2001
DOI: 10.1007/s006030170012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reassessing the Joint Roughness Coefficient (JRC) Estimation Using Z 2

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
46
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 183 publications
(47 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, numeric data from the 3D scan were used for more precise evaluation of JRC by the following corelation [29]:…”
Section: Calcite Fractured Core Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this study, numeric data from the 3D scan were used for more precise evaluation of JRC by the following corelation [29]:…”
Section: Calcite Fractured Core Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where Z 2 is the root mean square of the first derivative of the long axis profile, which is expressed in a discrete form as follows [29,30]:…”
Section: Calcite Fractured Core Samplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lee et al (2011) made a comparison of JRC with surface angularity θ s at SIs of 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 5.0 mm but suggested empirical equations with a fixed optimum sampling interval. However, it has been stated by Yang et al (2001), Li et al (2016), Zheng and Qi (2016), and Liu et al (2017) that sampling intervals might shift the relationship between the JRC and roughness parameters.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These three methods all have some drawbacks. Beer et al (2002), Yang et al (2001), and Milne (1990) have assessed or cast doubts on them, respectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%