4.6 Article

Indirect method for the quantitative identification of unstable rock

Journal

NATURAL HAZARDS
Volume 112, Issue 1, Pages 1005-1012

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-021-05197-4

Keywords

Unstable rock; Quantitative identification; Natural vibration frequency; Laser Doppler vibrometer (LDV); Indirect method

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Project of China [2018YFE0101100]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41702371]
  3. State Key Laboratory for GeoMechanics and Deep Underground Engineering, China University of Mining & Technology, Beijing [SKLGDUEK2130]
  4. USTB-NTUT Joint Research Program [TW2019011]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By proposing a cohesive safety factor and a relatively objective analysis method, unstable rock can be effectively identified, providing engineers with quantitative evaluation indices and criteria.
Under the influence of continuous external factors (rainfall, earthquakes, construction, etc.), slope rock masses in a stable state can gradually transition to unstable rock, which can then collapse. A safety factor can identify the occurrence of failure but cannot identify the transition of stable rock to unstable rock; thus, it cannot realise the quantitative identification of the latter. In this study, a cohesive safety factor (CSF) and a relatively objective analysis method are proposed to effectively identify unstable rock. The CSF can be calculated by the natural vibration frequency and applied as a mechanical index to characterise unstable rock; when CSF is less than 1, the rock is defined as unstable. Compared with the traditional method, the new method has the merits of simple operation, low cost and high efficiency and provides a relatively complete quantitative evaluation index and evaluation criteria for quantitative identification of unstable rock for engineers engaged in early warning and prevention of rock collapse.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available