## 1 Introduction  
In the realm of underground rock engineering, anchor reinforcement technology is commonly employed to avert deformation and damage to the rock mass, thereby ensuring the stability of the surrounding rock [1; 2; 3]. This technology, by offering proactive resistance, markedly enhances the shear strength of the structural surfaces and fortifies the constraints on ground deformation. It also optimizes the stress conditions within the excavated rock and soil mass [4]. Additionally, anchor reinforcement effectively harnesses the geotechnical body's intrinsic strength and load-bearing capacity [5], unleashing its latent strength potential. This approach not only reduces project costs but also expedites constructionelines and supports the project's sustainable long-term operation. In summary, the crack-stopping effect exerted by anchors on the fissured granite rock mass is of pivotal importance in underground rock reinforcement engineering. It offers substantial guidance and support for the design of underground engineering projects, safety assessments, the advancement of rock mechanics theory, and the exploitation of resources. The fracture stopping effect of anchors on the interior of the rock body cannot be solved by formula derivation of its rupture mechanism using theoretical methods, so indoor tests have become one of the main methods of studying the anchoring mechanism of anchors on fissured rock bodies, and many scholars and experts at home and abroad have carried out a lot of work on the mechanical behavior of the anchored fissured rock bodies. In 1974, [PERSON] [6] conducted a series of shear tests, revealing that anchors are capable of effectively containing deformation damage in jointed rock bodies and enhancing the shear resistance of joint surfaces. In 1975, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [7] categorized the damage modes of rock anchors into the following three distinct types: damage to the perimeter rock, interfacial failure, and damage to the anchor body itself. In 1987, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [8] carried out a series of large-scale in situ shear tests and similarly found that the anchorage angle of the anchor affects the anchorage effect of the anchor on the rock body. In 1990, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [9] investigated the anchorage effect of anchors in different rock materials by dividing their shear stress-displacement curves into a linear-elastic deformation, a yielding stage, and a plastic deformation stage. In 2010, [PERSON] [10] demonstrated that even with anchorage, jointed rock masses can still exhibit shear displacement when subjected to external loads. As the shear displacement across the joint surfaces accumulates, the anchor is likely to form a plastic hinge, at which point the maximum shear stress is reached. On the domestic front, studies on the mechanical behavior of anchored fractured rock bodies have also focused on uniaxial compression and shear, which are the two most common and simplest stress states. [PERSON] [11] conducted an experimental investigation on bolted rock samples to assess the anchoring efficacy of threaded steel bolts and D-bolts. The study incorporated a range of variables, including various angles of displacement, different joint spacings, and three distinct rock materials, namely, weak concrete, strong concrete, and concrete-granite. For anchored rock with perforated weak interlayers, [PERSON] et al. [12] found that the anchoring effect could change the damage mode of the rock samples from brittle to ductile, with tensile damage being replaced by more shear damage. These above conclusions are consistent with the studies of [PERSON] et al. [13] and [PERSON] et al. [14]. In 2016, [PERSON] et al. [15] and [PERSON] et al. [16] conducted laboratory tests on the effect of prestressing anchors in fractured rock bodies, which indicated the optimal anchorage angle and location. They also found that the anchors acted to inhibit fracture creation and expansion, and to improve the integrity of the fractured rock body.