l,zr J. Rock 3,1ech. 51in. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. Vol. 18, pp. 63 to 65 0020-7624 81 0201-0063502.

00 0
Pergamon Press Ltd I9S1. Printed in Great Britain

Technical Note
A Suggested Technique for Determining the
Basic Friction Angle of Rock Surfaces Using Core
B. S T I M P S O N *

M E A S U R I N G T H E BASIC F R I C T I O N horizontal at the point of limiting equihb-

ANGLE OF ROCK rium
~ AB= effective angle of friction along the con-
Various authors [1,2] have demonstrated that the effec-
tact of cores A and B
tive friction angle of a clean, rough joint may be con-
@AC ": effective angle of friction along the con-
sidered as comprised of a basic friction angle, qSb, and
tact of cores A and C
an angle, i. which accounts for the contribution of sur- ~pb= basic friction angle
face roughness, qS~ has been described by Barton [3-1 as
R= reactions at the points of contact between
the "'value of arctan (': 'ao) obtained from residual shear
core .q and cores B and C
tests on fiat. unweathered rock surfaces which are nor-
W= weight of the upper core, .q
really prepared by sawing, but which can conveniently
0= angle between the vertical plane through
be sand-blasted between tests". Barton further suggests
the center of core A and the line connect-
that (Oh is most closely simulated by artifical surfaces
ing the center of the upper core section A,
which show no stick-slip oscillations or increase in fric-
to the center of the lower core. B or C,
tional resistance with displacement (surfaces too
measured in the plane perpendicular to
smooth) and no appreciable peak, nor fall to residual.
the axis of the core.
The granular texture of the rock should be exposed but
not so as to cause interlocking and dilation. Sand-
blasted, fiat, sawn surfaces seem to give the most satis-
factory results.
An idea for an alternative to shear tests on sand-
blasted, sawn-cut surfaces for measuring q5b was
prompted by the observation that core surfaces
obtained by typical core-drilling procedures are already
pre-cut and smooth. A simple tilting test was devised
for measuring the critical angle of sliding of cylindrical
core surfaces in contact. The requirements are three
pieces of core and a base which can be slowly tilted and
the angle of tilt at the point of sliding measured to
+0.5:. Two pieces of core, B and C, are placed on the
horizontal base in contact with one another and the
third piece of core, A, is placed on top of B and C
(Fig. la and b). B and C are restrained from sliding but
A is free to slide. The base is rotated slowly about a
horizontal hinge until sliding of core A along the two
line contacts with cores B and C occurs. The angle of
tilt, :~, is recorded (Fig. lb).

THEORY
With reference to Fig. 1' @ 2":.3
Let :~ = inclination of the axis of core A to the

*Department of Mineral Engineering, University of Alberta,

R
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2GS. Fig. I.

63
64 Technical Note

Now. at limiting equilibrium or

W cos 0 cos
~A = t a n - I f1.155 tanTI i5)
R-
Equation {5t can be used to calculate OA from a
Therefore. the frictional resistance mobilized at the point measurement of ~ determined from a simple tilting test.
of sliding is given by:

W cos 0 cos ~ tan OA8 -t.

Woos 0 c o s ~ tan Oac RESULTS
A core drilled [24 m m dial by a diamond bit in the
W cos 0 cos laboratory was prepared from Tyndall Limestone. a
ttan OaB + tan OAc) [ 11
fossitiferous, fine-grained, inhomogeneous limestone.
much used as facing material in Canada. In the first
The driving force in the direction of sliding at the series of tests dry core was tested ten times, with sliding
point of limiting equilibrium is given by: repeated on the same lines of contact each time. In a
W sin ~ t2) second series of tests the contacts were cleaned off with
a tissue after each sliding test to remove any debris that
Equating ( l / a n d (21: may have been produced. The results of these two series
of tests are tabulated in Table 1. Both series of tests
W cos 0 cos
w sin ~ - Itan ~bae + tan Oac) gave an arithmetic mean for ~A o f 30 ~ which was the
value obtained by direct shear box testing on a sawn-
Therefore. cut surface. Values of ~bA ranged from 2#-38 "~. This
large range probably reflects the high degree of inhom-
2 sin ogeneity and heterogeneous character of the Tyndall
ttan ~baB -" tan ~bAc) =
cos 0 cos Limestone.
Barton [31 has tabulated values of ~Pb obtained from
= 2 sec 0 tan ~ 13) shear testing of sand-blasted, rough-sawn surfaces and
gives values for limestone ranging between 33 and 40L
Clearly there is an infinite number of values of cAa and To m a k e a more exact comparison with the results
~b,~c that will satisfy equation (3). Since the cylindrical reported in this paper it would be necessary to have
rock surfaces have been prepared in a standard manner more detailed descriptions of the fabric, texture and
during drilling at all points it may be assumed that if
mineralogy of the various limestones tested as well as
the rock is homogeneous ~b,tB and ~bac are identical.
descriptions of surface p r e p a r a u o n and texture.
Letting ~ba8 = CkAc = dPA, equation (3) becomes: When the same Tyndall Limestone cores were satu-
tan ~a = sec 0 tan ~ (4) rated by immersion in water, removed, excess surface
water wiped off and the core subjected to tilting tests.
Now. from Fig. l(a) it may be seen that values of ~,4 were significantly different from those
2 obtained with dry core. In five series of tests each com-
sec 0 = ~ = 1.155
prising 10 or 15 individual sliding experiments, the
mean 0 a values obtained were 46. 45, 46. 41 and 48L
Therefore, substituting sec 0 in (4) These values are at variance with Barton's tabulated
tan ~bA = 1.155 tan results which indicate no significant different between

TABLE t. RESULTS OF TILTING TESTS ON LIMESTONE CORE

1st series 2nd series

ot Oa* ~t OA*
Test (degrees) fdegrees) (degrees) (degreest

t 32 36 27 30
2 34 38 28 32
3 28.5 32 29 33
a 28 32 27.5 31
5 25.5 29 24 27
6 22 25 27.5 31
7 22.5 26 26.0 29
8 21.5 24 24.5 28
9 23.5 27 25 28
10 28 32 26 29

Arithmetic mean = 30.

Standard deviation = 4.7 ,
Arithmetic mean = 30 .
Standard deviation = 1.9
* Rounded off to nearest whole number of degrees.
 Technical N o t e
~b for wet and dry rock. The reason for this discrep-
ancy is not clear. Since the contact between core is a
narrow (theoretically, infinitesimally thin) line, a
meniscus of water could develop between rock surfaces
and the surface tension increase the effective normal
stress (cf. effects of water meniscus between two closely
spaced plates), thereby increasing the mobilized fric-
tional resistance. Another possible mechanism could be
the development of cohesive resistance along the con-
tact due to the formation of a thin layer of fine-grained.
cohesive material along the contact or development of
R~ s I8/I--E
65
cohesion at points of high stress in the presence of
water.
Received 14 July 1980.
REFERENCES
l. Patton, F. D. Multiple modes of shear failure in rock. Proc. Ist
Congr. Int. Soc. Rock 3,Iech. Lisbon. Vo[. i. pp. 509-513 11966L
2. Barton N. Review of a new shear strength criterien for rock
joints. Engng Geol. 7, 287-332 11973).
3. Barton N. The shear strength of rock and rock joints. [,t. J. Rock
Mech. 3,Iin. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. 13, 255 279 {19-6~.