Rock Mechamcs as a Multtd/sc/phnary Science, Roegiers (ed )

1991 Balkema, Rotterdam. ISBN906191 194X

Comparison of direct shear and hollow cylinder tests on rock
joints
Timothy B. Reardon, Eric C. Drumm & Dan Lange-Kombak
Institute for Geotechnology, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Tennessee,
Knoxville, Tenn.
ABSTRACT: For the fundamental study of the behavior of rock joints, and the
development of constitutive models for joint response, a hollow cylinder apparatus (HCA)
has been developed to overcome the deficiencies associated with the direct shear device.
A series of baseline tests have been performed to compare the results obtained with the
HCA to those of the direct shear device. The results indicate that the HCA yields slightly
lower friction angles than the direct shear device. However, the initial stiffness obtained
in the HCA is greater, probably a result of the increased rigidity of the torsional
configuration.
1 INTRODUCTION
The convenience of the direct shear device explains its widespread use to determine the
behavior of rock joint strength and deformational response (Brown 1981; Franklin 1985;
Sun, et al. 1985; Hutson and Dowding 1990). Along with this convenience come several
significant limitations. These limitations include the inability to determine the principal
stresses except at failure, nonuniform stresses at the joint, and high stress concentrations
at the edges. In addition, the response under large displacements can only be assessed by
reversing the direction of shear, and joint water pressure is difficult to control and
measure. Although the direct shear device is appropriate for design and analysis, it is not
adequate for a fundamental study of the behavior of rock joints or for the development
of constitutive models for joint response.
Hollow cylinder specimens have been utili7.ed to overcome the deficiencies associated
with the direct shear device (Kutter 1974; Olsson 1986; Olsson 1988; Power, et al. 1988;
Yoshioka and Scholz 1989). With the discontinuity oriented perpendicular to the axis of
the cylinder, a force is applied along the axis. A torque is then applied about that axis,
thus allowing for the determination of the shearing stresses required to deform (rotate)
the joint (Figure 1). The historical use of thin-walled annular specimens of soft subjected
to an applied torque is well documented and is gaining popularity (Hvorslev 1939; Bishop,
et al. 1971; Lade 1981; Hight, et al. 1983; Saada 1988). Due to the favorable stress state
in these devices, similar geometries have been used in the studies of other materials like
intact rock (Handin, et al. 1967; Christensen, et al. 1974; Cox and Scholz 1988) and the
high temperature testing of concrete and rock (Bazant, et al. 1981; Bazant, et al. 1986).
The geometry of the hollow cylinder apparatus (HCA) lends itself to an investigation of
the effects of various stress paths and anisotropy associated with many materials (Saada
1988). An additional advantage is the continuous contact of the discontinuity surface,
which alleviates the stress concentrations that occur in direct shear at the leading and
trailing edges of the joint.
1115
NORMAL 8TRESS
OI$CO#TI NUITY
SHEAR STRESS
CONFINING
PRESSURE
Figure 1. Schematic of the hollow cylinder geometry and stress orientations
The University of Tennessee-Hollow Cylinder Apparatus (UT-HCA) has been developed
to perform fundamental investigations needed for studying and modeling rock joint
behavior (Drumm 1988) (Figure 2). Unlike earlier HCA's used for joint testing, the UT-
HCA will allow the application and control of the confining pressure applied to both the
inner and outer cylinder walls, and the joint water pressure at the joint interface. The
sample used in the UT-HCA has an inside and outside diameter of 100mm and 150mm,
respectively. An MTS biaxial load frame with an electro-hydraulic dosed-loop system is
used to control the normal stress (axial force) and shear stress (torque). A function
generator controls the rate of displacement and cyclic rotation of the UT-HCA specimen.
The normal stress and shearing stress can be calculated by the following equations
(Hight et al. 1983):
P
(1) o---
A
3T
(2) -
2r(b-a )
where P is the normal force, A is the joint surface area, T is the torque, a is the inner
radius, and b is the outer radius.
2. BASELINE TESTING PROGRAM
Prior to beginning a fundamental investigation of joint response, a series of baseline tests
are needed to compare results obtained with the UT-HCA to those from the standard
direct shear test. Since the state of stress in the UT-HCA is different from that in the
direct shear device, differences in the strength and deformational response can be
1116
OAD CELL
CELL
AIR RELIEF
UPPER SAMPLE
HOLDER
RING
SPECIMEN
TIE ROD
(8)
ACRYLIC
TUBE
LOWER
SAMP1
HOLDER
PORE PRESSURE
CELL
DRAIN
PORE BUSHING
PRESSURE(2) I 3' DIAM. SHAFT
& INST, '___] FLUID CONTAINMENT
BLOCKS l U-l
Ill Ill . .
_MTS LINEAR/ROTARY
ACTUATOR
Figure 2. Section through the Unersi of Tennessee-Hollow Cylinder Apparatus (UT-
HCA)
expected. The tests described here have been conducted to compare the response
obtained from the two devices.
Baseline testing has been performed on smooth, dry, artificial saw-cut joints. The rock
used is a crystalline limestone with algal laminations. Two different geometries have been
used in the direct shear device: the standard square 100mm x 100mm sample (Figure 3a)
and a rectangular 25mm x 100mm sample (Figure 3b). The latter geometry simulates the
25mm wall thickness of the UT-HCA (Figure 3c) and evaluates the effects of sample
width.
All joints were saw cut and machined in a surface grinder prior to testing. Specimens
used in the direct shear tests were then "run-in" by hand to assure full contact between the
two specimen halves: The hollow cylinder specimens were installed in the UT-HCA and
cyclically sheared under low normal stress (less than 700 kPa). In both cases, the
accumulated gouge was removed periodically during "run-in" to assure a clean joint.
1117
P P P
T T
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 3. Geometries used in benchmark testing: direct shear samples (a) 100mm x
100mm, (b) 25mm x 100mm, and UT-HCA sample (c) I.D. = 100mm, O.D. = 150ram
After the tests without gouge were completed, additional "run-in" was performed until
the interface was covered with gouge. This results in an additional surface condition for
comparison of direct shear and UT-HCA response. The condition of the joint interface
is found to have the greatest influence on the overall shear strength. Substantial increase
in the shear strength was found when gouge is accumulated. For this reason, results both
with and without gouge are shown.
Tests with both devices were performed over a range of normal stress consistent with
that required for a typical analysis of rock slopes. The UT-HCA tests were conducted with
a sinusoidal displacement of approximately 0.06 radians, resulting in a rate of 0.08
rad/min.
The direct shear tests were conducted at a displacement rate of 1.0 cm/min, in a single
direction. Characteristic shear stress vs. displacement curves, observed for both the direct
shear device and the UT-HCA, are shown in Figure 4. To permit the direct comparison
of results from the two devices, the horizontal scale for the direct shear results corresponds
to that shown for the UT-HCA results (i.e., 0.10 radians = 0.75cm). This comparison is
based on the relative displacement at the outside circumference of the UT-HCA specimen.
For the tests run without gouge in the UT-HCA, a rapid increase in shear stress occurs
over a small deformation until a peak shear stress is reached, (Figure 4b). As deformation
continues, the shear stress decreases to a relatively constant residual shear stress. A
decrease in the residual shear strength is observed over subsequent cycles, similar to that
reported by Hudson and Dowding (1990). A similar peak and residual shear stress
response are observed in the direct shear device, (Figure 4a).
For those tests run with gouge in the UT-HCA, a peak shear stress is no longer
observed. The shear increases rapidly with little deformation until slip begins, and as
deformation continues, the shear stress slowly increases, (Figure 4b). With reversal of the
torque, a similar, parallel curve is observed. On continuation of the test, the hysteresis
curve reproduces itself. A similar monotonic increase in shear stress is observed for the
direct shear tests, (Figure 4a).
1118
I,O
-1.0
-0
Io DIRECT SHEAR w/o (Iouge
o DIRECT SHEAR w/g,uge
75 0.0 0.75
DEFLECTION (cm)
1,0
b.J
o UT-HCAw/o gouge
[] UT-HCA w/ gouge
-1 .O
-O.1 O,0 0,1
DEFLECTION (radians)
Figure 4. Shear Stress vs. Deflection Curve for the (a) Direct Shear Device (normal stress
= 801 kPa w/o gouge & 604 kPa w/gouge) and (b) University of Tennessee-Hollow
Cylinder Apparatus (normal stress = 352 kPa w/o gouge & 1057 kPa w/gouge)
1119
200
10OO
w
n 0
2O0
100mm x 100mm w/o gouge
o 100mm x 100mm w/gouge
100mm x 25mm w/o gouge
_ 100mmx 25ram w/gouge
200 400 600 00 1000 ! 200
NORMAL STRESS (kPo)
1800
1600
1400
'' ! 200
U"} 1 000
u o
400
200
i . ii '',"'' I'''l'''l''' l'''l
o UT-HCAw/ogouge J
,', UT-HCA w/gouge
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 400 1600 800
NORMAL STRESS (kPa)
Figure 5. Mohr-Coulomb Envelope for the (a) Direct Shear Device and (b) University of
Tennessee-Hollow Cylinder Apparatus
1120
From the results obtained, a series of Mohr-Coulomb envelopes are developed for each
of the three geometries (square, rectangular, and circular) and for the two surface
conditions (with and without gouge), (Figure 5). From the Mohr-Coulomb envelopes,
friction angles were determined by linear regression and are summarized in Table 1.
The results from the two sample sizes used in the direct shear device indicate that the
friction angles are similar, suggesting that a change in sample width has little effect on the
overall strength. The results also indicate that if the displacement is assumed constant
across the radius of the UT-HCA, wall thickness has little effect on the strength.
Differences in the observed strength are therefore due to the stress state, variation of slip
across the radius, and the condition of the joint surface. These results suggest that the
friction angles obtained with the UT-HCA are slightly less than those obtained with direct
shear.
The results for both the direct shear and HCA indicate that an increase in the shear
strength is observed after a substantial coating of gouge is developed. This increase in
strength with accumulated gouge is counter to previous observed data (Jaeger and Cook,
1976). Traditionally, the peak strength occurs in a dean joint and decays to the residual
value as gouge develops. Little has been reported on the effects of substantial gouge build-
up under a large number of loading cycles. Therefore, testing is required to further
investigate this effect.
A comparison of the shear stress-displacement curves from Figure 4 indicates that the
UT-HCA results in a stiffer initial response, both with and without gouge. This could be
a result of the stress concentrations associated with the direct shear device, leading to a
progressive type of failure starting at the edges and progressing toward the center. This
difference in initial stiffness can also be attributed to the greater compliance of the direct
shear device.
3 CONCLUSIONS
With the increased concern over the complex behavior of geo-materials comes a need for
more sophisticated constitutive models. Such constitutive models can only be developed
with a complete understanding of the fundamental mechanics of the behavior. A well
defined stress state and the control of stress path are essential for this understanding. The
UT-HCA has been developed just for such investigations. However, with the development
of such a research tool, it is essential that the results obtained be validated with respect
to standard test methods. The baseline test results presented in this paper are an attempt
to offer such a confirmation.
Table 1. Summary of friction angles.
Friction Angle
(de, Fees)
I Specimen without with
Size gouge gouge
Direct 100mm x 100mm 10.2 36.0
Shear
Device 100ram x 25ram 8.5 37.0
UT-Ho!low 150ram O.D.
Cylinder x 8.3 33.5
Apparatus 100mm I.D.
1121
These initial results indicate that the shear strength obtained with the UT-HCA
compares favorably with that of the widely used direct shear device. This comparison was
made for two different joint conditions. Preliminary results indicate that the initial
stiffness obtained with the UT-HCA is greater than that obtained in direct shear. The
difference is probably a result of stress concentrations and compliance within the direct
shear device.
Although these tests indicate that the UT-HCA can be an important research tool for
the investigation of rock joint behavior, further testing with different rock materials is still
required.
4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research has been supported by the National Science Foundation under contracts
MSM-8604873 and MSS-8915675. We would like to thank W. J. Long for his contributions
to the development of the UT-HCA, C. S. Allin for his assistance with the direct shear
tests, and W. F. Kane and D. W. Sherwood for their review and comments on the
manuscript.
REFERENCES
Bazant, Z.P., J.D. Hess & S. Meiri (1981). "High Temperature Triaxial-Torsional Machine
for Concrete and Rock," Geophysical Research Letters, 8(7), 707-708.
Bazant, Z.P., S. Prasannan, M. Hagen, S. Meiri, R. Vaitys, R. Klima & J.D. Hess (1986).
"Large Triaxial-Torsional Testing Machine with Hydrothermal Control," Materiaux et
Constructions, 19(112), 285-294.
Bishop, A.W., G.E. Green, V.K. Garga, A. Andresen & J.D. Brown (1971). "A New Ring
Shear Apparatus and its Application to the Measurement of Residual Strength,"
Geotechnique, 21(4), 273-328.
Brown, E.T., ed. (1981). Rock Characterization, Testing, and Monitoring: International
Society for Rock Mechanics, Suggested Methods, Permagon Press, Elmsford, NY, 129-137.
Christensen, R.J., S.R. Swanson & W.S. Brown (1974). "Torsional Shear Measurements
of the Frictional properties of Westerly Granite," Proc. Third Congress Int'l Society for
Rock Mech., Denver, Vol. IIA, 221-225.
Cox, S.J.D. & C.H. Scholz (1988). "Rupture Initiation in Shear Fracture of Rocks: An
Experimental Study," Journal of Geophysical Research, 93(B4), 3307-3320.
Drumm, E.C. (1988). "A Hollow Cylinder Shear Device for Undrained Testing of Rock
Discontinuities," Final Project Report to the National Science Foundation, Award #
MSM-8604873.
Franklin, J.A. (1985). "A Direct Shear Machine for Testing Rock Joints," Geotechnical
Testing Journal, GTJODJ, 8(1), 25-29.
Handin, J., H.C. Heard & J.N. Magouirk (1967). "Effects of the Intermediate Principal
Stress on the Failure of Limestone, Dolomite, and Glass at Different Temperatures and
Strain Rates," J. Geophysical Research, 72(2), 611-640.
1122
Hight, D.W., A. Gens & M.J. Symes (1983). "The development of a New Hollow Cylinder
Apparatus for Investigating the Effects of Principal Stress Rotation in Soils,"
Geotechnique, 33(4), 355-383.
Hvorslev, M.J. (1939). "Torsion Shear Tests and Their Place in the Determination of the
Shear Resistance of Soils," Proc., Amer. Soc. Test. Marls., Vol. 39, 999-1022.
Hutson, R.W. & C.H. Dowding (1990). "Joint Asperity Degradation During Cyclic Shear,"
lnt. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geornech. Abstr., 27(2), 109-119.
Jaeger, J.C. & N.G.W. Cook (1979). Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics. Chapman and
Hall, London.
Kutter, H.K. (1974). "Rotary Shear Testing of Rock Joints," Proc., 3rd Congress lntL Society
Rock Mech., Denver, 254-262.
Lade, P.V. (1981). "Torsion Shear Apparatus for Soil Testing," Laboratory Shear Strength
of Soil, ASTM STP 740, R. N. Young and F. C. Townsend, Eds., 145-169.
Olsson, W.A. (1986). "Rock Joint Compliance Studies," Sandia Report SAND86-0177-UC-
70, 101.
Olsson, W.A. (1988). "The Effects of Normal Stress History on Rock Friction," Proc., 29th
U.S. Syrnp. Rock Mech., Minneapolis, 111-117.
Power, W.L., T.E. Tullis & J.D. Weeks (1988). "Roughness and Wear During Brittle
Faulting," Journal of Geophysical Research, 93(B 12), 15,268-15,278.
Saada, A.S. (1988). "Hollow Cylinder Torsional Devices: Their Advantages and
Limitations," Advanced Triaxial Testing of Soil and Rock, ASTM STP 977, Robert T.
Donaghe, Ronald C. Chaney, and Marshal L. Silver, Eds., American Society for Testing
Materials, Philadelphia, 766-795.
Sun, Z., C. Gerrard & O. Stephansson (1985). "Rock Joint Compliance Tests for
Compression and Shear Loads," lnt. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sc & Geornech. Abstr., 22(4),
197-213.
Yoshioka, N. & C.H. Scholz (1989). "Elastic Properties of Contacting Surfaces Under
Normal and Shear Loads 2. Comparison of Theory With Experiment," Journal of
Geophysical Research, 94 (B 12), 17,691-17,700.
1123