A series of rock-joint behavior routines which, briefly stated, allow the shear strength and normal stiffness of rock joints to be estimated, graphed, and numerically modelled, for instance, in the computer code UDEC-BB. Coupled behavior with deformation and changes in conductivity is also included (Barton 2016).
A key aspect of the criterion is the quantitative characterization of the joint, joints, or joint sets in question, in order to provide three simple items of input data. These concern the joint-surface roughness (JRC: joint roughness coefficient), the joint-wall compressive strength (JCS: joint compressive strength), and an empirically derived estimate of the residual friction angle (φr). These three parameters have typical ranges of values from: JRC = 0 to 20 (smooth-planar to very rough-undulating), JCS = 10 to 200 MPa (weak-weathered to strong, unweathered) and φr= 20° to 35° (strongly weathered to fresh-unweathered). Each of these parameters can be obtained...
- Bakhtar K, Barton N (1984) Large scale static and dynamic friction experiments. In: Proceedings of 25th US rock mechanics symposium. Northwestern University, EvanstonGoogle Scholar
- Bandis S (1980) Experimental studies of scale effects on shear strength, and deformation of rock joints. PhD thesis, Department of Earth Sciences, University of LeedsGoogle Scholar
- Barton N (1982) Modelling rock joint behaviour from in situ block tests: implications for nuclear waste repository design. Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation, Columbus, 96 p, ONWI-308, Sept 1982Google Scholar
- Barton N, Bakhtar K (1983) Description and modelling of rock joints for the hydrothermomechanical design of nuclear waste vaults, vols I and II (unpublished). CANMET, Ottowa. Contract report from Terra Tek, Salt Lake cityGoogle Scholar
- Barton N, Bakhtar K (1987) Description and modelling of rock joints for the hydrothermalmechanical design of nuclear waste vaults, vols I and II. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. TR-418Google Scholar
- Barton N (1999) General report concerning some 20th century lessons and 21st century challenges in applied rock mechanics, safety and control of the environment. In: Proceedings of 9th ISRM congress, Paris, vol 3. Balkema, pp 1659–1679Google Scholar
- Barton NR (2016) Non-linear shear strength descriptions are still needed in petroleum geomechanics, despite 50 years of linearity. In: 50th US rock mechanics. Houston. ARMA 16, paper 252, 12 pGoogle Scholar
- Barton N, Bandis S (1982) Effects of block size on the shear behaviour of jointed rock. Keynote lecture, 23rd US symposium on rock mechanics, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
- Barton NR, Bandis SC (2017) Chapter 1. Characterization and modelling of the shear strength, stiffness and hydraulic behaviour of rock joints for engineering purposes. In: Feng X-T (ed) Rock mechanics and engineering, vol 1. Taylor & Francis, pp 3–40Google Scholar