keyword is
'DDQ ',corresponding to given initial
displacements,or 'TTQ
',corresponding to given initial
tractions. both varying parabolically ,then

Column 10 ., 20 displacement or traction at node 1 in the
horizontal direction
21 - 30 displacement or traction at node 1 in the vertical
direction
31 - 40 displacement or traction at node 2 in the
41 -. 50 displacement or traction at node 2 in the vertical
direction
51 - 60 displacement or traction at node 3 in the
-216-
61 - 70 displacement or traction at node 3 in the vertical
direction
71 - 75 element number
76 .- 80 element number
If the keyword is 'DDU '.corresponding to initial displacements.or
'TTU
'.corresponding to initial tractions being constant within an
element. then
Columns 10 .. 20 displacement or traction in the horizontal
direction
30 displacement or traction in the vertical direction
21
31 .- 35 element number
"
element number
75 - 80 element number
Particular solution(A5.5x.4F10.0)
Columns
- 5 'PRT ' (keyword)

11 .- 20 height to the free surface (+)
21 - 30 ratio of horizontal to vertical stress (K
A)
31 - 40 unit weight of the rock mass
41 - 50 pressure at the free surface
End of that boundary element region data(A5)

Columns 1 - 5 'ENDB
(keyword)
-217A1.4 Finite element region
A1.4.1 Membrane elements

Control card(A5,3I5)
Columns
- 5 'BAR ' (keyword)

11 - 15 number of different material properties
16 -- 20 number of integration points (default is 3)
Member properties(I5.3F10.0)
Columns
- 5 material identification number

6 - 15 Young's modulus
16 - 25 cross sectional area
26 .- 35 uni t weight
Member data cards(6I5,F10.0)

Columns
- 5 member number
6 - 10 nodal point
11 - 15 nodal point 2
16 - 20 nodal point 3
21 - 25 number of material of the member
26 - 30 optional parameter K causing automatic generation
of member data(default is 2)
31 - 40 initial stress in the membrane.
--Element data generation. Element cards must be in element number

sequence.If cards are omitted}data for the omitted elements will be
generated.The nodal numbers will be generated with respect to the
first card in the series by incrementing node numbers by K. All
other information will be set equal to the information on the last
card .The mesh generation parameter K is also specified in the last
card.
-218-
A1 .42 Plane strain elements

Control card(A5.2I5)
Columns
.- 5 'PLANE' (keyword)
11 - 15 number of different materials
Material property cards(2I5,7F10.0)
Columns

6 - 10 material type
11 - 20 unit weight
If material type is 1 ,the material is isotropic,

if the material type is O.the material is transversely isotropic.
For isotropic material,
Columns 20 .- 30 Young's modulus
31 - 40 Poisson's ratio
For transversely isotropic material,
Columns 21
31
30 Young's modulus in , s ' direction

40 Young's modulus in
41 - 50 Shear modulus in
51
.n ,
direction
s n ' plane
60 Poisson's ratio giving the strain in the 'n'

direction due to stress in the's' direction(v
sn
61 - 70 Poisson's ratio giving the strain in the 't'

direction due to stress in the's' direction(v st)
71 - 80 Direction of's' axis in degrees (Fig.A1.2b)
Element card
First card(11I5,2A5)
Columns
_. 5 element number
6 - 10 node 1 (Fig.A1.2a)
-219-
<
nL.
(a) Element
(b) Elastic axes

Figure A1.2
Plane strain element convention.
nt
2
:;.-
(a) Node numbering
nt
n'tt
:1. L s n~
r------------,
I
L sn
to
(b) Positive displacements and stresses

Figure AI.3
Joint element convention.
:>
-220-
11
15 node 2
16 - 20 node 3
21 - 25 node 4
26 - 30 node 5
31 - 35 node 6
36 ... 40 node 7
41 - 45 node 8
50 material identification number(default is 1)
46
51 - 55 element data generation K

56 .- 60 keyword
61 - 65 keyword 2
keyword 1 may be
'SAMEB' :all node numbers are automatically incremented by K
'NOD48':all node numbers are automatically incremented by K,
except for nodes 4 and 8 which are incremented by K/2.
'NOD26':all node numbers are automatically incremented by K.
except for nodes 2 and 6 which are incremented by K/2.
If keyword 1 is blank the previously defined keyword 1 is
applicable.Automatic generation proceeds as described for the
membrane element.
Keyword 2 may be either,
'NEXT ': next card is second card for this element
blank: second card for this element does not exist.
Second card(7F10.0)
Columns
.0
10 pressure on face
11 - 20 pressure on face 2
41 - 50 residual stress
a xo
-221-
51 60 residual stress
ayo
61 - 70 residual stress
xyo
A1 .4.3 Joint elements

Control cards(A5.4I5)
Columns
- 5 'JOINT' (keyword)
6 -. 10 number of joint elements
11 - 15 number of different materials(less or equal to 7)
16 - 20 number of integration points (2 to 5;default is 2)
21 - 25 code for law of behaviour
Law of behaviour'
'1' ,Hyperbolic closure with Ladanyi and Archambault shear
failure criterion
'2',Trilinear closure approximation with Mohr-Coulomb.Patton
shear failure criterion.
Material property cards(I5,8F10.0)
Columns

6 - 15 q .the unconfined compressive strength of the wall
u
rock
16 _. 25 quiTO for model 1, or the shear strength
intercept of the joint for model 2
26 -. 35 shear stiffness k
36 .. 45 BO.the ratio of residual to peak shear strength at

very low normal pressure
46 -. 55 Vmc(+)
56- 65 ';1 (.) for model 1 .or k
for model 2
66 - 75 the friction angle for a smooth joint

76 - 80 the dilatancy angle at zero(model 1 ),or
-222-
low(model 2) normal pressure

Element cards(9I5.2F10.0)
Columns
1 -
5 Element number (must start from 1)
6 - 10 node
(Fig. A1 . 3a)
11 - 15 node 2
16 - 20 node 3
21 - 25 node 4
26 - 30 node 5
31 - 35 node 6
36
40 material identification number(default is 1)
40 - 45 element data generation K.

as described for membrane element.
46 - 55 initial shear stress
56 .- 65 initial normal stress
(Fig.A1.3b)
0'0
-223-
A1 .5 Activities
A1.5.1 Activity 'GRAV
.Gravity, residual stresses and pressure
loading(SF10.0)
Columns
- 10 percent of total loading for the first step

n
71 - SO percent of total loading for the eighth step

For gravity,residual stresses and pressure load,the equivalent
forces of the three loadings are computed.added,and multiplied by
the percentage for this step. The percentage may be specified for up
to the first eight steps. Blank will generate equal steps for the
remaining percentage of the total load.This activity is usually
applied to consolidate the field.
A1 .5.2 Activity 'NOD' .Nodal point loading(I5,2F10.0)
Columns
- 5 Nodal point number

6
15 load in the H direction
16
25 load in the V direction
The sequence must be terminated with a blank card.

A1 .5.3 Activity 'EXC '.Excavation.
Nodal point cards(A5.5I5)
Columns
_. 5 keyword
6 - 10 number of last node of the group
11
15 boundary condition in H direction
16
20 boundary condition in V direction
21 - 25 generator index KN
26 - 30 number of first node of the group
The keyword may be.
'BNMNP' ,or blank for input of nodes
'ENDND' for ending nodal point input.
-224-
Nodes must be given in order.

Element cards
First card (15)
Column
- 5 Non zero only if at least one element to be
excavated is not on the excavation surface of this activity. If a

zero exists in the first card then skip to the third card of the
group
Second card group(1615).
Columns
- 5.6 - 10.etc.List here all elements excavated that do
not have a nodal point on the excavation surface of this

activity.There must be a separate list for each element type in the
same order as in the original input deck.
(Element types are
membrane. plane strain. and joint elements of type 1 and type 2) A

blank card must be provided for any element type that has no
individual elements being excavated.Always end each list(for each
element type) with a blank space.
Third card group(1615).
Columns 1 - 5.6 - 10.etc.List all elements excavated that do have
at least one nodal point on the excavation surface of this
activity.AII information of the paragraph above pertaining to the
second card group applies here as well.
A1 5.4 Activity 'GRNOD' .Gravity.residual stresses. pressure. and nodal
point loading. Follow the same format as for 'NOD' . shown in section
A1 52.The percentage of load or unload applied each step is
automatically 100% divided by the
A1 .5.5 Activity 'CON' .Construction .
Nodal point cards
-225-
First card(I5)
Column
1 - 5 new total number of nodal points.

Default is old total number of nodal points.
Second card
Freed nodal points are input as described in activity
'EXC'.section A1.53.New nodal points are input
section A1.2.
as described in
'ASSOC' and 'FIX' keywords apply only to the new
nodal points.In both types of nodal points end sequence of cards

with keyword 'ENDND' .Freed nodal points are those that were input in
the original mesh as dummies.unattached to any element and
originally fixed. Freeing such nodes and connecting them to new
elements is an alternate method of adding new material.This approach
permits one to optimize the bandwidth.
Element cards
All elements to be added,must be described by a new element
deck, following the formats of section A1 4. The control parameters
will refer only to the new elements.For example if 3 new plane
strain elements all of a single material type are added to a 100
element mesh. the first control card demanded in section A1 .4.2 will
have 3 in column 10 and 1 in column 15. Assemble the element types
in the same order as in the initial data deck. End the sequence with
a card containing the keyword 'ENDEL' in columns 1 to 5.
A1 .5.6 Activity 'EQ '.Earthquake loading.
Acceleration cards(4F10.0.A5)
Columns
10 minus acceleration in H direction(in g units)

11
20 minus acceleration in V direction(in g units)
21 - 30 unit weight to be used for plane strain elements.

If zero. the originally defined unit weight for
each plane strain element is applicable.
-226-
31- 40 unit weight to be used for membrane elements.

If zero. the originally defined unit weight for
each membrane element is applicable.
41 - 45 keyword
If the keyword is 'ALL ',then the loading is applied to all
elements of the finite element region,and the element cards are not
read. If the keyword is blank,then the loading is applied to
selected membrane and plane strain elements. which are given in the
next cards.
Elements cards.
List here all element types(membrane,or plane strain only) ,on
which earthquake loading is applied.There must be a separate list
for each element type in the same order as in the original input
deck.A blank card must be provided corresponding to any element
type,on which elements, earthquake loading is not applied. Note that
element types in this case are considered only the membrane and
plane strain elements.For the joint elements no blank card should be
provided.Always end each list(for each element type) with a blank
space.
Example of input data

The following is the input data for the problem shown in
Figures 6.3 to 6.8 in Chapter 6 .
-227-
IWfIlE
IJIIUJ DATA FCIl JIEIUM. Iff
.........
......
......
......
......
......
......
.........
......
...
.........
......
.........
......
...
......
......
~QI)
PAGE 1
......................................................******...............
efFECT
117
0
CM
(E
StMDCIRJC
2
2
5
7
Z7
35
39
22800.
10't00.
23100
23100.
'13
'17
53
61
3500.
-3500.
-17200.
-17200.
10300.
23100.
23100
23800
o.
23800.
1
1
1
. 11
o.
1'12'10.
1
1
1
1
1
68
73
11
17
92
100
IIEl.EM
B..E C
5110.
1300.
13000
19000.
31500
3000.
5110
o.
-3000
138
1'1'1
1'18
151
153
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
3000.
-5110.
11'1
117
-JOOO.
106
ttl
tt7
122
130
163
166
161
171
171
1'1'1
172
11'1
2
112
EJIII)
1
-12200.
-1200.
-5110.
A lEDGE Itt A 1\Itl ROCF
2
1
1
:1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
tt
15
17
19
21
23
(If
o.
O.
o.
o.
o.
6000
o.
1'12'10.
6000.
o.
3500.
1'12'10.
23800.
o.
1'12'10.
-3000.
6000
3000.
-5180.
-3000.
-1900.
-1500
o.
6000.
2000.
-3CJOO
o.
2000.
l2'tOO.
165S0.
15'100.
21600.
29
22206.7
11
-2916.7
22206.7
-2916.7
22206.7
'1816.7
1000.
-3800.
-l5O.
10350.
O.
l5O.
10350.
10350.
3550.
3000.
1
1 to'
1
1 117
1
1 153
1 163
1
1 161
3900
tt'lOO.
0.0
61
O.
O.
O.
-17200.
17912.
2916.7
1
1
1 1'f't
1 1'18
'tOOO.
350.
61
o.
o.
'1000.
o.
1900.
1500.
3000.
2975.
'tOOO.
-350
11'100.
23100.
1 173
1
1
1 175
2'1163.
2975.
11000.
11000
1 112
1 185
26000.
19800
6000.
6000.
'I
-228-
RCMDtE
JIIlVf MTA Fell PERUSIL rtf
~QI)
MGE 2
.............................................................................*
-- ..
E"r
a. MT
~
L
a. MT
a.
a.
a.
a. ClE
a. L
a. PRJ
a. EJD
a. IEUM
**-' EL
a. EL
a. EL
a. EL
a. EL
...
.........
......
......
.........
......
......
.........
......
ELE
ELE
ELE
MT
CU
L
PRJ
BD
:au IElBt
au
ELE
ELE
ELE
ELE
MT
CU
L
PRJ
-1
I
'I
5
13
1'1
20
I
I
100.+03
0.0
100.+03
3
'I
2
5
9 10'1 105
-2 10'1 102 103
a '11 17
19
2 '11 '19 'II
S9
3 60
100.+03
0.0
3
12
100.+03
I.
11
23
19
62
S
1
I
10
6
9
2
2
2
62
66
6'f
'I
II
II
19
I 100.+03
1
100.+03
1
3
27.-06
39
'11
'13 69
69 11
IS
11
0.0
39
1.
27.-06
II
61
63
61
'to
61
10
86
27.-06
2
1
2 '13 '15 'I't

'11 101 106
'I
2 101 109 101
1
ll5 '13 tt6
1 loo.E+03
0.0
1
1~.E+03
1.
27.E-06
BD
FElEM
26
1
1
1 27.E-06 100.+03
1 130 131 132 112 121 129
2 153 11'1 121 112 132 113
3 132 133 lJ1 I'll lS3 113
'I 121 11'1 153 163 126 127
5 lS3 I'll lJ1 135 136 1'19
6 lS3 15'1 155 16'1 12'1 125
PUlE
0.0
130
153
132
121
155
126
130
153
132
121
15'1
163
1
1
1
1
1
1
-229-
JIIIUI' MfA , . IIIRUM.
rtt
ReM.
MiE J
~QI)
.................................................................................~
...
...
...
au
au
au
au
au
au
...
au
au
au
au
au
1
I
9
10
It
ISS
tSS
151
151
159
159
161
161
1'10
120
1'12
169
12
13
1'1
15
16
11
II
19 2J
20 2S
21 62
22 I""
23 M
2'1 111
25 66
a 110
,"00 it
I
2
1 '11
2 a
'I '13
5 itS
6 lI3
1 92
13 10'1
1'1 130
15 121
16 121
11 12'1
11 122
19 120
20 lI8
9IIEL
fiIIJN
1
100.
E>E
3
139
152
162
161
...
...
......
...
...
......
......
...
...... II".
...... II"
au
au
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
lSI
1'19
137 1. ISO
tS6
t65 t22
ISO 1. 1ft 1'10 1til1
lSi 159 166 120 121
tSI t'lO 1'15 t'16 t52
160 161 161 16" 161
152 1'16 1'tl II 12
162 13 1'1 IS 1'70
I'll 1'12 1'ft 1'16 1'15
161 169 111 III lI9
1'13
9 10 II 1'17
110 IS 16 11 III
2'1 2S 111
112
a Z7 21 I""
29 lIS
112 I"" In 111 113
lIS 29 30 31 I.
10 111 119 110 11'1
1. 31 32 33 117
In 110 111 37
117 33 lit 35 36
2
3
2
0.2
20.
00.
00
0.2
20.
'11 11 106 a 107
101 19 101 90 109
'13 lI6 61 liS 69
69 It'l 10 lI3 11
11 1t2 12 III 13
130 93 131 crt 132
1'12 105 1'13
9
9
13 129 7'1 121 75
121 n
75 127
n 125 11 12'1 19
19 123 10 122 11
11 121 12 120 83
13 lI9 n ttl 15
15 III 16 11 17
5
20. 20.+06
II
""
5
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
II
12
20.
18
1
1
1
20.+06
121
151
158
166
13
20.
1'1
20.+06
BIle
0
9
II
E)O;
10
18
3
151
t2'l
159
122
16t
120
13
169
1'10
120
1'16
III
62
I""
M
111
66
110
ft
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
156
1M
lSI
165
160
166
162
161
1'10
120
1'ft
111
61
111
63
In
65
119
61
111
1.0
1.0
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.
1.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.
20.
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
-2.'13
'10.
'10.
-230-
..............................................................................,
AM'DE
JIIIU1' MFA Felt PElUSM. rtf
....
... ....
....
......
...... ....
......
~QI)
PAGE
..
.............................................................................
.....-
.........-
8ae
19
)E
eae
0
21
E)E
E)E
...
111
20
3
115
In
1
I
I
I
20
I
2O.E+06
116
3 112
.- sa.
0
.- 0 23
sa
22
2
179
I.
III .
I
I
sae
25
sa 0
EO
sa Ell)
I
I
I
I
20
I
2O.E+06
III
IIJ
2'1
117
0.0
20
I
-t.O
20
2O.E+06
110
tl't
2O.E+06
-231-
APPENDIX 2
OVERALL STRUCTURE OF THE PROGRAM
The program has been subdivided into a root segment and seven
primary overlays.
Overlay 1 copies the input data from file 4 to file 5 and echoes
them to the output file.
Overlay 2 is further subdivided into five secondary overlays.
These calculate the information needed for the formulation of the
equations, that is the individual finite element stiffness matrices
and load vectors.
Overlay 3 assembles the system of equations.
Overlay 4 solves the system of equations and calculates the
displacements stresses and unbalanced loads.
Overlay 5 contains the graphics routines.
Overlay 6 contains various routines seldom used.
Overlay 7 constructs the stiffness matrix and load vector of the
boundary element regions. It is subdivided into seven secondary
overlays.
-232FLOW CHART OF PROGRAM 'AJROCK'
Zeroise oounters and flags.

Read general information.
Read ooordinate and boundary oondition data.
Finite element
Read information for boundary
Read information for finite
element region.
elements.
Construct the stiffness matrix
Construct stiffness matrix and

load vector for it.
and the load vectors.
(Overlay 7
(Overlay 2 ,2.1 .2.3 ,2.4
Draw initial mesh(Overlay 5)
Zeroise displacements. Calculate parameters for the solver. (Overlay 6

Read type of activ1ty.
Calculate applied load this step.
Add any unbalanced loads (U.L) to the load vector. Assemble stiffness matrix and load
vector (Overlay 3). Solve the system of equations to find the incremental displacements.
Calculate the total displacements
the total and incremental stresses,and any unbalanced loads. Zeroise load vector. (Overlay 4)
Draw appropriate drawings.

y
Figure A2.l Flow chart of program AJROCK
-233-
APPENDIX 3
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION,RELEVANT TO CHAPTER
A3.l Orthotropic kernels

The generalized Hooke's law for orthotropy may be written as
11
l/E
22
-v12/E
l
33
-v
=
13/El
-v2l/E2
1/E
-V
-v
-v
2 / E3
3l/E3
32/E 3
1/E
3
23
31
12
1/(2.G
0
12) 0
0 1/(2.G
0
13)
0
0 1/(2.G
Il
22
33
12
23
3l)
31
or
= -Fo
....
(A3.l)
<f'J
Care must be taken in the notation of v .. If,

~J
3
e .. = L F . . 0 ..
i=1,2,3 (no sum double index convention)
11 j=l ~J
JJ
then Lekhnitski (1963) defines
from
F.. =-(v . .lEi) =-(v . .IE.)
~J
J~
~J
whereas Tomlin and Butterfield (1974) and .Gerrard (1982b) define
v.. from
~J
F .. =- (v . .IE. ) =- (v .. /E . )
~J
~J
a
J~
J
, i -F j
In the following the latter convention is used.

Due to the symmetry of matrix F ,
or
v .. /E . =v.. /E .
~J
J~
ij
(A3.2a)
-234-
The following inequalities must also be satisfied:

El,E2,E3,G12,G13,G31 > a
(1-V12eV21) , (1-V23eV32) , (1-V31eV13) > a
I-V12eV21-V23~1-V21eV13-2eV21eV32eV13
For plane strain
F .. are
lJ
Ell
E22 = F
21
E12
0
E = E =E
= a , hence
23
33
31
the compliances of
F
ll
>
(A3.2b)
F
12
22
equation
A3.1. Thus
Il
e 022
F
33
12
where
i,j=1,2
Substituting for
(A3e5a)
F.. we get
lJ
Fl l = l/El - V
> a
31/E3
F12 = -V21/E2 - V31eV32/E3 = F21
3/ E
~ >
F22 = 1/E2- V
3
F
= 1/(2 eG
> 0
12)
33
(A3.5b)
Tomlin and. Butterfield (1974) give the equations for stresses

and displacements due to a point load in an infinite orthotropic continuum. Let us define first the parameters used.
Parameters independent of position
.1.
.!.
a = FlleF22)2 - F
(real or imaginary)
12- F33)2
J...!.
b = FlleF22)2 + F + F
(real)
12
33)2
n = (b 2_ F33)e a 2 - (a 2 + F33)eF33
(A3.6a)
(A3.6b)
(A3.6c)
-235-
(A3.6d)
A = arbitrary = 1
(A3.6e)
Parameters dependent on position

m = Fllzi + 2.F12coz~oz~ + F22z~ =
~ll=
(A3.7a)
boz~ / (F22z~ + (F12 + F33 )oz~ )
(A3.7b)
11
)2 oZ2 + (F
)2 oZ2) 2_ 2oa2oz2oz2
= F
22
1.
J_
~12=~2l=/2ozloz2/Fll)2oz~ + (F22)2oZ~ )
(A3.7c)
~22=
(A3.7d)
boz~ / (Flloz~ + (F12 + F

33 )oz~ )
where
z , =x. -yo
111
(A3.B)
i=1,2
b is always real. This may be proven by substituting in equation

A3.6b
for
F.. from A3.5bo Then due to the last inequality of

lJ
A3.2b we have that
b2 - F
> a and hence b is always real.
33
m is always positive. This is proven as follows:
If z2*O
equation
A3.7a becomes,
m/z~ = Fli(zl/z2)4+ 2oF12Co(zl/z2)2+ F22
The discriminant of the right hand side of the equation is,

Di = F 2
l2c - FlloF22
If Di < a , then m >
If
Di
a ,
then
for
(A3.l0)
a
m>O
it is sufficient that
(zl/z2)2> (-F 12c + (F~2c - FlloF22)! )/F l l

1.
from b 2> a we get (FlloF22)2 > -F
12c
from Di> a we get
< F2
FlloF22
12c
(A3.ll)
> a
From the last two inequalities we conclude that F
12c
Hence the right hand side of inequality A3.ll is always negative,
and the inequality is always satisfied.
We may be proceed similarly for
for
zl = z2 = O.
z2 = a , zl O. m becomes zero
-236-
The kernels
are the
displace~ents
due to a unit force and
are given directly by Tomlin and Butterfie1d(1974). The functions are

different according to whether
is zero,rea1 but not zero,or imagi-
nary. They are given by the following formulae:

a
zero
Ul l
= U'+
U12
= F33-t 12/(4-n-b) = F33-t21/(4-n-b) = U21
U22
= U'+ (F 33-t 22)/(4-/2-n-/Fll)
(F33-t11)/(4-/2-n-/F22)
(A3.12)
real
U11
= U'
U
12
= (a2_b2~F2
)/(a-n-a-b)-logl
- 33
U22
= U'
- n/(4-/2-n-a-/F 22 )-arctan (a-t 11 )
+ a-t 12 )/(1 - a-t 12 = U21

(A3.B)
- n/(4-/2-n-a-/F11 )-arctan (a-t 22 )
Note that arctan is to be specified in the interval

a
[D,n [
imaginary
)
U' - n/(a-/2-n-(1-a)-/F 22 )-logl + l-a-t 11 )/(1- pa-t
l l)
U = (a 2_b2+ F 2 )/(4-n-(1-a)-b)-arctan(1-a-t ) = U
(A3.14)
12
33
12
21
)
U22 = U' - n/(a-/2-n-(pa)-/F11 )-logl + l-a-t 22 )/(1- pa-t
22)
U11
Note that
U'
is to be specified in the interval ]-n/2,n/2}
arctan
{(b 2_ F
33
)-F
33
+ (a 2+ F
33
)_b 2} l(a-/2-n-b-/F
11
)-log(F
11
-A'+ 1m)
(A3.15)
1
=1(-1)
-237-
The kernels
T are derived from the stress field equations given
by Tomlin and Butterfield (1974).
=222= z2{ 1F11o(b 2- F
33)ozi
+ 1F 22(b 2+ F33)oz~} /(2 o/2 oTIomob)
-122= zl/z2=222
(AJ.16)
=111= zl{1F22o(b2-F33)oz~ + 1F11o(b2+ F33)ozi}~ /(2 o/2oTI omob)

-121= z2/ z1
o=111
=.. k is the stress 0.. due to a unit force in the direction

lJ
lJ
The relation between _ and T becomes
where
k
t.(y) = T.. (x,y)oe.(x) = 0J.k(y)onk(y) = =.k.(x,y)oe.(x)onk(y)

J
lJ
1
J 1
1
or
T.. (x, y ) == .k. (x , y ) n (y )
k
lJ
J 1
e.(x)
is
a load at x in the
1
(A3.17)
The full expression of kernels
direction.
T then becomes
T =-(1/(2o/2oTIomob))o{((b2+ F )olF
- 2 o(a 2+ F )ob 2/1F )oz2 oz on +
12
33
11
33
22
2 1 2
2_
on2 - 1F22o(b2- F33)onloz~ +(F l l/1F22) (b
F
33)ozi
- 1F11o(b 2+ F33)ozioz2onl }
0
-238-
T2l=-(1/(2e/2enemeb))e{((b2t F33)e1F22 - 2 e(a 2t F33)eb2/1F11)ez~ez2enl t

t (F22/1F11)e(b2.;. F33)ez~enl - 1F11e(b2- F33)ez~en2--- 1F22e(b2t F33)ez~ezlen2 }
where
takes the values
1,2.
(A3.l8)
Singular solutions for line loads applied within half or whole orthotropic space are given also by Gerrard and Wardle (1973,1980).
Behaviour of kernels
We assume that
If
zl and
z2 are not simultaneously zero.
is real then,
1
F12c = F12 t F
< (FlleF22)2
33
Prove that
(ltae~2l)/(1-ae~2l)
is greater than zero and finite.
It suffices to prove that
l-ae~2l > 0
1+ae~2l
This is equivalent to
> 0 )
~{ae/2ezleZ2/(1F11ezf
~
+ 1F22ez~ )}2 < 1
2ea2ezfez~-< (lFllezf
which holds because

The function
+ 1F22ez~)2
m > O.
arctan is discontinuous and multivalued. In order to
perform numerical integration of this function over an element, this

function must be defined to be single valued and continuous in the
entire region.
.....
-239-
arctan(aetll) , arctan(a et 22)e
Define the functions
Let us first examine the arguments

a- tIl
If
-------==---
a- t
F22ez~ + Fl2cez~
El 2c > 0
22
aetll,aet22'
-------'""Fllez~ + Fl2cez~
then
and
, then let us define the angle
w from,
ae.Q,11 = ro
aet22 = ro
For the function
arctan
lie within the interval
to be continuous,we define the angle to

[O,n [,and
z2/ z1 = tan wI
arctan(aet l l) = n/2
zl/z2 = tan w2
arctan(a et 22) = n/2
In figure
A3el
z2/ zl= tan wI ' z2/ zl=tan w2
the lines defined by
are showneThe sign of the functions
ae~l' ae~2
changes
as point
(zl,z2) passes these lines respectively,their sign being shown in the

figure within parenthesise
From b 2 > 0 and
F
< 0 we get,
l 2c
~
1{(FlleF22)} >-F I 2c
or
(Fll/(-FI2c))2 > ((-FI2c)/F22)2,
or
wI + w2 < n/2
This proves that the line defined by
line defined by
w
2
is always lower than the
in the first quarter of the coordinate axes.
-240-
arctan(a-i
11)=n/2
(+)
(+)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(+)
(+)
a-i 11 =
(-)
12c
< 0
(-)
00
(+)
(+)
(+ )
(+)
arctan(a-i2~)=
n/2
(-)
Figure A3.1 Lines on which the orthotropic kernel U is undefined.
-241-
If
is imaginary then,
(1 + leae~22)/(l - leae~22) is always positive and fi-
Prove that
nite,so that the function
log (1 + pae~22)/(l - pa eQ,22) has mea-
ning. It suffices to prove that,

1 + pa eQ,22 > 0
1 - leaeQ,
> 0
22
and
this is equivalent to
Substituting for t
we get
22
_a2eb2ez~ /(Fllezi + F12cez~ )2 <1
or
2
F11 ez41 + F22 ez 24 + 2 eF12c ez 12ez 2 > 0
m > O.
The last inequality holds , as

Similarly we may prove that
(1 + leaeQ,ll)/(l - leaeQ,ll) is positive
and finite.
Define the function
arctan(leaeQ,21)
to be continuous and single
valued.
We proceed as follows:
le aeQ,21
never becomes infinite,and is continuous in the
Hence
arctan(leaeQ,21)
]-n/2,n/2
In table
zl,z2 plane.
must be defined to lie within the interval
t ,to be continuous.
A3 el
the function
arctan
for
real or imaginary is
defined
Table A3el Determination of function
0
positive
JO,n/2[
arctan(leaeQ, .. ),i~j 0
JO,n/2[
argument
aeQ,..
J.J
arctan(aeQ, .. ),i=j
J.J
J.J
arctan
oo
n/ 2
negative
J n/2,n [
J-n/2, 0 I
-242-
Relation between parameters of orthotropy and isotropy

The compliances when the orthotropy degenerates to isotropy become,
Fl l = F22 = (1 -
)/ E
= F =-V-(l + V)/E
1221
F
= 1/(2-G) = (1 + V)/E
33
F
Substituting into
A3.6 from
(A3.20)
A3.20 we get
a =0
l
b =
{2-(1 - v 2 )/ E}2
=-
F2
33
= -(1
+ v)2/E 2
Substituting from A3.20
12
21
(A).2l)
and
A3.2l
zl-z2/ r 2-{2-E/(1 -
into
A3.7 we get,
)2
(A3.22)
22 = (z2/ r)2-/{2-E/(1 - v 2 ) }
11
= (zl/r)2-/{2-E/(1 - v 2 ) }
By substituting these values to

formulae 3.15
A3.l2,A3.l5,A3.l8 we get the
of chapter 3 for isotropy.
-243-
A3.2 Integration of kernel-shane function products over an element

containing the first ill:gument
Kernel
1I
Instead of using a logarithmic Gaussian quadrature formula in

order to integrate the logarithmic term of a kernel
U over an
element,we may integrate analytically over a straight line element

tangent to the actual one, whLch in general is curved, and then add
the difference between the two integrals, which may be evaluated
numerically, using the Gauss-Legendre quadrature formula (G.L.Q.F).
If the intermediate node of a straight line element lies at
the middle of the element, the Jacobian is constant and equal to
the half length of the element, and
~ ~
(Fig. A3.2a).
Hence the shape functions are second order polynomials of
r. For
isotropy the logarithmic term is
A is
l
a constant and the kernel

a sum of terms
a
U = Allog(l/r), where
g
U - shape
g
f~~ction
product integral is
A J ug-(r/al)n- dr Let us evaluate these terms.

l-
a
l
U -(r/al)n- dr = A - J log(l/r)-(r/al)n- dr =
g
1 0
In Table
A3.2
Table
A3.2
the values of
Integral
Integral
1
1
1
for
for isotropy
value
-a -(log a - l)-A
111
-(a/2)-(log a
n= 0,1,2
-(a
l/3)-(log
- 1/2)-A
1
l - 1/3) - Al
are shovm.
at I
(b)
;f
a1
.-.- r
at 2
1/
/
r
r
x
1/
a1
(c)
2
(d)
at 3
I
al
4-
al
-i
Figure A3.2 Analytical integration of a log-polynomial product

over a straight line element.
(a)
a is extreme node
a-2
<1
spiral
separates elements
subelement
(b)
........
is intermediate node
a-l
spiral
Figure A3.3 Spiral method used for the determination of the diagonal
terms of matrix T.
-245-
For orthotropy the logarithmic term is in the form

U = A
2-1og(F11/m)
g
where A is a constant_ The kernel U ,shape function product ing
2
J ug-(r/al)n- dr .Let us evaluate these
tegral is the sum of terms
element
terms_ a
a
l
In = ~ ug-(r/al)n- dr = A2-~ log(Fll/m)-(r/al)n-dr =

= -a
l-A2/(ntl)-{4-(log
- l/(ntl))t Cal
where
In table
A3.3
the values of
Table
A3_3
Integral
Let
are shown.
n=O,1,2
Value
-a -A -{4-(log a - 1) t C }
1 2
1
a
-a -A /2-{4-(log a - 1/2) t Ca }
1 2
1
-a -A /3-{4-(log a ..- 1/3) t C }
121
a
0
1
for
for orthotropy
Integral
1
= rial In table
U (xa,y)_Ne(y) edr
g
A3.4
the analytically evaluated integrals
are evaluated. In column
de number of the first argument of the kernel

node number
relation between
1
a
the internal noand the internal
of the shape function are shown.In column
and
is shown. In column
tions are shown as functions of
s.
In column
the shape func-
the relative
of the tangent element to the Jacobian at the node
is shown_ In column
ment is given_
the
the value of the
analytically evaluated integral is shown. In column

length
6 the appropriate figure for the tangent ele-
-246-
\Vhen
a=3
the integration is performed over two straight line ele-
ments and the total integral is the sum of the two integrals. As Ug
is symmetric with respect to
a lit suffices to add the shape func-
tions in each half of the element and perform the integration over
one half only.
Having calculated analytically the logarithmic parts of the kernels
U over the tangent straight line elements,we need to add an
extra term to account for the deviation of the real element from the
linearity_ This term is given by
R = f N-U odS - f N-U -dS

es
Sr r
r
St gt
t
where subscript r denotes the real element and
(A3_25)
t
the tangent one.
Expressing the functions in terms of intrinsic coordinates

dSr =
dS
J-d~
= J -k
a
~,
-d~
becomes,
es
1
R = f N-(U -J - U -k -J )-d~
es ':'1
r
gt a a
(A3.26)
This last integration may be evaluated numerically.

Table A3.4 Analytically evaluated integrals of kernels Ug
1
2
~6
3
5
4
a , e
N'" (s )
~(d
f Ugt-N"'(s)-dS t ka=al/J Fig.
a
1
1 - 3-s + 2- s'" I O-3 I l+2 I 2
1
2
-s + 2- s 2
2
1 - 2- s
-I +2-I
A3.2b
1
2
2
3
4-I 1 - 4-I 2
4-s -4-s
1
-s + 2- s 2
-I +2-I
1
2
2
2
1 - 3- s + 2- S 2 I -3-I +2-I
2- s - 1
2
~3.2c
012
2
3
4-I 1 - 4-I 2
4-s -4- S
1
3
2
3
S2
S2
2 - 2- S 2
I
2
I
2
2-I o - 2-I 2
A3.2d
--247Kernel
The principal value of the integral

for nodes
and
d(b,e)
coinciding, over one subelement (Fig.A3.3b),
or over an element (Fig. A3.3a) , for node
middle or corner node
respectively,does not exist. This principal value exists only if the

two subelements or two adjacent elements are taken together. In other
treatises on the subject the total integrals are determined, either
by considering a rigid body translation of the region, or by direct
evaluation of the
c lJ
.. terms and the Cauchy princiual
values of the
integrals. In the program we have extended a method developed by

Watson (1981,1982) for potential flow problems,to elasticity. It
relies on the rigid body translation method. Each node is taken to
be separated from the rest of the body by an imaginary spiral contour
having end points the two neighbouring corner nodes and passing
through an intermediate point inside the body, called the halfway
node. A rigid body translation in each of two directions is assumed
for each node, together with the portion of the body within the spiral.
If
d(b,e) = a, and
c .. (x
lJ
- -
a)
is an intermediate node (Fig. A3.3b),then
+ IS T.. (xa,y(~)).J(tJ.d~ =
b lJ
IS T.. (xa,y(~)).(1_N3).J(~).d~
IT .. (x a ,y(~)) -d s
b lJ
rs
where
If
is the spiral contour.

d(b,e) = a, and
lJ
(A3.27)
is an extreme node (Fig. A3.3a), then
(A3.28)
where now So is the sum of
Sol and
Sbr.
The integrals on the right hand side of the equations may be

evaluated numerically using the
G.L.Q.F.
-248-
A3.3 Particular integral

The following stress field satisfies the equations of equilibrium,hence it is a particular solution.
(0) HV
=[:H]
V =[ ~A1-(p-g-x V 0HV
peg-h.0 + p 0 )
The boundary conditions at infinity are assumed to be also satisfied

by this equation.
is the vertical stress at level
KA
h,
o
is the ratio of horizontal to vertical stress,
H, V are the horizontal and vertical axes of the coordinate system.
If
1,2
are
the principal axes for orthotropy,then

(A3.30)
()12 = M-(g)HV
M is the stress vector transformation matrix.
The constitutive law that relates stresses to strains is
(A3.31)
F
is the compliance
matrix.in the principal directions
1 and 2.
We take the displacements to be given by a second order polynomial
(A3.32)
Then the strains are given by,
where
2-a
1
A
Y2
0.2 +Yl/2
Yl
2-S
Sl + y 2 / 2
-249-
By equating
.E:
from equations
A3.3l,A3.33 we get
",
Also from
A3029,
where
,!S* = (KA,1,0) T
Substituting Q in A3.34 we get
pogo~o~o~*o(sin
T
T
8,cos 8,-h O+Po/(pog) )o(x
=~o(xl,x2,1)
l,x2,1)
(A3.35)
where
(Fllocos 28 +F12osin28)oKA+Fll-sin28 +F -cos28
12
2
28
+F -cos28
(Fl2-cos2 8 +F22- sin 8) -KA+F12 - sin
22
8-cos 8-(1-K
F
A)
33-sin
(A3036)
For
A3.35 to hold for any pair of (x
multiplying the vector

of equation
(x
l,x2,1)
A3035, that is
,all nine coefficients

l,x2)
T
must be identical on both sides
2-0.1 =C 1 -sin 8
Yl=Cl-cos 8
Y2 =C 2 -sin 8
2-S2=C2-cos 8
a Z+Yl/2=C
3-sin
Sl+y2/2=C
3-cos
o1 =C1 -(-h 0+p0 /(p-g))

E: =C -4-h +p /(p-g))
2 2
0 0
8 (o2+~~)/Z=G3-(-ho+Po/(p-g))
(A3.37)
Three parameters may be chosen arbitrarily,to allow for a rigid body

motion o We define
sl=s2=0
rigin of the coordinate
which imposes zero translation at the o-
axes .~.
-250-
d~/dxH=O
We arbitrarily also specify
at the origin which gives the
following relation,
(A3.38)
Thus the parameters
a
l=1/2.Cl-sin
a to
become
a 2=C
8- Cl/2-cos 8
3-sin
S2=1/2-C 2-cos 8
8- C2/2-sin 8
Sl=C
3-cos
yl=Cl-cos 8
l=Cl-(-hO+po/(p-g))
1=2-C
3-(-h O+po/(p-g))-02
If the displacements in the
HV
system are given by
uH=aH-x~
+ SH-X~ + yH-xl-x2 + 0H-xl + H- x2
~=~-x~
+ SV-x~ + YV-xl-x2 + 0V-xl + EV-X 2
the parameters
to
are related
(A3.40)
to the parameters a
to 2
as follows
[~
SH
YH
Sv
YV
H
v
::J ~~::
8
-sin
~t
Sl
Yl
S2
Y2
cos 8 a
oj
2
(A3.4l)
The tractions are related to the stresses as follows
t H = 0H-(cOS 8-nl
sin 8-n
2)
tv = 0V-(sin 8-nl + cos 8-n

2)
(A3.42)
-251-
Special cases
Directions
1,2 and
R,V coincide, that is
8=0_
Then
Cl = P-g-(Fll-KA + F12)
C2 = P-g-(F 12-KA + F22)
C = 0
3
Isotropy
the angle
8 may be taken zero,hence
C1 = P-g-(l+V)/E-((l-V)-K A - v)
C2 = p-g-(l+v)/E-(-v-K A + 1 - v)
C = 0
3
Isotropy and KA=V/(l-v) (corresponds to lateral constraint)
~
=0
"v
= p-g-(l+v)/E - (1-2-V)/(1-v)-x 2-(0_5-x2-hO+p/(p-g))
OR = V/(l-v)-p-g-(x
- h
O + po/(p-g))
-252-
APPENDIX 4
Estimate of error due to the assumption of continuous tractions
at nodes.
The simultaneous
e~uations
approximating the integral equation
may be written in matrix form as
u 1 = 1.-,Y,
If t is discontinuous at nodesJthen the equation may be rewritten
as
l
r
where U , U are the matrices that have components equal to the
integrals of the kernels U times the shape functions to the right
r
or left of the node respectively, and t ,t
are the tractions to the
right and left of the nodes.

Le~
us say now that
where
and t' is arbitrary.Then

a - S = I
is the unit matrix. Equation A4.2 then becomes
(:~( +Ul)_ i'
+ (Ur_a +
~-S )-4.-t
~~
(A4.7)
or
(A4.8)
or
C-t' + C_U-1_(Ur_a + Ul-S)-t.t = K-u
- ""- ,...,
- - ""-1 --
where the non-symmetrized stiffness matrix has been used for the
sake- of clarity.
-253-
Let us define
~'
from the following relation:
-P=C-t' = J N-t-ds = J N_(Nr_t r + Nl_tl)_ds = Cr_tr + Cl_tl~ (A4.10)

",....., rrf- - ~
-,.....,
- ~
- ~
are ,the actually applied tractions on the boundary r.
l
Substituting fortr,t from A4.4 in equation A4.10 we get
t
,-..J
-Cr_a
- + -cl-S
- =0
-
(A4.11)
Also
(A4.12)
From equations A4.,,6,A4.11,and A4.12 we get
a = C-l_Cl
~ = _.2.--1_Cr
From equation A4.9 it can be seen that an additional term I1P is
needed for the correct answer to be obtained.Substituting fora
and.@. from A4.13 into A4.9 we get,
-11P=C-U-1_(Ur-C .1_Cl_Ul_C-1_Cr)_l1t= (Cl_C_U- 1_Ul)_l1t =
~-- - --=_(Cr -C-U -l_Ur) -l1t=
=(1/2)_{(Cl_Cr)_C_U-1_(Ul_Ur)}_~t
"-
---
If the elements are all of equal length then

r=Cl=0.5_C
-C _t.P=(1/2)-C-U -1_ (U r _U l) -l1t
........
(A4.15)
(A4.16)
The error in displacements is found from

(A4.17)
-254-
APPENDIX
GRAPHS FOR ESTIMATING THE STABILITY OF A WEDGE IN A TUNNEL ROOF

In this appendix,diagrams are drawn, that relate the non-dimensional parameters
gles
M ,to the angle
(PHI),stiffness ratios k /k
a (ALFA),for various friction ann
, and dilation angles
(IOTA).
The value of the friction angle of each curve can be read as the value of
ALFA
,at which the curve meets the
ALFA
axis.
~,
'?
..
_ALFA_
E:
E:
<'f
"V~RIOUS
PHI-VALUE Of PHI ON ALfA AxiS
::I
D'
0'
..
:I
D
r-
I
D
0'
Cl
-ALfA_
-'K 5/ KN=0 00 1 lOT R=0
!::
CURVES fOR
0'
...
..
":
~KS/KN=Oo0009IOTR=O
...
CURVES FOF VARIOUS PHI-VALUE OF PHI ON ALFA AXIS
I
1\)
\J1
\J1
I
I:
'*it~"
. " ........
i
.;
..
-RLFR-
"
0;0'
'9
.;
I:
:;
ci
..
ci
:=
ci
ci
'9
ci
'9
ci
.;
e-
.;
;
I
.;
'?
'9
-ALfA_
-'K S/ KN=0 004 , lOT R=0
RLFR-Axl
-'K S/ KN=0 0 0 2 lOT R=0
-PHCD"
~
VRiHous PHI-VRlUE OF
I
1\)
0'
V1
s:
';'
:I-,
:I
-ALFA-
s:
eO
:I
0
eO
0'
:I
e-
i ",
i
0
l;
..
..
1
t
t
-ALfA-
~0
I
0
'-1-5
F[f~Rfous PHI-Y~l
!:
CURvES
-'K S/ KN=0 DOD 6 , lOT R 0
PHI-VRLUE OF PHI ON RLFR AXIS
~RRIOUS
-'K 5 / KN=0 DOD 5 , lOT R=0
CURVES FOR
V'1
-..J
-258-
0
II
9)
a:
I-
..
t
...
a:
oJ
a:
0
0
0
II
Z
~
<,
(f)
~
11'1
'0'1
"'0
"'0
01'0
"'0
"'0
-Il_
"'0
"'0
'1'0
0"0
0
II
IT
I0
..
...a:
<D
0
0
.J
a:
0
II
Z
~
<,
e. . .
III
IIJ
>
A;
:>
u
(f)
~
er- ,
'0'1
"'0
"'0
01'0
lL'O
"'0
-Il-
"'0
1"0
0"0
u'O
"'0
10'0-
r:
...
..
0,
<>
<>
"':
<>
ci
<>
"!
1\1\11
~~\n
0'
<>
"!
<>
"!
ci
.
0
<>
..
:E:
<>
:;
<>
"!
<>
<>
-AlfA_
iii
-ALFA-
ci
:E:
I
0
"!
..-'K S/ KN=0 020 , lOT R =0
-'K S/ KN=0 0 10 , lOT R=0

..
0
IUII' , ~ I'US 'Mf-YlLuE 8F PMI OM 'L'I AXIS
CURVES FOR VARIOUS 'HI-VALUE OF PHI ON AL'A AxIS
<o
16;
z:
PHIVA~UE
OF PHI ON
A~FA
AXIS
eO
'!
_ALfA_
-'K S/ KN=0 0 30 , lOT R=0
..
CURVES FOR VARIOUS
z:
,~~;"$)o."\~,~~;:':,::';;;"J,t&j,':~;,,
eO
=!
"!
eO
eO
eO
eO
-ALfA_
-'K S/ KN=0 0 40 , lOT R 0
CURVES FOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE Of PHI ON ALfA AXIS
0'
1\)
f:
lC
lC
t .;
-ALfA-
.;
:::a
I
.;.
I
.;
'5' .,,,,,
-ALfA_
-'K S/ KN=0 060 , lOT R=0

I
.;
, lOT R=0
..
CURVES fOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE Of PHIOif'lIi.
.-'K S/ KN=0 050
..
CURVES FOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE Of PHI ON ALfA AXIS
f-'
0'-
I\)
-262-
0
II
-
Of)
...II
a:
I-
..
...a:
....,. Den
!f
t
i
I
I....
I
i
D
II
:::c
<,
en
:::c
i ""'
to"'
"'0
""0
01"0
U"O
14-
D
II
a:
.~
t<
!'.
'C...
-'
l-
0
~
Do
...a:....
to
;1
ato
.t
a:
r--
D
0
II
.~....
'f
<,
to
en
at:
....
."
'":>
at:
::>
~
ll'l
to' I
"'0
"'0
01'0
10'0-
lL'O
-14 -
-263-
a
II
a:
l-
..
t
...a:
o
o
a:
o
II
Z
~
<,
if)
~
ZI"'
to"
-101_
o
II
IT
en
>C
a:
a:
l-
II.
~
a:
...
...
o
o
o
..
a:
II.
~
a:
.--i
:::>
~
a:
>f
:z:
II
en
:::>
o
lIl:
Z
x;
>-
<,
if)
CL
a:
e~
:::>
~~~--::::r:--~:===:~==:;:;:=::::::::;;;:::"O:::::::;;:::~O;::::::::::~~::::;::"::::::::"::;;:~~~~---:-:""I':"'"--:-:-~-:-J~--:..
tOol
H'O
U'O
80'080'0
00'
"'0
"'0
z.,'j"
-101_
-264-
"
a:
l-
..
a:
o
o
II.
a:
lJ)
II
Z
~
<,
(f)
~
to"'
II"'
W-
o
II
IT
l-
..
...a:
o
o
a:
<r
o
II
Z
~
<,
(f)
~
~
::>
u
ZI,r:I='--~-~:-O:---:::-':--"':':--=--"":"'"'l.-':;""~:---~~--:~"""-----:,~-'-:-::-o:---L.~---r---..------;I*-----.
to'
W-
-265-
o
II
..
)(
a:
~
.~
...
..
.......a:
a:
CD
II
Z
~
""en
f 1,"r:'~""";;;---:~-~-=----.-""":::;-,---...-~-..---""",,-to"'
IU
.........~-4----~""'--.L-.,,,,,---~~-~-~~-~
-Il-
0
II
IT
~
0
l---4
.......
IE
0
0
IE
(.D
0
II
Z
x;
<,
en
"If)
,~IIJ
.,
:'>
:>
u
:x:::
ZI'I
to"
-Il
10'0-
Ii
Iio
0:
t
I:
-ALfA-
900 , lOT R=0
I:
.-'K S/ KN=0
..
CURVES FOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE OF PHI ON ALFA AXIS
il
-ALfA_
-'K S/ KN= 1 000 , lOT R=0
''fifs<
0'
0'
I\)
-267-
l.f)
II
a:
.-. 0
us
-Ill.
..
.--t
0
0
II>
Ill.
II
I...
x:
en
x:
<,
DC'O
'Z'O
N'O
'Z'O
ZZ'O
l.f)
II
...
,,-i
,,.,
ilL
I....
-
~
-...
'f
iii
on
';:)
-l
'0
8<
.....
L
:>
III:
::>
u
IT
r0
..
I---l
0
0
0
0
II
Z
~
<,
(f)
c
c
~~:"",:,,"-=:------:-:':O:----::='='"--=:,,::----::~-:::-:-o:--~?--~----:;~--'--...---~::"'---.--.....---+'
'Z'O
ZZ'O
'Z'O
'Z'O
0"0
W_
FORVA~IOUS
PHI-vA[U
~o
":
:::
:::
t
E:
E:
.;
~~
Dt.oo
~
o
2
.;
.;
":
":
.;
v,.U8US
jilHt"'WIlLU! 8' "1111 '11 lUI AXIS
'~.M
.'_1Ift ' "

O-ftft
..
AI'
it
.'J& - ; S ;
~K5/KN=O.004,IOTR=5
tultV!S fl
":
~K5/KN=O.002,IOTR=5
CURVES
I
l\)
00
0'
Axf
~>"#,,::~:;
t
I:
''tI'''''''''.t'.IIUS
::
~KS/KN=O.006,IOTR=5
..
::
....
::
eli
I:
..
..o'K 5/ KN=0 . 005 , lOT R=5
lil
CURVES FOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE OF PHI olfALFA
'0
0'
1\)
=
.;
t
I:
I:
I:
.;
0>
s:
0>
0>
::
.;
.;
..
.;
.;
..
~KS/KN=O.009,IOTR=5
CURVES fOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE Of PHI ON ALfA AXIS
O>'K S/ KN=0 . 008 , lOT R=5
1\)
-..J
t
I:
eta.oo
~t
..
..
l!l
..
::
..
..I:
t~.ftfII
'
.'_AftI !
8-- I
ill - i i
.'. -
Jl
, c - \
~KS/KN=O.020,IOTA=5
CUlIIYES FOlllvAlIIious PHI';v
I:
N
.~
....
O'K S/ KN=0 . 0 10 , lOT R=5
lit
CURVES FOR VRRIOUS PHI-VRLUE OF PHI ON RLFR RXIS
I
1\)
-.J
I-'
-272-
lJ)
II)
II:
...
"
IT
f-
<:)
II:
..
IE
z:
...
III
;:)
,.
~
Gl
-... 0
Z"
-,. <,
z:
;:)
CII
....
.
0
III
!!l
u
if)
~
noD
alO
n'o
1"0
"0
0'0
.'0
-14
LD
II
a:::
lit
M
II:
....a:
I-
0
~
a:
z:
....0
\AI
::lI
0
(I)
a:
>-
z:
II
Q,.
en
::lI
0
lO::
>-
<,
lO::
if)
a:
....C
....>'"
lO::
::>
u
~
01'0
"'0
lS'O
1"0
"'0
0"0
.0
--
"'0
14
f
I:
I:
~.DO
II~
.;
::I
.;
.~~-
\;r - \ iii 5-
-'-
ill - "
~KS/KN=O.060,IOTR=5
"!
..
O'K S/ KN=0 . 050 , lOT R=5
CURVES FOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE OF PHI ON ALFA AxiS
-...J
\.>.J
I
I\)
-274-
lJ)
II
a:
.- a
.. .....-...
I
-. aco
.,.
M
CIl
oJ
:IE
.....
lL
;)
.1:,t
f
'.'-J.
I..
.,
;)
If
Z
~
<,
(f)
~
01"0
"0
Z'o
--
'."0
II
LD
II
IT
.a
.....-.
..
a
La
0
II
Z
~
<,
(J)
...>
",
II::
::;)
~
0'0
"0
n"o
. .0
..0
w-
t
E:
, lOT R=5
~~
"'l.oo
.o'
.~_....
n.. .
.,..... , I' ....
ili -
.~
\-
iltl
S/KN=O.200,IOTR=5
;ualtJ ;01'llu' 'MI-llUi ., 'HI 1M IL'. I.IS
E:
:;
o
:;
o
OIK S/ K N=0 . 100
CURVES FOR VARIOUS PHI-VALUE OF PHI ON ALfA 8.15
.1> .
--J
\.J<
I
1\)
:II:
..~KS/KN=O.400,IOTR=5
..
...
t
!
:II:
~~
"'.00
~
~
FOR VARIOUS '"I-VALU OF '"1 ON-A[1A"Ax
I~ ..M
1' ..M~ftfIl
fllA
:;
. '..
\
-
ill
~KS/KN=O.500,IOTR=5
CU~VES
I
l\)
0'
-o
-277-
Lf)
II
-
II)
..
M
cr:
.a
..
til
o
o
co
i.
....
IL,..:O=::.-"T'""""-.......,---f"'::.--..---~_.--r---....---Jt.::....,..---r--.-....-~--,.-'-"'T'"-__~:-~-~~
OL"O
."0
OCO
01"0
w_
LJ)
II
-....
..,
...
CD
cr:
I-
0
~
.
...
....
....,.
.
~
.
...""
(j)
CD
0
to
:::l
ii
;;
CII
..
""
en
....
:;)
II
<,
~
SL'O
-W
IZO
-278-
lJ)
II
-'"
)C
...
e-
-.lID'
II.
,,
,
,"f
a:
r-
..-..
..
o
0
0
.......-4
w-
w-
lJ)
II
IT
ro
o
..
OJ
"'0
-279-
REFERENCES
BANERJEE. P,K. & BUTTERFIELD, R. (1981). Boundary element methods in

engineering sience,McGraw Hill.
BANDIS, S., LUMSDEN, A.C.,& BARTON, N. (1983). Fundamentals of rock
joint deformation. I.J.R.M.Min.Sci.,Vol.20,No6,pp.249-268
BARTON, N.R. (1971). A relationship between joint roughness and
joint shear strength.Proc.int.symp.rock fracture.Int.Soc.Rock
Mech.Nancy,France.
BARTON, N.R. (1972). A model study of rock joint deformation.
INT.J.R.M. Min.Sci.Vol.9,pp 579-602,Pergamon Press.
BARTON, N,R. (1973). Review of a new shear strength criterion for
rock joints.Engineering Geology, 7 ,pp 287-332.
BARTON, N,R. (1974). Estimating the shear strength of rock joints,
Proc.3d Congr.Int.Soc.Rock Mech.,1974,Vol.2,pp 219-220.
BARTON, N,R. (1976). The shear strength of rock and rock joints.
Rock Mechanics reviews,Int.J.Rock.Mech.Min.Sci.and Geomech.
Abstr.,Vol.13.pp 255-279,Pergamon press.
BARTON, N,R. (1980). Estimation of insitu joint properties in
Naesliden mine.In "the application of rock mechanics to cut and fill
mining",IMM,pp 186-192.
BARTON, N,R. & BANDIS, S. (1982). Effects of block size on the shear
behaviour of jointed
rock.Proc.
23rd symposium on rock
mechanics,Berkeley,pp 739-760.
BARTON, N.,BAKHTAR, K.,& BANDIS,
s.
(1983). Rock joint description
and modelling for prediction of near field repository performance.

Materials research society annual meeting, Boston, proceedings,
symposium D. Scientific basis for nuclear waste management.
BEER, G, (1982). Finite element,boundary element and coupled
analysis of unbounded problems in elastostatics. To be published.
-280-
BRADY, B.H.G. & WASSYNG, A. (1981) A coupled finite element-boundary

element method of stress analysis.Int.J.Rock Mech.,Min.Sci. &
Geomech.Abstracts,Vol.18,pp.475-485.
BRAY, J.W. (1967). A study of jointed and fractured rock.Part I,
fracture patterns and their failure characteristics.Rock Mech.
Vo1.5,no.2 & 3.pp.117136.
BRAY, J.W. (1975). Unpublished work.
BRAY, J.W. (1976). Unpublished work.
CAROL, I. & ALONSO, E.E. (1983) A new joint element for the analysis
of fractured rock.5th I.C.R.M.,Melbourne,pp.F 147-151.
CELESTINO. T.B. (1979). Path dependency in the behaviour of rough
discontinuities,in bi-directional direct shear.M.Sc thesis,
University of California,Berkeley.
CHAPPELL, B.A. (1979) Load distribution and redistribution in a
discontinuum.Int.J.Rock Mech.& Min.Sci.,Vol.16.pp.391-399.
CHAUDONNERET, M. (1977). Resolution of traction discontinuity
problem in boundary integral equation method applied to stress
analysis. C.r.,Acad. de Sci.,Ser.A,Math.,284(8),pp.463-466.
CHRISTIAN. J.T. & WONG, I.H. (1973) Error in simulating excavations
in elastic media by finite elements.Soil and foundation, Japanese
Society of soil mechanics on foundation eng.Vol.13.No.1.
CLOUGH, G.W. & DUNCAN, J.M. (1969). Finite element analysis of port
Allen and old river locks.
Contract report S69-6,
US Army
Engineering waterways experiment station, Vicksburg, Missisipi.

CRAWFORD. A.M. & CURRAN, J.
(1982). Higher order functional
variation displacement discontinuity elements. Int.J.R.M.Min.Sci.,

Vo1.19.
CRAWFORD. A.M. & BRAY, J.W. (1983) Influence of the in-situ stress
field and joint stiffness on rock wedge stability in underground
-281-
openings. To be published.
CROUCH, S.L. & STARFIELD, A.M. (1983). Boundary element methods in
solid mechanics.George Allen & Unwin.
CUNDALL, P.A. (1971). The measurement and analysis of accelerations
in rock slopes. Phd thesis. University of London.
DE ROUVRAY. A.L. & GOODMAN, R.E. (1972). Finite element analysis of
crack initiation in a block model experiment.Rock Mechanics,
Vol.4,pp.203-223.
DESAI, C.S. (1977). Deep foundations. In Numerical methods in
geotechnical engineering, ed. by Desai, C.S. and Christian, J.T., Me
Graw Hill.
DESAI, C.S., EITANI, I,M. & HAYCOCKS,
c.
(1983) An application of
finite element procedure for underground structures with non- linear

materials and joints.5th I.C.R.M.,Melbourne,pp.209-216.
DESAI, C.S .. ZAMAN, M.M . LIGHTNER, J.G.,& SIRIWARDANE, H.I. (1984)
Thin layer element for interfaces and joints.lnt.J.for Num. & Anal.
Meth. in Geomech.,Vol.8,pp.19-43.
EISSA, E.A. (1980). Stress analysis of underground excavations in
isotropic and stratified rock using the boundary element method. Phd
Thesis, University of London.
ERGUN. I. (1970) Stress distribution in jointed media.Proc. of the
2nd Congress of the I.S.R.M.,Belgrade,Vol.1,pp.2-31.
FAIRHURST, C. (1964). On the validity of the Brazilian test for
brittle material.lnt.J.R.M.Min.Sci .. Vol.1.pp.535-546.
GAZIEV, E.G., ERLIKHMAN. S.A. (1971). Stresses and strains in
anisotropic rock foundation(model studies). Symp.of the Int.Soc.Rock
Mech.. Nancy,pp.II-1.
GERRARD, C.M. & HARRISON, W,J. (1970). The effect of inclined planar
fabric features on the behaviour of a loaded rock mass. Proc.2nd
-282-
Congress
of
the
Int.Soc.
for
Rock Mech. ,Belgrade
Yugoslavia.Vol.1.pp.2-20.
GERRARD, C.M.
& WARDLE, L.J. (1973). Solutions for line loads and
generalized strip loads applied to an orthorhombic half space.

Division of applied
geomechanics.technical
paper
No.14,CSIRO,Australia.
GERRARD, C.M. & WARDLE, L.J. (1980). Solutions for line loads and
generalized strip loads applied within orthorhombic media.Division
of applied geomechanics ,technical paper No.31,CSIRO,Australia.
GERRARD. C.M. (1982a). Equivalent elastic moduli of a rock mass
consisting of orthorhombic layers.Int.J. of Rock Mech. and Min.,Sci.
& Geom. Abstr., Vol.19,No1,pp.9-14.
GERRARD, C.M. (1982b). Elastic models of rock masses having
one,two,and three sets of joints .I.J.R.M.M.Sci.& Geom.Abstr.,
Vol.19,No1,pp.15-24.
GERRARD, C.M. (1982c). Joint compliances as a basis for rock mass
properties and the design of supports. I.J.R.M.M.Sci.& Geom.Abstr.
Vol.19.No6,pp.285-306.
GERRARD, C.M. (1982d). Reinforced soil:An orthorhombic material.
Pr-oc o f the A.S.C.E.,Vo1.108,GT11.pp.1460-1474.
v
GHABOUSI, J., WILSON, E.L.,& ISENBERG, J. (1973). Finite elements

for rock joints and interfaces.J.of the soil mechanics and
foundation division,A.S. C.E., SM1 0, pp .833848.
GOODMAN. R.E .. TAYLOR, R.L.,& BREKKE, T.L. (1968). A model for the
mechanics of jointed rock.J.of Soil Mech. and Foundation
division,A.S.C.E., SM3.pp.637-659.
GOODMAN, R.E.
(1970). The deformability of joints.In "the
determination of the in-situ modulus of deformation of rock" ,STP

477,pp.174-198.
-283-
GOODMAN. R.E. & DUBOIS, J. (1971). Duplication of dilatant behaviour

in the analysis of jointed rocks.U.S.Army Corps of engineers, Omaha
district, final report. Contract DACA-45-70-C0088 neg.
GOODMAN, R.E. & DUBOIS. J. (1972). Duplication of dilatancy in
analysis of jointed rocks.Proc.A.S.C.E., Vo1.98,No.SM4,pp.399'422.
GOODMAN. R.E. (1974). The mechanical properties of joints.Proc.3rd
Congress Int.Soc.Rock Mech.. Vol.1,part 2,pp.127-140.
GOODMAN. R.E. (1975). Methods of geological engineering in
discontinuous rocks.West publishing Co.,St.Paul.Minn ..
GOODMAN. R.E. & ST.JOHN. C. (1977). Finite element analysis for
discontinuous rocks. In Numerical methods in geotechnical
engineering ed. Desai. C.S. and Christian. J.T., Me Graw Hill.
GOODMAN, R.E. (1977). Analysis of jointed r-o cks In "Finite elements
i
in Geomechanics",ed.Gudehus.G.,Ch.11.pp.351-375.
GOODMAN. R.E., SHI, G.H.. & BOYLE, W. (1982). Calculation of support
for hard jointed rock using the keyblock principle.Proc.23rd
Symposium on rock mechanics,Berkeley,pp.883898.
HARRISON. W.J. & GERRARD. C.M. (1972). Elastic theory applied to
reinforced earth.J. of the A.S.C.E.,SM12.
HEUZE, F.E . GOODMAN. R.E .. & BORNSTEIN.
A.
(1971).
Joint
perturbation and no tension finite element solutions.Rock

mechanics.Vol3,No.1.
HEUZE. F.E. (1979). Dilatant effects of rock joints.Proc. of the 4th
Congress Int. Soc. Rock Mech.. Montreux, Switzerland. Vol. 1 , pp. 169-175.
HEUZE, F.E. & BARBOUR. T.G.
(1981). Models for jointed rock
structures. Proceedings of the first Int.Conf. on Compo in Civil

Eng.,publ. A.S.C.E .. pp.811-824.
HEUZE, F.E. & BARBOUR, T.G. (1982). New models for rock joints and
interfaces J.of the Geot.Eng.div. of A.S.C.E.,Vol.108.GT5,pp.757-
-284-
776.
HITTINGER, M. & GOODMAN, R.E. (1978). JTROCK - A computer program
for stress analysis of two dimensional discontinuous rock
masses.Report No. UCB/GT/78-04.
Dept.of C.E.,University of
California, Berkeley.
HOEG. K.
(1968). Stresses against underground structural
cylinders.J.of
Soil
Mechanics
and
Found.
Division.A.S.C.E.,Vol.94.SM4.pp.833-858.
HOEK. E. & BROWN. E.T. (1980). Underground excavations in rock. IMM.
HUNGR. O. & COATES, D.F. (1978). Deformability of joints and its
relation to rock foundation settlements.Canadian Geotechnical
Journal.Vol.15pp.239-249.
JAEGER, J.C. (1960). Shear failure of anisotropic rocks.Geologic
magazine, Vol. 97 ,pp. 65 -72.
JAEGER. J.C. (1971). Friction of rocks and stability of rock slopes.
Geotechnique.Vol.21.pp.97-139
KE HSU JUN. (1979) Non linear analysis of the mechanical properties
of joints and weak intercalation in rock.3rd Int.Conf. on Num. Meth.
in Geom .. Aachen. pp. 523--532.
KE HSU JUN. (1981). Non-linear analysis of a joint element and its
application in rock engineering. Int.J.for Num.Anal.Meth. in
Geomechanics,Vol.5.pp.229-245.
KELLY, D.W . MUSTOE. G.G.W.,& ZIENKIEWICZ. O.C. (1979). Coupling
boundary element methods with other numerical methods.
In.Developments in boundary element methods - 1, ed. Banerjee. P.K.
& Butterfield. R. Applied science publishers Ltd.
KRSMANOVIC. D. (1967). Initial and residual strength of hard
rock. Geotechnique. Vo1.17. No.2. pp .145-160.
KULHAWY. F. (1975). Stress deformation properties of rock and rock
-285-
discontinuities.Engineering Geology.Vol.9.pp.327-350.
LACHAT, J.C. (1975). A further development of the boundary integral
technique for elastostatics. Phd Thesis. University of Southampton.
LADANYI. B. & ARCHAMBAULT. G. (1970). Simulation of shear behaviour
of a jointed rock mass.Proc.11th Symp.Rock Mech .. Berkeley.
AIME.pp.105-125
LADANYI. B. & ARCHAMBAULT. G.
(1980). Direct and indirect
determination of shear strength of rock mass.Preprint 8025.AIME.Annual meeting. Las Vegas.Nevada.

LEKHNITSKI. S.G. (1963). Theory of elasticity of an anisotropic
elastic body. Holden Day series in mathematical physics. translated
from russian.
LORIG, L.J. & BRADY. B.H.G. (1982) A hybrid discrete elementboundary element method
for stress analysis.23rd Rock
Mech.Symposium.
LOUREIRO PINTO. L. (1970). Deformability of schistous rocks.Proc.2nd
Int. Congress of the I.S.R.M .. Belgrade,Vol.I.pp.2--30.
MAC LAMORE. R. & GRAY, K.E. (1967). The mechanical behaviour of
anisotropic sedimentary rock.Trans.A.S.M.E .. J.of Eng.
for
industry.pp.62-76.
MAHTAB. M.A. & GOODMAN, R.E. (1970). Three dimensional finite
element analysis of jointed rock slopes.Proc.2nd Congress
Int.Soc.Rock Mech. Belgrade,Vol.3.pp.7-12.
MAURY. V. (1970). Distribution of stresses in discontinuous layered
systems. Water power.Vol.22,No.56.pp.195-202.
MOGI. K. (1966). Pressure dependence of rock strength and transition
from brittle to ductile flow.Bulletin Earthquake Research
Institute.Tokyo University,Vol.44.pp.215-232.
MUSTOE. G.G.W. (1979). A combination of the finite element method
-286-
and boundary solution procedure for continuum problems.Phd Thesis.

University of Wales,University College,Swansea.
OBERT, L. & DUVALL, W.I. (1967). Rock mechanics and the design of
structures in rock. John Wiley and sons. New York.
OBERT, L., BRADY. B.T .. & SCHMECHEL. F.W. (1976). The effect of
normal stiffness on the shear resistance of rock.Rock
mechanics,Vol.8,pp.57-72.
OWEN, D.R.J. & HINTON. E. (1980). Finite elements in plasticity.
Pineridge Press Ltd.
PANDE. G.N. (1979). Numerical modelling of rockspossibilities and
problems.
Proc.3rd Int.Conf.Num.Meth.in Geomechanics,
Balkema,Rotterdam. Vol4. pp .1341--1356.

PANDE, G.N. & GERRARD. C.M.
(1983). The behaviour of reinforced
jointed rock masses under various simple loading states.5th

I.C.R.M.,Melbourne,pp.F217-223.
PATTON. F.D. (1966). Multiple modes of shear failure in rock.Proc.
of the first congress of the I.S.R.M .. Lisbon,VoL1 ,pp.509-513.
PERES RODRIGUES, F. (1966). Anisotropy of granites.modulus of
elasticity and ultimate strength ellipsoids. joint systems,slope
attitudes and their correlations.Proc.of the 1st Congress of the
I.S.R.M .. Lisbon.Vol.I,pp.721-731.
PERES RODRIGUES, F. (1970). Anisotropy of rocks.Most probable
surfaces of the ultimate stresses and
of the moduli of
elasticity.Proc.of the 2nd congress of the I.S.R.M .. Vol.I.pp.1-20.

POULOS, H.G. & DAVIES, E.H. (1974). Elastic solutions for soil and
rock mechanics; chapter 11 ,stresses and displacements around
underground openings. John wiley and sons Inc.
ROBERDS, W.J. & EINSTEIN. H.H. (1978). Comprehensive model for rock
discontinuities.J.of the geot.div.,A.S.C.E .. Vol.104,GT5.pp553-569.
-287-
ROBERDS, W.J. & EINSTEIN, H.H. (1979). Numerical modelling of rock

joints. 20th symposium on rock mech.,Austin Texas.pp.233-241.
SALAMON, M.D.G. (1968). Elastic moduli of a stratified rock
mass.Int.J.Rock Mech.Min.Sci .. Vol.5.pp.519-527.
SHARMA, H.D.. NAYAK, G.C.,& MAHESHWARI, J.B. (1976). Generalization
of sequential non-linear analysis. A study of rockfill dam with
joint elements. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Num. meth. in Geomechanics,
Blacksburg, Va., Vol.2. pp.662-685.
SINGH, B. (1973). Continuum characterization of jointed rock
masses.Part I & Part II,Int.J.R.M.& Min.Sci .. Vol.10.pp.311-349.
STEWART, I.J.
(1981). Numerical and physical modelling of
underground excavations in discontinuous rocks.Phd thesis.University

of London.
SWAN, G. (1983). Determination of stiffness and other joint
properties from roughness measurements. Rock mechanics and rock
engineering Vol.16. pp .19-38.
TOMLIN. G.R. & BUTTERFIELD. R. (1974). Elastic analysis of zoned
orthotropic continua. J. of the eng .Mech. di v , ,A. S. C.E., EMJ, pp. 511 --529
VAN DILLEN, D.E. & EWING, R.D. (1981). BMINES'A F.E. Code for rock
mechanics applications.Proc.of the 22nd symposium on rock
mech., M. I. T. ,Cambridge, Mass. ,pp. 353--358.
VARGAS. E.Jr. (1982). Development and application of numerical
models to simulate the behaviour of fractured rock masses.Phd
thesis,Univ.of London.
WALSH, J.B. & GROSENBAUCH. M.A. (1979). A new model for analysing
the effect of fractures on compressibility.J.of Geophysical
research,Vol.84.NoB7.
WARDLE, L.J. & GERRARD. C.M. (1972). The equivalent anisotropic
properties of layered rock and soil masses.Rock mechanics and
-288-
engineering geology.Vol.4. pp.155-175.

WATSON. J.O. (1979). Advanced implementation of the boundary element
method for two and three dimensional elastostatics;from the book
"Developments in boundary element methods - 1".ed.by Bannerjee.P.K.
and Butterfield.R . Applied Science publishers Ltd.
WATSON. J.O. (1981). Program QFLOW.Unpublished yet.
WATSON. J.O. (1982). Hermitian cubic boundary elements for plane
problems of fracture mechanics. Res Mechanica. Vol.4.No1.pp.23-42.
WILSON. E.L .. BATHE, K.J .. & DOHERTY, W.P. (1974). Direct solution of
large
systems
of
linear
equations.Computers
and
structures,Vol.4,Pergamon press, pp.363-372.

WILSON. E.L. (1977). Finite elements for foundations joints and
fl u i d a . in ch.1 O. "Fini te elements in geomechanics", ed . Gud ehus
G., pp .319-350.
WILSON. R.B., & CRUSE, T.A. (1978). Efficient implementation of
anisotropic three dimensional boundary integral equation stress
analysis. Int.J.Num. Meth. in Engng .. 12. 1383-1397.
ZIENKIEWICZ. O.C .. VALLIAPAN. S .. & KING,
I.P.
(1968). Stress
analysis of rock as a no-tension materiaLGeotechnique,VoL18,pp.56

66.
ZIENKIEWICZ,
O.C.
(1975). The FEM and boundary solution
procedures(Boundary integral method)
Report C/R/236/75.
Civ.Eng.Univ.of Wales,Swansea.
ZIENKIEWICZ.
O.C.
(1977). The finite
element method.3rd
edition.McGraw Hill Book Co.

ZIENKIEWICZ. O.C .. KELLY, D.W .. & BETTESS, P. (1977). The coupling of
Finite element and boundary solution procedures.lnt.J.Num.Meth.in
Eng .. Vol.11.pp.355-376.

Tunnelling Fem

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tunnelling Fem

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NUMERICAL

JOINTED ROCK OF INFINITE EXTENT

A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor

Rock Mechanics Section,

The subject of the thesis is the development of

jointed rock masses around

discontinuities,appropriate models have been selected and parameter

Simplified theoretical solutions developed for the problem of a

author wishes to acknowledge the contribution of all members

of the Rock Mechanics group at Imperial College to

support by the State Scholarship Foundation of

introducing me to the boundary element method.

Dr. Nicholas Barton for providing me

with useful information.

this work, and his friendship.

least I whish to express my thanks to my wife for

her patience during the hard period of the study, and to

for dealing with all my interests during my absence from home.

NOTATION AND CONVENTIONS

CHAPTER 2 - NUMERICAL MODELLING OF JOINTED ROCK

Distribution of stresses and displacements

2.1.1 Mechanical properties

Discontinuities - A literature survey

2,2,1 Mechanical properties

The joint element

2,3,1 The element

2,3,2 The constitutive law

2,3,3 Iterative solution

Change of the geometry

Equivalent elastic properties of a jointed rock

3.1.1 Three orthogonal sets of joints

3.1.2 Two oblique sets of joints

Implementation of the direct boundary integral method

3.2.1 The integral equation for the complementary

3.2.2 Kernels U and T

3.2.3 Isoparametric element

3.2.4 Nodal collocation

3.2.5 Numerical integration

3.2.6 Rotation of axes

3.2.7 Particular integral

3.2.8 Infinite domain

CHAPTER 4 - COUPLING REGIONS WITH CONTINUOUS AND

4.3.1 Causes of errors

5.1.1 Symmetric wedge

5.1.2 Asymmetric wedge

5.2.1 Symmetric wedge

5.2.2 Asymmetric wedge

CHAPTER 6 - APPLICATION OF THE PROGRAM TO ORE STOPING

CHAPTER 7 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

APPENDIX 1 - Description of input for program AJROCK

APPENDIX 2 - Overall structure of the program

APPENDIX 3 - Additional information relevant to Chapter 3

Integration of kernel - shape function products

over an element containing the first argument

APPENDIX 4 - Estimate of error due to the assumption of

APPENDIX 5 - Graphs for estimating the stability of a wedge

Eight node serendipity element

Axes for transverse isotropy and global cartesian

Sign convention for internal forces

Isoparametric three node membrane element

Peak shear strength

Peak shear strength

First joint element

Three dimensional joint elements