C.

Derek Martin

University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada

Rock masses

Core logging
Traditional core logging

BIPS: Borehole image

Terzaghis 1946 Classifications

Intact rock

contains neither joints nor hair cracks. Hence, if it breaks, it breaks across sound rock.
On account of the injury to the rock due to blasting, spalls may drop off the roof several
hours or days after blasting. This is known as a spalling condition. Hard, intact rock may
also be encountered in the popping condition involving the spontaneous and violent
detachment of rock slabs from the sides or roof.

Stratified
Rock

consists of individual strata with little or no resistance against separation along the
boundaries between the strata. The strata may or may not be weakened by transverse
joints. In such rock the spalling condition is quite common.

Moderately
jointed
Rock

contains joints and hair cracks, but the blocks between joints are locally grown together
or so intimately interlocked that vertical walls do not require lateral support. In rocks of
this type, both spalling and popping conditions may be encountered.

Blocky and
Seamy Rock

consists of chemically intact or almost intact rock fragments which are entirely separated
from each other and imperfectly interlocked. In such rock, vertical walls may require
lateral support.

Crushed
Rock

chemically intact rock has the character of crusher run. If most or all of the fragments
are as small as fine sand grains and no recementation has taken place, crushed rock below
the water table exhibits the properties of a water-bearing sand.

Squeezing
Rock

slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible volume increase. A prerequisite for
squeeze is a high percentage of microscopic and sub-microscopic particles of micaceous
minerals or clay minerals with a low swelling capacity.

Swelling
Rock

rock advances into the tunnel chiefly on account of expansion. The capacity to swell seems
to be limited to those rocks that contain clay minerals such as montmorillonite, with a high
swelling capacity.

Downie Slide Drainage Tunnels

Shallow tunnels
Disturbed rock mass
Foliated gneiss & schist

Terzaghis Blocky and Seamy

Effect of water

Large quantities of water cause problems in tunneling

Terzaghis intact rock

Lauffers Standup time (1958)

Lauffer (1958) proposed that the stand-up time for

an unsupported span is related to the quality of the
rock mass in which the span is excavated. In a tunnel,
the unsupported span is defined as the span of the
tunnel or the distance between the face and the
nearest support, if this is greater than the tunnel
span. Lauffer's original classification has since been
modified by a number of authors, notably Pacher et al
(1974), and now forms part of the general tunnelling
approach known as the New Austrian Tunnelling
Method.

For hard rocks Standup time is not an issue

Deeres 1969 Rock Quality Designation

Classification schemes for tunnels

After G.Russo, G.S. Kalamaras & P. Grasso, 1998

geomechanical classes - represent rock mass of

different qualities, characterized by a set of welldefined geomechanical properties;
behavior categories - express the deformation
responses of the cavity upon excavation,
corresponding to different combinations of the
geomechanical and in-situ stress conditions
technical classes - directly associated with the
different project solutions (in terms of typical
sections of excavation and support).

Elements of Modern Empirical Methods

Rock Mass Rating

RMR

= A1+A2+A3+A4+A5 + B
= 0 to 100

Worst to Best

1
3
5
0
0
0

to
to
to
to
to
to

15%
20%
20%
30%
15%
-12%

A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
B

= Uniaxial Strength
= RQD
= Joint Spacing
= Condition of Joints
= Groundwater
= Joint Orientation

Rock Quality Index: Q and Q

For Tunnel
Support

For Characterization

RQD

Jr

Jw

Q = Jn x Ja x SRF

RQD
Jn
Jr
Ja
Jw
SRF

= Rock Quality Designation

= Joint Set Number
= Joint Roughness Number
= Joint Alteration Number
= Joint Water Reduction Number
= Stress Reduction Factor

Empirical Rockmass Properties

Modified Rockmass Quality Index, Q

Q=10

Q=1000

Q=0.5

Q=5

Rock mass Quality and Velocity

Rock Mass Modulus

Note: Based largely on projects at depth
from 0 to 200m

Rock mass Quality and Confined Modulus

After Hutchinson & Diederichs 1996

eg:
Rockmass
Modulus
(stiffness)

10

Empirical Stand-up Time Assessment

Rockmass Quality and Critical Span

11

Experience Based Design

eg:from Civil Engineering
Experience

Design Philosophy

Demands an understanding of the failure process.

12

Rock mass strength

Hoek-Brown failure criterion
(developed for confined conditions around tunnels)

1 = 3 + m c 3 + s c 2

Intact rock strength

mi= Lab
s=1

Rock mass
strength

3
m & s are derived from empirical charts that are
related to rock mass quality RMR & Q

m ~ Friction
s ~ Cohesion

GSI
Hoek:
These papers introduced the concept of the
Geological Strength Index (GSI) as a
replacement for Bieniawskis RMR. It had
become increasingly obvious that
Bieniawskis RMR is difficult to apply to
very poor quality rock masses and also
that the relationship between RMR and m
and s is no longer linear in these very low
ranges. It was also felt that a system based
more heavily on fundamental geological
observations and less on numbers was
needed.

13

GSI & Hoek-Brown failure envelope

Geological Strength Index

Hoek-Brown
Failure Criterion

1 = 3 + ci mb 3 + s

ci

GS I 100
m b D m i exp
28

GS I 100
s D exp
9

GSI mi values Igneous rocks

14

GSI mi values Metamorphic rocks

GSI mi values Sedimentary rocks

15

GSI + Block size

How to incorporate Modes of Failure

GSI
Classification

Rock mass

Ground Response

16

17

18

19

20

21

SKBs Site Selection Process

A challenge for Site Characterization
* Depth 0 to 1000 m
* Plan about 2 km2

Sites 1 & 2

Sites 3

22

SKBs Rock Mechanics Model Project

How confidently can we predict geological

and geoEngineering information

Example from Aspo Hard Rock Laboratory, Sweden

Provide each team with 3 Borehole logs

Teams were asked to assess:

1. The in-situ stress distribution
2. The Q and RMR distribution

3. The calculated rock mass strength

In a volume of 50 m x 50 m x 150 m

Major Structure
N
EW-1a
NE-2

EW-1b

NE-1

EW-3

23

Aspo HRL

Drill & Blast

Spot bolts & Shotcrete

420m level

450m level

TBM
No Support

Development of a Fracture Model

24

Discrete Fracture Model

3D Network

2D Network

UDEC Strength
140

100

80

60

Vertical stress (MPa)

120

40
sigy [MPa]
20
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Vertical deformation (m)

3D Block modelling
A common software tool in mining:
e.g, Vulcan, Datamine, Surpac, GoCad, etc

Petteri Somervuori
Gridpoint Finland Oy

25

The Major Fracture Zones at Aspo

Target volume

26

Drillhole information

RMR statistics

27

Variogram RMR along a borehole

Block modelling - inverse distance

28

RMR - kriging interpolation

Kriging variance - smaller close to drillholes

29

Kriging variance versus distance

kriging variance

0
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Average_distance_to_samples (m)

SurPac

30

3Dec

31

Conclusions

Rock mass characteristics are described

using ranges of values
Geostatistics hold much promise for
estimating the distribution of rock mass
properties
Existing software such as Surpac and
GoCad facilitate the development of a
geological model and the associated
GeoEngineering data.

32