Effect of Sampling Interval and Anisotropy on Laser Scanning Accuracy in Rock Material Surface Roughness Measurements
- 20 Downloads
Three-dimensional laser scanning is an advanced technique for fracture roughness measurements. The surface roughness of fractures (discontinuities) accurately measured is of practical importance for proper evaluation of the mechanical properties of a fractured rock material. It is also appropriate to perform a more systematic study on the effect of a sampling interval on the roughness measurement accuracy. This effect was investigated based on the 3D-point-cloud data of a fracture surface acquired with laser scanning. A series of 2D profiles corresponding to twelve directions were extracted from concentric circular sampling windows of different diameters. The roughness measurement accuracy is quantified by the three parameters, viz the mean square first derivative Z2 , structure function SF, and roughness profile index Rp . The sampling interval effect was investigated for its different values by analyzing the three parameters of different profiles. It was established that SF was very sensitive, while Z2 and Rp were less responsive to the sampling interval. It exerts a much weaker influence on the rock material fracture roughness in comparison with anisotropy.
Keywordsrock material fracture rock discontinuity surface roughness sampling interval effect three-dimensional laser scanning
This research was supported by four funds, namely the Science and Technology Project of Jiangxi Provincial Transportation Department (No. 2017H0018), the Open Foundation of Jiangxi Engineering Research Center of Water Engineering Safety and Resources Efficient Utilization (No. OF201602; No. OF201604), and Zhejiang Collaborative Innovation Center for Prevention and Control of Mountain Geological Hazards (No. PCMGH-2017-Z03). The authors would also like to thank Chenghui Wan, and Zongjun Wu for their assistance.
- 17.N. Barton and V. Choubey, “The shear strength of rock joints in theory and practice,” Rock Mech., 10, Nos. 1–2, 1–54 (1977).Google Scholar