Method for Quantification of Wear of Sheared Joint Walls Based on Surface Morphology

Roughness and wear evolution of three different joint wall surfaces were characterized using surface roughness and surface wear parameters. Parameters were defined by considering the two components of morphology: waviness (“primary” roughness) and surface roughness (“secondary” roughness). Two surface roughness parameters are proposed: joint interface (or single wall) specific surface roughness coefficient SR _s (0 ≤ SR _s  ≤ 1) for quantifying the amount of “pure” roughness (or specific roughness), and degree of joint interface (or single wall) relative surface roughness DR _r (0 ≤ DR _r  ≤ 0.5). Two further parameters are also proposed in order to quantify the wear of wall surface: joint interface (or single wall) surface wear coefficient Λ_interface, and the degree of joint interface (or single wall) surface wear D _w(interface). The three test specimens were: man-made granite joints with hammered surfaces, man-made mortar joints with corrugated surfaces, and mortar joints prepared from natural rough and undulated schist joint replicas. Shearing under monotonic and cyclic shearing was performed using a computer-controlled bidirectional and biaxial shear apparatus. Joint surface data were measured using a noncontact laser sensor profilometer prior to and after each shear test. Calculation of specific surface roughness coefficient SR _s , and degree of surface wear D _w , indicated that the hammered joint interface with predominant interlocking wears much more (>90%) than the corrugated (27%) and the rough and undulated (23%) joint interfaces having localized interlocking points. The proposed method was also successfully linked to the classical wear theory.     

Quantitative Parameters for Rock Joint Surface Roughness

Summary The morphologies of two artificial granite joints (sanded and hammered surfaces), one artificial regularly undulated joint and one natural schist joint, were studied. The sanded and hammered granite joints underwent 5 cycles of direct shear under 3 normal stress levels ranging between 0.3–4 MPa. The regularly undulated joint underwent 10 cycles of shear under 6 normal stress levels ranging between 0.5–5 MPa and the natural schist replicas underwent a monotonous shear under 5 normal stress levels ranging between 0.4–2.4 MPa. In order to characterize the morphology of the sheared joints, a laser sensor profilometer was used to perform surface data measurements prior to and after each shear test. Rather than describing the morphology of the joints from the single profiles, our characterization is based on a simultaneous analysis of all the surface profiles. Roughness was viewed as a combination of a primary roughness and a secondary roughness. The surface angularity was quantified by defining its three-dimensional mean angle, θ_s, and the parameter Z2_s. The surface anisotropy and the secondary roughness were respectively quantified by the degree of apparent anisotropy, k _a, and the surface relative roughness coefficient, R _s. The surface sinuosity was quantified by the surface tortuosity coefficient, T _s.  Comparison between the means of the classical linear parameters and those proposed shows that linear parameters underestimate the morphological characteristics of the joint surfaces. As a result, the proposed bi-dimensional and tri-dimensional parameters better describe the evolution of the joints initial roughness during the course of shearing.     

Friction and degradation of rock joint surfaces under shear loads

The morpho‐mechanical behaviour of one artificial granite joint with hammered surfaces, one artificial regularly undulated joint and one natural schist joint was studied. The hammered granite joints underwent 5 cycles of direct shear under 3 normal stress levels ranging between 0.3 and 4 MPa. The regularly undulated joint underwent 10 cycles of shear under 6 normal stress levels ranging between 0.5 and 5 MPa and the natural schist replicas underwent a monotonics shear under 5 normal stress levels ranging between 0.4 and 2.4 MPa. These direct shear tests were performed using a new computer‐controlled 3D‐shear apparatus. To characterize the morphology evolution of the sheared joints, a laser sensor profilometer was used to perform surface data measurements prior to and after each shear test. Based on a new characterization of joint surface roughness viewed as a combination of primary and secondary roughness and termed by the joint surface roughness, SR_s, one parameter termed ‘joint surface degradation’, D_w, has been defined to quantify the degradation of the sheared joints. Examinations of SR_s and D_w prior to and after shearing indicate that the hammered surfaces are more damaged than the two other surfaces. The peak strength of hammered joint with zero‐dilatancy, therefore, significantly differs from the classical formulation of dilatant joint strength. An attempt has been made to model the peak strength of hammered joint surfaces and dilatant joints with regard to their surface degradation in the course of shearing and two peak strength criteria are proposed. Input parameters are initial morphology and initial surface roughness. For the hammered surfaces, the degradation mechanism is dominant over the phenomenon of dilatancy, whereas for a dilatant joint both mechanisms are present. A comparison between the proposed models and the experimental results indicates a relatively good agreement. In particular, compared to the well‐known shear strength criteria of Ladanyi and Archambault or Saeb, these classical criteria significantly underestimate and overestimate the observed peak strength, respectively, under low and high normal stress levels. In addition and based on our experimental investigations, we put forward a model to predict the evolution of joint morphology and the degree of degradation during the course of shearing. Degradations of the artificial undulated joint and the natural schist joint enable us to verify the proposed model with a relatively good agreement. Finally, the model of Ladanyi and Archambault dealing with the proportion of total joint area sheared through asperities, a_s, once again, tends to underestimate the observed degradation. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.