Multi-Segment Linear Function Approximation of the Nonlinear Shear Strength Envelope
Source abstract
Abstract
In spite of available precise implementations made for the Hoek–Brown (HB) elastic-plastic analysis, most geotechnical engineers and technicians usually apply linear Mohr–Coulomb (MC) criterion for designs of engineering projects. However, no particular linear equation can match the curvature variation of a non-linear HB envelop. This study employs multi-segment linear equations to approximate the HB envelope. The present method can reduce the approximation error when subdividing each material of the analytical mode into several zones appropriate to the actual stress gradient variation of that material. The error estimate and stability analysis for a slope example have validated the present method.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Analysis · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization · Rock Mechanics and Modeling
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (12)
Show source-provided references
1. E. Hoek and E. T. Brown, “Empirical strength criterion for rock masses,” J. Geotech. Engng. Div., 106, No. GT9, 1013–1035 (1980).10.1061/AJGEB6.0001029 ↗
2. E. Hoek and P. Marinos, “A brief history of the development of the Hoek–Brown failure criterion,” Soils and Rocks, 30, No. 2, 85–92 (2007).10.28927/SR.302085 ↗
3. E. Hoek, C. Carranza-Torres, and B. Corkum, “Hoek–Brown failure criterion – 2002 edition,” in: R. Hammah (Ed.), NARMS-TAC 2002: Mining and Tunnelling Innovation and Opportunity (Proc. of the 5th North American Rock Mechanics Symposium and the 17th Tunnelling Association of Canada Conference: NARMS-TAC 2002, July 7–10, 2002, Toronto, Ontario, Canada), Vol. 1, University of Toronto Press (2002), pp. 267–273.
4. S. D. Priest, “Comparisons between selected three-dimensional yield criteria applied to rock,” Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 43, No. 4, 379–389 (2010).10.1007/s00603-009-0064-y ↗
5. L. Zhang, “A generalized three-dimensional Hoek–Brown strength criterion,” Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 41, No. 6, 893–915 (2008).10.1007/s00603-008-0169-8 ↗
6. W. X. Fu and Y. Liao, “Non-linear shear strength reduction technique in slope stability calculation,” Comput. Geotech., 37, 288–298 (2010).10.1016/j.compgeo.2009.11.002 ↗
7. S. D. Priest, “Determination of shear strength and three-dimensional yield strength for the Hoek–Brown criterion,” Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 38, No. 4, 299–327 (2005).10.1007/s00603-005-0056-5 ↗
8. X. L. Yang and J. H. Yin, “Slope equivalent Mohr–Coulomb strength parameters for rock masses satisfying the Hoek–Brown criterion,” Rock Mech. Rock Eng., 43, No. 4, 505–511 (2010).10.1007/s00603-009-0044-2 ↗
9. E. T. Brown, “Estimating the mechanical properties of rock masses,” in: Y. Potvin, J. Carter, A. Dyskin, and R. Jeffrey (Eds.), Proceedings of the First Southern Hemisphere International Rock Mechanics Symposium (SHIRMS 2008, Sept. 16–19, 2008, Perth, Western Australia), Vol. 1, Australian Centre for Geomechanics (2008), pp. 3–21.
10. O. C. Zienkiewicz, C. Humpheson, and R. W. Lewis, “Associated and nonassociated viscoplasticity in soil mechanics,” G#otechnique, 25, No. 4, 671–689 (1975).10.1680/geot.1975.25.4.671 ↗
11. A. W. Bishop, “The use of the slip circle in the stability analysis of slopes,” G#otechnique, 5, No. 1, 7–17 (1955).10.1680/geot.1955.5.1.7 ↗
12. E. M. Dawson, W. H. Roth, and A. Drescher, “Slope stability analysis by strength reduction,” G#otechnique, 49, No. 6, 835–840 (1999).10.1680/geot.1999.49.6.835 ↗