The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The 2003 Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium: Mechanistic interpretation and practical application of damage and spalling prediction criteria for deep tunnelling
Abstract
Spalling and strain bursting has long been recognized as a mechanism of failure in deep underground mines in hard rock and in deep infrastructure tunnels. The latter is a significant growth industry, particularly in Europe where subalpine base tunnels in excess of 10 m wide and dozens of kilometres long are being driven by tunnel boring machine (TBM) through alpine terrain at depths greater than 2 km. In more massive granitoid or gneissic ground, these tunnels have experienced significant spalling damage. En route to a practical predictive technique for this condition, the author utilizes a number of analytical and micromechanical tools to validate a simple empirical predictive model for tunnel spall initiation. The true nature of damage and of yield, as the result of extensile damage accumulation, in hard rocks is examined using these tools. Based on the resultant conceptual model, the author expands on the empirical damage threshold, using a spalling limit to differentiate stress paths that lead to crack propagation and spalling from those that incur stable microdamage prior to conventional shear failure at higher relative confinements. Finally, the composite and robust in situ yield model is applied to nonlinear modelling for support design.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies
Cundall, P. A., & Strack, O. D. L. (1979) · Géotechnique · doi:10.1680/geot.1979.29.1.47 · Cited by 17,527
VI. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids
Griffith, A. A. (1921) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical or Physical Character · doi:10.1098/rsta.1921.0006 · Cited by 11,052
Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support
Barton, N., Lien, R., & Lunde, J. (1974) · Rock Mechanics Felsmechanik M�canique des Roches · doi:10.1007/bf01239496 · Cited by 2,979
Cited by
Evaluation method of rockburst: State-of-the-art literature review
Zhou, J., Li, X., & Mitri, H. S. (2018) · Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tust.2018.08.029 · Cited by 470
Moradian, Z., Einstein, H. H., & Ballivy, G. (2016) · Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering · doi:10.1007/s00603-015-0775-1 · Cited by 389
Metadata
- Authors
- Diederichs, M. S.
- Venue
- Canadian Geotechnical Journal
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2007-09
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1082-1116
- ISSN
- 0008-3674 (ISSN-L)
- 1208-6010
- OpenAlex
- W2163869980
- Cited by
- 582
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The 2003 Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium: Mechanistic interpretation and practical application of damage and spalling prediction criteria for deep tunnelling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/t07-033
- The paper
- Diederichs, M. S. (2007). The 2003 Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium: Mechanistic interpretation and practical application of damage and spalling prediction criteria for deep tunnelling. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1139/t07-033
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.