English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The anisotropic rock mass rating classification system, ARMR, has been developed in conjunction with the Modified Hoek-Brown failure to deal with varying shear strength with respect to the orientation and degree of anisotropy within an anisotropic rock mass. Conventionally, ubiquitous-joint or directional shear strength models have assumed a general rock mass strength, typically estimated using the Hoek-Brown failure criterion, and applied a directional weakness in a given orientation depending on the anisotropic nature of the rock mass. Shear strength of the directional weakness is typically estimated using the Barton-Bandis failure criterion, or on occasion, the Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria. Directional shear strength models such as these often formed the basis of continuum models for slopes and underground excavations in anisotropic rock masses. This paper compares ARMR and the Modified HoekBrown failure criterion to the conventional directional shear strength models using a case study from Western Australia.

The ARMR Classification System and the Modified Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion Compared to Directional Shear Strength Models for Anisotropic Rock Masses