1 Introduction
2 Problem Statement and FELA Modelling
3 Results and Discussions
σci/γD | GSI | mi | C/D | σs/σci (LB) | σs/σci (UB) | σs/σci (Avg) | %Diff |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
100 | 40 | 5 | 1 | 0.848 | 0.882 | 0.865 | 3.98 |
100 | 40 | 5 | 5 | 3.827 | 4.007 | 3.917 | 4.60 |
100 | 40 | 30 | 1 | 5.429 | 5.567 | 5.498 | 2.51 |
100 | 40 | 30 | 5 | 23.920 | 24.225 | 24.073 | 1.27 |
100 | 100 | 5 | 1 | 9.450 | 9.769 | 9.610 | 3.32 |
100 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 36.250 | 37.140 | 36.695 | 2.43 |
100 | 100 | 30 | 1 | 46.850 | 46.330 | 46.590 | 1.12 |
100 | 100 | 30 | 5 | 193.200 | 196.320 | 194.760 | 1.60 |
1000 | 40 | 5 | 1 | 0.869 | 0.897 | 0.883 | 3.18 |
1000 | 40 | 5 | 5 | 3.898 | 3.920 | 3.909 | 0.56 |
1000 | 40 | 30 | 1 | 5.174 | 5.413 | 5.294 | 4.51 |
1000 | 40 | 30 | 5 | 23.990 | 24.288 | 24.139 | 1.23 |
1000 | 100 | 5 | 1 | 9.506 | 9.818 | 9.662 | 3.23 |
1000 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 37.110 | 37.549 | 37.330 | 1.18 |
1000 | 100 | 30 | 1 | 44.780 | 46.410 | 45.595 | 3.57 |
4 Stability Criterion
a1 | a2 | b1 | b2 |
8.8310 | −3.5150 | 9.7852 × 10–2 | −0.1116 |
b3 | c1 | c2 | c3 |
1.7318 × 10–2 | −1.1060 × 10–3 | 1.4627 × 10–3 | −2.1621 × 10–4 |
d1 | e1 | e2 | f1 |
3.9885 × 10–6 | 0.3070 | −0.4847 | −1.5624 × 10–2 |
f2 | f3 | g1 | g2 |
3.5499 × 10–2 | −6.8341 × 10–4 | 1.2109 × 10–4 | −5.4357 × 10–4 |
5 Conclusions
-
The limit normalized surface pressures σs/σci increases as the cover depth ratio C/D increases. The greater the values of GSI and mi, the larger the σs/σci. In addition, the effect of σci/γD on σs/σci is insignificant for all considered depth ratios in this study.
-
The failure mechanism of a cavity resembles a chimney type of vertical slippage when C/D is small. The lateral size of the failure mechanism extends when C/D increases.
-
The new cavity stability factors Nc and Nγ for the stability of cavities in rock masses are proposed in this paper, where Nc is a function of C/D only while Nγ is a function of C/D, GSI, and mi.