International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 409427

CivilZone review paper

Numerical methods in rock mechanics

L. Jinga,*, J.A. Hudsona,b

a

Division of Engineering Geology, Royal Institute of Technology, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden

Imperial College and Rock Engineering Consultants, 7 The Quadrangle, Welwyn Garden City, AL8 6SG, UK
Accepted 19 May 2002

Abstract
The purpose of this CivilZone review paper is to present the techniques, advances, problems and likely future development
directions in numerical modelling for rock mechanics and rock engineering. Such modelling is essential for studying the fundamental
processes occurring in rock, for assessing the anticipated and actual performance of structures built on and in rock masses, and
hence for supporting rock engineering design. We begin by providing the rock engineering design backdrop to the review in Section
1. The states-of-the-art of different types of numerical methods are outlined in Section 2, with focus on representations of fractures
in the rock mass. In Section 3, the numerical methods for incorporating couplings between the thermal, hydraulic and mechanical
processes are described. In Section 4, inverse solution techniques are summarized. Finally, in Section 5, we list the issues of special
difculty and importance in the subject. In the reference list, signicant references are asterisked and very signicant references
are doubly asterisked. r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Review; Rock mechanics; Numerical modelling; Design; Coupled processes; Outstanding issues

Contents

411
411
413
413
415
415
416

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

410 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.

411
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .

2.

3.

Numerical
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . . . .

methods
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .

for
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .

rock mechanics: states-of-the-art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The FDM and related methods .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The FEM and related methods . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The BEM and related methods . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The distinct element method (DEM)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The DFN method related methods .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hybrid models . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neural networks . . . . . . . . . .

Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical (THM) models

. . . . . . .
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
2.6.
2.7.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

416

417 Inverse solution methods and applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.

417 4.1. Displacement-based back analysis for rock engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
417 4.2. Pressure-based inverse solution for groundwater ow and reservoir analysis . . . . . . . . . . . .
418 .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5.

419 .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . .

419 .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Conclusions and remaining issues

This paper was commissioned by Elsevier Science as part of its CivilZone initiative to generate review articles in civil engineering subjects.
*Corresponding author. Division of Engineering Geology, Royal Institute of Technology, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden. Tel.: +46-8-790-6808;
fax.: +46-8-790-6810.
E-mail addresses: lanru@kth.se (L. Jing).
1365-1609/02/$ - see front matter r 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights
reserved. PII: S 1 3 6 5 - 1 6 0 9 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 6 5 - 5

154

L. Jing, J.A. Hudson / International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 39 (2002) 409
427

1. Introduction

is to be included in the model is modelled directly, such

as an explicit stressstrain relation. Conversely, the
lower row, Level 2, includes methods in which such
mechanism mapping is not totally direct, e.g. the use of
rock mass classication systems. Some of the rock mass
characterization parameters will be obtained from site
investigation, the left-hand box. Then the rock engineering design and construction proceeds, with feedback
loops to the modelling from construction.
The review is directed at Methods C and D in the
Level 1 top row in the central box of Fig. 1. An
important point is that, in rock mechanics and
engineering design, having insufcient data is a way of
life, rather than a local difcultywhich is why the
empirical approaches, i.e. classication systems, have
been developed and are still required. So, we will also
be discussing the subjects of the representative elemental
volume (REV), homogenisation/upscaling, back analysis and inverse solutions. These are fundamental
problems associated with modelling, and are relevant
to all the A, B, C & D method categories in Fig. 1.
The most commonly applied numerical methods for
rock mechanics problems are:

Because rock mechanics modelling has developed for

the design of rock engineering structures in different
circumstances and different purposes, and because
different modelling techniques have been developed,
we now have a wide spectrum of modelling and design
approaches. These approaches can be presented in
different ways. A categorization into eight approaches
based on four methods and two levels is illustrated in
Fig. 1.
The modelling and design work starts with the
objective, the top box in Fig. 1. Then there are the eight
modelling and design methods in the main central box.
The four columns represent the four main modelling
methods:
Method A
Method B
Method C
Method D

design based on previous experience.

design based on simplied models.
design based on modelling which attempts to capture most relevant mechanisms.
design based on all-encompassing
modelling.

(1) Continuum methodsthe nite difference method

(FDM), the nite element method (FEM), and the
boundary element method (BEM).
(2) Discrete methodsthe discrete element method
(DEM), discrete fracture network (DFN) methods.
(3) Hybrid continuum/discrete methods.

There are two rows in the large central box in Fig. 1.

The top row, Level 1, includes methods in which there is
an attempt to achieve one-to-one mechanism mapping
in the model. In other words, a mechanism which is
thought to be occurring in the rock reality and which

Objective

Method A

Use of preexisting
standard
methods

Method B

Method C
Basic

Extended

Analytical

numerical

numerical

methods,

methods, FEM,

methods,

stress-based

BEM, DEM,

fully-coupled

hybrid

models

Site

Method D

Level 1
1:1 mapping

Investigation

Database
expert

Precedent type

Rock mass

analyses and

classification,

systems, &

modifications

RMR, Q, GSI

other systems
approaches

Design based on forward analysis

Integrated
systems
approaches,

Level 2
Not 1:1 mapping

internet-based

Design based on back analysis

Construction

Fig. 1. The four basic methods, two levels, and hence eight different approaches to rock mechanics modelling and providing a predictive capability
for rock engineering design [1].

The choice of continuum or discrete methods depends

on many problem-specic factors, and mainly on the
problem scale and fracture system geometry. The
continuum approach can be used if only a few fractures
are present and if fracture opening and complete block
detachment are not signicant factors. The discrete
approach is most suitable for moderately fractured rock
masses where the number of fractures is too large for
the continuum-with-fracture-elements approach, or
where large-scale displacements of individual blocks
are possible. There are no absolute advantages of one
method over another. However, some of the disadvantages of each type can be avoided by combined
continuum-discrete models, termed hybrid models.
In this review, we concentrate on the states-of-the-art
of the capability and utility of the numerical methods
for rock mechanics purposes and note the outstanding
issues to be solved. The emphasis is on civil engineering
applications, but the information applies to all branches
of rock engineering, and is supported here by a
moderately extensive literature reference source.
2. Numerical methods for rock mechanics: states-of-theart
2.1. The FDM and related methods
The basic technique in the FDM is the discretization
of the governing partial differential equations (PDEs) by
replacing the partial derivatives with differences dened
at neighbouring grid points. The grid system is a
convenient way of generating objective function values
at sampling points with small enough intervals between
them, so that errors thus introduced are small enough to
be acceptable. With proper formulations, such as static
or dynamic relaxation techniques, no global system of
equations in matrix form needs to be formed and solved.
The formation and solution of the equations are
localized, which is more efcient for memory and
storage handling in the computer implementation. No
local trial (or interpolation) functions are employed to
approximate the PDE in the neighbourhoods of the
sampling points, as is done in the FEM and BEM. It is
therefore the most direct and intuitive technique for the
solution of the PDEs. This also provides the additional
advantage of more straightforward simulation of complex constitutive material behaviour, such as plasticity
and damage, without iterative solutions of predictorcorrector mapping schemes which must be used in other
numerical methods using global matrix equation systems, as in the FEM or BEM.
The conventional FDM with regular grid systems
does suffer from shortcomings, most of all in its
inexibility in dealing with fractures, complex boundary
conditions and material heterogeneity. This makes the

standard FDM generally unsuitable for modelling

practical rock mechanics problems. However, signicant
progress has been made in the FDM with irregular
meshes, such as triangular grid or Voronoi grid systems,
which leads to the so-called Control Volume, or Finite
Volume, techniques. Voronoi polygons grow from
points to ll the space, as opposed to tessellations where
the polygons are formed by lines cutting the plane, or by
building up a mosaic from pre-existing polygonal
shapes.
The FVM can be formulated with primary variables
(e.g. displacement) at the centres of cells (elements) or at
nodes (grid points) for an unstructured grid. It is also
possible to consider different material properties in
different cells. The FVM approach is therefore as
exible as the FEM in handling material heterogeneity,
mesh generation, and treatment of boundary conditions
with unstructured grids of arbitrary shapes. It has
similarities with the FEM and is also regarded as a
bridge between the FDM and FEM. The original
concept and early code development in FVM for stress
analysis problems can be traced to the work in [2], using
a vertex-centred scheme with a quadrilateral grid. At
present, the most well-known computer code for stress
analysis for rock engineering problems using the FVM/
FDM approach is perhaps the FLAC code group [3],
with a vertex scheme of triangular and/or quadrilateral
grids.
Explicit representation of fractures is not easy in the
FDM/FVM because they require continuity of the
functions between the neighbouring grid points. In
addition, it is not possible to have special fracture
elements in the FDM or FVM as in the FEM. In fact,
the inability to incorporate explicit representation of
fractures is the weak point of the FDM/FVM approach
for rock mechanics. On the other hand, the FDM/FVM
models have been used to study the mechanisms of
fracturing processes, such as shear-band formation in
the laboratory testing of rock and soil samples [4], and
fault system formation as a result of tectonic loading [5].
This is achieved via a process of material failure or
damage propagation at the grid points or cell centres,
without creating fracture surfaces in the models.
The FVM is one of the most popular numerical
methods in rock engineering, with applications covering
almost all aspects of rock mechanics, e.g. slope stability,
underground openings, coupled hydro-mechanical or
thermo-hydro-mechanical processes, rock mass characterization, tectonic process, and glacial dynamics. The
most comprehensive coverage in this regard can be seen
in [6].
2.2. The FEM and related methods
The FEM is perhaps the most widely applied
numerical method across the science and engineering

elds. Since its origin in the early 1960s, much FEM

development work has been specically oriented towards rock mechanics problems, as illustrated in [710].
This has been because it was the rst numerical method
with enough exibility for the treatment of material
heterogeneity, non-linear deformability (mainly plasticity), complex boundary conditions, in situ stresses and
gravity. Also, the method appeared in the late 1960s and
early 1970s, when the traditional FDM with regular
grids could not satisfy these essential requirements for
rock mechanics problems. It out-performed the conventional FDM because of these advantages.
Representation of rock fractures in the FEM has been
motivated by rock mechanics needs since the late 1960s,
with the most notable contributions reported in [11,12].
The well-known Goodman joint element in rock
mechanics literature has been widely implemented in
FEM codes and applied to many practical rock
engineering problems. However, these models are
formulated based on continuum assumptionsso that
large-scale opening, sliding, and complete detachment of
elements are not permitted. The zero thickness of the
Goodman joint element causes numerical ill-conditioning due to large aspect ratios (the ratio of length to
thickness) of joint elements, and was improved by joint
elements developed later in [1320].
Despite these efforts, the treatment of fractures and
fracture growth remains the most important limiting
factor in the application of the FEM for rock mechanics
problems. The FEM suffers from the fact that the global
stiffness matrix tends to be ill-conditioned when many
fracture elements are incorporated. Block rotations,
complete detachment and large-scale fracture opening
cannot be treated because the general continuum
assumption in FEM formulations requires that fracture
elements cannot be torn apart.
When simulating the process of fracture growth, the
FEM is handicapped by the requirement of small
element size, continuous re-meshing with fracture
growth, and conformable fracture path and element
edges. This overall shortcoming makes the FEM less
efcient in dealing with fracture problems than its BEM
counterparts. However, special algorithms have been
developed in an attempt to overcome this disadvantage,
e.g. using discontinuous shape functions [21] for implicit
simulation of fracture initiation and growth through
bifurcation theory, the enriched FEM and generalized
FEM approaches [2225]. The treatment of fractures is
at the element level: the surfaces of the fractures are
dened by assigned distance functions so that their
representation requires only nodal function values,
represented by an additional degree of freedom in the
trial functions, a jump function along the fracture and a
crack tip function at the tips. The motions of the
fractures are simulated using the level sets technique and
no pre-dened fracture elements are needed. In the

Generalized FEM, the meshes can be independent of the

problem geometry. In [26], the enriched FEM method
was applied to tunnel stability analysis with fractures
simulated as displacement discontinuities.
The Generalized FEM is in many ways similar to the
manifold method except for the treatment of fractures
and discrete blocks [2729]. The manifold method
uses the truncated discontinuous shape functions to
simulate the fractures and treats the continuum bodies,
fractured bodies and assemblage of discrete blocks in a
unied form, and is a natural bridge between the
continuum and discrete representations. The method is
formulated using a node-based star covering system for
constructing the trial functions, where a node is
associated with a covering star, which can be a set of
standard FEM elements associated with the node or
generated using least-square kernel techniques with
general shapes. The integration, however, is performed
analytically using Simplex integration techniques. The
manifold method can also have meshes independent of
the domain geometry, and therefore the meshing task is
greatly simplied and simulation of the fracturing
process does not need remeshing. The technique has
been extended for applications to rock mechanics
problems with large deformations and crack propagation [30,31]. Most of the publications are included in
1
the series of proceedings of the ICADD conferences
[3235].
The mesh generation, with complex interior structures
and exterior boundaries, is a demanding task when
applying the FEM to practical problems. The problem is
critical when dealing with 3-D problems with complex
geometry. Signicant progress has been made in the last
decade in the meshless (or meshfree, element-free)
method that simplies greatly the meshing tasks. In this
approach, the trial functions are no longer standard, but
generated from neighbouring nodes within a domain of
inuence by different approximations, such as the leastsquares technique. A comprehensive overview of the
method is given in [36]. From the pure computing
performance point of view, it has not yet outperformed
the FEM techniques, but it has potential for civil
engineering problems in general, and rock mechanics
applications
in particulardue to its exibility in
treatment of fractures, as reported by Zhang et al. [37]
for analysis of jointed rock masses with block-interface
models, and by Belytschko et al. [38] for fracture growth
in concrete. A contact-detection algorithm using the
meshless technique was also reported by Li et al. [39]
that may pave the way for extending the meshless
technique to discrete block system modelling. The
concept was also extended to the BEM.

ICADD: International Conference on Analysis of Discontinuous

Deformations.

2.3. The BEM and related methods

Unlike the FEM and FDM methods, the BEM
approach initially seeks a weak solution at the global
level through a numerical solution of an integral
equation derived using Bettis reciprocal theorem and
Somiglianas identity. The introduction of isoparametric
elements using different orders of shape functions, in the
same fashion as that in FEM, in [40,41], greatly
enhanced the BEMs applicability for stress analysis
problems.
The most notable original developments of the BEM
application in the eld of rock mechanics may be
attributed to early works reported in [4244] which was
quickly followed by many others, as reported in [4548].
The applications were for general stress and deformation analysis for underground excavations, soil-structure
interactions, groundwater ow and fracturing processes.
Notable examples of the work are as follows:
Stress analysis of underground excavations with
and without fractures [4955].
*
Dynamic problems [5658].
*
Back analysis of in situ stress and elastic
properties
[59,60].
*
Borehole tests for permeability measurements [61].
*

Since the early 80s, an important developmental

thrust concerns BEM formulations for coupled thermo-mechanical and hydro-mechanical processes, such
as the work reported in [6264]. Due to the BEMs
advantage in reducing model dimensions, 3-D applications are also reported, especially using the displacement
discontinuity method (DDM) for stress analysis, such as
in [6567]. The DDM approach [68] is most suitable for
fracture growth simulations and was extended and
applied to rock fracture problems for two-dimensional
[69] and three-dimensional [70,71] problems. Its counterpart, the ctitious stress method [44], is also an indirect
BEM approach suitable for stress simulations.
To simulate fracture growth using the standard BEM,
two techniques have been proposed. One is to divide the
problem domain into multiple sub-domains with fractures along their interfaces, with a pre-assumed fracture
path, [72]; and the second is the dual boundary element
method (DBEM) using displacement and traction
boundary equations at opposite surfaces of fracture
elements [73,74]. However, the original concept of using
two independent boundary integral equations for
fracture analysis, one displacement equation and another with its normal derivatives, was developed rst in
[41]. Special crack tip elements, such as developed in
[7576], should be used at the fracture tips to account
for the stress and displacement singularity.
A special formulation of the BEM, called the
Galerkin BEM, or GBEM, produces a symmetric
coefcient matrix by double integration of the tradi-

tional boundary integral twice multiplied by a weighted

trial function in the Galerkin sense of a weighted
residual formulation. A recent review of the GBEM is
given in [77] and an application for rock mechanics
problems was reported in [78].
Inclusion of source terms, such as body forces, heat
sources, sink/source terms in potential problems, etc.,
leads to domain integrals in the BEM. This problem will
also appear when considering initial stress/strain effects
and non-linear material behaviour, such as plastic
deformation. The traditional technique for dealing with
such domain integrals is the division of the domain into
a number of internal cells, which essentially eliminates
the advantages of the BEMs boundary only discretization. Different techniques have been developed over the
years to overcome this difculty [79], most notably
the dual reciprocity method (DRM) [80]. In [81] the
approach is applied for solving groundwater ow
problems.
The main advantage of the BEM is the reduction of
the model dimension by one, with much simpler mesh
generation and therefore input data preparation, compared with the FEM and FDM. In addition, solutions
inside the domain are continuous, unlike the point-wise
discontinuous solutions obtained using the FEM and
FDM. However, in general, the BEM is not as efcient
as the FEM in dealing with material heterogeneity
because it cannot have as many sub-domains as
elements in the FEM. The BEM is also not as efcient
as the FEM in simulating non-linear material behaviour,
such as in plasticity and damage evolution processes
because domain integrals are often presented in these
problems. The BEM is more suitable for solving
problems of fracturing inhomogeneous and linearly
elastic bodies.
2.4. The distinct element method (DEM)
Rock mechanics is one of the disciplines from which
the concept of DEM originated [8285]. The key
concepts of the DEM are that the domain of interest
is treated as an assemblage of rigid or deformable
blocks/particles and that the contacts among them need
to be identied and continuously updated during the
entire deformation/motion process, and be represented
by appropriate constitutive models. The theoretical
foundation of the method is the formulation and
solution of equations of motion of rigid and/or
deformable bodies using implicit (based on FEM
discretization) and explicit (using FDM/FVM discretization) formulations. The method has a broad variety of
applications in rock mechanics, soil mechanics, structural analysis, granular materials, material processing,
uid mechanics, multibody systems, robot simulation,
computer animation, etc. It is one of most rapidly
developing areas of computational mechanics. The basic

difference between the DEM and continuum-based

methods is that the contact patterns between components of the system are continuously changing with the
deformation process for the former, but are xed for
the latter.
The most representative explicit DEM methods are
the computer codes UDEC and 3DEC for two and
three-dimensional problems in rock mechanics [8692].
The hybrid technique with distinct element and boundary element methods was also developed [93] to treat the
effects of the far-eld most efciently for two-dimensional problems. Similar but different formulations and
numerical codes with the same principles have also been
developed and applied to various problems, such as rigid
block motions [94,95], plate bending [96], and the blockspring model (BSM) [9799] which is essentially a subset
of the explicit DEM by treating blocks as rigid bodies.
Due mainly to its conceptual attraction in the explicit
representation of fractures, the distinct element method
has been enjoying wide application in rock engineering.
A large quantity of associated publications has been
published, especially in conference proceedings. Some of
the publications are referenced here to show the wide
range of applicability of the methods.
*

Underground works [100

109].
Rock
dynamics
[110,111].
*
Nuclear waste repository design and
performance assessment [112114].
*
Reservoir
simulations
[115].
*
Fluid injection [116
118].
*
Rock
slopes
[119].
*
Laboratory test simulations and constitutive
model development [120122].
*
Stress-ow
coupling
[123,124].
*
Hard
rock reinforcement
[125].
*
Intraplate earthquakes
[126].
*
Well and borehole stability
[127,128].
*
Rock
permeability characterization
[129].
*
Acoustic emission in rock
[130].
*
Derivation of equivalent properties of fractured
rocks
[131,132].
*

A recent book [133] includes references to a collection of

explicit DEM application papers for various aspects of
rock engineering.
The seminal DEM work for granular materials for
geomechanics and civil engineering application is in a
series of papers [134138]. The development and

applications are mostly reported in series of proceedings

of symposia and conferences, such as in [139140] in the
eld of geomechanics. The most well-known codes in
this eld are the PFC codes for both two-dimensional
and three-dimensional problems [141], and the DMC
code [142,143]. The method has been widely applied to
many different elds such as soil mechanics, the
processing industry, non-metal material sciences and

defence research. More extensive coverage of this

subject will be given in a later expanded version of
this review.
The implicit DEM is represented mainly by the
discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA) approach,
originated in [144,145], and further developed in
[146,147] for stress-deformation analysis, and in
[148,149] for coupled stress-ow problems. Numerous
other extensions and improvements have been implemented over the years in the late 90s, with the bulk of
the publications appearing in a series of ICADD
conferences [3235]. The method uses standard FEM
meshes over blocks and the contacts are treated using
the penalty method. Similar approaches were also
developed in [150152] using four-noded blocks as the
standard element, and was called the discrete nite
element method. Another similar development, called
the combined nite-discrete element method [153155],
considers not only the block deformation but also
fracturing and fragmentation of the rocks. However, in
terms of development and application, the DDA
approach occupies the front position. DDA has two
advantages over the explicit DEM: relatively larger time
steps; and closed-form integrations for the stiffness
matrices of elements. An existing FEM code can also be
readily transformed into a DDA code while retaining all
the advantageous features of the FEM.
The DDA method has emerged as an attractive model
for geomechanical problems because its advantages
cannot be replaced by continuum-based methods or by
the explicit DEM formulations. It was also extended to
handle three-dimensional block system analysis [156]
and use of higher order elements [157], plus more
comprehensive representation of the fractures [158]. The
code development has reached a certain level of maturity
with applications focusing mainly on tunnelling, caverns, fracturing and fragmentation processes of geological and structural materials and earthquake effects
[159165].
Similar to the DEM, but without considering block
deformation and motion, is the Key Block approach,
initiated independently by Warburton [166,167] and
Goodman and Shi [168], with a more rigorous
topological treatment of block system geometry in the
latter (see also [169,170]). This is a special method for
analysis of stability of rock structures dominated by the
geometrical characteristics of the rock blocks and hence
the fracture systems. It does not utilize any stress and
deformation analysis, but identies the key blocks or
keystones, which are formed by intersecting fractures
and excavated free surfaces in the rock mass which have
the potential for sliding and rotation in certain directions. Key block theory, or simply block theory, and the
associated code development enjoy wide applications in
rock engineering, with further development considering
Monte Carlo simulations and probabilistic predictions

[171175], water effects [176], linear programming [177],

nite block size effect [178] and secondary blocks [179].
Predictably, the major applications are in the eld of
tunnel and slope stability analysis, such as reported in
[180186].
2.5. The DFN method related methods
The DFN method is a special discrete model that
considers uid ow and transport processes in fractured
rock masses through a system of connected fractures.
The technique was created in the early 1980s for
both two-dimensional and three-dimensional problems
[187197], and is most useful for the study of ow in
fractured media in which an equivalent continuum
model is difcult to establish, and for the derivation of
equivalent continuum ow and transport properties of
fractured rocks [198,199]. A large number of publications have been reported, and systematic presentation
and evaluation of the method have also appeared in
books [200203]. The method enjoys wide applications
for problems of fractured rocks, perhaps mainly due to
its conceptual attractiveness. There are many different
DFN formulations and computer codes, but most
notable are the approaches and codes FRACMAN/
MAFIC [204] and NAPSAC [205207] with many
applications for rock engineering projects over the years.
The stochastic simulation of fracture systems is the
geometric basis of the DFN approach and plays a
crucial role in the performance and reliability of the
fracture system model in the same way as for the DEM
[208,209]. A critical issue is the treatment of bias in
estimation of the fracture densities, trace lengths and
connectivity from conventional surface or borehole
mappings. Recent development using circular windows
is reported in [210,211].
Solution of ow elds for individual fracture disks in
the DFN uses closed-form solutions, the FEM and
BEM mesh, pipe models and channel lattice models.
Closed-form solutions exist, at present, only for planar
fractures with parallel surfaces of regular (i.e. circular or
rectangular discs) shapes [212,213]. For fractures with
general shapes, the FEM discretization technique is
perhaps the most well-known techniques used in the
DFN codes FRACMAN/MAFIC and NAPSAC. The
use of BEM discretization is reported in [194,195].
The pipe model [214] and the channel lattice model
[215] provide simpler representations of the fracture
system geometry, the latter being more suitable for
simulating the complex ow behaviour inside the
fractures, such as the channel ow phenomenon.
Computationally, they are less demanding than the
FEM and BEM models because the solutions for the
ow elds through the channel elements are analytical.
The fractal concept has also been applied to the DFN
approach in order to consider the scale dependence of

the fracture system geometry and for up-scaling the

permeability properties, using usually the full box
dimensions or the Cantor dust model [216218]. Power
law relations have been also found to exist for
tracelengths of fractures and have been applied for
representing fracture system connectivity [219]. The
fracturematrix interaction for DFN models was
reported in [220] using full FEM discretization and in
[221] with a simplied technique using a probabilistic
particle tracking technique. The effects of in situ stresses
on fracture aperture variations in DFN models were
reported in [222]. Below are some examples of developments and applications of the DFN approach.
Developments for multiphase uid ow
[223].
*
Hot-dry-rock reservoir simulations [224
226].
*
Characterization of permeability of fractured rocks
[227234].
*
Water effects on underground excavations and rock
slopes [235237].
*

Despite the advantages of the DEM and DFN, lack of

knowledge of the geometry of the rock fractures limits
their more general application. In general, the detailed
geometry of fracture systems in rock masses cannot be
known and can only be roughly estimated. The adequacy
of the DEM and DFN are therefore highly dependent on
the interpretation of the in situ fracture system geometry
which cannot be even moderately validated in
practice. The same problem applies to the continuumbased models as well, but the requirement for explicit
fracture geometry representation in the DEM and DFN
models makes the drawback more acute, even with
multiple stochastic fracture system realizations. The
understanding and quantication of the system uncertainty become more necessary in discrete models.
There are other numerical techniques such as percolation theory and lattice models that are closely related to
DEM and DFN approaches. Reviews on their fundamentals and applications are covered in the extended
version of this paper to be published later.
2.6. Hybrid models
Hybrid models are frequently used in rock engineering, basically for ow and stress/deformation problems
of fractured rocks. The main types of hybrid models are
the hybrid BEM/FEM, DEM/FEM and DEM/BEM
models. The BEM is most commonly used for simulating far-eld rocks as an equivalent elastic continuum,
and the FEM and DEM for the non-linear or fractured
near-elds where explicit representations of fractures
and/or non-linear mechanical behaviour, such as plasticity, are needed. This harmonizes the geometry of
the required problem resolution with the numerical
techniques available, thus providing an effective representation of the far-eld to the near-eld rock mass.

The hybrid FEM/BEM was rst proposed in [238],

then followed in [239,240] as a general stress analysis
technique. In rock mechanics, it has been used mainly
for simulating the mechanical behaviour of underground excavations, as reported in [241245]. The
coupling algorithms are also presented in detail in [48].
The hybrid DEM/BEM model was implemented
only for the explicit distinct element method, in the
code group of UDEC and 3DEC. The technique
was created in [246248] for stress/deformation analysis.
In [249250] a development of hybrid discrete-continuum models was reported for coupled hydro-mechanical analysis of fractured rocks, using combinations
of DEM, DFN and BEM approaches. In [251], a
hybrid DEM/FEM model was described, in which
the DEM region consists of rigid blocks and the
FEM region can have non-linear material behaviour.
A hybrid beam-BEM model was reported in [252]
to simulate the support behaviour of underground
openings, using the same principle as the hybrid BEM/
FEM model. In [253], a hybrid BEM-characteristics
method is described for non-linear analysis of rock
caverns.
The hybrid models have many advantages, but special
attention needs to be paid to the continuity
or
compatibility conditions at the interfaces between
regions of different models, particularly when different
material assumptions are involved, such as rigid and
deformable blockregion interfaces.

The disadvantages are that

(1) The procedure may be regarded as simply supercomplicated curve ttingbecause the program has
to be taught.
(2) The model cannot reliably estimate outside its range
of training parameters.
(3) Critical mechanisms might be omitted in the model
training.
(4) There is a lack of any theoretical basis for
verication and validation of the techniques and
their outcomes.
Neural network models provide descriptive and
predictive capabilities and, for this reason, have been
applied through the range of rock parameter identication and engineering activities. Recent published works
on the application of neural networks to rock mechanics
and rock engineering includes the following publications.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

2.7. Neural networks

All the numerical modelling methods described so far

are in the category of 1:1 mapping, i.e., the Level 1
methods in Fig. 1. The neural network approach is a
non-1:1 mapping in the Methods C and D categories of
the Level 2 methods indicated in Fig. 1. The rock mass is
represented indirectly by a system of connected nodes,
but there is not necessarily any physical interpretation of
the geometrical or mechanistic location of the networks
internal nodes, nor of their input and output values.
Such a non-1:1 mapping system has its advantages and
disadvantages.
The advantages of neural networks are that

(1) The geometrical and physical constraints of the

problem, which dominate the governing equations
and constitutive
laws when the 1:1 mapping
techniques are used, are not such a problem.
(2) Different kinds of neural networks can be applied
to a problem.
(3) There is the possibility that the perception we
enjoy with the human brain may be mimicked in the
neural network, so that the programs can incorporate judgements based on empirical methods and
experiences.

*
*
*
*

Stressstrain curves for intact rock [254].

Intact rock strength [255,256].
Fracture aperture [257].
Shear behaviour of fractures [258].
Rock fracture analysis [259].
Rock mass properties [260,261].
Microfracturing process in rock [262].
Rock mass classication [263,264].
Displacements of rock slopes [265].
Tunnel boring machine performance [266].
Displacements and failure in tunnels [267,268].
Tunnel support [269,270].
Surface settlement due to tunnelling [271].
Earthquake information analysis [272].
Rock engineering systems (RES) modelling [273,274].
Rock engineering [275].
Overview of the subject [276].

As evidenced by the list of highlighted references

above, the neural network modelling approach has been
widely applied and is considered to have signicant
potentialbecause of its non-1:1 mapping character
and because it may be possible in the future for such
networks to include creative ability, perception and
judgement, and be linked to the Internet. However, the
method has not yet provided an alternative to conventional modelling, and it may be some time before it can
be used in the comprehensive Box 2D mode envisaged in
Fig. 1 and described in [277].
3. Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical (THM) models
The couplings between the processes of heat transfer
(T), uid ow (H) and stress/deformation (M) in
fractured rocks have become an increasingly important
subject since the early 1980s [278,279], mainly due to the

modelling requirements for the design and performance

assessment of underground radioactive waste repositories, and other engineering elds in which heat and
water play important roles, such as gas/oil recovery,
hot-dry-rock thermal energy extraction, contaminant
transport analysis and environment impact evaluation in
general. The term coupled processes implies that the
rock mass response to natural or man-made perturbations, such as the construction and operation of a
nuclear waste repository, cannot be predicted with
condence by considering each process independently.
The THM coupling models are based on heat and
multiphase uid ow in deformable and fractured porous
media, and have been mainly developed according to two
basic partial but well established coupling mechanisms:
the thermo-elasticity theory of solids and the poroelasticity theory developed by Biot, based on Hookes law of
elasticity, Darcys law of ow in porous media, and
Fouriers law of heat conduction. The effects of the THM
couplings are formulated as three inter-related PDEs,
expressing the conservation of mass, energy and momentum, for describing uid ow, heat transfer and
deformation. The solution technique can be based on
continuum representations using mainly the FEM [280
287], FVM [3] and the discrete approach using the
UDEC code without matrix ow but with heat convection along fractures [288]. In [289] and [290] systematic
development of the governing equations and FEM
solution techniques are presented for porous continua.
Comprehensive studies, using both continuum and
discrete approaches,
have been conducted in the
2
international DECOVALEX
projects for coupled
THM processes in fractured rocks and buffer materials
for underground radioactive waste disposal since 1992,
with results published in a series of reports [291,292], an
edited book [293] and two special issues of the
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
Sciences in [294,295]. Other applications are reported, as
examples, in the following list.
*

Reservoir

simulations [296

298].
*

Partially

saturated porous

materials

[299].
Advanced numerical solution techniques for
coupled
THM models [300302].
*
Soil mechanics
[303].
*
Simulation of expansive clays
[304].
*
Flow and mechanics of fractures
[305].
*
Nuclear
waste repositories
[306,307].
*
Non-Darcy ow in coupled THM processes
[308].
*
Double-porosity model of porous media [309].
*
Parallel formulations of coupled models for
porous media [310].
*

Tunneling

in cold regions

[311].
2

DECOVALEXDEvelopment of COupled Models and their

VAlidation against EXperiments.

The coupled processes and models represent a great

advance in rock mechanics towards an well founded
branch of physics. Their extensions to include chemical,
biochemical, electrical, acoustic and magnetic processes
have also started to appear in the literature and are an
indication of future research directions.

4. Inverse solution methods and applications

A large and important class of numerical methods in
rock mechanics and civil engineering practice is the
inverse solution techniques. The essence of the inverse
solution approach is to derive unknown material
properties, system geometry, and boundary or initial
conditions, based on a limited number of laboratory or
usually in situ measured values of some key variables,
using either least square or mathematical programming
techniques of error minimization. In the case of rock
engineering, the most widely applied inverse solution
technique is back analysis using measured displacements
in the eld [312,313] and the inverse solution of rock
permeability using eld pressure data.
4.1. Displacement-based back analysis for rock
engineering
Since displacements measured by extensometers with
multiple anchors and the convergence of tunnel walls are
the most directly measurable quantities in situ, and are
one of the most used primary variables in many
numerical methods, they have been used extensively to
derive rock properties over the years. The majority of
applications concern identication of constitutive properties and parameters of rocks, using displacement
measurements from tunnels or slopes. Below are some
typical and recent examples of such applications.
*
*
*
*
*

Underground excavations [314325].

Slopes and foundations [326330].
Initial stress eld [331].
Time-dependent rock behaviour [332,333].
Consolidation [334].

4.2. Pressure-based inverse solution for groundwater flow

and reservoir analysis
The inverse solution has long been used in hydrogeology, reservoir engineering (oil, gas and hot-dry-rock
(HDR) geothermal reservoirs) and geotechnical engineering analyses of environmental impactsas a critical
technique for estimating hydraulic properties of largescale geological formations, such as permeability,
porosity, storativity, etc. by assuming hydraulic constitutive laws of porous media based on Darcys law or
non-Newtonian uid models. Complexity is increased

when thermal processes are also involved, due to phase

changes during multiple-phased ow of uids with
various states of saturation.
A comprehensive review of the subject is given in [335]
with the history of inverse solution development and
methods for the past 40 years, especially the application
of the stochastic approach using geostatistics. Some of
the most recent developments in this subject are
referenced below to illustrate the advances.
Capillary pressure-saturation and permeability
func- tion of two-phase uids in soil [336].
*
Water capacity of porous media
[337].
*
Unsaturated properties [338].
*
Transmissivity, hydraulic head and velocity
elds
[339].
*
Hydraulic function estimation using
evapotranspira- tion uxes [340].
*
Use of BEM for inverse solution
[341].
*
Integral
formulation
[342].
*
Hydraulic conductivity of rocks using pump
test results [343].
*
Least-square penalty technique for steady-state
aqui- fer models [344].
*
Maximum likelihood estimation method
[345].
*
Inversion using transient outow methods
[346].
*
Use
of geostatistics
for
transmissivity
estimation
[347350].
*
Successive forward perturbation method [351].
*

A distinct advantage of the inverse solution technique

is the fact that the measured values in the eld represent
the behaviour of a large volume of rock and the scaleeffects of the constitutive parameters are automatically
included in the identied parameter values. It also
indicates a promising method for validation of constitutive models and properties using back analysis with
eld measurements. On the other hand, the uniqueness
of the solution is not guaranteed because the minimization of the same objective error function may be
achieved through different paths.
5. Conclusions and remaining issues
Over the last three decades, advances in the use of
computational methods in rock mechanics have been
impressiveespecially in specic numerical methods,
based on both continuum and discrete approaches, for
representation of fracture systems, for comprehensive
constitutive models of fractures and interfaces, and in
the development of coupled THM models. Despite
all the advances, our computer methods and codes can
still be inadequate when facing the challenge of

some practical problems, and especially when adequate

representation of rock fracture systems and fracture
behaviour are a pre-condition for successful modelling.

Issues of special difculty and importance are the

following.
*

*
*
*

*
*

Systematic
evaluation
of geological and
engineering uncertainties.
Understanding and mathematical representation of
large rock fractures.
Quantication
of
fracture
shape,
size,
connectivity and effect of fracture intersections for
DFN and DEM models.
Representation of rock mass properties and
beha- viour as an equivalent continuum and existence
of the REV.
Representation of interface behaviour.
Scale effects, homogenization and upscaling methods.
Numerical
representation
of
engineering
processes, such as excavation sequence, grouting and
reinforce- ment.
Time effects.
Large-scale computational capacities.

The model and the computer are now integral

components of rock mechanics and rock engineering
studies.
Indeed, numerical methods and computing techniques have become daily tools for formulating conceptual models and mathematical theories
integrating diverse information about geology, physics,
construction techniques, economy, the environment and
their interactions. This achievement has greatly enhanced the development of modern rock mechanics
from the traditional empirical art of rock deformability
and strength estimation and support design, to the
rationalism of modern mechanics, governed by and
established on the three basic principles of physics:
mass, momentum and energy conservation.
As a result of numerical modelling experience over the
past decades, it has become abundantly clear that the
most important step in numerical modelling is, perhaps
counter-intuitively, not operating the computer code,
but the earlier conceptualization of the problem in
terms of the dominant processes, properties, parameters
and perturbations, and their mathematical presentations. The associated modelling steps of addressing the
uncertainties and estimating their signicance via
sensitivity analyses is similarly important. Moreover,
success in numerical modelling for rock mechanics and
rock engineering can depend almost entirely on the
quality of the characterization of the fracture system
geometry, the physical behaviour of the individual
fractures and the interaction between intersecting
fractures. Todays numerical modelling capability can
handle very large scale and complex equations systems,
but the quantitative representation of the physics of
fractured rocks remains generally questionable,
although much progress has been made in this direction.
The engineer must have a predictive capability for
design, and that predictive capability can only be

achieved if the key features of the rock reality have

indeed been captured in the model. Furthermore, the
engineer needs some reassurance that this is indeed
the case, which is why the authors place importance on
the concept of auditing rock mechanics modelling and
rock engineering design to ensure that the modelling is
adequate in terms of the modelling or engineering design
objective.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their sincere
appreciation and gratitude to Professor B.H.G. Brady,
Professor Y. Ohnishi, Professor W.G. Pariseau and Dr
R.W. Zimmerman for their comments, suggestions,
corrections, and especially encouragement, in their
reviews of the extended version of this paper.
Introduction to references
In CivilZone review papers, the signicant and very
signicant references quoted in the review are highlighted, as indicated here by the symbols * and **,
respectively. The asterisked references represent groundbreaking developments or major advances in the subject,
or contain comprehensive review material.

References
[1] Hudson JA. Rock engineering case histories: key factors,
mechanisms and problems. In: Sa. rkka. , Eloranta, editors.
Rock mechanicsa challenge for society. Rotterdam: Balkema,
2001. p. 1320.
[2] Wilkins ML. Calculation of elasto-plastic ow. Research Report
UCRL-7322, Rev. I. Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, University of California, 1963*.
[3] ITASCA Consulting Group, Inc. FLAC Manuals, 1993.
[4] Fang Z. A local degradation approach to the numerical analysis
of brittle fracture in heterogeneous rocks. Ph.D. thesis, Imperial
College of Science, Technology and medicine, University of
London, UK, 2001.
[5] Poliakov ANB. Modeling of tectonic problems with PAROVOZ:
examples of lithospheric rifting and buckling. In: Detournay,
Hart, editors. Flac and numerical modeling in geomechanics.
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1999. p. 16572.
[6] Detournay C, Hart R. FLAC and numerical modelling
in
geomechanics (Proceedings of the International FLAC symposium on Num. Modelling in Geomechanics, Minneapolis).
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1999*.
[7] Naylor DJ, Pande GN, Simpson B, Tabb R. Finite elements in
geotechnical engineering. Swansea, UK: Pineridge Press, 1981.
[8] Pande GN, Beer G, Williams JR. Numerical methods in
rock
mechanics. New York: W!ley, 1990
*.
[9] Wittke W. Rock mechanicstheory and applications. Berlin:
Springer, 1990 *.
[10] Beer G, Watson JO. Introduction to nite boundary
element method for engineers. New York: Wiley, 1992 *.

[11] Goodman RE, Taylor RL, Brekke TL. A model for the
mechanics of jointed rock. J Soil Mech Dn ASCE 94;SM3:1968.
[12] Goodman RE. Methods of geological engineering in discontinuous rocks. San Francisco: West Publishing Company, 1976.
[13] Zienkiewicz OC, Best B, Dullage C, Stagg K. Analysis of nonlinear problems in rock mechanics with particular reference to
jointed rock systems. Proceedings of the Second International
Cong. on Rock Mechanics, Belgrade, 1970.
[14] Ghaboussi J, Wilson EL, Isenberg J. Finite element for rock
joints and interfaces. J Soil Mech Dn ASCE SM3:1973.
[15] Katona MG. A simple contact-friction interface element with
applications to buried culverts. Int J Numer Anal Methods
Geomech 1983;7:37184.
[16] Desai CS, Zamman MM, Lightner JG, Siriwardane HJ.
Thin- layer element for interfaces and joints. Int J
Numer Anal Methods Geomech 1984;8:1943.
[17] Wang G, Yuan J. A new method for solving the contact-friction
problem. In: Yuan, editor. Computer methods and advances in
geomechanics, vol. 2. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1997. p. 19657.
[18] Gens A, Carol I, Alonso EE. An interface element formulation
for the analysis of soil-reinforcement interaction. Comput
Geotech 1989;7:13351.
[19] Gens A, Carol I, Alonso EE. Rock joints: FEM implementation
and applications. In: Sevaldurai, Boulon, editors. Mechanics of
geomaterial interfaces. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1995. p. 395420.
[20] Buczkowski R, Kleiber M. Elasto-plastic interface model for 3Dfrictional orthotropic contact problems. Int J Numer Methods
Eng 1997;40:599619.
[21] Wan RC. The numerical modeling of shear bands in geological
materials.
Ph.
D.
thesis,
University
of Alberta,
Edmonton, Alberta, 1990.
[22] Belytschko T, Black T. Elastic crack growth in nite
elements with
minimal
re-meshing.
Int
J
Numer
Methods Eng
1999;45:60120 *.
[23] Stolarska
M, Chopp
DL, Moe.s N, Belytschko T.
Modeling crack growth by level sets in the extended nite
element method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 2001;51:94360 *.
[24] Strouboulis T, Babus$ka I, Copps K. The design and analysis of
the generalized nite element method. Comput Methods Appl
Mech Eng 2000;181:4369 *.
[25] Strouboulis T, Copps K, Banus$ka I. The generalized
nite element method.
Comput Methods
Appl Mech
Eng
2001;190:4081193 *.
[26] Belytschko T, Moe.s N, Usui S, Parimi C. Arbitrary
disconti- nuities in
nite
elements.
Int
J
Numer
Methods Eng
2001;50:9931013 *.
[27] Shi G. Manifold method of material analysis. Trans. Ninth
Army Conference on Applied Mathematics and Computing,
Minneapolis, MN, 1991. p. 5776*.
[28] Shi G. Modeling rock joints, blocks by manifold method.
Proceedings of the 33rd US Symposium on Rock mechanics,
Santa Fe, New Mexico, 1992. p. 63948*.
[29] Chen G, Ohnishi Y, Ito T. Development of high-order manifold
method. Int J Numer Methods Eng 1998;43:685712 *.
[30] Wang Z, Wang S, Yang Z. Manifold method in analysis of large
deformation for rock. Chin J Rock Mech Eng 1997;16(5):
399404.
[31] Wang S, Ge X. Application of manifold method in
simulating crack propagation. Chin J Rock Mech Eng
1997;16(5):40510.
[32] Li C, Wang CY, Sheng J, editors. Proceedings of the First
International Conference on Analysis of Discontinuous Deformation (ICADD-1). Chungli, Taiwan: National Central University, 1995**.
[33] Salami MR, Banks D, editors. Discontinuous deformation
analysis (DDA) and simulations of discontinuous media.
Albuquerque, NM: TSI Press, 1996**.

[34] Ohnishi Y, editor. Proceedings of the Second International

Conferences of Discontinuous Deformation (ICADD-II), Kyoto, 1997**.
[35] Amadei B, editor. Proceedings of the Third International
Conferences of Discontinuous Deformation (ICADD-III), Vail,
Colorado, 1999**.
[36] Belytchko T, Krongauz Y, Organ D, Fleming M, Krysl P.
Meshless methods: an overview and recent developments.
Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1996;139:347 *.
[37] Zhang X, Lu M, Wegner JL. A 2-D meshless model
for jointed rock structures. Int J Numer Methods Eng
2000;47:
164961.
[38] Belytschko T, Organ D, Gerlach C. Element-free Galerkin
methods for dynamic fracture in concrete. Comput Methods
Appl Mech Eng 2000;187:38599 *.
[39] Li S, Qian D, Liu WK, Belytschko T. A meshfree contactdetection
algorithm.
Comput
Methods
Appl
Mech
Eng
2001;190:327192 *.
[40] Lachat JC, Watson JO. Effective numerical treatment of
boundary integral equations: a formulation for three-dimensional
elastostatics. Int J Numer Methods Eng 1976;10:9911005 *.
[41] Watson JO. Advanced implementation of the boundary element
method for two- and three-dimensional elastostatics. In: Banerjee PK,
Buttereld
R,
editors.
Developments
in
boundary element methods, vol. 1. London: Applied Science
Publishers,
1979. p. 3163 *.
[42] Crouch SL, Fairhurst C. Analysis of rock deformations due to
excavation. Proceedings of the ASME Symposium on Rock
Mechanics, 1973. p. 2640.
[43] Brady BHG, Bray JW. The boundary element method for
determining stress and displacements around long openings in a
triaxial stress eld. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr
1978;15:218 *.
[44] Crouch SL, Stareld AM. Boundary element methods in solid
mechanics. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983 **.
[45] Hoek E, Brown ET. Underground excavations in rock. London,
UK: Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 1982.
[46] Brebbia CA, editor. Topics in boundary element research, vol. 4,
applications in geomechanics. Berlin: Springer, 1987*.
[47] Pande GN, Beer G, Williams JR. Numerical methods in
rock mechanics. New York: Wiley, 1990.
[48] Beer G, Watson JO. Introduction to nite boundary
element method for engineers. NY: Wiley, 1992 *.
[49] Venturini WS, Brebbia CA. Some applications of the boundary
element method in geomechanics. Int J Numer Methods
Eng
1983;7:41943.
[50] Beer G, Pousen A. Efcient numerical modelling of faulted rock
using the boundary element method. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1995;32(3):117A.
[51] Beer G, Pousen A. Rock joints-BEM computations. In:
Sevaldurai, Boulon, editors. Mechanics of geometerial interfaces.
Rotterdam: Elsevier, 1995. p. 34373.
[52] Kayupov MA, Kuriyagawa M. DDM modelling of narrow
excavations and/or cracks in anisotropic rock mass. In: Barla,
editor. Proceedings of Eurock96. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1996.
p. 3518.
[53] Cerrolaza M, Garcia R. Boundary elements and damage
mechanics to analyze excavations in rock mass. Eng
Anal Boundary Elements 1997;20:116.
[54] Pan E, Amadei B, Kim YI. 2D BEM analysis of anisotropic
half- plane problemsapplication to rock mechanics. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(1):6974 *.
[55] Shou KJ. A three-dimensional hybrid boundary element
method for non-linear analysis of a weak plane near
an underground excavation. Tunnelling Underground Space

Tech- nol 2000;16(2):21526.

[56] Tian Y. A two-dimensional direct boundary integral method for

elastodynamics. Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1990*.
[57] Siebrits E, Crouch SL. Geotechnical applications of a twodimensional elastodynamic displacement discontinuity method.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1993;30(7):138793.
[58] Birgisson B, Crouch SL. Elastodynamic boundary element
method for piecewise homogeneous media. Int J Numer
Methods Eng 1998;42(6):104569.
[59] Wang BL, Ma QC. Boundary element analysis methods for
ground stress eld of rock masses. Comput Geotech 1986;2:
26174.
[60] Jing L.Characterization of jointed rock mass by boundary
integral equation method. Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Mining Technology and Science. Xuzhow,
China: Trans Tech Publications, 1987. p. 7949.
[61] Lafhaj Z, Shahrour I. Use of the boundary element method for
the analysis of permeability tests in boreholes. Eng Anal
Boundary Elements 2000;24:6958.
[62] Pan E, Maier G. A symmetric integral approach to transient
poroelastic analysis. Comput Mech 1997;19:16978 *.
[63] Elzein AH. Heat sources in non-homogeneous rock media by
boundary elements. Proceedings of Geotechnical Engineering,
Sydney, Australia, 2000.
[64] Ghassemi A, Cheng AHD, Diek A, Roegiers JC. A complete
plane strain ctitious stress boundary element method for
poroelastic media. Eng Anal Boundary Elements 2001;25:418.
[65] Kuriyama K, Mizuta Y. Three-dimensional elastic analysis by
the displacement discontinuity method with boundary division
into triangle leaf elements. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech.
Abstr 1993;30(2):11123.
[66] Kuriyama K, Mizuta Y, Mozumi H, Watanabe T. Threedimensional elastic analysis by the boundary element method
with analytical integrations over triangle leaf elements. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1995;32(1):7783.
[67] Cayol Y, Cornet FH. 3D mixed boundary elements for
elastostatic deformation eld analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 1997;34(2):27587.
[68] Crouch SL. Solution of plane elasticity problems by the
displacement discontinuity method. Int J Numer Methods Eng
1976;10:30143 *.
[69] Shen B. Mechanics of fractures, intervening bridges in hard
rocks. Ph. D. thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm,
Sweden, 1991*.
[70] Weaver J. Three dimensional crack analysis. Int J Solids Struct
1977;13:32130 *.
[71] La Pointe PR, Cladouhos T, Follin S. Calculation of displacement on fractures intersecting canisters induced by earthquakes:
Aberg, Beberg and Ceberg examples. Technical Report of
Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB),
SKB TR-99-03, 1999.
[72] Blandford GE, Ingraffea AR, Ligget JA. Two-dimensional stress
intensity factor computations using the boundary element
method. Int J Num Methods Eng 1981;17:387406.
[73] Portela A. Dual boundary element incremental analysis of crack
growth. Ph.D. thesis, Wessex Institute of Technology, Portsmouth University, Southampton, UK, 1992*.
[74] Mi Y, Aliabadi MH. Dual boundary element method for threedimensional fracture mechanics analysis. Eng Anal Boundary
Elements 1992;10:16171.
[75] Yamada Y, Ezawa Y, Nishiguchi I. Reconsiderations on
singularity or crack tip elements. Int J Numer Methods Eng
1979;14:152544.
[76] Aliabadi MH, Rooke DP. Numerical fracture mechanics.
Southampton: Computational Mechanics Publications. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991.

[77] Bonnet M, Maier G, Polizzotto C. Symmetric Galerkin

boundary element methods. Appl Mech Rev 1998;51(11):
669704 **.
[78] Wang J, Mogilevskaya SG, Crouch SL. A Galerkin
boundary integral method for non-homogenous materials with
crack. In: Elsworth,
Tunicci, Heasley, editors.
Rock
mechanics in the national interest. Rotterdam: Balkema, 2001.
p. 145360*.
[79] Brebbia CA, Telles JCF, Wrobel LC. Boundary element
techniques: theory & applications in engineering. Berlin: Springer, 1984 *.
[80] Partridge PW, Brebbia CA, Wrobel LC. The dual reciprocity
boundary element method. Southampton and Boston: Computational Mechanics Publications and Elsevier, 1992 *.
[81] El Harrouni K, Ouazar D, Wrobel LC, Cheng AHD. Groundwater parameter estimation by optimazation and DRBEM. Eng
Anal Boundary Elements 1997;19:97103.
[82] Burman BC. A numerical approach to the mechanics of
discontinua. Ph.D. thesis, James Cook University of North
Qeensland, Townsville, Australia, 1971.
[83] Cundall PA. A computer model for simulating progressive, large
scale movements in blocky rock systems. Proceedings of the
International Symposium on Rock Fracture, vol.1. PaperII-8,
ISRM, Nancy, 1971*.
[84] Chappel BA. The mechanics of blocky material. Ph.D. thesis,
Australia National University, Canberra, 1972.
[85] Byrne RJ. Physical and numerical model in rock and soil-slope
stability. Ph.D. thesis, James Cook University of North Qeensland, Townsville, Australia, 1974.
[86] Cundall PA. UDECa generalized distinct element program for
modelling jointed rock. Report PCAR-1-80, Peter Cundall
Associates, European Research Ofce, US Army Corps
of Engineers, 1980.
[87] Cundall PA. Formulation of a three-dimensional distinct
element modelPart I: a scheme to detect and represent
contacts in a system composed of many polyhedral blocks.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1988;25(3):
10716 **.
[88] Cundall PA, Hart RD. Development of generalized 2-D and 3-D
distinct element programs for modelling jointed rock. ITASCA
Consulting Group, Misc. paper SL-85-1. US Army Corps of
Engineers, 1985.
[89] Hart RD, Cundall PA, Lemos JV. Formulation of a threedimensional distinct element methodPart II: mechanical
calculations for motion and interaction
of a system
composed of many polyhedral blocks. Int J Rock mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 1988;25(3):11725 *.
[90] Cundall PA, Hart RD. Numerical modelling of discontinua. In:
Hudson JA, editor. Comprehensive rock engineering, vol. 2.
Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1993. p. 23143 *.
[91] ITASCA Consulting Group, Inc. UDEC Manual, 1992.
[92] ITASCA Consulting Group, Inc. 3DEC Manual, 1994.
[93] Lemos JV. A hybrid distinct element computational model
for the half-plane. M.Sc. thesis, Dept. Civ. Engng, University
of Minnesota, 1987*.
[94] Taylor LM. BLOCKSa block motion code for geomechanics
studies. Research Report, SAND82-2373, DE83 009221. Sandia
National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1982.
[95] Hocking G. Development and application of the boundary
integral and rigid block method for geotechnics. Ph. D.
thesis, University of London, 1977.
[96] Mustoe GGW, Williams JR, Hocking G, Worgan KJ. Penetration and fracturing of brittle plates under dynamic impact.
Proceedings of NUMETA87, Swansea, UK. Rotterdam:
Balkema, 1987.
[97] Kawai T, Kawabata KY, Kondou I, Kumagai K. A new discrete
model for analysis of solid mechanics problems. Proceedings of

[98]

[99]

[100]
[101]

[102]

[103]

[104]

[105]

[106]

[107]

[108]

[109]

[110]

[111]

[112]

[113]

[114]

[115]

the First Conference Numerical methods in Fracture Mechanics,

Swansea, UK, 1978. p. 267*.
Hu Y. Block-spring-model considering large displacements and
non-linear stress-strain relationships of rock joints. In: Yuan,
editor. Computer methods and advances in geomechanics, vol. 1.
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1997. p. 50712.
Li G, Wang B. Development of a 3-D block-spring model
for jointed rocks. In: Rossmanith, editor. Mechanics of jointed
and faulted rock. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1998. p. 3059.
Barton N. Modeling jointed rock behaviour and tunnel
performance. World Tunnelling 1991;4(7):4146.
Jing L, Stephansson O. Distinct element modelling of
sublevel stoping. Proceedings of the Seventh International
Congress of ISRM, vol. 1. Aachen, Germany, 1991. p. 7416.
Nordlund E, Ra( dberg G, Jing L. Determination of failure modes
in jointed pillars by numerical modelling. In: Myer, Cook,
Goodman, Tsang, editors. Fractured and jointed rock masses.
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 34550.
Chryssanthakis P, Barton N, Lorig L, Christiansson M.
Numerical simulation of bre reinforced shotcrete in a
tunnel using the distinct element method. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci
1997;34(34), Paper 054, p590.
Hanssen FH, Spinnler L, Fine J. A new approach for rock
mass cavability. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr
1993;30(7):137985.
Kochen R, Andrade JCO. Predicted behaviour of a subway
station in weathered rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;
34(34), paper 160, p587.
McNearny RL, Abel JF. Large-scale two-dimensional block
caving model tests. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr
1993;30(2):93109.
Souley M, Hommand F, Thoraval A. The effect of
joint constitutive laws on the modelling of an underground
excavation and comparison with in-situ measurements. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(1):97115.
Souley M, Hoxha
D, Hommand F. The distinct
element modelling of an underground excavation using a
continuum damage model. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;35(4
5), Paper 026.
Soanos AI, Kapenis AP. Numerical evaluation of the response
in bending of an underground hard rock voussoir beam roof. J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(8):107186.
Zhao J, Zhou YX, Hefny AM, Cai JG, Chen SG, Li HB, Liu JF,
Jain M, Foo ST, Seah CC. Rock dynamics research related to
cavern development for ammunition storage. Tunnelling Underground Space Technol 1999;14(4):51326.
Cai JG, Zhao J. Effects of multiple parallel fractures on apparent
attenuation of stress waves in rock mass. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 2000;37:66182.
Hansson H, Jing L, Stephansson O. 3-D DEM modelling of
coupled thermo-mechanical response for a hypothetical nuclear
waste repository. Proceedings of the NUMOG VInternational
Symposium on Numerical Models in Geomechanics, Davos,
Switzerland. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 25762.
Jing L, Tsang CF, Stephansson O. DECOVALEXan international co-operative research project on mathematical models of
coupled THM processes for safety analysis of radioactive waste
repositories. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr
1995;32(5):38998 *.
Jing L, Hansson H, Stephansosn O, Shen B. 3D DEM study of
thermo-mechanical responses of a nuclear waste repository in
fractured rocksfar and near-eld problems. In: Yuan, editor.
Computer methods and advances in geomechanics, vol. 2.
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1997. p. 120714.
Gutierrez M, Makurat A. Coupled THM modelling of cold
water injection in fractured hydrocarbon reservoirs. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 1997;34(34), Paper 113, p429.

[116] Harper TR, Last NC. Interpretation by numerical modeling of

changes of fracture system hydraulic conductivity induced by
uid injection. Ge! otechnique 1989;39(1):111.
[117] Harper TR, Last NC. Response of fractured rocks subjected to
uid injection. Part II: characteristic behaviour. Techtonophysics 1990;172:3351.
[118] Harper TR, Last NC. Response of fractured rocks subjected to
uid injection. Part III: practical applications. Techtonophysics
1990;172:5365.
[119] Zhu W, Zhang Q, Jing L. Stability analysis of the ship-lock
slopes of the Three-Gorge project by three-dimensional FEM
and DEM techniques. In: Amadei B, editor. Proceedings of the
Third International Conference of discontinuous deformation
Analysis (ICADD-3), Vail, USA. Alexandria, USA: American
Rock Mechanics Association (ARMA), 1999. p. 26372.
[120] Jing L, Stephansson O, Nordlund E. Study of rock joints under
cyclic loading conditions. Rock Mech Rock Eng 1993;26(3):
21532.
[121] Jing L, Nordlund E, Stephansson O. A 3-D constitutive model
for rock joints with anisotropic friction and stress dependency
in shear stiffness. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr
1994;31(2):1738.
[122] Lanaro F, Jing L, Stephansson O, Barla G. DEM modelling of
laboratory tests of block toppling. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci
1997;34(34):5067.
[123] Makurat A, Ahola M, Khair K, Noorishad J, Rosengren L,
Rutqvist J. The DECOVALEX test case one. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1995;32(5):399408.
[124] Liao QH, Hencher SR. Numerical modeling of the hydromechanical behaviour of fractured rock masses. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 1997;34(34), Paper 177, p428.
[125] Lorig L. A simple numerical representation of fully bounded
passive rock reinforcement for hard rock. Comput Geotech
1985;1:7997.
[126] Jing L. Numerical modelling of jointed rock masses by distinct
element method for two and three-dimensional problems.
Ph.D. thesis, 1990:90 D, Lulea( Univ. of Tech., Luleaa( ,
Sweden,
1990.
[127] Rawlings CG, Barton NR, Bandis SC, Addis MA, Gutierrez
MS. Laboratory and numerical discontinuum modeling of
wellbore stability. J Pet Technol 1993;10861092.
[128] Santarelli FJ, Dahen D, Baroudi H, Sliman KB. Mechanisms of
borehole instability in heavily fractured rock. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1992;29(5):45767.
[129] Zhang X, Sanderson DJ, Harkness RM, Last NC. Evaluation of
the 2-D permeability tensor for fractured rock masses. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1996;33(1):1737 *.
[130] Hazzard JF, Young RP. Simulating acoustic emissions in
bonded-particle models of rock. Int J rock Mech Min Sci
2000;37(5):86772.
[131] Mas-Ivas D, Min KB, Jing L. Homogenization of
mechanical properties of fracture rocks by DEM modeling. In:
Wang S, Fu B, Li Z, editors. Frontiers of rock mechanics and
sustainable development in 21st century (Proceedings of the
Second Asia Rock Mechanics Symposium, September 1114,
2001, Beijing, China). Rotterdam: Balkema, 2001. p. 32214.
[132] Min KB, Mas-Ivars D, Jing L. Numerical derivation of the
equivalent hydro-mechanical properties of fractured rock masses
using distinct element method. In: Elsworth, Tinucci, Heasley,
editors. Rock mechanics in the national interest. Swets
& Zeitlinger Lisse, 2001. p. 146976.
[133] Sharma VM, Saxena KR, Woods RD, editors. Distinct
element modelling in geomechanics. Rotterdam: A. A. Balkema,
2001**.
[134] Cundall PA, Strack ODL. A discrete numerical model for
granular assemblies. Ge!otechnique 1979;29(1):4765 **.

[135] Cundall PA, Strack ODL. The development of constitutive laws

for soil using the distinct element method. In: Wittke W, editor.
Numerical methods in Geomechanics, Aachen, 1979. p. 28998.
[136] Cundall PA, Strack ODL. The distinct element method as a tool
for research in granular media. Report to NSF Concerning
Grant ENG 76-20711, Part II, Dept. Civ. Engineering,
University of Minnesota, 1979.
[137] Cundall PA, Strack ODL. 1982. Modelling of microscopic
mechanisms in granular material. Proceedings of the US-Japan
Sem. New Models Const. Rel. Mech. Gran. Mat., Itaca, 1982.
[138] Strack ODL, Cundall PA. The distinct element method as a tool
for research in granular media. Research Report, Part I. Dept.
Civ. Engineering, University of Minnesota, 1978*.
[139] Mustoe GGW, Henriksen M, Huttelmaier HP, editors. Proceedings of the First Conference on DEM, CSM Press, 1989**.
[140] Williams JR, Mustoe GGW, editors. Proceedings of the Second
International Conference on DEM, IESL Publications, 1993**.
[141] ITASCA Consulting Group, Inc. PFC-2D and PFC-3D
Manuals, 1995.
[142] Taylor LM, Preece SD. DMCa rigid body motion code
for determining
the interaction
of multiple
spherical
particles. Research Report SND-88-3482. Sandia National
Laboratory, USA, 1989.
[143] Taylor LM, Preece SD. Simulation of blasting induced rock
motion using spherical element models. Eng Comput
1990;9:24352 *.
[144] Shi G, Goodman RE. Two dimensional discontinuous deformation analysis. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 1985;9:
54156 *.
[145] Shi G. Discontinuous deformation analysisa new numerical
model for the statics and dynamics of block systems. Ph.D.
thesis, University of California, Berkeley, USA, 1988*.
[146] Shyu K. Nodal-based discontinuous deformation analysis. Ph.D.
thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1993*.
[147] Chang QT. Nonlinear dynamic discontinuous deformation
analysis with nite element meshed block systems. Ph.D. thesis,
University of California, Berkeley, 1994.
[148] Kim Y, Amadei B, Pan E. Modeling the effect of
water, excavation
sequence and rock reinforcement
with
discontinuous deformation analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci 1999;36(7):
94970 *.
[149] Jing L, Ma Y, Fang Z. Modelling of uid ow and solid
deformation for fractured rocks with discontinuous deformation
analysis (DDA) method. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
2001;38(3):34355 *.
[150] Ghaboussi J. Fully deformable discrete element analysis using a
nite element approach. Int J Comput Geotech 1988;5:17595 *.
[151] Barbosa R, Ghaboussi J. Discrete nite element method.
Proceedings of the First US Conference on Discrete Element
Methods, Golden, Colorado, 1989.
[152] Barbosa R, Ghaboussi J. Discrete nite element method for
multiple deformable bodies. J Finite Elements Anal Design
1990;7:14558 *.
[153] Munjiza A, Owen DRJ, Bicanic N. A combined nite-discrete
element method in transient dynamics of fracturing solid. Int J
Eng Comput 1995;12:14574 *.
[154] Munjiza A, Andrews KRF, White JK. Combined single and
smeared crack model in combined nite-discrete element
analysis. Int J Numer Methods Eng 1999;44:4157.
[155] Munjiza A, Andrews KRF. Penalty function method for
combined nite-discrete element systems comprising large
number of separate bodies. Int J Numer Methods Eng
2000;49:137796.
[156] Shi G. Three dimensional discontinuous deformation analysis.
In: Elworth, Tinucci, Heasley, editors. Rock mechanics in the
national interest, Swets & Zeitlinger Lisse, 2001. p. 14218*.

[157] Hsiung SM. Discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA) with

nth order polynomial displacement functions. In: Elworth,
Tinucci, Heasley, editors. Rock mechanics in the national
interest, Swets & Zeitlinger Lisse, 2001. p. 143744.
[158] Zhang X, Lu MW. Block-interfaces model for non-linear
numerical simulations of rock structures. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 1998;35(7):98390.
[159] Lin CT, Amadei B, Jung J, Dwyer J. Extensions of
discontin- uous deformation analysis for jointed rock masses.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1996;33(7):67194.
[160] Yeung MR, Loeng LL. Effects of joint attributes on tunnel
stability. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(3/4), Paper No. 348.
[161] Jing L. Formulation of discontinuous deformation analysis
(DDA)an implicit discrete element model for block systems.
Eng Geol 1998;49:37181 *.
[162] Hatzor YH, Benary R. The stability of a laminated Vousoir
beam: back analysis of a historic roof collapse using dda. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(2):16581.
[163] Ohnishi Y, Chen G. Simulation of rock mass failure with
discontinuous deformation analysis. J Soc Mater Sci Japan
1999;48(4):32933.
[164] Pearce CJ, Thavalingam A, Liao Z, Bic!anic!
N.
Computational aspects of the discontinuous deformation analysis
framework for modelling concrete fracture. Eng Fract Mech
2000;65:28398.
[165] Hsiung SM, Shi G. Simulation of earthquake effects
on underground
excavations
using
discontinuous
deformation analysis (DDA). In: Elworth, Tinucci, Heasley,
editors. Rock mechanics in the national interest, Swets &
Zeitlinger Lisse,
2001. p. 141320.
[166] Warburton PM. Application of a new computer model for
reconstructing blocky rock geometry, analysing single rock
stability and identifying keystones. Proceedings of the Fifth
International Cong. ISRM, Melbourne, 1983. p. F22530*.
[167] Warburton PM. Some modern developments in block theory for
rock engineering. In: Comprehensive rock engineering, Hudson
(ed.-in-chief), vol. 3. 1993. p. 293315*.
[168] Goodman RE, Shi G. Block theory and its application to rock
engineering. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1985 *.
[169] Shi G, Goodman RE. The key blocks of unrolled joint traces in
developed maps of tunnel walls. Int J Numer Anal Methods
Geomech 1989;13:13158 *.
[170] Shi G, Goodman RE. Finding 3-D maximum key blocks on
unrolled joint traces of tunnel surfaces. In: Hustrulid, Johnson,
editors. Rock mechanics contributions and challenges. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1990. p. 21928*.
[171] Stone C, Young D. Probabilistic analysis of progressive block
failures. In: Nelson, Laubach editors. Rock mechanics: models
and measurements, challenges from industry. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1994. p. 5318.
[172] Mauldon M. Variation of joint orientation in block theory
analysis.
Int
J
Rock
Mech
Min
Sci Geomech
Abstr
1993;30(7):158590.
[173] Hatzor YH. The block failure likelihood: a contribution to rock
engineering in blocky rock masses. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci Geomech Abstr 1993;30(7):15917.
[174] Jakubowski
J, Tajdus
A. The
3D
Monte-Carlo
simulation of
rigid
block
around
a tunnel.
In:
Rossmanith, editor. Mechanics of jointed and faulted rock.
Rotterdam: Balkema,
1995. p. 5516.
[175] Kuszmaul JS, Goodman RE. An analytical model for estimating
key block sizes in excavations in jointed rock masses. In: Myer,
Cook, Goodman, Tsang, editors. Fractured and jointed rock
masses. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 1926.
[176] Karaca M, Goodman RE. The inuence of water on the
behaviour of a key block. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr 1993;30(7):15758.

[177] Mauldon M, Chou KC, Wu Y. Linear programming analysis of

keyblock stability. In: Yuan, editor. Computer methods and
advancements in geomechanics, vol. 1. Rotterdam: Balkema,
1997. p. 51722.
[178] Windsor CR. Block stability in jointed rock masses. In:
Myer, Cook, Goodman, Tsang, editors. Fractured and jointed
rock masses. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 5966.
[179] Wibowo JL. Consideration of secondary blocks in key-block
analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997; 34(3/4):333.
[180] Chern, JC, Wang MT. Computing 3-D key blocks delimited by
joint traces on tunnel surfaces. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 1993;30(7):1599604.
[181] Scott GA, Kottenstette JT. Tunnelling under the Apache
trial.
Int
J
Rock
Mech
Min
Sci
Geomech
Abstr
1993;30(7):14859.
[182] Nishigaki Y, Miki S. Application of block theory in weathered
rock. In: Myer, Cook, Goodman, Tsang, editors. Fractured and
jointed rock masses. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 7538.
[183] Yow JL. Block analysis for preliminary design of underground
excavations. In: Hustrulid, Johnson, editors. Rock mechanics
contributions and challenges. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1990.
p. 42935.
[184] Boyle WJ, Vogt TJ. Rock block analysis at Mount Rushmore
National Memorial. In: Myer, Cook, Goodman, Tsang, editors.
Fractured and jointed rock masses. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995.
p. 71723.
[185] Lee CI, Song JJ. Stability analysis of rock blocks around
a tunnel. In: Rossmanith, editor. Mechanics of jointed and
faulted rock. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1998. p. 4438.
[186] Lee IM, Park JK. Stability analysis of tunnel keyblock: a
case study.
Tunneling
Underground
Space
Technol
2000;15(4):
45362.
[187] Long JCS, Remer JS, Wilson CR, Witherspoon PA. Porous
media equivalents for networks of discontinuous fractures.
Water Resour Res 1982;18(3):64558 *.
[188] Long JCS, Gilmour P, Witherspoon PA. A model for steady
uid ow in random three dimensional networks of disc-shaped
fractures. Water Resour Res 1985;21(8):110515 *.
[189] Robinson PC. Connectivity, ow and transport in network
models of fractured media. Ph.D. thesis, St. Catherines College,
Oxford University, UK, 1984*.
[190] Andersson J. A stochastic model of a fractured rock conditioned
by measured information. Water Resour Res 1984;20(1):7988.
[191] Endo HK. Mechanical transport in two-dimensional networks of
fractures. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1984*.
[192] Endo HK, Long JCS, Wilson CK, Witherspoon PA. A model
for investigating mechanical transport in fractured media. Water
Resour Res 1984;20(10):1390400.
[193] Smith L, Schwartz FW. An analysis of the inuence of fracture
geometry on mass transport in fractured media. Water Resour
Res 1984;20(9):124152.
[194] Elsworth D. A model to evaluate the transient hydraulic
response of three-dimensional sparsely fractured rock masses.
Water Resour Res 1986;22(13):180919 *.
[195] Elsworth D. A hybrid boundary-element-nite element analysis
procedure for uid ow simulation in fractured rock masses. Int
J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 1986;10:56984 *.
[196] Dershowitz WS, Einstein HH. Three-dimensional ow modelling
in jointed rock masses. In: Herget, Vongpaisal, editors.
Proceedings of the Sixth Cong. ISRM, vol. 1. Montreal, Canada,
1987. p. 8792.
[197] Andersson J, Dverstop B. Conditional simulations of uid ow
in three-dimensional networks of discrete fractures. Water
Resour Res 1987;23(10):187686.
[198] Yu Q, Tanaka M, Ohnishi Y. An inverse method for the model
of water ow in discrete fracture network. Proceedings of the

[199]

[200]

[201]
[202]

[203]
[204]

[205]

[206]
[207]

[208]
[209]

[210]

[211]

[212]

[213]

[214]

[215]
[216]

[217]
a

34th Janan National Conference on Geotechnical Engineering,

Tokyo, 1999. p. 13034.
Zimmerman RW, Bodvarsson GS. Effective transmissivity of
two-dimensional fracture networks. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci Geomech Abstr 1996;33(4):4336 *.
Bear J, Tsang CF, de Marsily G. Flow and contaminant
transport in fractured rock. San Diego: Academic Press,
Inc.,
1993 **.
Sahimi M. Flow and transport in porous media and fractured
rock. Weinheim: VCH Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, 1995 *.
. National research council. Rock fractures and uid ow
contemporary understanding and applications. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press, 1996 **.
Adler PM, Thovert JF. Fractures and fracture networks.
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999 **.
Dershowitz WS, Lee G, Geier J, Hitchcock S, La Pointe P. User
documentation: FracMan discrete feature data analysis, geometric modelling and exploration simulations. Golder Associates, Seattle, 1993.
Stratford RG, Herbert AW, Jackson CP. A parameter study of
the inuence of aperture variation on fracture ow and the
consequences in a fracture network. In: Barton, Stephansson,
editors. Rock joints. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1990. p. 41322.
Herbert AW. NAPSAC (Release 3.0) summary document. AEA
D&R 0271 Release 3.0, AEA Technology, Harwell, UK, 1994.
Herbert AW. Modelling approaches for discrete fracture network ow analysis. In: Stephansson, Jing, Tsang, editors.
Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical processes of fractured mediamathematical and experimental studies. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1996. p. 21329*.
Dershowitz WS. Rock Joint systems. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, USA, 1984.
Billaux D, Chiles JP, Hestir K, Long JCS. Three-dimensional
statistical modeling of a fractured rock massan example from
the Fanay-Auge! res Mine. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
Geomech Abstr 1989;26(3/4):28199 *.
Mauldon M. Estimating mean fracture trace length and density
from observations in convex windows. Rock Mech Rock
Eng
1998;31(4):20116 *.
Mauldon M, Dunne WM, Rohrbaugh Jr MB. Circular scanlines
and circular windows: new tools for characterizing the geometry
of fracture traces. J Struct Geol 2001;23:24758.
Long JCS. Investigation of equivalent porous media permeability in networks of discontinuous fractures. Ph.D. thesis,
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Univ. of California, Berkeley,
CA, 1983*.
Amadei B, Illangasekare T. Analytical solutions for steady and
transient ow in non- homogeneous and anisotropic rock joints.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1992;29(6):56172 *.
Cacas MC, Ledoux E, de Marsily G, Tille B, Barbreau A,
Durand E, Feuga B, Peaudecerf P. Modeling fracture ow with a
stochastic discrete fracture network: calibration and validation.
I. The ow model. Water Resour Res 1990;26(3):47989 *.
Tsang YW, Tsang CF. Channel model of ow through fractured
media. Water Resour Res 1987;22(3):46779 *.
Barton CC, Larsen E. Fractal geometry of two-dimensional
fracture networks at Yucca Mountain, southwestern Nevada. In:
Stephansson O, editor. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Rock Joints, Bjorkliden, Sweden, 1985. p. 7784*.
Chile! s JP. Fractal and geostatistical methods for modelling

fracture network. Math Geol 1988;20(6):63154 *.

[218] Barton CC. Fractal analysis of the scaling, spatial clustering of
fractures in rock. In: Fractals and their application to geology,
Proceedings of 1988 GSA Annual Meeting, 1992.
[219] Renshaw CE. Connectivity of joint networks with power
law length distribution. Water Resour Res 1999;35(9):266170
*.

[220] Sudicky EA, McLaren RG. The Laplace transform Galerkin

technique for large scale simulation of mass transport in
discretely fractured porous formations. Water Resour Res
1992;28(2):499514.
[221] Dershowitz W, Miller I. Dual porosity fracture ow and
transport. Geophys Res Lett 1995;22(11):14414 *.
[222] Wilcock P. The NAPSAC fracture network code. In: Stephansson, Jing, Tsang, editors. Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical
processes of fractured media. Rotterdam: Elsevier, 1996.
p. 52938.
[223] Hughes RG, Blunt MJ. Network modelling of multiphase ow in
fractures. Adv Water Resour 2001;24:40921.
[224] Ezzedine S, de Marsily G. Study of transient ow in hard
fractured rocks with a discrete fracture network model. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1993;30(7):16059 *.
[225] Watanabe K, Takahashi H. Parametric study of the energy
extraction from hot dry rock based on fractal fracture network
model. Geothermics 1995;24(2):22336 *.
[226] Kolditz O. Modelling ow and heat transfer in fracture rocks:
conceptual model of a 3-d deterministic fracture network.
Geothermics 1995;24(3):45170 *.
[227] Dershowitz WS, Wallmann P, Doe TW. Discrete feature dual
porosity analysis of fractured rock masses: applications
to fractured reservoirs and hazardous waste. In: Tillerson,
Wawer- sik,
editors.
Rock
mechanics.
Rotterdam:
Balkema, 1992. p. 54350.
[228] Herbert AW, Layton GW. Discrete fracture network modeling
of ow and transport within a fracture zone at Stripa. In: Myer,
Cook, Goodman, Tsang, editors. Fractured and jointed rock
masses. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 6039.
[229] Doe TW, Wallmann PC. Hydraulic characterization of fracture
geometry for discrete fracture modelling. Proceedings of the
Eighth Cong. IRAM, Tokyo, 1995. p. 76772.
[230] Barthe!le!my P, Jacquin C, Yao J, Thovert JF, Adler
PM.
Hierarchical structures and hydrulic properties of a fracture
network in the Causse of Larzac. J Hydrol 1996;187:23758.
[231] Jing L, Stephansson O. Network Topology and homogenization
of fractured rocks. In: Jamtveit B, editor. Fluid ow
and transport in rocks: mechanisms and effects. London:
Chapman
& Hall, 1996. p. 91202.
[232] Margolin G, Berkowitz B, Scher H. Structure, ow and
generalized conductivity scaling in fractured networks. Water
Resour Res 1998;34(9):210321 *.
[233] Mazurek M, Lanyon GW, Vomvoris S, Gautschi A. Derivation
and application of a geologic dataset for ow modeling by
discrete fracture networks in low-permeability argillaceous
rocks. J Contaminant Hydrol 1998;35:117.
[234] Zhang X, Sanderson DJ. Scale up of two-dimensional conductivity tensor for heterogenous fracture networks. Eng Geol
1999;53:8399 *.
[235] Rouleau A, Gale JE. Stochastic discrete fracture simulation
of groundwater ow into underground excavation in granite.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 1987;24(2):
99112.
[236] Xu J, Cojean R. A numerical model for uid ow in the block
interface network of three dimensional rock block system.
In: Rossmanith, editor. Mechanics of jointed and faulted rock.
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1990. p. 62733.
[237] He S. Research on a model of seapage ow of fracture networks,
modelling for coupled hydro-mechanical processes in fractured
rock masses. In: Yuan, editor. Computer methods and
Advances in Geomechanics, vol. 2. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1997.
p. 113742.
[238] Zienkiewicz OC, Kelly DW, Bettess P. The coupling of the nite
element method and boundary solution procedures. Int J Numer
Methods Eng 1977;11:35575.

[239] Brady BHG, Wassyng A. A coupled nite elementboundary

element method of stress analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci Geomech Abstr 1981;18:47585.
[240] Beer G. Finite element, boundary element and coupled analysis

[241]

[242]

[243]

[244]

[245]

[246]

[247]

[248]

[249]

[250]

[251]

[252]

[253]

[254]

[255]

[256]

[257]
[258]

of unbounded problems in elastostatics. Int J Numer Methods

Eng 1983;19:56780.
Varadarajan A, Sharma KG, Singh RB. Some aspects of coupled
FEBEM analysis of underground openings. Int J Numer
Anal Methods Geomech 1985;9:55771.
Ohkami T, Mitsui Y, Kusama T. Coupled boundary element/
nite element analysis in geomechanics including body forces.
Comput Geotech 1985;1:26378.
Gioda G, Carini A. A combined boundary element-nite
element analysis of lined openings. Rock Mech Rock Eng
1985;18:293302.
Swoboda G, Mertz W, Beer G. Pheological analysis of
tunnel excavations by means of coupled nite element(FEM)boundary element (BEM) analysis. Int J Numer Anal Methods
Geomech
1987;11:15129.
von Estorff O, Firuziaan M. Coupled BEM/FEM approach for
non-linear soil/structure interaction. Eng Anal Boundary Elements 2000;24:71525.
Lorig LJ, Brady BHG. A hybrid discrete element-boundary
element method of stress analysis. In: Goodman, Heuze, editors.
Proceedings of the 23rd US Symposium on Rock Mechanics,
Berkeley, Aug. 2527, 1982. p. 62836.
Lorig LJ, Brady BHG. A hybrid computational scheme for
excavation and support design in jointed rock media. In: Brown
ET, Hudson JA, editors. Proceedings of the Symposium Design
and Performance of Underground Excavations. Cambridge:
British Geotechnical Society, 1984. p. 10512.
Lorig LJ, Brady BHG, Cundall PA. Hybrid distinct element
boundary element analysis of jointed rock. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci Geomech Abstr 1986;23(4):30312 *.
Wei L. Numerical studies of the hydromechanical behaviour of
jointed rocks. Ph.D. thesis, Imperial College of Science and
Technology, University of London, 1992.
Wei L, Hudson JA. A hybrid discrete-continuum approach to
model hydro-mechanical behaviour of jointed rocks. Eng Geol
1988;49:31725 *.
Pan XD, Reed MB. A coupled distinct element-nite
element method for large deformation analysis of rock
masses.
Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr
1991;28(1):939.
Po. ttler R, Swoboda
GA. Coupled beam-boundary
element model (FE-BEM) for analysis of underground
openings. Comput Geotech 1986;2:23956.
Sugawara K, Aoki T, Suzuki Y. A coupled boundary elementcharacteristics method for elasto-plastic analysis of rock caverns.
In: Romana, editor. Rock mechanics and power plants.
Rotterdam: Balkema, 1988. p. 24858.
Millar D, Clarici E. Investigation of back-propagation articial
neural networks in modelling the stress-strain behaviour
of sandstone rock, IEEE International Conference on
Neural NetworksConference Proceedings, vol. 5. 1994.
p. 332631.
Alvarez Grima M, Babu ka R. Fuzzy model for the prediction of
unconned compressive strength of rock samples. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 1999;36(3):33949.
Singh VK, Singh D, Singh TN. Prediction of strength properties
of some schistose rocks from petrographic properties using
articial neural networks.
Int J Rock
Mech Min
Sci
2001;38(2):26984.
Kacewicz M. Model-free estimation of fracture apertures
with neural networks. Math Geol 1994;26(8):98594.
Lessard JS, Hadjigeorgiou J. Modelling shear behavior of rough
joints using neural networks. In: Vouille G, Berest P, editors.

20th century lessons, 21st century challenges, ISBN 9058090698,

1999. p. 9259.
[259] Sirat M, Talbot CJ. Application of articial neural networks to
fracture analysis at the A.
HRL, Sweden: fracture sets
spo.
classication. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38(5):62139.
[260] Qiao C, Zhang Q, Huang X. Neural network method for
evaluation of mechanical parameters of rock mass in numerical
simulation. Yanshilixue Yu Gongcheng Xuebao/Chin J Rock
Mech Eng 2000;19(1):647.
[261] Feng XT, Zhang Z, Sheng Q. Estimating mechanical rock mass
parameters relating to the Three Gorges Project permanent
shiplock using an intelligent displacement back analysis method.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2000;37(7):103954.
[262] Feng XT, Seto M. A new method of modeling the
rock microfracturing problems in double torsion experiments
using neural networks. Int J Numer Anal Methods
1999;23(9):90523.
[263] Sklavounos P, Sakellariou M. Intelligent classication of rock
masses. Applications of Articial Intelligence in Engineering,
1995. p. 38793.
[264] Liu Y, Wang J. A neural network method for engineering rock
mass classication. In: Vouille G, Berest P, editors. 20th century
lessons, 21st century challenges. ISBN 9058090698, 1999.
p. 51922.
[265] Deng JH, Lee CF. Displacement back analysis for a steep slope
at the Three Gorges Project site. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci
2001;38(2):25968.
[266] Alvarez Grima M, Bruines PA, Verhoef PNW. Modelling tunnel
boring machine performance by neuro-fuzzy methods. Tunnelling Underground Space Technol 2000;15(3):25969.
[267] Sellner PJ, Steindorfer AF. Prediction of displacements
in tunnelling. Felsbau 2000;18(2):226.
[268] Lee C, Sterling R. Identifying probable failure modes
for underground openings using a neural network. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 1992;29(1):4967.
[269] Leu SS. Data mining for tunnel support stability: neural network
approach. Autom Constr 2001;10(4):42941.
[270] Leu SS, Chen CN, Chang SL. Data mining for tunnel support
stability:
neural
network
approach.
Autom
Constr
2001;10(4):42941.
[271] Kim CY, Bae GJ, Hong SW, Park CH, Moon HK, Shin HS.
Neural network based prediction of ground surface settlements
due to tunnelling. Comput Geotech 2001;28(67):51747.
[272] Feng XT, Seto M, Katsuyama K. Nueral network modelling on
earthquake magnitude series. Int J Geophys 1997;128(3):54756.
[273] Millar DL, Hudson JA. Performance monitoring of rock
engineering systems using neural networks. Trans Inst Min
Metall Sec A 1994;103:A3A16.
[274] Yang Y, Zhang Q. Application of neural networks to Rock
Engineering Systems (RES). Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1998;35(6):72745.
[275] Yi H, Wanstedt S. The introduction of neural network
system and its applications in rock engineering. Eng Geol
1998;
49(34):25360.
[276] Hudson JA, Hudson JL. Rock mechanics and the Internet. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(34):603, with full paper on
the associated CD.
[277] Feng XT, Hudson JA. Integrated approaches to solving rock
engineering design problems: Part IMethodology; Part-II
Case studies, 2003, Manuscript in preparation.
[278] Tsang CF, editor. Coupled processes associated with nuclear
waste repositories. New York: Academic Press, 1987**.
[279] Tsang CF. Coupled thermomechanical and hydrochemical
processes in tock fractures. Rev Geophys 1991;29:53748 *.
[280] Noorishad J, Tsang CF, Witherspoon PA. Theoretical and
eld studies of coupled hydromechanical behaviour of

fractured rocks1. Development and verication of a numerical

simulator.
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr
1992;29(4):
4019 *.
[281] Noorishad J, Tsang CF. Coupled thermo-hydroelasticity phenomena in variably saturated fractured porous rocksformulation and numerical solution. In: Stephansson, Jing, Tsang,
editors. Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical processes of fractured media. Rotterdam: Elsevier, 1996. p. 93134*.
[282] Rutqvist J, Bo. rgesson L, Chijimatsu M, Kobayashi A, Jing
L, Nguyen TS, Noorishad J, Tsang CF. Thermo-hydromechanics of partially saturated geological media: governing
equations and formulation of four nite element models. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38(1;):10527 *.
[283] Rutqvist J, Bo. rgsson L, Chijimatsu M, Nguyen TS, Jing
L,
Noorishad J, Tsang CF. Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical
analysis of a heater test in fractured rock and bentonite at
Kamaishi Minecomparison of eld results to predictions
of four nite element codes. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci
2001;38(1):12942.
[284] Bo. rgesson L, Chijimatsu M, Fujita T, Nguyen TS, Rutqvist
J, Jing L. Thermo-hydro-mechanical characterization of a
bento- nite-based buffer material by laboratory tests and
numerical back analysis. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
2001;38(1):95104.
[285] Nguyen TS, Bo. rgesson L, Chijimatsu M, Rutqvist J, Fujita
T, Hernelind J, Kobayashi A, Ohnishi Y, Tanaka M, Jing
L. Hydro-mechanical response of a fractured granite rock mass
to excavation of a test pitthe Kamaishi Mine experiments
in Japan. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38(1):7994 *.
[286] Millard A. Short description of CASTEM 2000 and TRIO-EF.
In: Stephansson, Jing, Tsang, editors. Coupled thermo-hydromechanical processes of fractured media. Rotterdam: Elsevier,
1996. p. 55964.
[287] Ohnishi Y, Kobayashi A. THAMES. In: Stephansson, Jing,
Tsang, editors. Coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical processes of
fractured media. Rotterdam: Elsevier, 1996. p. 5459.
[288] Abdaliah G, Thoraval A, Sfeir A, Piguet JP. Thermal convection
of uid in fractured media. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech
Abstr 1995;32(5):48190 *.
[289] Lewis RW, Schreer BA. The nite element method in the static
and dynamic deformation and consolidation of porous media.
Chechester: Wiley, 1998 **.
[290] Schreer BA. Computer modelling in environmental geomechanics. Comput Struct 2001;79:220923 **.
[291] Jing L, Stephansson O, Tsang CF, Kautsky F. DECOVALEX
mathematical models of coupled T-H-M processes for nuclear
waste repositories. Executive summary for Phases I, II and III.
SKI Report 96:58. Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate, Stockholm, Sweden, 1996*.
[292] Jing L, Stephansson O, Tsang CF, Knight LJ, Kautsky F.
DECOVALEX II project, executive summary. SKI Report
99:24. Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate, Stockholm, Sweden,
1999.
[293] Stephansson O, Jing L, Tsang CF, editors. Coupled thermohydro-mechanical processes of fractured media. Rotterdam:
Elsevier, 1996**.
[294] Stephansson O, editor. Special issue for thermo-hydro-mechanical coupling in rock mechanics. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci Geomech Abstr 1995;32(5)*.
[295] Stephansson O, editor. Special issue for thermo-hydro-mechanical coupling in rock mechanics. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci Geomech Abstr 2001;38(1)*.
[296] Zhao C, Hobbs BE, Baxter K, Mu. hlhaus HB, Ord A.
A numerical study of pore-uid, thermal and mass ow
in uid-saturated porous
rock
basins.
Eng
Comput
1999;16(2):20214 *.
[297] Yang XS. A unied approach to mechanical compaction,
pressure solution, mineral reactions and the temperature

[298]

[299]

[300]

[301]

[302]

[303]

[304]

[305]
[306]

[307]

[308]

[309]

[310]
[311]

[312]

[313]

[314]

[315]

[316]

[317]

[318]

distribution in hydrocarbon basins. Tectonophysics 2001;330:

14151.
Sasaki T, Morikawa S. Thermo-mechanical consolidation
coupling analysis on jointed rock mass by the nite element
method. Eng Comput 1996;13(7):7086 *.
Gawin D, Schreer BA. Thermo-hydro-mechanical analysis
of partially saturated materials. Eng Comput 1996;13(7):11343
*.
Wang X, Schreer BA. A multi-frontal parallel algorithm for
coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical analysis of deformable porous media. Int J Numer Methods Eng 1998;43:106983.
Cervera M, Codina R, Galindo M. On the computational
efciency and implementation of block-iterative algorithms for
non-linear coupled problems. Eng Comput 1996;13(6):430.
Thomas HR, Yang HT, He Y. A sub-structure based parallel
solution of coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical modeling of
unsaturated soil. Eng Comput 1999;16(4):42842.
Thomas HR, Missoum H. Three-dimensional coupled heat,
moisture and air transfer ina deformable unsaturated soil. Int J
Numer Methods Eng 1999;44:91943 *.
Thomas HR, Cleall PJ. Inclusion of expansive clay behaviour in
coupled thermo hydraulic mechanical models. Eng Geol
1999;54:93108 *.
Selvadurai APS, Nguyen TS. Mechanics and uid transport in a
degradable discontinuity. Eng Geol 1999;53:2439 *.
Selvadurai APS, Nguyen TS. Scoping analyses of the coupled
thermal-hydrological- mechanical behaviour of the rock mass
around a nuclear fuel waste repository. Eng Geol 1996;47:
379400.
Hudson JA, Stephansson O, Andersson J, Jing L. Coupled T-HM issues relating to radioactive waste repository design and
performance. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2001;38(1):14361.
Nithiarasu P, Sujatha KS, Ravindran K, Sundararajan T,
Seetharamu KN. Non-Darcy natural convection in a hydrodynamically and thermally anisotropic porous medium. Comput
Methods Appl Mech Eng 2000;188:41330.
Masters I, Pao WKS, Lewis RW. Coupling temperature to a
double-porosity model of deformable porous media. Int
J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 2000;49:42138 *.
Zimmerman RW. Coupling in poroelasticity and thermoelasticity. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2000;37(1):7987 *.
Lai YM, Wu ZW, Zhu YL, Zhu LN. Nonlinear analysis for the
coupled problem of temperature, seepage and stress elds in
cold-region tunnels. Tunneling Underground Space Technol
1998;13(4):43540 *.
Sakurai S. Direct strain evaluation technique in construction of
underground openings. Proceedings of the 22nd US Symposium
on Rock Mechanics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1981.
p. 27882**.
Sakurai S, Akutagawa S. Some aspects of back analysis in
geotechnical engineering. EUROC93, Lisbon, Portugal. Rotterdam: Balkema, 1995. p. 113040*.
Ledesma A, Gens A, Alonso EE. Estimation of parameters in
geotechnical back analysisI. Maximum likelihood approach.
Comput Geoetch 1996;18(1):127.
Gens A, Ledesma A, Alonso EE. Estimation of parameters in
geotechnical back analysis. IIapplication to a tunnel problem.
Comput Geotech 1996;18(1):2946.
Ledesma A, Gens A, Alonso EE. Parameter and
variance estimation in geotechnical back-analysis using prior
information. Int J Numer Anal Methods
Geomech
1996;20(2):11941.
Mello Franco JA, Assis AP, Mansur WJ, Telles JCF, Santiago
AF. Design aspects of the underground structures of the Serra da
Mesa hydroelectric power plant. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci
1997;34(3/4):580, paper no. 16.
Hojo A, Nakamura M, Sakurai S, Akutagawa S. Back analysis
of non-elastic strains within a discontinuous rock mass around a

large underground power house cavern. Int J Rock Mech Min

Sci 1997;34(3/4):570, paper no. 8.
[319] Sakurai S. Lessons learned from eld measurements in
tunnelling.
Tunnelling Underground Space Technol 1997;12(4):45360 **.
[320] Singh B, Viladkar MN, Samadhiya NK, Mehrotra VK.
Rock
mass strength parameters mobilised in tunnels. Tunnelling
Underground Space Technol 1997;12(1):4754.
[321] Pelizza S, Oreste PP, Pella D, Oggeri C. Stability analysis of a
large cavern in Italy for quarrying exploitation of a pink marble.
Tunnelling Underground Space Technol 2000;15(4):42135.
[322] Yang Z, Lee CF, Wang S. Three-dimensional back-analysis of
displacements in exploration adits-principles and application. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci 2000;37:52533 *.
[323] Yang Z, Wang Z, Zhang L, Zhou R, Xing N. Back-analysis of
viscoelastic displacements in a soft rock road tunnel. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 2001;38:33141.
[324] Krajewski W, Edelmann L, Plamitzer R. Ability and limits
of numerical methods for the design of deep construction
pits. Comput Geotech 2001;28:42544.
[325] Chi SY, Chern JC, Lin CC. Optimized back-analysis for
tunnelling-induced ground movement using equivalent ground
lodd model. Tunnelling Underground Space Technol
2001;16:15965.
[326] Ai-Homoud AS, Tai AB, Taqieddin SA. A comparative study of
slope stability methods and mitigative design of a highway
embankment landslide with a potential for deep seated
sliding. Eng Geol 1997;47(12):15773.
[327] Okui Y, Tokunaga A, Shinji M, Mori M. New back analysis
method of slope stability by using eld measurements. Int J
Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(3/4):515, paper no. 234.
[328] Rossmanith HP, Uenishi K. Post-blast bench block stability
assessment. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1997;34(3/4):627,
paper no. 264.
[329] Sonmez H, Ulusay R, Gokceoglu C. A practical procedure for
the back analysis of slope failure in closely jointed rock. Int
J Rock Mech Min Sci 1998;35(2):21933.
[330] Obara Y, Nakamura N, Kang SS, Kaneko K. Measurement of
local stress and estimation of regional stress associated with
stability assessment of an open-pit rock slope. Int J Rock Mech
Min Sci 2000;37(8):121121.
[331] Yang L, Zhang K, Wang Y. Back analysis of initial rock stress
and time-dependent parameters. In J Rock Mech Min
Sci
Geomech Abstr 1996;33(6):6415.
[332] Guo WD. Visco-elastic consolidation subsequent to pile
installation. Comput Geotech 2000;26(2):11344.
[333] Ohkami T, Swoboda G. Parameter identication of viscoelastic
materials. Comput Geotech 1999;24:27995.
[334] Kim YT, Lee SR. An equivalent model and backanalysis
technique for modelling in situ consolidation behaviour
of drainage-installed soft deposits. Comput
Geotech
1997;20(2):12542.
[335] de Marsily G, Delhomme JP, Delay F, Buoro A. 40 years
of inverse solution in hydrogeology. Earth
Planet Sci
1999;329:
7387 (in French, with an English summary)**.

[336] Chen J, Hopmans JW, M, Grismer ME. Parameter estimation of

two-uid capillary pressure-saturation and permeability function. Adv Water Resour 1999;22(5):47993.
[337] Fatullayev A, Can E. Numerical procedure for identication of
water capacity of porous media. Math Comput Simulations
2000;52:11320.
[338] Finsterle S, Faybishenko B. Inverse modelling of a
radial multistep
outow
experiment
for
determining
unsaturated hydraulic
properties.
Adv Water
Resour
1999;22(5):43144.
[339] Hanna S, Jim Yeh TC. Estimation of co-conditional moments of
transmissivity, hydraulic head and velocity elds. Adv Water
Resour 1998;22(1):8795.
[340] Jhorar RK, Bastiaanssen WGM, Fesses RA, van Dam JC.
Inversely estimating soil hydraulic functions using
evaportran- spiration uxes. J Hydrol 2002;258:198213.
[341] Katsifarakis KL, Karpouzos DK, Theodossiou N. Combined
use of BEM and genetic algorithms in groundwater ow
and mass transport problems. Eng Anal Bound Elem
1999;23:55565.
[342] Vasco DW, Karasaki K. Inversion of pressure observations: an
integral formulation. J Hydrol 2001;253:2740.
[343] Lesnic D, Elliott L, Ingham DB, Clennell B, Knipe RJ. A
mathematical model and numerical investigation for determining
the hydraulic conductivity of rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min
Sci
1997;34(5):74159.
[344] Li H, Yang Q. A least-square penalty method algorithm for
inverse problems of steady-state aquifer models. Adv Water
Resour 2000;23:86780.
[345] Mayer AS, Huang C. Development and application of a
coupled-process parameter inversion model based on the
maximum likelihood estimation method. Adv Water Resour
1999;22(8):84153.
[346] Nu. tzmann G, Thiele M, Maciejewski S, Joswig K.
Inverse modelling techniques
for determining hydraulic
properties of coarse-textured porous media by transient
outow methods. Adv Water Resour 1998;22(3):27384.
[347] Russo D. On the estimation of parameters of logunsaturated conductivity covariance from solute transport data.
Adv Water Resour 1997;20(4):191205.
[348] Roth C, Chile"s JP, de Fouquet C. Combining geostatistics and
ow simulators to identify transmissivity. Adv Water Resour
1998;21:55565.
[349] Wen XH, Capilla JE, Deutsch CV, Go! mez-Hernandez
JJ, Cullick AS. A program to create permeability elds that
honour single-phase ow rate and pressure data. Comput
Geosci
1999;25:21730.
[350] Wen XH, Deutsch CV, Cullick AS. Construction of geostatistical aquifer models integrating dynamic ow and tracer data
using inverse technique. J Hydrol 2002;255:15168.
[351] Wang PP, Zheng C. An efcient approach for successively
perturbed groundwater models. Adv Water Resour 1998;21:
499508.