Rockburst

Hazard Estimation Through

Seismic Characterization Using Conventional Seismic
Monitoring.

Juan Jarufe T., Universidad de Santiago de Chile. USACH
Juan.Jarufe@usach.cl

Abstract
Rockbursts are violent rock ejections caused by seismic events near excavations. These
situations occur as a mixture of rock mass conditions surrounding the excavations and the
energy transferred from a seismic event. Identifying these rock mass conditions where the
rock is prone instabilities or to violent rock ejections is the main task of rock engineers.
This paper presents a methodology to characterize rock mass behavior in terms of the
seismic response to blasting and relate this characterization to observed ground control
instabilities as structural controlled rockfalls or high energy rockburst.
Notwithstanding this seismic characterization was not directly correlated with any specific
geologic or geotechnical characteristic, sharp differences in the seismic response are
evident as tunneling progress, observable not only through the seismic system but also with
ground observations in terms of tunnel instability and damage. This makes the Seismic
Monitoring a useful tool to evaluate and anticipate rock instabilities based on seismic
characterization.
Spatial clustering and interpretation of this seismic characterization allow short-term
forecasting of instabilities, preparing management and operation to take into account
specific mitigation techniques as increased rock support, re-entry times or isolation zones.

Keywords: Seismic Monitoring, Seismic Hazard, Rockmass Characterization.

Introduction
Rockburst occurrence has been a serious issue for underground excavations form nearly 50
years but exacerbated in the last decade as result of the increase in deep mining, tunneling,
and hydroelectric projects (Jarufe et al. 2013, Cai 2016, Ptacek 2017, Mazaira & Konicek
2017). Rockburst correspond to the ejection of rock from the tunnel contour to several
meters ahead of the detach location, and its size and energy is associated with the size of
the ejected block and it ejection velocity, which are related to the rock mass conditions near
the excavation and to the seismic energy imposed in the rock mass by a seismic event
respectively (Kaiser and Cai, 2012, Kawbe and Wang 2015). The characteristics of these
rockburst events can be characterized in two groups, those directly related to the blast
stress distribution, so-called strain burst, where the location of the seismic event and the
damage is practically the same, and fault slip related rockburst, where the instability is
triggered by blast, but it is the direct result of a process of stress accumulation on

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 1/14



discontinuities that can be released many hours or even days after the last blast (Heib 2018,
Cai and Wang 2018, Woodward 2015, . While the energy driving the ejection is caused by
the seismic event, the exact location and size of the ejected block is governed by local rock
conditions surrounding the excavation, thus in theory, they could be observed and mapped.
Nevertheless, geological mapping is usually controlled by operation thus limited on its
applicability, with restricted measurement at excavation faces and not always in the best
observational conditions since considerable dust, low light, water and moisture and
distance from the face may exist, difficulting the mappinng and the following interpretation.
All of this may lead to misinterpretations of the geological database that may cause failure
in the correlation between rockburst and geology. This paper present a new method to
characterize the rock mass behavior based on the seismic monitoring of the rock mass
response after blast, using a engineering based seismic sensor design and
seismicity/blasting relations to differentiate rock mass behavior. A case study of seismic
monitoring of a deep tunnel and cavern is developed as an example of this methodology

Seismic analysis for deep excavations

As rock noises and seismically triggered rockfalls become more common, the use of a
seismic network to quantify the intensity of the seismic activity becomes a necessity,
enabling the site to evaluate the seismic hazard through the Mmax calculation, re-entry
times and finally, rock support estimation (Mendecki 1999, Vallejos and Mckinnon 2008,
Vallejos and Mckinnon 2011)
Seismic networks for mine and tunneling purposes usually consist in geophones or
accelerometers whom can be rather triaxial or uniaxial sensors. The selection of the
monitoring equipment depends on the monitoring objectives but fundamentally is defined
by the amount of reliable seismic data that is needed for the analysis. The higher the
periodicity of the analysis, higher number of seismic events per period are needed. To
increase the number of seismic events recorded, the sensitivity of the seismic network must
be improved. Recommendations for sensitivity are provided by Mendecki et al 1999, shown
in table 1.

Table 1. Recommended parameters for seismic network design (Mendecki 1999)

With the use of routine analysis it is possible to evaluate changes in the rock mass condition
and assess any possible indication of an increase in the seismic risk. Some of the most used
tools to assess the seismic potential correspond to the Gutenberg Richter relationship in
the frequency-magnitude chart, reentry times using the Mckinnon Vallejos Method or any
other blanket rule and the use of quantitative seismological parameters, as the energy index
Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,
Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 2/14



and the cumulative apparent volume, Schmidt and Deborah number or the diffusivity and
viscosity characteristics of the seismic data ((Mendecki & Van Aswegen, 1999))

Figure 1 Example of energy index and cumulative apparent volume as part of a instability analysis (Mendecki 1993)

All of the previous analysis are commonly used in seismically active mine sites, for mid and
long term hazard analysis, focusing in the identification of seismic hazard in space and time,
however, the asertivity and presicion of these methods in the forecast of large seismic
events is still under debate, with several published cases of success in the forecasting of
large seismic events, but also, many publications illustrating how the success rate of these
methods is no much higher than just guessing. This lack of success is in great part due to
two main factors:
• these methods do not include the effect of blasting in the calculations, a major issue
since blasting is the trigger to all the seismicity in mines and tunnels
• These methods do not include or evaluate the effect of heterogeneity or
discontinuities in the rockmass thus, a fundamental mechanism in the generation of
seismicity is not included.
In this aspect, the use of re-entry tools as Omory analysis and their variations (references)
is a useful tool because it present seismicity as the result of blasting, and is interpreted as
the time to the blast, explicitely introduced in the calculations. Is necessary then to include
explicitely the blast information in seismic hazard analysis.

Seismic monitoring layout design

To perform seismic analysis in tunnels, a minimum amount of seismic data is needed in
order to obtain enough data for analysis. To increase the number of seismic events recorded

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 3/14



after each blast, and increase the amount of reliable data above the mmin value, a specific
density of seismic sensors is needed.

Figure 2. Estimation of the Mmin magnitude based on the proposed sensor array and in empirical data (Mendeki
2009,(PotvinHudyma, 2009))

The desing of the seismic system is focused on achieving a low m min value to capture
enough seismic events after blast to perform seismic analysis. This can be achieved throug
closely spaced geophones or using high frequency accelerometers.

For the mine infraestructure developed in the case study used as example, only 14 Hz
Geophones were be used, with an average spacing between sensors of 150 meters (Figure
3).

Figure 3. Seismic sensor layout and distance from any point in the rockmass to the 5th seismic sensor

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 4/14



The empirical relation between detection distance and moment magnitude developed by
Mendecki 2009 can be used to relate the distance between any rockmass point and the
sensors with a detection magnitude, providing a first estimation of the expected Mmin for
the monitored volume (Figure 4). For this case study, Mmin varies between -1.5 and -2 for
the monitored volume, providing enough coverage for the siemsicity related to the
development blasting.

Figure 4. Estimation of the Mmin magnitude based on the proposed sensor array and in empirical data (Mendeki 2009)

Operation Based Seismic Analysis (OBSA)

To characterize the rock behaviour as excavation progress, the explicit incorporation of
blasting parameters into the seismic analysis must be implemented. Considering this,
several practical seismic tool that can be readily undesrstand and utilized by on ground
engineers and technicians were defined. The implementation of the Operation Based
Seismic Analysis (OBSA) corresponds to a effor to define seismic parameters that could be
interpreted by non specialists proffesionals, as mine technicians, construction engineers or
mine managers, whom need a more practical interpretacion of the seismic behaviours on
tunnels. To achieve this objectve, the OBSA needs to have a physical, ground obsevable
consequence, in order to create a solid relation between ground condition and seismicity.
The main parameter that control seismicity is blasting thus, to understand in a better way
the behaviour of seismicity, the volume and date of blasts is requeried, enabling the
computation of blast volume/ time/ seismicity based parameters. To evaluate these
variables, the use of the Cummulative Apparent Volume (CAV) as a measure of seismic
activity is consiedred, due the hability to include moment and energy and also, to be a time
stable parameter, without logaritmic increments in different time windows (Mendecki
2013, Hudyma 2011). The major ground conditions to be initially evaluated corresponds to
large seismic event ocurrence and strainburst/ rockburst proneness.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 5/14



To evaluate these parameters, seismicity, blast times and volumes are related to each other
defining the following indexes:

-Volumetric Seismic Index (VSI): is the relation between seismicity and blasted volume and
is defined as
*+!
!"# = %&'()
,-./

Where:
VSI is the Volumetric Seismic Index
CAV corresponds to the Cummulative Apparent Volume (Mendecki 2013)
Bvol corresponds to the blasted volume.

-P(80)t CAV: Correponds to the amount of time after blast where 80% of the total Apparent
Volume has been released. As shown in Figure 5, with colour lines representative of the
amount of CAV for two different tunnels (green acounts for tunnel VA1-1 and red for tunnel
VA1-2), 80 % of CAV happens around 5 hours after blast for the two tunnels.

Figure 5. Dots represent the magnitude of seismic events (left axis) in relation to their occurrence after blast (bottom
axis). Lines correspond to the accumulative CAV measured from the blast until no further events are recorded or next
blast occurs. Arrows indicate how many hors after blast 80% of the CAV has been released.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 6/14



-b-value: As an indication of the potential of large events, the clasic b-value, from the
gutemberg-richter linear relationship in the frequency magnitude chart (Gutemberg et al.
1944) will be evaluated. Rather than absolute values, the variations in the magnitude of this
value will be monitored. Changes in the b-value, aside from the analitic implicance of the
increase in the expected maximum magnitude, it is an indicator of stresses and
heterogeneity in the rock mass.

Figure 6. Frequency- magnitude relationship for one week of data, showing two tunnels and one zone of remote, non
directly indiced seismic events. b-value from remote seismic events is lower than events related to tunneling.

-Energy S to Energy P Ratio (Es/Ep): This well known parameter represent the ratio
between the shear and compresive seismic waves generated by seismic events. The higher
this value, the greater of the shearing component in the energy distribution thus, a higher
deviatoric component in the rupture mechanism is present, usually associated with seismic
slip along discontinuities.

Overall seismic results and OBSA results.

The seismic data obtained from the proposed system ranges between magnitudes -3 and
1.2, with a completenes magnitude, usually reffered as Mmin, near -2.2. Such low mmin
magnitude allow the measurement of the seismic response of small excavations as caverns
and tunnels almost in a blast per blast basis.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 7/14



Location error is the same order than the tunnel axis (6 meters), also the same order to the
brune rupture radius of most of the seismic events (Leslie 2011). This error is greatly
exceded when considering the vertical location component, with a error in the order of 30
meters (Figure 7)

Figure 7. Plan and section view of seismic events. horizontal error is in the same order as drift section but vertical error
exceed 30 meters.

The result of the OBSA were calculated on a weekly basis, stacking all blasts and seismicity
of the week. This time window was selected for operational reasons to perform a weekly
report to management, providing a clear, smooth and reliable seismic behaviour on time,
considering also that this is a one week average of the seismic behaviour. The variations of
these parameters in time is shown in Figure 8. While this representation of the OBSA
provides a clear view of the changes in the trend of the seismic response to blasting, the
quick changes in the trends make it hard to use this chart as a foreacsting tool.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 8/14



Figure 8. Time history of OBSA at the different working fronts. Temporal changes in the seismic behaviour are evident,
but it is not possible to conclude on this time history basis.

Spatial distribution of OBSA and their relationshipt with instabilities.

Since temporal changes in OBSA lack of forecasting capabilities, spatial plotting of these
parameters was implemented. The date where the OBSA were calculated was linked to the
spatial coordinates where blasting was being executed, allowing to asign the OBSA results
to each performed blast. These results are shown in Figure 9 and ¡Error! No se encuentra
el origen de la referencia., where actual alignment of the different rockmass behaviour can
be observed. While there may not be a unique interpretation of these results, it seems
evident that zones with Pt(80)CAV higher than 10, Es/Ep ratio higher than 1000 or ISV
greater than 3 have a spatial relationship aligning themselves in a N45W trend.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 9/14



Figure 9. Pt(80)CAV, VSI, Es/Ep and b-value for the executed developments. Some trends may be interpreted

When comparing these results with observed unstabilities, a first pass revealed no apparent
connection between OBSA and ground instabilities. Nevertheless, when considering only
those instabilities that involve a kinetic energy higher than 10Kj/m2 in their failure process
(energy calculated using the ballistic method, Tannant 1995, Kaiser1996, Jarufe et al. 2013,
Jarufe et al. 2017), a uniequivocal relationship existed between the location of these
instabilities and the blast zones with Pt(80)CAV higher than 10 hrs, regardless the magnitude
of large events.
The Es/Ep ratio shown in ¡Error! No se encuentra el origen de la referencia. was positively
related to the ocurrence of rockburst with more than 10KJ/m2 and also with structurally
controlled, non violent rockfalls, generating large overbreak (>4m) in the excavation roof.
Finally, the VSI parameter was related to the occurrence of relatively large events in the
tunnel, with a high number of positive magnitude events in zones with VSI>3 and only
negative seismic records in zones with lower VSI.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 10/14



Figure 10. Black rings correspond to the location of instabilities with rock ejection distance larger than 2.5 m and kinetic
energy greater than than 10kJ/m2. On coulors, the P(80) CAV map and Es/Ep map. Note that all instabilities occurs for
P(80) larger than 10 hrs and Es/Ep greater than 1000.

Result discussion and application field

The comparison between OBSA and observed instabilities show a positive relationsip
between instabilities and OBSA, even for not seismically related rockfalls. This relationship
may be caused because the different OBSA results are controlled by different rockmass
conditions that are evidenced when blasting is performed. These rockmass conditions may
not be specifically related to a higher seismic hazard but in practice, they are related to
different instability mechanism ocurrence, in this case, violent rock ejection and structural
wedge failure (Figure 11)
a)
b)

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 11/14



Figure 11. a) 20Kj/m2 rockburst, in a zone with Pt(80)CAV >10hrs. b) non violoent structurally controlled instability at
zone with high Es/Ep value.

While the relationship between OBSA and instabiolities is straigthforward, no obvious

relation with observed geology was found. With no specific joint set, fault plane, shear zone
or lithological change associated with the OBSA results. This apparent no relation between
seismicity and geology has been already noted in similar seismic monitoring arrays as the
one described in Jarufe et al. 2013, for a deep underground project in Chile. In that case,
alignments of seismic events was noted but at the time of the publication, expert ground
geologist could never found a matching geological feature. 3 years later, during the
construction of a ventilation shaft, the seismically interpreted fault finally emerged 150
meters south, at the projection line of the seismic events alignments, with a 1.8 Mw seismic
event.

Figure 12. Seismic events related to blasting and a N-NW alignment of seismic events (Jarufe et al. 2013). Geologoc
structure was found 3 years later when developing a ventilation shaft.

The results of the OBSA can be sumarized in Table 2, with the different indexes calculated ,
the operational and seismic data input and the operational significance. The relationship
between blast and seismicity can positively be related to observed ground control stability
issues, providing practical tools to engineers and shift managers to quicki asses re-entry
times or rock support type, with yielding support system for high energy zones and
cablebolts or other operational measure for those zones where structural problems are
expected.

Table 2. Summary of selected seismic parameters, input data and practical interpretation

Index Operation Base Seismic data Operational

Parameter Significance
VSI Blast Volume Seismic energy Large Seismic Event
Seismic Moment Frequency
P(80)t CAV Blast Time Seismicity Timing Post-Bast Seismic
Seismic Energy decay

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 12/14



Seismic Moment High energy

Instabilities
Es/Ep - Energy S Structurally
Energy P controlled
instabilities (not
violent)
b-Value - Number of events -
Magnitude


The seismic characterization of tunnels has a more practical relevance in zones where a 2nd
stage loading after the develpments is expected. This is the case for production levels that
need to be completed prior to mineral extraction. Once production start, major cavities are
generated thus, inducing high stress in the surrounding areas and loading the already
completed production level. Seismic characterization with the OBSA provides early
information about the expected behaviour of excavations, indicating where a high energy
failure may ocurr or where structurally controlled instabilities are expected. This early
mapping of rockmas behaviour provides a invaluable tool for management to take early
action and mitigate instabilities consequences.

Conclusion
This work has shown how seismic monitoring can provide invaluable information about
rockmass behaviour that can be related to ground control instabilities. While the theory
behind the analysis is simple, it is practical because has direct relation with rockfalls and
rockburst, providing a tool to take early action as re-entry restrictions, support
enhancement

Aknowledgement
This research project has been funded by the Authors would like to thanks to the
Technological Development Society (SDT), at the Universidad de Santiago de Chile and the
project entitled “Analisis y Herramientas para el control del peligro sismico” for funding this
research. To the Australian Centre for Geomechanics and the mXrap Consortium for their
continuous support with mXrap software, to SRK Consulting Chile for the oportunity to
collaborate with them in rockburst projects in Chile and to AES-GENER for their technical
support in this research.

References
Jarufe, J. A., Vasquez, P., Rodriguez, W., & Pereira, J. (2013). Rockburst and Seismic Hazard
Management at the New Mine Level Project, Codelco VP, CHILE. In D. Malovichko (Ed.), (pp.
1–11). Presented at the Rockburst and Seismicity in Mines, Moscu.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 13/14



Cai, M. (2016): Prediction and prevention of rockburst in metal mines- A case study of
Sanshandao gold mine. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechical Engineering, Vol 8, Issue
2, pp 204-211
Ptacek, J. (2017): Rockburst in Ostrava-Karvina Coalfield. Symposium of the International
Society for Rock Mechanics, Proceeding Engineering 191 (2017), pp1144-1151.
Mazaira, A. and Konicek, P. (2017): Intense rockburst impacts in deep underground
construction and their prevention. in Recent developments in geomechanics and
Geophysics, 5th international colloquium on Geomechanics and Geophysics, Karolina, Czech
Republic, pp 25-27.
Kaiser, P., Cai, M. (2012): Design of rock support system under rockburst condition. Journal
of rock mechanics and geotechnical enegineering, Vol 4, Issue 3, pp 215-217.
Kabwe, E. and Wang, Y. (2015): Review on Rockburst Theory and Types of Rock Support in
Rockburst Prone Mines. Open Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 5, 104-121
Cai M., Wang, X. (2018): Numerical Modelling of Ground Motion Near Underground
Excavation Boundaries in Rockbursts, Mechanisms, Monitorinfg, Warning and Mitigation
ed. Xia-Ting Feng
Heib, M.A. (2018): Description of Rockburst in Mines Boundaries in Rockbursts,
Mechanisms, Monitorinfg, Warning and Mitigation ed. Xia-Ting Feng
Vallejos, J., Mckinnon, S. (2008): Guidelines for development of re-entry protocols in
seismically active mines
Vallejos, J., Mckinnon, S. (2011): Correlations between mining and seismicity for re-entry
protocol development
Gutenberg, B., & Richter, C. F. (1944). Frequency of earthquakes in California. Bulletin of
the Seismological ….
Mendecki, A., & Van Aswegen, G. (1999). A guide to routine seismic monitoring in mines.
… for Tabular Hard Rock Mines.[S. l.]:[sn].
Potvin, Y. H., Hudyma, Marty. (2009). An Engineering Approach to Seismic Risk
Management in Hardrock Mines. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 1–16.

Juan Andres Jarufe T. juan.jarufe@usach.cl,

Departamento de Ingenieria en Minas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, USACH. 14/14