A Few Rock Mechanics Problems in Correlating Laboratory Results with Prototype Reactions.
Purchase Print Copy
| Format | List Price | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add to Cart | Paperback37 pages | $20.00 | $16.00 20% Web Discount |
A discussion of techniques designed to offset the hazards of using laboratory test results to predict the reaction of a rock massif. The major obstacles to such an approach are three: (1) the fact that frequently rock in situ has natural stresses that cannot be quantitatively examined; (2) no way to assess quantitatively the influence of gross geological defects; and (3) lack of empirical data on the reaction of rock under a prototype load. The paper considers some approaches, such as the use of statistical methods or the pressure chamber test, developed to meet these difficulties. Although some progress has been made, the author concludes that more data on the reaction of rock to prototype loading conditions are urgently needed.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.