4.7 Article

Centroid sliding pyramid method for removability and stability analysis of fractured hard rock

Journal

ACTA GEOTECHNICA
Volume 12, Issue 3, Pages 627-644

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11440-016-0510-4

Keywords

Block theory; Free domain; Removability; Rock mass; Sliding pyramid; Stability analysis

Funding

  1. Key Programme from Natural Science Foundation of China [41130751]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [SLDRCE 14-A-09]
  3. Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [16QA1404000]
  4. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (PCSIRT) [IRT1029]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes a new method using centroid sliding pyramid (CSP) to identify the removability and stability of fractured hard rock in tunnel and slope engineering. The new method features two geometrical and topological improvements over the original key block method (KBM). Firstly, all the concave corners are considered as starting points of cutting process when a concave block is divided into a set of convex blocks in the original KBM. Only the concave corners formed by two joint planes are used for partitioning a concave block in the presented method and concave corners with free planes are excluded. Secondly, joint pyramid for removability computation in the original KBM is generated using all of the joint planes, while CSP is calculated only from the joint planes adjoining the free planes. The cone angle theta of CSP is the vectorial angle formed by the two candidate sliding surfaces of this CSP. Removability analysis of a block is transformed into calculating the cone angle of CSP. The geometrical relationship is simplified, and data size for removability computation is reduced compared with the original KBM. The provided method is implemented in a computer program and validated by examples of fractured rock slopes and tunnels.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available