CIP-DATA KONINKLUKE BIBLIOTHEEK, DEN HAAG Giani, Gian Paolo Rock slope stability analysis / Gian Paolo Giani: (transl. from align]. ~ Rotlerdam fete. Balkema.~ Ml, Transl, of: Analisi di stabilita dei pedi, ~ Part: Chassifiewzione dei fenoment di stabil pendii naturafi ¢ fronti di scavo in roccia. Torino: Associazione Minecana Sul 1988, with ee ISBN 90 5410 122.9 bound Subject headings: rock slopes: alysis Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use. or the internal oF personal use of specific clients, is granted by A.A.Balkema, Rotterdam, provided that the hase fee of USS1.00 per copy, plus USSO. 10 per page is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center. 27 Congress Sirect, Salem, MA 01970, USA. For thoxe organizations that have been photocopy license by CCC. a separate system of payment has been arranged. The fee eau for users of the Transactional Reporting Service is: 90 5410 122 9/92 USS1.00 + USSO.10. Original text Anolisi di siobilité dei pend ~ Parte b: Classifienzione dei fenomeni di instabilita. pendit nannroli e fromtidi scavo in raccia ©1988 Associazione Mineraria Subslpina, Turin Completely revised and updated edition in English: ©1992 A.A. Balkema, PO. Box 1675, 3000 BR Revtterdam, Netherlands ISBN 9054101229 Distributed in USA & Canada by: ‘A.A. Balkema Publishers, Olel Post Road, Brooklicld, VT S134, USA Printed in the NetheslandsContents PREFACE TO REVISED ENGLISH EDITION 1 PROBLEM DEFINITION AND LANDSI.IDE CLASSIFICATION 1 Natural slopes 2 Anificial slopes 1.2.1 Excavation slopes 2 Embankments and dams 1.2.3 Wastes 1.3 Aim of a slope stability analysis 1.4 Classification of slope movements 1.5 Slope movement and analysis types 1.5.1 Falls. 1.5.2 Topples 1.5.3 Slides (5.4 Lateral spreads 15.5 Flows 1.5.6 Complex movements ROCK SLOPE ENGINEERING 2.1 Inteoduction 2.2 Problem definition 23 Stability analysis methods 2.4. Static and dynamic equilibrium equations 2.5 Safety factor and limit equilibrium method 2.6 Effect of water pressure in rack discontinuities 2.7 Principal factors affecting rock slope stability analys xt 29 20 29 39 40 42 44 45VI Rock slope stability analysis 3 GEOMECHANICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF DISCONTINUITIES 3.1 Discontinuity types 3.1.5 Bedding planes 3.1.2 Cleavage planes 3.1.3 Schistosities 3.1.4 Folds 3.1.5. Faulis 3.L.6 Joints 3.2. Rock slope discontinuity classification 3.3. Rock feature description methods. 3.4. Orientation 3.4.1 Angle definition 3.4.2 Spherical projections 3.4.3. Equal-area projection 3.4.4 Discontinuity orientation survey analysis and interpretation 3.4.5. Statistical interpretation of pole contour diagrams 3.5 Spacing 3.5.1, Definitions, measurements and scopes 3.5.2 Precision of the mean spacing and spacing distribution 3.6 Persistence definitions, scones and measurements 3.7 Roughness 3.7.1 Definitions and scope 3.7.2. Measurement and presentation of results 3.8 Wall strength 39 Aperture 3.10 Filling 3.11 Seepage 3.12 Number of sets 3.13 Block size 3.14 Discontinuity description using drill core and drill hole analysis 3.15 Geophysical surveys 4 SHEAR STRENGTH 4.1 Basic concepts 4.1.1 Intact rock strength envelope 4.1.2. Types of sicength criterion 4.1.3 Coulomb shear strength criterion 4.2. Rock discontinuity shear strength 4.2.1 Planar discontinuity surfaces 4.2.2 Inclined discontinuity surfaces 47 47 47 a7 50 50 5 52 53 55 56 56 ST SR 64 oe 73 7 14 78 85. 85 BS 88 1 92 93 94 95 96 97 9 99 99 99 101 103 103 1056 Contents 4.2.2. Multiple inclined discontinuity surfaces 4.2.4 Ladanyi & Archambault criterion 4.2.5 Rough discontinuity surfaces 4.2.6 Barton criterion 4.2.7 Scale clfects 4.2.8 Joint Roughness Coefficient measurements from large scale index tests 4.2.9 Statistical methods for IRC determination and shear behaviour prediction 4.2.10 Fractal characterization of joint surface roughness for estimating shear strength 4.2.11 Geostatistical operators applied to the rock joint shear strength prediction 4.2.12 Influence of the wall discontinuity interlock tevel on the shear resistance 4.2.13 Filled discontinuities 4.2.14 Discontinuity shear behaviour under dynamic conditions: 4.2.15. Concluding remarks on joint shear resistance 4.3 Shear strength of rock mass GROUNDWATER FLOW IN ROCK MASSES S.A Introduction 5.2 Basic concepts 5.3 Flow in discontinuous media 5.4 Flow in porous media 5.5 Rock mass flow models 5.6 Hydraulic conductivity of a single discontinuity, 5.7 Hydraulic conductivity of a discontinuity ser 5.8 Hydraulic characterization of discontinuous rock masses 5.8.1 Practical example of pumping tests in boreholes 5.9 Hydraulic characterization of equivalent contimious masses 5.10 Mathematical models 5.10,t Single fracture models 5.10.2 Joint network mouels GEOMECHANICAL MODEL 6.1 Introduction 6.2. Rock joint system models 6.2.1 Orthogonal mode} 6.2.2. Unbounded random plane model vil 106 108 iW 13 116 129 132 134 138 139 141 141 146 146 146 148 150 151 153 154 156 159 162 163 163 165 167 167 167 167 169Vill Rock slope stabiluy analysis 63 64 6.5 6.2.3 Co-planar polygonal model 6.2.4 Mosaic block tessellation models 6.2.5 Poisson disk model 6.2.6 Other joint modelling approaches 6.2.7 Concluding remarks on the joint system modelling techniques Potential instability phenomena identification Design sectors 6.4.1. Statistical models 6.4.2 Geostatistical models Application example 7 ROCKFALLS, TOPPLES AND BUCKLES, VW 72 73 Rockfall 7.1.1 Analytical formulations of rock fall 7.1.2 Rockfall movement analysis Toppling 7.2.1 Toppling mechanisms 7.2.2. Single block toppling limit equilibrium 7.2.3 A block system loppling analysis Rock buckling 7.3.1 Flexural buckling of plane slabs 7.3.2 Thice hinge bean models for plane slopes 7.3.3. Three hinge buckling of curved slopes 8 SLIDING PHENOMENA ANALYSIS 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Siiding instability types Simplified methods 8.2.1. Plane sliding 8.2.2 Sliding on a two plane intersection line Stability analysis using vector methods 8.3.1 Equations of lines and planes 8.3.2. Volumes, areas, angles and forces 8.3.3 Warburton procedure for stability analysis of a polyhedral rock block 8.3.4 Block theory Probabilistic methods 8.4.1 Introduction 8.4.2 Stability indexes 8.4.3 Monte Carlo method 8.4.4 Rosenblucth point estimare method 7 174 74 176 176 7 179 (80 180 185 191 I 191 193 208 208 215 218 222 222 224 226 229 229 229 231 242 282 253 256 259 264 281 281 282 283 285Contents 1X 8.4.5 Application example 286 8.4.6 Conditioned probability and Bayes theorem 287 8.4.7 Application example 288 8.4.8 Fuzzy set theory 289 8.4.9 Rock slope stability analysis ap} 290 8.5. Concluding remarks on the graphical methods in rock slope stability analysis, 292 9 DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM EQUATION METHOD 295 9.1 Method of analysis 295 9.2. Distinet Element Method 295 9.2.1 Introduction 295 9.2.2 Theoretical fonnulation of the method 296 9.2.3 Block deformability 297 9.2.4 Discontinuity behaviour model 298 9.2.5 Motion equations 301 9.2.6 Calculation sequence 302 9.2.7 Static analysis 303 9.2.8 Boundary element representation for zones distant from the examined arca 304 9.29 Coupled problems 304 9.2.10 Dynamic analysis 306 9.2.1] Other main DEM applications 306 9.3. Seismic analysis, 307 9.3.1 Pscudo-statie method 307 9.3.2. Overall displacement method 308 10 STABILIZATION AND PROTECTION METHODS 3IS 10.0 Introduction 315 10.2 Excavation and geometrical slope parameter design 315 10.2.1, Rock sliding along discontinuity planes 317 10.2.2. Rock slope toppling and sliding 322 10.2.3 Circular failure in soft or weitk rock 322 10.2.4 Secondary toppling failure 323 10.3 Drainage measures 324 10.4 Support and reinforcement systems 329 10.4.1 Active reinforcements 333 10.4.2 Passive reinforcements 337 10.5. Methods of protection 340 REFERENCES 347Preface to revised English edition This English cdition of the book: Analisi di, stabilita dei pendii ~ Parte 1. Classificazione dei fenomeni di instabilita, péndii naturali ¢ fronti di scavo in roccia vepresents an updated and revised ,version of the first Halian edition published by the Associazione Mineraria Suibalpina of Turin. ‘The book deals with the methods of assessing the stability of rockélapes and the techniques of improving the stability conditions of natural and artificial slopes which arc at risk. a , The book also deals with the-description ofurvey.and measurement methods used (o mode! the mechanicalehaviour of rock masses and theouilinifig.of field observations to calibrate numerical or analytical methods of slope analysis. The main {opiés of the book are: "Slope instability movement classification and description in order to establ- ish a connection between engineering geology and rock and soil slope engineer ing ficlds; = Different modes of slope instability and the correspondent types of slope analysis: _ ~The geometrical and physical featurés of the rock mass and the rock discontinuity; ~ ‘Sheatstrength; Rock mass modelling for flow and mechanical analysis; Rock slope stability analysis in static and dynamic fields, Rock fall modelling: Methods of improving rock slope stability and the protection methods for rockfalls. The first 1988 Italian edition of the book was written especially for the students of the course of ‘Fisica de! suolo ¢ stabilita dei pendii’ of the Technical University of Turin and contained the resulis of scientific researches published in books, magazines and international conference proceedings as far as possible. This new edition of the book has been updated with some real case application examples and with the results of new rescarch and experimental data gathered. ‘abovelall from Malian research laboratories such as those of the “Gvorisorsé ¢ xtXII Rock slope stability analysis Territorio’ Department of the Technical University of Turin and ISMES of Bergamo. 1 would like to thank all my colleagues who helped me in the writing of this book by giving me their opinions and technical papers and the other international authors of the papers quoted in the references from which I gathered scientific material I would also like to thank the past-president Prof. L. Stragiotti and the President Prof. S. Pelizza of the Associazione Mincraria Subalpina who permitted the publication of this English edition Finally | would like to thank the following persons for their important contribu- tions: ~ Dr Margherita Ferrero who assisted me in the discussing and reading of the text; — Nuova Copisterin who did the typing of the manuscript; Mrs Marguerite Jones who helped me in the English translation of the book: Miss Cristiana Catino and Miss Marina Berardi for the drawings; Dr Gabriele Pancotti who reproduced the photographs; My wife who put up with me during this period Gian Paoto Giani Turin, July 191CHAPTER | Problem definition and landslide classification (1 NATURAL SLOPES Natural slopes can be classified by referring to the activily state (Varnes, 1978). Active slopes are those (hat are cither currently moving or not moving al the present but have moved within the last seasonal cycle. Inactive slopes are thse where there is no evidence that movement has taken place within the last seasonal cycle. These slopes may be dormant, when the faiture causes are still present and a movement may occur again, or they may be stabilized when the factors causing the movement have been removed naturally or by human activity. Zaruba & Mencl (1969) and Vames (1978) subdivided slope movements according to age. A slope movement is called ‘recent’ when it has occurred in recent decades ina slope which has not yet been the center of mass movements. A movement for which there is no memory or historical records is called ancient. A fossil movement, finally, is where a slope movement occurred in a previous geological age. ‘The causes which determine sliding movement in a slope depend on pheno- mena which contribute to a shear stress increase and/or to a reduction of shear strength. The principal phenomena which contribute to a shear stress increase involve the toe or the slope surface weakening or the slope surcharging. ‘The toe or the slape surface weakening can be due to: 1. Erosion by streams, rivers, glaciers, waves. tidal currents. sub-acrial weath- cring, wetting and drying and frost action; 2. Subsidence. previous rock fall, toppling, sliding and superiicial scaling: 3. Phenomena connected to human activity such as mining or civil excavations, channel construction or water level variation in the toc zone of reservoirs. Surcharges can also be induced by natural causes or human activity. Natural surcharges are due to rain water or snow weight, or to water percolation in rock discontinuities. Surcharges due (o human work are embankments, mining '2 Rock slope stability analysis and industrial waste disposal, weight of buildings and other structures and water weight in channels and reservoirs. The principal causes which contribute to a shear strength reduction depend on: Soil texture, rock fabric and rock structural defects; physical and chemical reactions; and changes in intergranular forces. 1. Texture plays an important role in sensitive soil behaviour such as clay, shale, loess, loose sand and organic porous material. The rounded shape of the sand particles decreases shear resistance, whilst sharp shapes increase shear res- istance, The principal parameters affecting the rock mass shear resistance are the structural discontinuities, the contrast in stiffness and resistance in non- homogencous masses, the unfavorable orientalion of beddings and joints, the slope orientation and the cementation degree of semi-coherent rocks such as sandstone and conglomerates. 2. Physical and chemical reactions can be due to: a) The softening in fissured clays; b) The physical disintegration of granular rocks such as granites or sandstones under frost action or thermal eycle effects; Plate 1.1. Fissure in over- consolidated clays. By F Lida,Problem definition and landslide classification 3 c) The hydration in clay soils, when a large quantity of water is absorbed by clay fraction thereby decreasing initial shear strength (smectitic clay swelling determines a shear decrease): d) The oversaturation of loess with a consequent destruction of the bonds between the clay particles and large soil particles; c) Cement dissolution phenomena in sandstones and conglomerate: 3. The principal intergranular force varistion phenomena depend on: a) The water content which determines the pore pressure and the water pressure in the rock discontinuities. Meicoric events and human works such as the diversion of streams, biackage of drainages, irrigation and pondin, b) The clearing of vegetation and forests. 4, The soil texture and rock fabric variation can be caused by: a) Fissures of shales and overconsolidated clay (Plate 1.1): ‘b) Weathering and fracturing duc to the release of vertical or horizontal stresses. in valley cuts or walls; c) Remoulding or revelling which can decrease the shear strength of fine Particle material such as loess, loose sands and sensitive clays. 1.2 ARTIFICIAL SLOPES Anificial slopes can be subdivided into three categories: Excavation slopes; dams and embankments; and wastes (Chowdhury, 1978). 1.2.1 Excavation slopes “She excavation design aims at determining the average excavation height and inclination which can keep the slope stable, while taking economical aspects into consideration The period for which an excavation slope has to remain stable varies according tothe: — Mining or civil work type: ~ Foreseen mainicnance works; = Forescen stability control measurements. The principal parameters affecting rock slope excavation stability arc: 1. Rock matrix shear and deformation features; Physical and geometrical features of discontinuities in the siope rock mass; Average height, slope angle and the complete geometry of benche: Discontinuity and rock mass water flow; Drainage works: Reinforcing works (rockbolis, cables, ete.) which can also be considered in the design phase for a suitable slopé stability condition. The principal parameters which must considered in the slope excavation design are: Queen4 Rock slope stability analysis: 1, Shear resistance parameters in drained and undrained conditions (the stabil- ity analysis of an excavation slope in a clay material is usually carried out in effective stress terms with drained parameters); 2. Stress state history; both those induced in the geological formation before excavation and those duc to the excavation; 3. Pore pressure distribution and change in pore pressure during and after the slope excavation; 4. Long (c’, ’) and short (S,) term stability conditions. 1.2.2 Embankments and dams The mechanical properties of the materials used to construct embankments and dams can be known before or “in situ’ determined both from soit and rocktiil composition and from the compaction degree points of view. Careful investiga- tions and “in situ" tests are insicad required in order to characterize the subsoil Embankmients and dams constricted on a cohesive soil require a staged construction by consolidating with controlicd loading rates in order to strengthen the foundation soil (Ladd, 1987). Consolidation may be accelerated by the \stallation of vertical drains. Ficld observations are necessary for important works built on cohesive soil foundations in order to estimate the rate of pore overpressure dissipation Stability analysis must consider staged construction problems according to the CU (consolidated undrained) case which represents the most realistic and critical conditions. The CU case rclers toa full or partial consolidation of soil as far as the applica stresses and undrained failure are concerned. Numerical methods such as the Finite Element Method (FEM) can be used for the coupled deformation-flow problem in order to help the enginecr in the staged construction parameter definition, The principal advantages of FEM use in designs are: = The possibility of simulating the staged construction by varying soil detor- mation modulus with confining siresses and by choosing an appropriate soil stress-strain constitutive law; ~ The possibility of computing and comparing the settlements determined for each dam layer application with experimental results; = The possibility of examining the interacting soil core rockfill behaviour and of computing effective stresses in the soil core for cach dam layer loading: ~ The possibility of assessing overall dam stability conditions for each con- struction stage on the basis of the effective stresses and the pore pressures computed When a dam is working, control grid measurements are periodically or continuously carried out and the stability analysis usually relcrs to the following critical situations:Problem definition and landslide classification $5 Atthe end of the dany construction; I. 2. In ong term conditions with full water load; 3. In rapid water emptying conditions; 4. Inscismic conditions. 1.2.3 Wastes In many European laws waste disposals are classificd according to the toxicity degree and the material types (such as sanitary landfill, industrial muds or mining, and civil work debris). The principal Factors governing the waste disposal slope stability problems are: 1. The site choice which depends on environmental problems, soil mompholo- gy. stratigraphy and mechanical features and hydrogeological conditions of the basin housing the waste disposal; 2. The waste disposal construction method choice which must allow one (o store the required waste volume while maintaining the designed slope stability conditions; 3. The mechanical characteristics of the waste material and the tailing dams; 4. The seepage control. Waste material can be shoveled or set in place by means of hydraulic filling techniques. In the first case the material can be, from a geomechanical point of view, considered a debris or a sand, according to the material particle size distribution. In the second case, different kinds of problems affecting the waste disposal slope stability should be considered. Two problems which influence the hydraulic fill structure stability are here bricfly discussed: The construction methods of tailing dams for hydraulically transported waste material and the sclection of shear strengih for static and dynamic stability analysis. Tailing dam construction methods (Morgenstern & Kupper, 1988) (Fig ae = Upstream method: = Downstream method; — Centerline method. The upsircam method is the oldest, simplest and most economical method of tailing dam construction. However, the most famous examples of hydraulic filled structure collapses were constructed using an upstream method (Morgenstern & Kupper, 1988). Morgenstern & Kupper have pointed out that the failure statistics reflect the fact that the upstream method of tailing dam construction is the most Trequently used; if correctly designed, safe structures can also be built using the upstream method. Morgenstern & Kupper also pdinted out that the most significant characteristics which affect the design and the performance of hydraulic filling structures re 1.1)CHAPTER | Problem definition and landslide classification (1 NATURAL SLOPES Natural slopes can be classified by referring to the activity state (Varnes, 1978). Active slopes are those that are cither currently moving or not moving al the present but have moved within the last seasonal cycle. Inactive slopes are those where there is no evidence that movement has taken place within the last seasonal cycle. These slopes may be dormant, when the faiture causes are stil! present and a movement may occur again, or they may be stabilized when the factors causing the movement have been removed naturally or by human activity, Zaruba & Mencl (1969) and Varnes (1978) subdivided slope movements according to age. A slope movement is called ‘recent’ when it has occurred in recent decades in a slope which has not yet been the center of mass movements. A movement for which there is no memory or historical records is called ancient. A fossil movement, finally, is where a slope movement occurred in a previous geological age. The causes which determine sliding movement in a slope depend on pheno- mena which contribute to a shear stress increase and/or to a reduction of shear strength The principal phenomena which contribute to a shear stress increase involve the toe or the slope surface weakening or the slope surcharging. The toc or the slope surface weakening can be due to: 1. Erosion by streams, rivers, glaciers, waves. tidal currents. sub-acrial weath- cring, wetting and drying and frost action; 2. Subsidence, previous rock fall, toppling, sliding and superficial scaling: 3, Phenomena connected to human activity such as mining or civil excavations channel construction or water level variation in the toe zone of reservoirs. Surcharges can also be induced by natura) causes or human activity. Natural surcharges are due to rain water or snow weight, or to water percolation in rock discontinuities, Surcharges due to human work are embankments, mining 1Problem definition and landslide classification 7 independent of the method of construction are: — The particle size separation; ~ The drainage measures; ~ The compaction = Earthquake resistance. The selection of the strength parameters is of vital importance for the design of a stable embankment and fora stable hydraulic filled structure. Poulos (1988) poinicd out that the steady state strengths of soils ultimately control stability for both static and earthquake loading in every case. The steady state strength is the strength at a very large strain (i.e. the strength when the soil is in a stcady state of deformation - Figure 1.2). The ‘in situ® peak strength is of a temporary nature and should nol usually be relied on for a long term. 1.3 AIM OF A SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS In the geotechnical ficld, stability analyses aim to support the safe and functional design of rock and soil slopes. Preliminary analyses can be carried out in order to determine the critical parameters of a work stability. Parametric analyses allow ‘one to assess the physical and geometrical problem parameter influence on the slope stability. A rock and soil slope stability analysis allows one to evaluate: 1. The optimal staged excavation or construction time sequence determina- tion; 2. The role, which design parameters such as slope angle and excavation or embankment height, play in the work stability; 3. Consolidation works such as retaining walls, drainage systems or rockbolt- ing, which can stabilize a slope. A stability analysis can also be carried out to assess the equilibrium conditions of a natural slope. Civil works are often constructed on natural slopes which are in limiting equilibrium conditions or which were the center of a landslide movement. In these cases, stabilily back analyses are carried out with the purpose of assessing the values of shear strength parameters and pore pressure distributions in potentially unstable masses in the absence of undisturbed specimen laboratory tests. Dynamic equilibrium equation analyses can be carried out in order to predict unstable mass movements. This is the case of flow or fall instability phenomena where soil mass and rock block paths are determined until the statical equilibrium condition is reached Stability analysis can be carried out with the aim of analyzing the seismic shack event effect on a natural or artificial slope. Two analyzing methods are usually used for this purpose: The first is Called pscudostatic and simulates the seismic shock effect by adding an external force proportional to the maximum seismic8 neck slope stability analysis designed acceleration to the active forces: the second, called the overall displace- ment method, solves the dynamic equitibrium equations of the examined unstable mass by taking the time variation of the seismic acceleration. according 10 2 designed seismogram. into account The instability risk is a concep! which should be introduced into stability analysis because of the uncertainties connected to the geological material parame- ter determination, Probabilistic analyses are carried out for this purpose. Geostat- istical models for the geological variables governing slope stability problems can finally be carried out, by considering the regionalized aspect of those variables and by therefore decreasing the uncertainties of the slope stability assessment 1.4 CLASSIFICATION OF SLOPE MOVEMENTS ‘The most widely used classification of slope movements was compiled by Varnes (1978) for the US Trasportation Research Board and the National Academy of Sciences. There are six basic considered types of slope movements: Falls, topples. slides. lateral spreads. flows and complex movements. Sliding movements are further divided into rotational and translational slides. Every type of moveme: is also considered on the basis of the geological formation type which has besn subjected! 10 the movements. Geological formations are subdivided into: Bedrock, debris soil and earth soil Slope movements were therefore classified by Varnes into 18 types Table 1.1 repons the abbreviated classification af slope movements proposed by Vames. The types of slope movements occur with a different Irequence. An earth block slide is. in nature. more frequent than an eanh topple. Table 1.1, Abbreviated classification of slope movements proposed by Vames (1978). Type of movement Type of material Engineering soils Bedrock Predominantly coarse Fails Rockfall (a) Debris fail (hi Earth falt (oy Topples Rock topple (b) Debris topple tit Earth toppte 1p) Slides: Revational A few units Rock slumpic) Debris slump (1) Earth stump (7) Slides: Transiational A few units Rock block slide Debris block slide Earth block slide Many usits Rock slide td) Debris slide (mi Earth slide «n) Lateral spreads Rock spread (e) Debris spread anh spread (s) Flows Rock How (deep Debris Naw (soil Ean flow (Soil creep) it) creep (ny creep) (t) Complex Combination of to of more principal types of movements ig)Problem definition and landslide classification 9 Carrara et al. (1985) examined the different frequencies of the Varnes classifi- cation of movement types in the Jtalian geological environment The tems used to refer to the frequency of a slope movement type are 1. Large diffused types 2. Average diffused types: 3. Rare diffused ty pes. Carrara et al. also referred to the identification difficulty degree of slope move- ment in the lalian environment. A slope movement can be: 4. Easily identitied and classified on the basis of ‘in situ’ observations: 2. Identitied and classified only on the basis of geological and geotechnical investigations, Table 1.2 reports (Carrara et al., 1985) the diffusion and the investigation difficulty degree of slope movements for the Italian environment. A slope analysis is carried out by usit an analy tical or numerical model which can determine the limiting equilibrium conditions or the movement of a poten tially unstable mags. Slope analyses can in fact be devoted to examining either stability conditions or motion equations of a slope mass. by determining. in the latter case. the paths and the velocities of the unstable body Table 1.3 reports the terms used (9 qualitatively describe the slope movement velocity according to the Vames classification Table 1.2. Frequency of the Varnes classification movement pes and identitic ty degree in the lalian geological environment (afler Carrara et al. 19 a Fee soo ho #438 p db 4400 ie 4 ce #4 000 1 44 eoo r d 44 0e m #4 409 $ e488 n 40 1 fo 48 obo ato v gs Fe edd Slope movementiypes: # # # Large dittused slope: # # Average diffused: # Rare diffused 090 Easily identifiable slope: ¢¢ Difticutt o identify: © Unlikely identifiable. Table 1.3. Slope movement scale (alter Varnes, 1978 Rae Delinition term aims Extremely rapid > 3 mimin Nery rapid > 1S miday Rapid > 13 m/month Moderate > 15 mésear Slow > 006 méyear Very 100 km/h) on the Spriana (Valteltina. Italy) landslide site, over a path of more than 1000 m (Plate 1.2) Rock block fall analysis methods. as discussed in Chapter 7. are used in order to predict the block path and the block energy during movement. Protection darriers. catch fences, catch nets and other rockfall protection systems can be reliably designed when the block path and enerey are predicted Plate 1.2. Path of block falling. at Spria- na Valiellina, Lombardy, Italy 7 duced by permission of ISMES Geo- mechanical Division,Problem definition and landslide classification Figure 1.3. Main types of falls accosd- ing to Hurchinson (1988). a) Primary. Rock and soil fatis: b) Secondary: ny {b) Stone Plate 1.3. Debris falls in an alluvial deposit in Soncala, Valtellina, Waly Stone and boulder fails involve rock bodies already physically detached from the cliff and merely lodged upon it and have been as a secondary fall category (Hutchinson. 1988) in contrast to the primary fall category which refers to the fresh detachment of material from the parent mass (Figure 1.2, Plate 1.3). 1.5.2 Topples Toppling movements are due to forces that cause an overturning mement about a pivot poim below the toppling block unit center of gravity. {n.a blocky rock mass,12 Rock slope stability analysis (2) 3 (cy Figere ‘a. Toppling & res:a) Si-> +S tiple: c) Debris topple: 1) \Y ke stches'ratum: 2) Streuny erosion: 3) Beh; 4) Sund: 5) Tension crack: 6) Clayey yravel:” set al is due to block w the resultant force which determines the block top! water pressure in the joint and the adjacent block thnust Rock block single toppling conditions can be analyzeu. as discussed in Chap- ter 2, by means of rotational and traslational block equilibrium equations. Rock block multiple toppling phenomena were classified, as is discussed in Chapier 7, by Goodman & Bray (1976) according to the rock block system geometry and to the forces acting on the blocks The block movements which follow a topple are falls, rollings and slides. A block fall analytical model can be used to determine the path and energies of a falling block which stans to move by toppling. Rock and soil toppling failure schemes are reported in Figure 1.4 1.5.3 Slides A sliding movement is determined by unbalanced shear siress along one or more surfaces. These surfaces are visible or may be inferred by analyzing ‘in sity’ observations. Sliding surface determination is one of the most important prob- lems in a landslide analysis. A landslide phenomenon may already have occurred and the sliding surface shape and position can be identified by means of site investigations (Walker et al., 1987). In this case slope stability analysis is carried out with the purpose of assessing unstable slope mass strength or pore pressure parameters by means of @ landslide back analysis.Problem definition and landslide classification 13 A landslide phenomenon can be incipient or a sliding condition can be determined for a man-made slope. In these cases, slope stability analyses are carried out with the purpose of locating a critical failure surface. The methods proposed to automatically locate the critical failure of an ‘engineering soil" slope by considering it to be the surface that has the minimum safety factor (Mostyn & Small, 1987) are: 1. The minimum safety factor research into families of surfaces that pass through a pre-determined slope zone (for exaniple: The toe, the crest of the slope or acontact zone between two different layers) 2, The use of the operation research /dynamic programming method to guide the search. 3. The application of the variation calculus. Figure 1.5 shows the grid search pattem forthe critical circular sliding surface of a triangular slope. This procedure of minimum safety factor determination has disadvantages and limitations. Disadvantages occur because the critical surface obtained by the grid search pattern does not always correspond to the absolute minimum safety factor but often corresponds 1o a local minimum surface for non-homogeneous slopes. Limitations of the minimum safety factor determination using a grid search Pattern occur when the centre of the critical circular surface is not located inside the grid. In many cases the center is located at an infinite point or along the lowest border of the grid. The first situation occurs when a non-cohesive soil is examined Figure 1.3, Determination of the minimum safety factor circular surface in a homogeneous slope: 1) The circles pass through the slope toe; 2) Radius of the circular surface which refers to the minimom safety factor: 3) The centers of the examined circles lie on grid points: 4) Contours of iso-safety factor curves.14 Rock slope stability analysis with a linear Mohr-Covlomb shear strength envelope. The second occurs when an embankment is built on a cohesive soil and an undrained loading condition has to be verified. ‘The second method of locating the critical failure surface has no arbitrary restrictions on the shape and position of the critical surface. This method involves establishing an initial estimation of the location of the critical failure surface and evaluating the safety factor for this surface. The initial estimation is then modified and the safety factor is re-evaluated for the new surface location. The process is continued iteratively until a minimum safety factor has been obtained. The limit equilibrium method is the most used method applied to determine the safety factor along a surface. Different alghorithms were instead proposed for the critical surface location. The secant method (Nguyen, !985 a, c) is a numerical procedure often adopted in order to locate the critical surface with a few iterations, A probabilistic analysis method was proposed by Oboni & Bourdeau (1983) in order to find the most probable critical failure surface. The method, which applies the calculus of variations, consists of the deriving of an analytical function for the safety factor and then, by using calculus, the determination of the condition for which this function is a minimum. The geometry and cther variables of the stability problem need to be expressed as a differentiable function in order to apply this method A summary of the various methods of applying the variation calculus for the enitical surface location has been given by Fredlung (1984), Since field investigations have » dominant influence on the soi) and rock mass geotechnical characterization and consequently on the landslide analysis model choice. the principat landslide parameters which should to be classified are: ~ Failure surface: ~ Depositional area: ~ The way in which the movement occurs; ~ The rate of the movement; The size of materials and the degree of disruption of the displaced mass: — The parent material involved; - ‘The age of the failure; — Various combinations of the above parameters The failure surface shape is determined by the landslide movement Planar slides are characterized by slides on a plane or on more than one plane. These planes are dip directed out of the existing ground surface. Slides are, in this case, translation movements. Much of the material is forced down the slide plane as blocks of material which are often held together by vegetation roots. Rates of movement range from mm/s to a few m/s. Rotational slides, also called stumps, are characterized by curvilinear (concave upward) shear planes. ‘The dominant characteristic of the failed mass is a backward rotation. SlumpsProblem definition and landslide classification 15. are generally deep compared to their length. The failed material remains intact in that only one or a few discrete blocks are likely to be produced. Slumps are rare on natural hillslopes, even though they are perhaps the most common mode of failure in man-made excavations and in soft ground fills. Rates of movement range from mm/y to m/day (Walker et al., 1987) Walker et al. (1987) gave typical ranges of geometrical features of various slope movements, based on published sets of experimental data. The examined slope movement geometrical feature is the ratio between the maximum thickness (D) of the moving mass and the maximum length (L) of the moving mass im the direction of the maximum slope ‘The translational slide phenomena varied in a range between 5 to 10 of D/L%, the rotational slide phenomena in a range between 15 10 30 and flows in a range between 0.5 10 3 1.5.3.1 Rotational slides The most common rotational sliding phenomena involve a sliding surface with a spoon shape or a convex cylindrical shape. The sliding surface is seldom a uniform concave upward spherical segment: often the presence of beddings. joints, faults and non-homogeneity zones influence the sliding surface shape. The 3-D stabilizing effect. given by a non-constant sliding surface along the transversal direction to the ground surface. can be taken into account in a linziting equilibrium analysis. Figure 1.6 illustrates the principles of a method available to include 3-D effects in a classical 2-D limit equilibrium method approach (Plate 1.4). The sliding surface, determined on the principal landslide vertical section, is therefore often composed of straight lines and circular arcs Rotational slides mainly occur in slopes made up of relatively homogereous clay and shale deposits. This phenomenon also occurs in slopes of granular material or closely jointed rock. in which pore water pressures are sufficiently high (© cause a rotational rather than a shallow (ranslational failure. Rotational failures aiso occur in slopes of highly alterated and weathered rocks. Methods of assessing stability conditions in closely jointed rock slopes, alterated and wea- thered rock slopes are discussed in Chapter 8 (Sarma, 1973; Hoek & Bray, 1981: Hoek & Brown, 1980; Hoek, 1983). Hutchinson (1968) has defined and described the following three main types of rotational landslide (Figure 1.7) \. Single rotational slide; 2. Successive rotational slides; 3. Multiple rotational slides. The first type is characterized by the presence of a single, concave upward sliding surface upon which the unstable mass moves as an essentially coherent unit. The second type, characteristic of the latter stage of degradation in freely16 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 1.6. Approximate method of 3-D stability analysis for a cireular or non-circular surface in terms of tolal or effective stress (after Hutchinson & Del Prete. 1985). The 2-D factor of safety Fon section J-1 (fora | m wide strip) is: F, = (Resisting moment of forces, ER)/{Disturding moment or forces, SD). The 3-D safety factor, Fy, is given by F; =(B,- IR + Ry + Ry)! (B,- ED). where B, is the arm of an equivalent rectangular sliding body. Ry is the restoring moment or force on end ptane M and Ris the restoring moment or force on end plane N. a) Slide boundary; 1) Section 1-1: 2)8,: 3) End plane Mf: 4) End plane N; 5) Idealized equivalent rectangplar slide boundary; b) Section }-1 of the landslide, Plate 1.4. Rotational sliding in clay at Craco. Basilicata, ltaly. By M. Del Prete.Problem definition and landslide classification \7 Figure 1.7. Main types of rotational slides (after Varnes, 1978): a) Single: b) Multiple: c) Successive; 1) Slope degrading cliffs or stiff fissured clays, refers to a succession of shallow rotational slips. arranged approximatively head to toe up @ slope and usually of the retrogressive type. The third phenomenon type can occur, under certain circumstances, as a retrogression of a single rotational slip and results in the formation of two or more slipped blocks. each with curved, concave upward slip surface tangeras to a common, generally deep-seated, slip sole. The classical limit equilibrium methods can be applied to assess slope stability conditions or to carry out a slope back analysis for circular sliding surface cases (Bishop, 1955; Spencer, 1967) or for non-circular sliding surface cases (Janbu, 1973: Morgenstern & Price, 1965: Fredlung & Krahn, 1977; Sarma, 1973). 1.5.3.2 Translational slides Translational slides involve shear failure on-alrnost planar surfaces in a down slope section. These phenomena were subdivided by Hutchinson (1988) into the following principal types (Figure |.8): 1, Sheet slides: 2. Slab slides; 3. Peat slides;18 Rock slope stability analysis 9 h Figure 1.8. Principal «ypes of sliding translations: 1) Sheet slides: 2) Slab slides: 3) Rock slides (a-d: 2-D phenomena: e-h: 3-D phenomena); 4) Debris slides: 5) Sudden spreading failures (after Hutchinson. 1988; Kovari & Fritz, 1984). 4. Rock slides: 5. Debris slides; 6. Sudden spreading failures. Sheet slides are very shallow translational movements of essentially dry and cohesionless materials. Slab slides involve coherent but unlithified soils, The phenomenon often occurs when a greater contrast between a very soft slipping zone and the overlying, stiffer, but still unlithified zone, occurs. Peat slides usuaily affect blanket bogs and the failure surface often occurs in mineral soils just below the base of the peat, or in mineral peats Rock slides can be subdivided on the basis of the movement type, of the sliding plane surface shape or of the number of sliding rock blocks. Sliding movement can occur along a single plane (Plate 1.5) or at the intersection line between two planes (Plate 1.6). Sliding surfaces can be planar (Plate 1.7), stepped or poly- gonal. Rock sliding movement can involve a single unit, a few units or many units, Chapters 8 and 9 are devoted to the analysis of the rock slide phenomena Slides of debris can involve, in non-periglacial zones, movement along a bedrock or along a more consolidated debris material.Problem definition and landslide classification 9 Sa Sot Jello Plate 1.5. Plane sliding in a layered excavated rack wall in Valnoci, Tuscany. lta. By A. Azzoni. ISMES. Plate 1.6. Rock wedge failures in the Corinto channel walls, Greece.20 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 1.7. Sliding plane along a bedding surface in marl, Basilicata, Naly. Debris slides can be caused in a periglacial zone by the thaw of a thin layer of soil. In this case, the saturated debris material slides over a planar surface, which is generally the permafrost table Sudden spreading failure usually occurs in varved clays and in other quaternary deposits, in particular, in quick clays or with sub-horizontal layers of loose saturated sand or silt, prone to liquefication by earthquakes Hutchinson (1988) also defined compound slides as intermediate types as far as, the proportions between rotational and translational slides are concerened (Figure 1.8). Compound slides are characterised by markedly non-circular slip surfaces formed by a combination of a steep, curved orplaner rear part and a flatter sole. Compound slides usually reflect ihe presence of hetereogeneity beneath a slope which is often a weak layer or a boundary between weathered and unweathered materialProblem definition and landslide classification 21 The limit equilibrium method is often, for the above quoted sliding types, not able to take all the factors affecting the slope equilibrium conditions into account, A stress-strain analysis method should be used when failure stresses are due to stiffness contrast between a potentially unstable mass and the underlying soi) ‘The relative displacements of rock blocks may affect the equilibriuma condi- tions of a rock mass formed by several block units. The slope analysis method has to consider the joint stiffnesses in order to compute relative block movements. A numerical method able to determine interstitial overpressure, caused by cyclic or impulsive loadings. should be used when an instability phenomenon can be caused by soil liquefaction 1.5.4 Lateral spreads ‘The prevailing mode of movement of lateral spreads is a lateral extension created by shear or tensile fracture generation. These movements are often determined when the slope is formed by a stiff formation lying on a soft formation or when a stiff and soft layer sequence occurs In the case in which a stiff slab lies on a soft layer, the slab weight can induce yield zones in the Jower layer. Subvertical tensile fractures in the slab are the consequence of these yield zones. These fractures can be extended from the slab basis up to the top, dividing the whole slab imto a set of blocks. Lateral spread movements can be generated or increased when the fractures are water or debris filled. Two pictorial examples of lateral spreads, given by Vames (1978), are reported in Figure 1.9. (a) (b) Figure 1.9. Examples of lateral spread proposed by Varnes ()978): a) Lateral rock spread (Zarvba & Mencl, 1969); b) Lateral soil spread; 1) Compact clay; 2) Soft clay layered with send and silt; 3) Compact clayey gravel22. Rock slope stability analysis Different lateral spread phenomena can be numerically modelled by means of 1. Computation of the yield zones induced by external loadings; 2. Analysis of failure propagation in the stab, 3. Analysis of lateral extension movements, 4. Analysis of stabilization methods. ‘The computation of the yield zones induced by external loading can be carried out using a stress-strain analysis method such as the finite element method. In this case: a) deformability and strength features of geological formations, b) body forces, c) boundary conditions and d) plasticity laws for the formations, need to be assigned to the numerical model. The failure propagation analysis in the slab can be examined by using a method such as the displacement discontinuity method (Crouch & Stanfield, 1983) by also assigning the fracture toughness to the numerical model. The analysis of lateral extension movements can be examined as a sliding movement and sliding analysis methods can be used for this purpose The analysis of the stabilization method can be carried out by simulating cables or other reinforcing techniques with a numerical method such as the distinct element method or finite element method The use of the distinct element method allows one to schematize a blocky system; in finite clement method application, the fracturated slab can be consi- dered as an equivalent continuous method or can be alternatively schematized as a jointed system and joint elements must be used 1.5.5 Flows Several types of movements cannot be classified into falls, topples, slides or lateral spreads. These movements have a flow aspect in unconsolidated materials, both with low or high rates, whether saturated or drained The moving mass rate distribution is found in several cases and especially in fine soils similar to that of a viscous fluid. 15.5.1 Rock flows ‘A rock flow movement includes deformations that are distributed among many large or small fractures, or even microfractures, without a concentration of displacements along a through-going fracture. The movements are usually slow and sometimes are so slow as to be called gravitational movements. Flow movernents may result in folding, bending. bulging or other manifesta- Lions of plastic behaviour (Varnes, 1978) A numerical simulation is extremely difficult as it is difficult to assess rock mass paramelers and have experimental displacement measurements available to compare with numerical results in so slow and Jong term movements. 1.5.5.2 Debris and earth flows In debris and earth flows. the sliding surface is not usually visible and when aProblem definition and landslide classification 23 sliding surface is visible, it occurs for a short period of time. The limit between the moving mass and the underlying soil can be a clear differential movement surface ora distributed sliding zone. Varnes classified the debris flows as: Debris flows, debris avalanches, solifiuctions, block streams, soil creeps. 1. Debris flows are called mud flows in some other classifications. Vames (1978) distinguished debris from mud flows on the basis of the particle size of the materials which are involved in the flow movement. Some typical distributions of the particle size of materials involved in mud flows and debris flows are reported in Figure 1.10. Debris flows commonly result from unusual heavy rainfalls or cles V fa) 199 /|—_—_—. 80 60 aoe 20 — —- ) Figure 1.10. Grain size distribution of mud flow and debris flow materials. a) After Hutchin: son (1988): 1-2) Mud flows; 3-5) Debris flows; 6) Wet concrete. b) After Giani & Mancini (1988): 1) Specimens gathered on the side of the debris flow area: 2) On the flowing material: 3) On the material in the toe zone in a debris flow which occured in 1987 in Valiellina (haly,24 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 1.8. Debris flow in Val Brem- bana, Lombardy. Italy. By A. Frassoni, iSMES from snow or frozen soil thawing. The debris flow movement has been classified as very rapid (Plate 1.8). 2. Debris avalanches are those types of movement which have similar charac- teristics to the classical movements of snow or ice. In debris avalanches the rate of movement is very rapid or extremely rapid, whilst the phenomenon is progressive and always involves greater masses of debris during the flow and tumble, 3. Solifiuctions or soil flows involve the movement of superficial debris. This phenomenon is, in areas of perennially or permanently frozen ground. better termed gelifluction and is however dependent on the frost-thaw cycles which can seasonly determine a weakening of the debris mantle cavering the slope bedrock. with a consequent viscous curling debris movement. Solifluctions are typical in gentle slopes ang are also recognizible (Civita, 1982) because of the unusual tree forms with the trunk being bent near to the root and straight in the upper part 4. Block streams are typical movements in semi-arid environments and can be caused by the rapid lowering of rock mass mechanical features combined withProblem definition and landslide classification 25 5. Soil creeps are extremely slow movements which are imperceptible if displacement measurements are not carried out over a long period of time. Movernents have a viscous character and involve almost fine grain debris material in non-periglacial areas. The rate of movement is in the 10 mm/year range, the movements are determined by the wet content variation in the debris material; these wet variations are usvally cavsed by temperature variation The earth flow movements have been classified by Varnes as: Wet sand or silt flows, rapid earth flows, earth flows, dry sand flows, loess flows 1. Wet sand or silt flows have been identified for natura! and man made slopes, both in sub-aqueous and in a wholly sub-aerial environment. In the first environ ment. instability ofien occurs when banks of sand in the toe zone of a submerged slope are subjected to score and to repeated fluctuations of pore water pressure because of the rise and fall of the tide or the stormy sea wave action. In the sub-acqueous environment, the flow may be of a liquefaction type. This occurs when. in the lower saturated slope part. high excess of pore pressures are induced by the weight of the upper part of the slope. Flow movements vary from rapid to very rapid 2. Rapid earth flows occur in fine-grained silt, clay and clayey sand. These flows form a complete gradation with slides involving failure caused by lateral spreading. They involve not only liquefaction of the subjacent material. but also retrogressive failure and liquefaction of the entire slide mass. This phenomenon usually takes place in sensitive materials, that is. in those materials whose remoulding strength is decreased to a small fraction of its original value at constant water content (Varnes, 1978). Flow movements are very rapid. 3. Slower and drier earth flows are typical in plastic earth whenever there is a combination of clay or weathered clay-bearing rocks, moderate slopes, and adequate moisture to provoke instability (Plate 1.9) (Varnes, }958).26 Rock slope stability analysis 4, Dry sand flows vary from rapid to very rapid movements. These movements are common along shores or embankments underlain by dry granular material Flowing material may be channelized or sheetlike. 5. Loess flows are dry and extremely rapid movements. The instability is caused by earthquake shock which destroys the fairly coherent internal structure of the porous silt which makes up the loess. The loess therefore becomes similar toa dry sand which can flow. Water action can be superimposed onto this failure mechanism and in seismic conditions liquefaction phenomenon can arise, deter- mining an earth-like flow movement Analytical models of Aow-slide phenomena have been proposed with the purpose of determining the motion equations of the Rowing material and conse- quently the maximum extension of the movement. Hutchinson (1986) has analyzed slope failure due to a structural collapse and the consequent flow-slide of the unstable material. The analyzed slopes can be formed by a metastable, non coherent matenial and the instability is caused by extemal actions such as those due to an earthquake or to pile driving. Hutchinson analyzed the movement of a generic flow slice by applying the rigid motion equation and neglecting every possibie viscous movement inside the flowing mass. The model schematizes the flow evolution and exhaustion as being dependent on the slice consolidation due to the natural drainage which occurs during the flow movements. Results of the model application were also compared successfully to some real cases such as that of the Aberfan industrial waste landslide (1965). Plate 1.10. Complex landslide which occurred in 1988 in Mount Zandila in Valteltina, Italy. The movement started with a rock sliding on two orthogonal discontinuity planes and a subsequent rockfall occured (Govi, 1988). The movement continved with a debris-avalanche and a dehrie-flow which is reraenizable in the lower dartProblem definition and landslide classification 27 1.5.6 Complex movements Slope movements are often the combination of one or more of the above described principal movements. Complex instability movements can be those in which the moving mass is subjected in one part to one movement type and in an other part to another type of movement (Case 1). A second complex movement type is that in which the moving mass passes from one movement type to a second movement type during travelling (Case 2; Plates 1.10-1.12). Varnes (1978) described: 1. Rockfall and debris avalanche (Case 2); 2. Rock topple and rotational slide (Case 1); 3. Rock slide and rock fall (Case 2); 4. Cambering and valley bulging (Case 1); 5. Slump (or rotational sliding) and earth flow (Case 2). Some of these phenomena types are analyzed in Chapter 7. Plate 1.11. Debris flow at Mount Zandila. By G. Robiglio, }988.28 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 1.12. Mount Zandila landslide blocked Val Pola with a 300 m rise of the debris Sow on the opposite valley slope. The landslide movement occurred on a path of about 100m. Taken in 1988.CHAPTER 2 Rock slope engineering 2.1 INTRODUCTION The Varnes classification of slope movements considers the sliding phenomena by differentiating the movements involving a few block units from those move- ments which involve several block units. The examples of Varnes, used for the examplification of lateral spreads. gravitational rock creep or complex movements, involve large masses and consequently large landslides Traditionally, large scale (km) instability phenomena are examined in the engineering geology field, while small scale instability analysis pertains to the soil and rock mechanics field, even though both the geological and engineering backgrounds are required in order to study both large and smal! landslide problems. Rock slope engineering (Piteau & Peckover, 1978) is not concerned with large landslides, but with individual rock block falls, translation of small rock masses, occasional slides of accumulated debris from gullies, talus slopes and postglacial slide areas. The main purposes of rock slope engineering are to determine rock slope stability conditions, to stabilize unstable natural slopes and to design, while maintaining safety conditions, the rock excavation slopes by obtaining optimal conditions from the reliability and the economical points of view The subsequent chapters of this book are mainly dedicated to rock slope engineering even though the geomechanical rock mass characterization and the slope stability analysis methods here reported are equally uscfu) for large land- slide engineering analysis. “Some examples of typical complex movement mechanisms are also dealt with 2.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION From an engineering point of view, ‘rock’ means a compact semi-hard mass of a variety af minerals30 Rock slope stability analysis All the features, starting from ultra microscopic to macroscopic, which in- fluence the strength and the deformation characteristics of rocks, can be called defects. The influence of these defects (Lama & Vutukuri, 1978) is to decrease the load carrying capacity of rocks and cause a concentration of stresses in cenain directions around an excavation. Defects in rocks can be grouped into the following categories: Fabric defects and structural defects ‘The first defect category refers to the component part of the rock which may be arranged in a regular or irregular order relative to each other which defines what is known as rock fabric (Plate 2.1), Structural defects in rocks are of three types: Folds. faults and joints. These defects are mainly duc to tectonic stresses to which the rocks have been subjected during the course of history. The quantitative description of structural defects, Plate 2.1. Volcanic tuff flow structures on Ischia is- land, Campania, Haly. By G. Miglian.Rock slope engineering 31 commonly called ‘discontinuity’, is one of the main problems of rock slope engineering and is dealt with in Chapter 3 (see also Plate 2.2), Rocks can also be weathered by different causes such as mechanical processes or chemical dissolutions. Rock weathering is a process which causes alteration of the rock due to the action of water, carbon dioxide and oxygen. The effect of weathering is not limited to the surface, but extends deeper depending on the presence of channels, which permit the flow of water and contact with the atmosphere. Weathering, results in a decreased competency of the rock from the engineering point of view. Rock slope stability depends on the strength features of the rocks. the geome- trical and strength features of the discontinuities and the presence of weathering action on the rock and rock defects. Rock slope excavations have been classified on the basis of the relative importance of the defects and alterations to the slope stability (Duncan & Goodman, 1968). Plate 2.2. Quarry faces in porphiric formation, Rock discontinuities determine the columnar shape of the rock. By M. Fomaro.32 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 2.1. Rock slope excavation classification (after Duncan & Goodman, 1968): 1-3) Continuous masses, 4-5) Pseudo-continuous; 6-10) Discontinuous: 1) Strong homogeneous; 2) Weak homoge- neous; 3) Terraced rocks; 4) Ravelling: 5) Slumping rocks: 6) Sheeted: 7) Slabby; 8) Blocky; 9) Buttressed; 10) Schistose rocks. Excavated rocks are divided into continuous, pseudo-continuous aid disconti- nuous masses. The diffent types of rock slopes are illustrated in Figure 2.1, with examples of relative rock types and include: ~ Continuous masses: !) strong homogeneous, 2) weak homogeneous and 3) terraced rocks; ~ Pseudo-continuous masses: 4) ravelling. 5) slumping rock; — Discontinuous: 6) sheeted, 7) slabby, 8) blocky, 9) buttressed and 10) schistose rocks. ‘A rock slope can be homogeneous or can be made up of a complex of rocks of different geological origins with a different sequence of sediments or be intruded by bodies of igneous rocks or partially metamorphosed Different lithological units can have different strength, deformation and com- petence features.Rock slope engineering 33 The weathering of friable rock material, such as sandstone, or of closed fractured shales can be the cause of slope ravelling. When the slopes are faulted, fault zones can be subjected to slumping. A fault gauge behaves like a clay material, while a fault breccia behaves like debris composed of broken rack fragments varying in size from centimeters to deci- meters. Rock slopes can be affected by sheet structures parallel to the slope face. The thickness of the individual sheets may increase from a few decimeters near the surface to several metres at a depth. Sedimentary rock depositional features can determine regular bedding and the principal weakness surfaces. present at the excavation faces, are the parallel bedding planes (Plates 2.3-2.5). Different types of mechanisms can cause the development of the forces that result in the jointing formation. ‘A buttressed rock slope can be determined by the intersection of joint planes with conjugate planes. Unstable rock wedges can therefore be exposed on the slope faces (Plate 2.6). Blocky rocks can be determined by the intersection of different joint plane sets and by the presence of other weakness planes in regular or irregular shapes (Plate 2.7).34 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 2.4. Subvertical closely layered limestone at the Strozza quarry, Lombardy, Italy. By A Auzoni, ISMES. a Bees se esata ars Seok Plate 2.5. Closely jointed and layered limestone excavation faces at the Antoigne quarry, Belgium. By M. Cardu.Rock slope engineering 35 Plate 2.7. Quarry faces in Baveno ink. Piedmont, ttaly, The three recognizable exploitation splitting joint sets, are almost perpendicular. By G. Gola A rock slope is called schistose (Plate 2.8) when the foliation, which occurs in the coarse-grained metamorphic racks, is closely spaced Slope failure mechanism can be differentiated on the basis of the Duncan and Goodman rock slope classification.36 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 2.8. Quarry faces in onthogneiss. The wo conjugate joint sets are perpe schistosity which is the main splntubility plane of the explo icvlar to the ion. By G. Gola, ITEA. Table 2.1. Typical shear strengih and unit weight rock values (afer Hoek & Bra Rock type Dry unit weight (kN/m3) Hard igneous rocks: Granite, basalt, porphyry 25-30 35-53 35-45 Metamorphic socks: Quarzite. gneiss, st: 25-28 20-40 30-40 Hard sedimentary rocks: Limestone, dolomite, sandstone 23-28 10-30 33-45 Soft sedimentary rocks: Sandstone, coal. cha'k, shale 17-23 The shear strength characteristics and unit weight of intact rock determine the stability conditions of a homogencous slope. A typical range of cohesion. friction angle and unit weight value, of the main geological rock groups are given (Hoek & Bray, 1981) in Table 2.1 ‘As the intact rock shear failure envelope is nonlinear, the strength features depend on the applied normal stress level as described in Chapter 5 Uniaxial compressive strength is probably the most important feature for the mechanical characterization of intact rocks. The uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock is a characteristic requiredRock slope engineering 37 in many cases, including stability problems, which are governed by the shear strength of the discontinuity planes. This can be utilized, forexample, as a reference point, for the disconsinuity wall trength, or for the buckling analysis of rock slabs. Table 2.2 reports some typical values of uniaxial compressive strength ob- tained in Italian rock mechanics laboratories. Terraced rocks can determine stability problems when deformation. features of the alternate layers are different and tensile stresses can be induced im the stiffer layers, as a result of ‘extrusion’ of the more deformable layers. As the tensile of rocks is very weak. vertical tension cracks open in stiff rock. Tension cracks, filled by water, can induce near surface failure in the slope. The ravelling of the weathered surface material on a slope is a phenomenon which produces the fall of small individual pieces of the detenorated rowk and the accumulation of a debris material at the base of the slope. The stability conditions of the rock slope can be reduced by ravelling, above all, if the detached rock pieces come from above, from the foot of the slope. In this case, topplimg, fall and sliding of the overhanging slope rock mass can be released and an analysis of these movements should be carried out, Stability analysis of fault breccia or fault gouge are performed by examining the potential sliding of the filling material on rotational or translatiorzal sliding surfaces. Rock slope engineering is devoted to the discontinuous rock slope: analysis. The failure surface, in discontinuous rock masses, tends to follow the pre-existing discontinuities and does not occur throughout the intact rock portions. tev any great extent, unless the rock is very soft. The shear strength of the rock mass is determined largely by the presemce of the discontinuities and the result is that the rock mass behaviour results to be anisotropic in its strength and deformation features The principal instability phenomena of discontinuous rock slopes axe due to toppling and sliding Toppling conditions of a rock block are reached when the block is: zs tall and thin as the weight force vector of the block falls outside its base. Sliding conditions of a rock mass are determined when the sheaw’ strength mobilized on the potential sliding surface reaches the shear strength available for maintaining the mass stable. The ratio between available and mobilized shear strength defines the safety factor of a slope. The rock slope stability analysis and the consequent safety factor determination depend on the identification of the potentially unstable phenomenon ard on the quantitative description of the physical and geometrical features governing the Problem; this description also involves the hydraulic pressure determinazion. Rock slope stability conditions are more influenced by movements than soil slope stability conditions, Sma}] movements can determine a large fall in the available shear strenoth and therefnre rance a Larne enfety reduntion38 Rock slope stability analysis Table 2.2. Uniaxial compressive strength of rocks C. (Mal . to | ost | | I | or) dil log a me ig | | | | | gE 3 ee 38 ge 828 BEES PEPER EBEE § fs £8 é83 8 828 88382 F 855 § 1) Carbonate rocks; Ml) Lithified argilaceous rocks; Ill) Arenaceous rocks; IV) Metamorphic crystalline rocks (trom finer grained to coarser grained): V) Igneous rocks (from finer to coarser). 1. Finale, 2. Pioganismi, 3. Fiastrone, 4, Fiume Santo, 5. Vicenza, 6. Porto Torres, 7. Rive del Garda, 8. S. Vito dei Normanni, 9. Pineroio, 10. Carrara, 11. Vaidieri, 12. Valdieri, 13, Perlato di Sicilia, 14. Riva del Garda. 15. Porto Tories, 16. Salafossa. 17. S. Vito dei Normanni, 18 Premagio, 19. Edolo, 20, Lavagna, 21. Pavana, 22. Ridracoli, 23. Pavana, 24. Potenza, 25. Pavana, 26. M. Aniola, 27. Salatossa, 28. Ridracoli,29 Pavana, 30. Brasimone, 31, Rivoli, 32 Gioveretto, 33. Edolo, 34. Cervinia, 35. Voliri, 36. Vaimalenco, 37. Vaimalenco, 38. Voitri, 39. Sondrio, 40. Chiotas, 41. Luserna, 42. Bussoleno, 43. Luserna. 44. Adamelio, 45. Bronzolo, 46. Albiano, 47. Albiano, 48. Lasa, 49. Baselga ci Pine, 50. Gioveretto. 51. Orvieto, 52. S. Fecelino, 53. Traverselle, 54. S. Federico, 55. Tatoro, 56. Baveno, 57. Monte Stefano.Rock slope engineering 39 Consequently, the risk to a rock slope excavation is greater than that (o a soil slope, even though the two average designed safety factors are the same. ‘The safety factor designed for a rock slope should be greater than the safety factor for a soil slope in order to maintain the same risk degree, otherwise, residual shear strength features should be assumed to be *a priori’ in ordes to define the available sliding surface strength. A rational rock slope design, minimizing rock slope excavation and reinforcing works, must take the reliability of the works into account. The terms of reference. conceming safety factors, work reliability. and long term mining and civil work stability conditions are completely different (Scavia et al., 1988). Mining excavations are designed on the basis of the maximum mineral recovery and the instability risks are mainly assessed by means of economical criteria. Civil excavations, however, are designed on the basis of the different maintenance, control and efficiency necessities of the civil works. 2.3 STABILITY ANALYSIS METHODS A procedure. which is able to define the geometry of blocks or of the system of blocks isolated by discontinuity planes and exposed on the examined excavation face or on the natural slope surface, is developed in every stability analysis method. Sliding analysis methods can use static or dynamic equilibrium equations. ‘A static equilibrium analysis firstly examines the kinematic possibitity of the sliding or toppling of each block which has a face exposed on the slope face. The weight forces, the forces due to water filling the joints, the resistant and the sliding forces are then computed and the equilibrium equations are solved in order to determine whether the block is stable or not. If the block is not stable and a sliding movement occurs, the method assumes that it is in an indefinite motion without changes in motion. Static equilibrium analysis, carried out using the Limit Equilibrium Method, only examines the incipience of motion and does not consider the subsequent behaviour of the whole system of blocks. The methods that use static equilibrium equations, whether involving a single tock block or a system of blocks, assume the block fo be stiff and only analyze sliding phenomena (Wittke, 1965; Goodman & Bray, 1976; Chan & Einstein, 1981; Lin & Fairhurst, 1988). ‘The methods that use dynamic equilibrium equations simulate the behaviour of a blocky system by assuming a more realistic hypothesis by referring 10 the examined physical phenomenon. The Distinct Element Method, an efficient procedure for dynamic analysis, is also able to examine the stability conditions of a blocky rock mass (Cundai). 1971, 1988; Cundall & Hart, 1985: Hart et al., 1988)40 Rock slope stability analysis A system of blocks, analyzed by means of the Distinct Element Method. can exihibit different stable and unstable block configurations, in different computa- tion steps, throughout the whole development of the numerical analysis (see Chapter 9) 2.4 STATIC AND DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM EQUATIONS. The analysis of a parallelepiped block resting on an inclined plane (Figure 2.2) has been considered as a first approximation of the rock slope stability conditions in which the dip and the dip direction of rock joints can produce either individual block sliding or toppling. The static and dynamic equilibrium equations of the problem have been developed (Sagaseta, 1986) with the purpose of analyzing the rigid block instability modes on an inclined plane. The results of that analysis are here reported and the application field of methods which considers static and dynamic equations are aiso defined. The data of the problem are the height h. the width b and the weight W of the block, the inclination angle & and the friction angle 6 of the plane on which the block rests. The vnkowns are: The normal (iV) and the tangential components (7) of the base reaction, the position (a) of its application point and for the dynamic equilibrium equations, the components of the linear acceleration (i, £) of the gravity center and the angular acceleration (8) of the rotation. Figure 2.3a plots the results of the problem with the static equilibrium equa- tions in the form of a stability chart, while Figure 2.3b plots the stability chart, obtained by solving the problem using the dynamic equilibrium equations. The stability chants define the zones corresponding to stability. sliding, toppling and toppling with sliding conditions. The static equilibrium equation conditions la) ib) Figure 2.2. Block sliding and toppling analysis: a) Static equilibrium problem variables: b) Dynamic equilibrium problem variables (afler Sagaseta, 1986).Rock slope engineering 41 2 + h \ stable incipience of sliding tans (a) tene tena 4 om | | fane j stable | sliding toppling and sliding tane = 7 i ———— gant ' topple tan = 0,5 tanea . { : 7“ oe 7 4 tance (yy rene Figure 2.3, Sibility chart: a) Static equiliium analysis; b) Dynamic equilibrium analysis are plotted in the b//= ‘an a plane; dynamic equilibrium equation conditions are plotted in the b/(/ tan @) ~ tan ot/tan 6 plane. The conditions which define these four situations have been analyzed by Bray & Goodman (1981) who used a base friction mode! for this purpose and also differentiated the capabilities of limit equilibrium analysis from the capabilities of dynamic analysis. Sagaseta (1986) subsequently gave a complete analytical solution of the problem, by examining the toppling with sliding limit conditions in detail As can be seen in Figure 2.3b the limit between the toppling regions with and Without sliding is a curve whose shape depends on the absolute value of friction angles. It intercepis the horizontal axis ata value of tan a = 4 tang. The solution of the problem obtained by using the static equilibrium equations can be used to define a stable situation or motion incipience for sliding or toppling Situations. Dynamic analysis allows one to determine the motion equation of Unstable blocks. Static analysis can be carried out (o determine the limit equilibrium condition Or the relationship between the existing situation and the correspondent limit equilibrium situation by computing the safety factor.42 Rock slope stability analysis Unstable situations can de analyzed, using static equilibrium equations, only in order to determine the stabilizing forces which are able to change the unstable conditions of blocks into stable conditions. Dynamic analysis must be used when the problem consists in the computation of the block motion or when the blocks are subjected to cyclic siresses or pulsing loads (e.g. in earthquake conditions). 2.5 SAFETY FACTOR AND LIMIT EQUILIBRIUM METHOD The safety factor concept is imroduced (Hoek & Bray. 1981) in order va quantitat- ively define the stability degree of the single block previously examined using static and dynamic equilibrium equations. The only force acting on the block is due to gravity. hence the block weight force W acts ventically downwards (Figure 2.4). The component of W which tends to cause the sliding of the block is W sino. ‘The component of W perpendicular to the contact surface between the base of the block and the inclined plane is W cos c. The normal siress 6 acting across the contact surface (also called potential sliding surface). is given by 6 = (Weosa)/A Q.1) where A is the area of the block base. Assuming that the shear strength T on the sliding surface is defined by the Coulomb criterion (see Chapter 4) expressed as: T= ¢ +6 tan o, where cand 6 are the cohesion and friction angle and taking Equation 2.1 into account, the follow- ing expression is obtained for the shear strength of the block: tect Weos a/A tan (22) ‘The shear force R (R = tA) which resists to sliding down the inclined plane is therefore: R=cA+Weos aang (2.3) Figure 2.4. Sliding of a blockRock slope engineering 43 The limiting block equilibrium condition corresponds to the perfect equibrium between the forces which tend to cause the block to slide and the forces which tend to oppose the sliding of the block. This condition is given by: W sin a=cA +Wos a tan (2.4) If the cohesion is nil, the limiting equilibrium condition. given in Equation 2.4, simplifies to & = 6, which is the same condition of the incipience of sliding motion oblained in the previous section. In order to quantitatively define the stability conditions of the examined block, or. more generally, of a slope under conditions other than those of limiting equilibrium, the safety factor concept is defined as a stability degree index. The safety factor is defined as the ratio of the maximum mobilized force which resists sliding and the existing force which tends to induce sliding. In terms of stresses, the safety factor is defined as the ratio between the maximum mobilitable shear strength on the examined potential sliding surface and the effectively mobilized shear stress: 1 (maximum mobilitable) t (mobilized) The safety factor can also be interpreted as a number for which, the available shear strength parameters, cohesion and friction angles, must be divided to reach the limit equilibrium condition The principal hypothesis of the limit equilibrium method are as follows: ~ The failure surface can be a simple or composite shear failure surface: = The sliding mass is made up of a single or more intact stiff blocks which can move without significant strain or failure of the block rock matrix The Jinit equilibrium method is defined as an overall analysis method because the solution of the stability problem is given fora system of blocks or for a single block by means of the overall safety factor, which is constant on the whole examined surface. An example is here presented in order to clarify the concept of the overail safety factor. In Figure 2.5 a rock slope. made up of two blocks. is reported, The two blacks are separated by a vertical joint which lies on two inclined discontinuity surfaces. Both blocks have the kinematic possibility of sliding. A stability analysis method can be set up by considering the possibility of Block 1 sliding in such a way as to mobilize the whole available friction on the sliding surface and subsequently to determine the stability condition of Block 2, subjecied to force R3, which represents the force exceeding the mobilitable resistant force. The R; force computed according to this method is: sin (B, ~0)) "cos (6.465 -B,) =W (2.6)44 Rock slope stability analysis all Figure 2.5. Two blocks sliding on a rock slope. where W/, is the weight of Block 1, B, is the dip of the base of the contact surface of Block 1 and 6,:(i=1, 2,3) are the friction angle values on Planes 1,2 and 3 (the cohesion is assuined 10 be 0). The safety factor of Block 2 (F,) is given as: (WV, - cos B+; sin (0; By )] tan b> Fy 2 W, sin B, +R; cos (,—B,) (2.7) The limiting equilibrium method analysis is however able to define an overall safety factor, by determining the limiting equilibrium condition of the whole system by reducing the friction strength of the three discontinuity planes by the same coefficient (overall safety factor) 2.6 EFFECT OF WATER PRESSURE IN ROCK DISCONTINUITIES Water filling discontinuities involves a lowering of stability conditions for natural or artificial slopes The scheme of Figure 2.6 considers a rock block resting on an inclined plane and separated from the upper part of the slope by a subvertical discontinuity plane. Water flowing down the slope generates, on the subvertical plane and on the base contact plane. the water pressure distribution illustrated in Figure 2.6. This pressure distribution results in a force V due to water filling the subvertical discontinuity and in an uplift force U due to water flowing at the surface between the block and its base. The water pressure increases linearly with depth down to the intersection of the subvertica) plane with the base and linearly decreases from this intersection point to the lower edge of the block in contact with the surface where the water pressure is nil. Force V is resolved in the components Vp and V,, parallel and normal to the sliding plane respectively.Rock slope engineering 45 Figure 2.6. Diagram of water pressures act- ing on a block. In Figure 2.6: W=V v,=0 The normal stress acting at the base of the block has to be considered in terms of effective stress as: 6 =(W cos &- UA The safety factor hence becomes: pa CA t{W cos—U) tan @ - Wesina+V 2.7 PRINCIPAL FACTORS AFFECTING ROCK SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS The rock slope stability is conditioned by the presence of weakness or discontinu- ity planes inside the rock mass. The strength and deformation features of the rock mass strongly depend on continuity, spacing, orientation and on the mechanical features of these planes. The first step of a stability analysis is therefore to find a connection between the discontinuity seis and the potential instability kinematisms. The second step is to determine the available shear strength on the discontinu- ity planes on which rock blocks can slide46 Rock slope stability analysis ‘The third step is to assess the water flow conditions in the discontinuities or in the intesively fractured media in order to determine the water pressures and consequently the water thrusts and the uplifting forces acting on the potential unstable blocks. The stability analysis is then carried out for the potentially unstable blocks in order to determine the slope safety factor or to determine the motion of the blocks detached from the rock slope for rockfall analysis. Finally, the efficiency of stabilizing technique applications (excavation, drain- age, rock bolts) are computed still using the stability analysis for the cases in which the slope stability conditions need to be improved The previously mentioned analysis steps are described and examined in the subsequent chapters as follows: — Survey and quantitative descriptions of discontinuities (Chapter 3); — Determination of shear strength of discontinuities, intact rocks and rock masses (Chapter 4): — Analysis of the water flow in discontinuities and rock masses (Chapter 5): ~ Analysis of the unit block size of the rock mass and of the sliding and toppling kinematisms and geomechanical model set up (Chapter 6): — Analysis of rockfalls, topplings and bucklings (Chapter 7): Analysis of the sliding phenomena (Chapter 8): — Dynamic analysis (Chapter 9); — Stabilization and protection method analysis (Chapter 10). Mathematical models for the analysis of rockfall detached from rock walls are dealt with in Chapter 7. Shear failure of rock blocks on pre-existing discontinuity surfaces are dealt with in Chapter $ under the name of sliding phenomena analysis. Some sliding phenomena can evolve in a rock fall phenomena. From the classification of movement point of view. these rock landslides are named rockfalls or translational slides (see Chapter 1) (Civita, 1982) on the basis of the prevailing mode of instability, of the discontinuity orientation and of the lytolo- gical features of the rock media. Similarly, the incipience conditions of toppling and sliding movemenis are treated in Chapter 7. for when it concerns toppling analysis. These conditions involve static equilibrium and not the subsequent motion for unstable rock blocks which can be sliding. toppling and falling. In this case, the complete instability motion is called with the name of the prevailing movement from the movement classification point of view.CHAPTER 3 Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities 3.1 DISCONTINUITY TYPES Discontinuity is, in rock mechanics, the most commonly used term for rock defects. Bedding planes in sedimentary rocks, éleavagés and schistosities in metamorphic rocks are typical examples of fabric defects. Foldyifaults and joints are structural defects. “ 3.1.1 Bedding planes Bedding planes represent interruptions in the course of sedimentary rock grain deposition which are «therefore separated by beds or strata (Plates 3.1-3.2). Different bedding or stratification and separation plane features depend on different modes of deposits. Sedimentary rock depositional features have been classified by Duncan (1969) as: Regular bedding, current bedding, cross bedding, graded bedding, slump bedding, ripple marks (top wave or bottom current) and sun cracks (Figure 3.1). Bedding planeishear features are influenced by the morphology of the beddi plane surfaces, the mineralogy, the. different grain size distribution, the orientation and thesealed degree of grains (Plate 3.3). Laminates and wavy surfaces exhibit a different shear behaviour. Mineralogy determines the frictional behaviour of planarlickenside surfaces. The orientation of grains is infiuenced by the transport medium (traction or suspension) and_by the €fvironmenty(gravity or slump). Differem. grain size distributions can determine intériocking forces between the grains when the bedding planes are subjected to shear forces and therefore to a dilatance effect of the bedding surfaces. A partial sealed state of the bedding plane surfaces can cause some cohesion between the beds. Pre-existing morphological orientation of grains. induced by the depositional process, may give fise\towweakthess planes parallel to the bedding planes. 3.1.2 Cleavage planes Cleavage planes are generated under the influence of tensile stresses which48 Rock slope stabiliry analysis Plate 3.2. Example of beddings in limestone, Cingue Terre. Liguria, Italy. By L. SambuelliGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 49 SS ———__ |) (o) ESS . = *) —— SS Eee ~_ (82) 4 (a) Figure 3.1. Depositional features of sedimentary rocks: a) Ri bedding: c) Graded bedding; d) Stump bedding: e,) Top wave current ripple marks: f) Sun cracks (after Duncan, 1969). lar bedding: b) Current ipple marks: 5) Bottom Plate 3.3, Upper advance face of a tunnel at the ‘Potasos Li abregat’ mine. Spain. The mineral a the left top is cumnallite and is surrounded by 4 muhiple layer of sylvite which is itself surrounded by halite. There are several thin ayers of merl:clay intercalated with the individual layer of the salts which provide a highly textured: image. By J.C. Catalina AITEMIN.50 Rock slope stability analysis determine rock Splitting along definite parallel planes. Cleavage is also associated with changes in rock fabric and large foldings. Cleavage is a secondary structure and is usually accompanied byiat least some recrystallization of the rock. 3.1.3 Schistosities Schistosities are the varieties of foliations that occur in the Coarser-grained metamorphic rocks and js usually the result of the parallel arrangement of platy and ellipsoidal grain within the rock substance. The schistosity surfaces are usually slickenside and.slightly undulated exhibit- ing a‘fegligiblédilatance in direct shear conditions. 3.1.4 Folds Folds are caused by a.bend)in the strata of layered rock. From a rock mechanics point of view, folds can be classified on the basis of the formation mechanism as 1. Flexure folding; 2. Shear folding. A schematization of the folding mechanisms and of the extemal kinematic and tectonic forces which generate folding are reported in Figure 3.2. In flexure folding the mechanism involves adjacent bed sliding. In shear folding, shearing or slipping occurs along closely spaced secondary surfaces not parallel to the original primary bedding surfaces. Folding strain) under the influence of horizontal stresses, can furthes progress by determining buckling\pf the beds with the occurence of cleavage and tensional joims. Figure 3.2. Mechanism of folding: a) Shear or slip\folding: ) Flexure folding (flexural slip) mechanism in- volving shear motion (after Bagdley, 1965),Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities 5\ 3.1.5 Faults Faults are fractures or fractured zones along which there has been an appreciable shear displacement. The displacements which occur between the two opposite sides of the faults can vary from a few centimeters up to many kilometers ‘The faultdip and dip direction correspond to the state of stress which existed at the time of the fault formation. The faults can be classified according to the direction of the maximum and minimum stresses which determined the stress field. The rock walls of the faults are frequently slickenside as a consequence of the shear failure and movement Some weak materials, such as fault gouge (clay) and fault breccia (the assemblage of rock fragments), can occur between the walls (Plate 3.4). Some minerals such as graphite or chlorite, which have low frictional strength, can also be found between the rock walls Plate 3.4. Example of fault filled with breccia in alpine prasinitic formations, ltaly.52. Rock slope stability analysis The faultthickness may vary from metres, as in the case of major regional structures, to millimeters, as in the case of local faults. The ground adjacent to the fault may be weakened by associated structures such as drag folds or secondary faults. Asa result of these factors, faults are zones of Jow shear strength on which slip may readily occur. 3.1.6 Joints Joints are fractures in rocks along which there has been little or no displacement or very slight movement perpendicular to the joint surface. Joints can be systematic or non-systematic. Systematic joints occur in a joint setwhich represents a group of parallel joints. Joint sets intersect to form a joint system. Non-systematic joints do not have any definite patfer® and frequently terminate at systematic joints. t tS Joints are secondary features of rock tectonics and they have a definite relationship with the regional structure and can be called longitudinal. cross or diagonal (Figure 3.3) Longitudinal joints are formed roughly parallel to the fold axes due'to > tensile stress at a high angle to the bedding. v% b 3 Figure 3.3, Geometric orientation of joints relative to fold axis and to principal stress axes: 1) Cross joints; 2) Longitudinal joints; 3) Diagonal joints: 2) Maximum stress; b) Intermediate stress: ¢) Minimum stress.Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities Cross joints are roughly perpendicular to the fold axes and generally terminate AgainsDsystematic joints. Diagonal joints generally occur in pairs and approximately symmetric to the longitudinal and cross joints with a high angle to the bedding and are the result of shear failure, Different stress states, at the time of the joint formation, induce different orientation and different types of stress at failure (tension or shear depending on the principal stress directions). Finally joints are the most common and usually the most significant structvral features in rocks (Piate 3.5). 3.2 ROCK SLOPE DISCONTINUITY CLASSIFICATION In the slope design of jointed rocks the shape'and size of blocks, which are isolated by discontinuities, need to be assessed on the basis of the data gathered from structural. surveysisuch as spacing, extent, dip and dip direction. However, (0 assess the existence of potentially unstable rocks. the size of the blocks should be compared to the dimension of the examined slope face. Features such as spacing. extent and mode of origin have a typical range of54 Rock slope stability analysis Name Observ. scale Scale Spacing Principal origin Macro and micro fes- 2.5 em Laboratory s < 0.25¢m —_Alieration and ten- sures specimen sile origin fessures Beddings cleavages Rock block ‘in 0.25em60m Shear stress origin TT] chain. fractures Figure 3.4. Discontinuity characterization on the basis of the scale of observation (Duncan & Goodman, 1968). values for each type of rock defect or discontinuity (macro and micro fissures. beddings, cleavages, joints, faults) and the structural survey needs to be carried outlaccording ta the scale of observation. Duncan & Goodman (1968) proposed a discontinuity classification according to scale (Figure 3.4) An observation of the discontinuity surfaces helps to assess the fracture stress type, for example, in a tension fracture the surfaces are usvally clean and well matched, while in a shear fracture the surfaces tend to be filled with weathered material. © 2s . Asa joint system is composed of sets of parallel joints which represent multiple features, nonsysiematic joints represent single features. Single features can be mapped and accounted for one by one; multiple features must be grouped into sets. ol Ant Single features are usually major faults and dikes, while multiple features are ubiquitous joint sets. Rock mass and subsequent component discontinuities can be examined on defined domains, where systematic features such as joints. possess similar values or spacing.Geomechanical characterization of discominuities 55 3.3 ROCK FEATURE DESCRIPTION METHODS Rock feature description can be carried out, at different scales, by different specific methods. Air photogrammetry is an irreplaceable method for the geological reconnai- sence of rock types, major structures, faults, dikes and lythological contacts. Ata preliminary stage of the slope design, air photographs can be used to recognize domains where systematic features such as joints possess similar orientation or spacing The principal methods of describing rock masses and their component discon- invities, from a rock slope engineering point of view. are the survey of rock exposures, thesdrill core’ and drill hole description and the use of terrestrial photogrammetry. The photogranimetric method is convenient only if the orientation of a large number of discontinuities needs to be surveyed and it is the only practical aliemative to rock exposure survey if the relevant rock face is close to magnetic anomalies or if the rock face is unstable and/or inaccessible In the drill core and drill hole method, the axis of each drilling represents a sample line of the rock mass. Structural features such as discontinuity orientation, spacing and the number of sets cannot usually be adquately sampled by one hole without prior knowledge of the orientation and number af sets: In same slope design problems. suchas, forinstancé.quarr¥ slope designs, the drill core method is often considered too expensive if compared with the econom- ical advantage of a larger mineral recovery. from a steeper wall slope. A few drill cores can also be useful for the detenninaton of some rock mass quality indexes and for the assessing of discontinuity parameters such as spacing or frequency, Drill cores can be useful in assessing shear strength rock and discontinuity by means of laboratory tests. Rock exposure survey is the most common method used 10 assess the parame- ters required for the quantitative description of discontinuities Rock exposures are objectively surveyed (randomly) when the sampling is d out by setting fixed lines (scanlines) onto the surface of the rock mass. The surveyer can carefully and systematically work along the scanline by measuring and recording the discontinuity features required for a quantitative description. The ten parameters selected to describe discontinuities and rock masses are (ISRM, 1978): Orientation, spacing, persistence, roughness, wall strength, aper- lure, filling, seepage. number of sets, block size. ca56 Rock slope stability analysis 3.4 ORIENTATION 3.4.1 Angle definition The measurement of the two angles, dip and dip direction, is sufficient to completely define the orientation of a discontinuity plane (Figure 3.5). Dip is the angle between the steepest declination liné of the discontinuity plane and the horizontal line. Dip direction is the angle between the Northern direction and the horizontal line measured clock-wise from the Norther direction. A third angle, called azimuth or strike, is often used in the discontinuity orientation definition, eventhough it gives additional information. Strike is the angle between the Northem diréction and the trace intersection of the discontinu- ity plane with a horizontal reference plane. The practical advantage of this measurement is that the visible trace of a discontinuity is seen on the horizontal surface of a rock mass. In orientation survey, special care must be taken to distinguish the irue strike of a plane from apparent strikes. The difference between the dip direction angle and the true strike angle is 90° As there are two directions of a trace and the angle bewween the two directions is 180°, the measured direction has to be defined with reference to the wo cardinal points between the chosen direction of the trace. For example, a plane Figure 3.5. Angles defining the plane orientation: oc= dip directions, y= dip.Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities 57 which has a dip direction of 210° and a dip of 30° can be defined by means of a strike of N 30°W. The dip direction, which is 30°SW, should also be defined. A compass and a clinometer (ISRM. 1978) are used to obtain the dip direction and dip angle measurements. 3.4.2 Spherical projections A jointed rock’ mass can be considered as a system of blocks separated by discontinuity planes that can be joint systems or singular discontinuities. The blockchape is defined by discontinuity plane orientations while the block size is defined by discontinuity distances (Figure 3.6) Froma theoretical point of view, if only ubiquitous joints are present in the rock mass, the rock blocks will have fixed shapes but can assume any volume. The stability analysis of a rock block sliding on one or more discontinuity planes becomes more complicated than the case of the parallelepiped block sliding on a single plane, as reported in Chapier 2. By therefore excluding the simple case of the parallelepiped block examined by means of the Figure 2.2 stability charts'for which the safety factor is weight independent and values: F = tan O7fn a, the solution of the slope stability problems requires the vectorial analysis of the forces acting on the discontinuity plane. The direction of these forces depends on the orientation of the discontinuity planes which isolate the rock blocks and vector forces must be resolved on the normai and tangential directions to the sliding planes. An alternative method, incorporating spherical projection, can be used as a compiete substitute for the vectorial analysis or as a complement 1 the vector Figure 3.6. Pictorial drawing of a rock mass as a system of blacks58 Rock slope stability analysis analysis to give clear perception of the geometrical features of the rock blocks involved in the slope stability problem. Spherical projection is a method of representation and analysis of the three- dimensional relations between planes and lines on a two dimensional diagram. In this book, spherical projection methods are applied in order to: 1) Analyse the discontinuity systems, by determining the central value and orientation distribution features with cluster analysis, 2) Visualise the potential instability phenomena of the blocks isolated by discontinuities, 3) Determines by meansjof the Goodman & Shi block theory (1985). block geometrical features ina rock mass and their connection with stability. Two different spherical projection methods have here been chosen: The equal-area projection (Lambert or Schmidt) for the statistical analysis of the spatial distribution discontinuity planes and the equal-angle stereographic or Wuif projection. Both the methods are used to construct the stereoplots of the discontinuity planes and visualise the main types of potential slope instability conditions. Basic principles of the equal-area method are here reported, while basic principles of the stereographic method are reported in Chapter 9, with references to the key block theory. 343: Equal-area projection In spherical methods, the projection sphere (reference:sphere) is free to move in space, but not free to rotate; therefore, every radial line Joining a point on the surface of the reference sphere with the center of the sphere has a fixed direction in space. If this sphere is then moved until its center lies on the plane which is to be projected, the intersection between the plane and sphere is a circle called “great circle’ (Figure 3.7). ‘The required projection of the discontinuity plane will be the projection of the circumference of the great circle onto the representation plane. If one considers the deepest line of the plane (the line OA of Figure 3.8) as the Jine to be projected by means of equal area projection, Figure 3,8 shows the basis for the construction method Line OA intersects the reference sphere at point A The equal-area projection of the OA line on the equatorial plane C-D firstly » a $ Sample mean, x Sample mean Figure 3.22. Frequency distribution of she mean values of the scantine sampled spacings: a) Histogram obtained from survey data: b) Gaussian curve chosen to approximate the histogram: the ratio between the dotted area and the total arew between the curve and the abscissa axis represents (=) (afier Priest & Hudson, 1981).76 Rock slope stability analysis Table 3.1. Values of 6(:) for the normal distribution. oe) 0.675 0.50 0.842 0.60 1.036 0.70 1.282 0.80 1.645 0.90 1.960 0.95 2.576 0.99 discontinuity spacing is 0.175 m with 6 Vn = 0.140/ 80 = 0.018 m, By selecting a 98% confidence band, (4(z) = 0.95), the value obtained for = is 1.960. ft can be therefore said that there is 95% confidence of the mean value of 0.175 which lies within 0.035 of the population mean. The mean velue of the population therefore lies within the range 0.140-0.210 m with 95% of confidence. regardless of the distribution of the discontinuity spacing As previously mentioned, the discontinuity spacings x often follows the negative exponential probability density distribution f(x) = Ae, where the mean ¥and standard deviation 6 of the population are equal. A useful reduction of the formula occurs. For a sample of a size, the bandwidth of 100 6(:)% confidence is then § (= vn. Alternatively; this band width of 6(=) confidence can be written &€ ¥ where € is the allowable proportionate error. Hence: & Wn or n=(c/eP The last expression can be used to estimate the sample size required to achieve a given error bandwidth by substituting the appropriate values of = and € cor- responding to the required confidence level and the desired error bandwidth For example, if the mean spacing is required within an error bandwidth of £2064 at the 80% confidence level. € = 0.2, := 1.282 and» =41. Conversely this lastexpression can be used to establish the error limits given by acertain size. If the mean spacing is required within £10% at the 90% confidence level, € = 0.1.2= 1.645, sample size n will be: n2(1,648/0.1) 2271 These results show that several hundreds of sample are required to give reason- able estimates. Figure 3.23 reports an experimental spacing distribution in a joint set surveyedGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 77 frequency t \\ 4 0 10% . ——— frequency } — distance 0 10 cm Stat, distance Figure 3.23, Experimental spacing distribution in a join set survey carried au by Geodata in Aita Val Dora (aly):€ = 0.1.0 = 256.2 = 1,645, 0(2) = 0.9. se 809095 99% 100 ! Le toe 0.10 0.20 0.20 Figure 3.24. Estimation diagrams of the required number of spacing values versus the error bund for various confidence levels for negative exponential distributed spacings. The two points corresponding £0 Iwo couples of € and 1 values refer to the examples reported in the text (after Priest & Hudson, 1981)78 Rock slope stability analysis on a rock wall in the Alta Val Dora, the sample size, confidence level and error bandwidth Figure 3.24 shows, by means of a graph, the required number of spacing values versus the error band for various confidence levels. It can be seen that the required sample size increases very rapidly as the allowable error is reduced 3.6. PERSISTENCE DEFINITIONS, SCOPES AND MEASUREMENTS The concept of a rock mass being a system of blocks separated by discontinuity planes is ideal. Discontinuity surfaces are not indefinitely continuous through the rock mass. The plane which contains a discontinuity crosses intact-rock regions. Joint persistence K is usually defined as the fraction of the area that is actually discontinuous. K can also therefore be expressed as the limit (Figure 3.25): dae, lim, AD AD in which D is aregion of the plane with area Ap and ap, is the area of the ith joint in D. The summation in the above expression refers (o all the joints in D Persistence can be roughly quantified by observing the discontinuity trace Jength on the rock exposure surface. _. In terms of trace length, joint persistence can be expressed as a Jimit length ratio. along a given line on a joint plane (Einstein et al., 1983): where Lg is the length of the straight line segment S and /s, is the length of the ith joint segmentin S. Figure 3.25, Discontinuity persistence given Ap total areaGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 79 fa) (b) Figure 3.26. a) Discontinuity persistence given in joint leng segment: b) Idealized example of a stepped sliding surface terms: |) Rock bridge: 2) Joint Finally, with reference to a yock slope, joint length K can be expressed as (Figure 3.26): DIL+ZRBR where SIL represents the total length of the joint segments and SRBR the total length of segments crossing rock bridges. In slope design. stability analysis are often performed in cautious conditions by assuming 100% persistence on the shear planes. Because the available shear strength on rock bridges is one or wo orders of magnitudine greater than the shear strength available on discontinuity planes, it is still safer 10 assume 100% persistence when in doubt (ISRM, 1978). The shear strength of rock bridges and of discontinuities can not be simultaneously mobilized because failure occurs at differem displacements When a set of joints, less than 100% persistent, has been assessed. it is important to investigate the possibility of a stepped failure surface forming, as iMustrated by the 2-D failure situation in Figure 3.26b. Ina discontinuity persistence survey, the length /of the discontinuity traces ona rock wall exposure is systematically measured. in the scanline technique semi- trace lengths are measured. The semitrace is defined as the portion of the trace length between the scanline intersection point and the end of the trace. During the mapping of the discontinuity lengths the type of terminations are recorded according to the following scheme. Discontinuities which extend out- side the exposure (x) are differentiated from those that visibly terminate inside rock exposure (1), and from those that terminate against other discontinuities in the exposure (d). Mean and modal discontinuity len; data presented for each joint set. A degree of persistence can be determined for each joint set. fram the modal hs and len, distributions are the principal80 Rock slope stability analysis discontinuity length, according to ISRM (1978). The mean value and distribution are used to set up a probabilistic jointed rock model which discretizes a rock mass for slope analysis The estimation of the mean length involves a larger number of problems than the spacing estimation Several scientific papers have been written with the aim of suggesting procedu- res able 10 give an accurate and unbiased estimation of a joint set mean length. Bias and accuracy problems are listed below with the name of some authors who discussed the problem: 1. Bias errors are due to the fact that the angle between the direction of the discontinuity trace length and the scanline direction can be an apparent dip and not the true dip angle of the discontinuity plane (Cruden, 1977; Priest, 1985); 2. Bias in length measurements is caused by the fact that scanline preferen- tially intersects longer trace lengths (Priest & Hudson, 1981); 3. In scanline survey only one part (called the semitrace length) of the trace length is measured (Priest & Hudson, 1981; Cruden, 1977); 4. The lengih of the discontinuities which extends outside the exposure cannot be measured and those discontinuities are censored at a value which depends on the size of the exposure (Priest & Hudson, 1981); 5. Truncation bias occurs when joint lengths below a certain known cutoff length are not recorded (Cruden, 197; Baecher & Lanney, 1978); 6. The accuracy of the estimated confidence bounds should be determined (Zhang & Liao, 1990). In the case in which survey traces make variable angles with the scanline direction and in which these angles do not represent the dip angle of the discontinuity planes, the leng:h ¢ of the maximum measurable trace needs to be corrected according to the scheme of Figure 3.27, with the corrective parameter R upper limit of exposure r jeeoncealed I Lo et { ne factual \semitrace concealed Mover limit of exposure Figure 3.27. Diagrammatic representation of discontinuity traces intersecting a scanline set ‘ona planar face of a limited extent.Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities 81 @ is the angle between the scanline direction and the dip direction of the examined discontinuity plane, ot is the dip and a’ is the apparent dip of this plane. The corrective parameter R for which c has to be multiplied, is given as: since _ cos e (tan? cos? 6 + 1)! sinat cos 8 As the scanline has the tendency to preferentially intercept longer traces, the surveyed trace length distribution is a biased distribution g(/) and not the required FU distribution. According to Priest & Hudson (1981) the biased distribution can be expressed as: a= L fd) where / is a generic ‘corrected’ value of the trace length and Tis the ‘corrected’ mean value of the trace lengths It is important to point out that, as the surveyed distribution data can be assumed t0 be log-normal (MacMahon, 1971: Bridges. 1976: C.M. Barton, 1978; Einstein et al.. (980) the unknown required distribution /()) willbe of the n esponential type (Figure 3.28) Using this hypothesis. the unknown value / w ill be: ive 7) 5 where /, is the mean value of the surveyed trace lengths. By calling /,, the mean value of the distribution /i(/) of the surveyed semitraces These above reported expressions show that the bias introduced towards the Regative esponential probability density /£(1) Betval trace lengths) atl) (intersected trace lenoths) trace length Figure 3.28. Probability density distribution of actual lengths f{) and intersected length 2 where (U) is negative exponential (after Priest & Hudson. 1981).82 Rock slope stability analysis selection of longer lengths by scanline sampiing exactly cancels the bias caused by only measuring the semitrace length The truncation bias due to the impossibility of measuring a trace length longer than ¢ (see Figure 3.27) involves a semitrace distribution expressed as (Priest & Hudson, 1981): = M/A) where H(c) is the probability that a randomly intersected semi-trace length is less than c. Fora larger sample, H(c) can be given as: Heya rin where r is the number of surveyed discontinuities with a trace length lower than ¢ and nis the total number of intersected discontinuities If the surveyed semitraces follow log-normal distribution. H(c) can be ex- pressed as: H(@)=1-e¥ andl by taking the i(/) distribution equation into account, the ‘corrected’ mean value [can be expressed as ~ln [@r= n/n) The correspondent ‘corrected’ probability density distribution of the trace lengths fil) will be negative exponential given as: Ad= Yet with standard deviation 6, =/. The effect of the truncation bias that occurs when the joint lengths below a known cut off length are not recorded can be made negligible by choosing a cut off length which is small compared to the average length (Baecher & Laney, 1978) Zhang & Liao (1990) examined the precision or possible problem error estimation for the trace length of the discontinuities. According to the results obtained by Priest & Hudson for the estimation of the mean discontinuity trace lengths using scanline surveys, Zhang & Liao provided a method for confidence bounds for mean joint trace lengths recorded ona finite size exposure The basic steps of the method are as follows 1. Calculate the sum of all the semi-trace lengths of joint S(L,) as: SL) thst. L+n-nb, where 1 is the total number of surveyed discontinuities, 7 is the number ofGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 83 tO) fd 0 x (2r) . a x2 (ar) 1-0/2 a2 Figure 3.29. Density function of 4? distribution; (2r) are the degrees of freedom (after Zhang & Liao, 1990). surveyed discontinuities which end in the rock or against another discontinuity, L, is the maximum measurable value of the trace Jet The value L, (L, = ¢) is given to all the discontinuities which extend outside the Tock exposure. 2. Choose the confidence level (1 - 0), by obtai the y3 302") and Y7_a/2 (2r) from any table of cumulative distribution function squared densities. Density functions of 4° distributions are plotted in Figure 2.29 with the confidence interval. 3. Calculate the mean length L and the confidence bounds L, and L, for the semi-trace length of discontinuities. For negative exponential distribution: L=liu where {1 is the mean trace termination frequency for the population where for a large sample w= 1//. The confidence bound L, and L,, for the mean semitrace discontinuity lengths are: 25tL,) wane) 2SiL,) 1-<2(2”) | 4. Calculate the relative accuracy of the estimated confidence bounds 6, using the following equation (LL, L,-&, x 100% QL Zhang & Liao also presented some practical cases. The results of one case referring to a survey of rock wall exposure in the E-Kon open pit mine are here reported. Figure 3.30a reports a histogram distribution of semi-trace lengths. The sample size is 93. There are 75 discontinuity traces which end in rocks or against other84 Rock slope stability analysis frequency > 93 15 30 semi-trace length t{m) {m Point estimation (+) 8 ee = 0.01 4 a= 0.1 60 ea = 0.40 40 20 2 . ‘ 0) rn tc) 2 4 6B ck} > & 6 Bem) Figure 3.30. a) Hisiogram of a sample xemi-trace length: b) Variation of confidence bounds at three different confidence levels (1 ~ c1) und mean for trace fength with censoring level c: ¢) Variation of accuracy § at different censoring levels (1 ~ &) with censoring level ¢ for the results in (b) (after Zhang & Liao, 1990). discontinuities (= 75). The measurements are censored at § m lengths (¢ = 8) and wisO.38m" Figure 3.30b gives the variation of estimated confidence bounds at three different confidence levels and the mean for trace lengths with censoring level c. Figure 3.30c gives the relationship between the relative estimated accuracy and the censored level ¢ for three different confidence levels examined for Figure 3.30b. As illustrated in Figure 3.30b, the mean trace length determined from the individual trace length measurement. increases with the censoring level ¢ As reported in Figure 3.30c, the accuracy of the estimated confidence bounds at the same confidence level (1 ~ 0: increases as the censored level c increases (i.eGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 85 the confidence level (1 - c), with the same accuracy, increases as the censored level c increases). 3:7 ROUGHNESS 3.7.1 Definitions and scope ‘The roughness parameter represents an index of the Uneveniess and waviness\of the adjacent discontinuity rock wall, This index refers to the mean discontinuity plane. A waved discontinuity is characterized by large scale undulations, an uneven discontinuity is characterized by small scale roughness. ‘The shear strength of a discontinuity is influenced by the raughness of its walls. especially in the case of undisplaced and unfilled walls. “ Waviness affects the initial direction of shear displacements relative to the mean discontinuity plane: unevenness affects the shear strength that would normally be sampled in laboratory or ‘in situ’ (ISRM. 1978) with direct shear tests at medium scale. The shear component due to the roughness decreases as the aperture or filling _hlicknessior degree of any previous displacement increases. The shear behaviour of rough discontinuities is discussed in Chapter 4. Roughness also influences the water flow conditions along single discontinui- ties and jointed rock masses. The roughess influence on equivalent hydraulic aperture is discussed in Chapter 5 3.7.2. Measurement and presemation of results Joint roughness can be surveyed along a tine or on a surface. In the first case, roughness should be surveyed along the potential sliding direction, in the second. the surface roughness survey can provide indication of the sliding direction. As the influence of roughness on the shear strength is not free of scale. the profile size or surveyed surfaces should be comparable with the size of the joint areas potentially involved in shear failure. - Several methods and procedures are available to measure roughness profiles or surfaces on the rock exposure scale and laboratory scale. The problem consists in the determination of scale factor in order to correlate shear-dilatant roughness behaviour at small scale with the scale of the slope problem. Different discontinuity roughness scales are sampled at different test scales, as Teported in Figure 3.31. Small scale measurement involves a several centimeter sample size, intermediate scale involves several meters. Large scale waviness may be’ superimposed onto the small and intermediate scale roughness. The linear profile, compass and disk-clinometer and photogramimetric methods can be used to survey roughness surfaces at intermediate scales (JSRM, 1978).86 Rock slope stability analysis N\. S >. NSN Figure 3.31. Ditferent scales of surveyed roughness with reference to different shear strength tests; the angle i characterizes the waviness: 1) Size of laboratory shear test: 2) Size of the block volume in an “in situ’ shear test (alter ISRM. 1978). The roughness profiles can be surveyed along an axis which has the estimated direction of potential sliding. The heights y of the asperities are measured along the axis at various points (approximatively 50 points are suggested) at a constant interval (Figure 3.32). Roughness surfaces can be surveyed by detennining the orientation and the inclination of small scale roughness angles by using compass and clinometer in different surface positions and with different disk diameters. The dip and dip direction of ench roughness measurement are then plotted in terms of equal-area pole projection in order to determine the discontinuity roughness orientation tendenc: Altematively: photogrammetric methads can be applied to obtain the coor- dinate of numerous points on the surface and to determine the cantour map of the surface roughness. Mechanical profilometers can be used to digitize roughness profiles (Weiss- bach, 1978: Swan, 1981) at laboratory scale, or allematively more sophisticated techniques invalving close-range photogrammetry and stereo-digitising can be used (Miller et al., 1989). Joint roughness can be defined qualitatively or quantitatively. In the first case the roughness description is limited to descriptive terms which should be based on small scale or intermediate scale observations.Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities 87 Roughness “ “profile Aazimuth=o rent JB" epp SA dip \nused half gf 2m folding straight edge Figure 3.32, Method to survey roughness profiles along the estimated direction of potential According to this concept the roughness profile shape can be defined using the terms reported in Figure 3.33. Figure 3.33 also illustrates, for each qualitative term used, the correspondent typical profile shape. A quantitative description of the discontinuity roughness has the aimi of giving numerical information useful for the discontinuity shear strength prevision. Barton (1973) proposed an empirical criterion for the peak shear stre of natural discontinuities which uses a joint roughness coefficient JRC in order to take dilatant behaviour into account, Barton & Choubey (1977) proposed ten standard roughness profiles (Figure 3.34) characteristic of different JRC ranges. The assessment of the joint roughness coefficient occurs by comparing sur- veyed joint profiles and standard profiles. ‘AS this assessment is subjective, several objective IRC estimation methods involving experimental measurements and analytical formulations based on statistics, geostatistics and the fractal theory have been developed in recent years and are discussed in the next chapter.88 Rock slope stability analysis —__! Figure 3.33, Discontinuity roughness classification: 1) Rough or irregular. stepped: 2) Smooth, stepped: 3) Slickenside, stepped: 4) Rough or irregular. waviness: $) Smooth, waviness: 6) Slichenside. waviness: 7) Rough or irregular. planar: 8) Smooth. planar: 9) Slickenside. planar. 3.8 WALL STRENGTH Wallsstrength is defined (ISRM, 1978) as the equivalent compressive strength of the adjacent'rock wall of.a discontinuity. Itis a very important component of shear strength and deformability, especially if the walls are in direct rock to rock contact asin the case of unfilled joints. Wall strength may be lower than rock strength due to weathering or alternation of the walls. A qualitative description involves the weathering grade description of the rockGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 89 Figure 2.34. Roughness profiles and corresponding range of JRC values associated 10 each profile (after Barton & Choubey, 1977). mass and the rock material made“tp of the discontinuity walls. The grade of weathering of rock mass as avwholé should be described in general and also in detailed ters. The rock wall"fiaterial alteration grade is classified in fresh, discoloured, decomposed and disintegrated rock. A semi-quantitative and quantitative description of wall strength are obtained by using a geological hammer. strong pen KniveSand the Schmidt hammer. Manual index tests are carried out on the idiscontinuity walls or on material Tepresentative of the walls by using a knife and geological hammer. Rock wall strength is assessed as weak oF strong with intermediate levels (extremely, very or90 Rock slope stability analysis AVERAGE DISPERSION OF STRENGTH FOR MOST ROCKS (H#Pa) ROCK DENSITY = S56 so TT I 2 : 300 iw 3 250 ns > 200 ne g = 130 I~? e * 00 S90 ¥ 2 oo ‘5 70 i 00 za Ew oe Ew 5 “ 20 30 40 30 60 e SCHMIDT HARDNESS (r) — L-hammer Figure 3.35, Relationship between the Schmidt hammer hardness index (abscissa) and the niaxial rock strength. Different orientations of the hammer during the lest refer to different hardness index sewies. The relationship depends on the rock unit weight (kN/m"). The ined area in the top left hand side of the diagram defines the correspondent dispersion of values around the central value for different uniaxial compressive strength values (sfier Hoek & Bray. 1981).Geomechanical characterization of discontinuities 91 medium) on the basis of the possibility of the rock material crumbling with the knife or fracturing with the hammer. A table which shows an approximate range of uniaxial compressive strength values for this quality description and rock knife and hammer tests was given by ISRM (1978). Schmidt hammer tests are performed in order to estimate the joint wall compressive strength(JCS). These tests are carried out by applying the Schmidt hammer in a direction perpendicular to the discontinuity wall. The rock surface should be tested on a clear wall under saturated conditions to give the most conservativé results. In this test, the. rebound resulting from the impulse given to the examined rock walll by the Spring-loaded, projectile of the Schmidt hammer is given in a numerical range from about 10 to 60. The rebound number is correlated to rock density and compressive strength (Deere & Miller. 1966). Figure 3.35 repons a chart of these correlations, which is available for different hammer orientations. “The tests are usually performed in groups of 10 for each discontinuity and the wall compressive strength is determined on the basis of the mean value of the highest 5 rebound numbers. Alternatively, the pointsloadtesis can be used 10 estimate the strength of the intact portions of any potential failure surface 3.9 APERTURE Aperture is defined as the perpendicular distance between'adjacent rockwalls of discomtinuity-in which the intervening space'is-air or waler-fivled (ISRM, 1978). Aperture is thereby distinguished from the.width of a filled discontinuity (Figure 3.36). Aperture influences shear strength and hydraulic conductivity. te) Figure 3.36, Blocks including a discontinuity: a) Clased; b) Open; c) Filled.92 Rock slope stability analysis In most subsurface rock masses,dpertures are small, probably less than half a millimeter. The aperture of real discontinuities are likely to vary widely over the extent of the discontinuity./This variation is difficult, if not impossible. to measure. Problems which-Gerive from rock wall mismatched surfaces are dis- cussed in Chapter 4.as far asshear discontinuity strength is concerned. Equivalent joint apertures with rough walls can be assessed by water permeability testing. ‘Aperture and roughness effects, on the joint conductivity, can be estimated with empirical correlations. These aspects are discussed in Chapter S. The size of large apertures of different origins is assessed in a rock exposure survey. These origins can result from shear displacement of discontinuities with appreciable roughness and waviness, from tensile opening. from outwash, from solution and, from tension in the vertical discontinuity due to valley erosion or glacial retreating. 340 FILLING Filling is-defined as, the: material that. separates-theadjacent rock‘ wall of a discontinuity-(ISRM, 1978). I is usually weaker than the parent rock. Typical filling materials are sand, silt, clay, breccia, gouge and mylonite. The perpendicular distance between the adjacent rack walls is termed the:width of the filled discontinuity: Mechanical features of filling material strongly influence the discontinuity shear strength. Apart from the situation in which discontinuities are filled with high strength and deformability feature minerals (calcite, quartz, pyrite) (Plate 3.6), filled discontinuities exhibit a lower shear strength than clean walls and closed discontinuities. The following filling features, which can affect the discontinuity physical behaviour, should be recorded in the rock exposure survey 1. Mineralogy of tilling material taking care to identify low friction material such as chlorite; 2. Grading and particle size; Water content and permeability Previous shear displacement; Wall roughness; Width: . 7, Fracturing or crushing of rock wall. A detailed presentation also involves the results of soil mechanics laboratory tests carried out to determine the filling shear strength behaviour. The description should give the following filling features: 1. Geomeiry: Width, wall roughness, field’ Skeiche" 2. Filling type: Mineralogy, particle size, weathering grade. soil index parame- ters; swelling potential . re aGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 93 Plate 3 6. Quanz aplithic vein in a tonalitic rock sheared by 2 joint. Adamello, Lombardy, ltaly. By E. Drigo, ISMES. 3. Filling strength: Manual index of soil and rock stiffness and strength determined by penetrating, crumbling and’ scraping the material with hands, knives or geological hammers, shear strength, over-consolidation ratio for dis- placed or undisplaced walls: 4. Seepage: Water content and permeability estimation by using ‘in situ’ quick tests 3.11 SEEPAGE . The term seepage is related to-water-flow.and freedffieisture: visible inindi vidual discontinuities or in therock:mass as a.whole (ISRM! 1978): Field descriptions of rock masses and hydrogeological large scale surveys need to be carried out at an early stage of the slope design. The discontinuity age and origin is important in order to assess the water trasmissivity. Recent origin discontinuities are water transmissible as they have not yet concreted and clogged\(Boitino & Civita, L988). Dry discontinuous rock masses store @ large part of infiltration water, whilst infiltrated water will immediatly percolate on discontinuity surfaces in an already ‘damp rock mass. Stream and water infiltration are the consequences of meteoric effective94 Rock slope stability analysis precipitations (depurated by evaporation and transpiration) for a hydrogeologic balance. Groundwater infiltration and streaming should be assessed on the basis of the following principal factors (Celico, 1986): _- . 1. Meteorology: Precipitations, air and earyitémperatures, air humidity state: 2. Morphology: Slope angles, watershiédy fracture evolution; 3. Geology and hydrogeology: Lithology, tectonicity. superficial weathering, water table depth. The approximate description of the local hydrogeology should be supple- mented with detailed observations of seepage from individual discontinuities or particular sets. according to their relative stability importance. ISRM (1978) prepared a seepage description table for unfilled and filled discontinuities. In this table seepage ratings are proposed for both discontinuity types on the basis of the moisture degree or of the water flow visible in the discontinuity 3.12. NUMBER OF SETS The-parameter.called-the number of sets;expresses the:number.of joint sets which makes.up the intersecting joint system. The rock mass may beefuither divided by individual discontinuities. The rock mass appearance is dominated by the number of discontinuity sets that intersect one another. The rock block shape is determined by the discontinuity’ imersections and stability analysis is performed on the basis of the block types formed by discontinuities such as infinite or finite, non-removable or removable, stable or potentially unstable blocks. Infinite blocks cannot be removed from the rock mass without involving failure of the intact rock. A large number of joint sets increases the probability of forming finite. removable and potentially unstable blocks, A large number of joint sets may determine the composite shape of the sliding surface or circular sliding surfaces when the joints are closely spaced The set number is often a function of the size of the mapped area. The cluster analysis of poles is useful to identify trends in joint orientation distribution and to distinguish the number of joint sets existing in the surveyed rock expossure The number of joint sets is usually given for determined design sectors of the excavated area according to the ISRM (1978) scheme: 1, Massive. occasional random joints; 2. One joint set: One joint set plus random: . Two joint sets; Two joint sets plus random; Three joint sets; . Three joint sets plus random: . Four or more joint sets; Crushed earthlike rock.Geomechanical characterization of discomtinuities 95 3.13 BLOCK SIZE The block size parameter is determined by the discontinuity spacing, numberof sets and discontinuity persistence. The number of sets and the orientation determine the shape of the resulting block which can take the form of cubes, rhombohedrous. tethrahedrons or sheets. According to these geometrical forms and to the fact that joints én one set are _seldom consistently parallel. SRM (1978) proposed a rock mass description on ~ the basis of block size and shape. This classification has many similasities with the {rock slope classification proposed by Duncan & Goodman (1968¥ presented in Chapter 2. The rock mass is described (Figure 3.37) with the following adjectives: 1. Massive: Few joints or very wide spacing: 2. Blocky: Approximatively equidimensional: 3. Tabular: One dimension considerably smaller than the other tao; ure 3.37. Sketches of rock masses illustrating: 2) Blocky: b) Irregular; c) Tabular: 4) Columnar block shaped rocks (after ISRM, 1978).96 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 3.7. Example of a columnar rock mass in a prophirie formation in Trentino. lisly. By PF. Micheli. ISMES. 4. Columnar: One dimension considerably larger than the other wo (Plate 3.7): 5. lnegular: Wide variations of block size and shape: 6. Crushed: Heavily jointed (o “sugar cube’. ‘The combined properties of block size-and interblock shear strength determine the mechanical behaviour of (lié rock mass. A small block size may determine shear band or Kink Band formations under given stress conditions. Very small block sizes may cause a potential mode of failure such as rotational movement Block size can be described either by means of the average dimension of typical blocks (block size index /,,) or by the total number of joints intersecting in the rock mass unit volume (volumetric joint count J, ) The joint system analysis, developed in order to set up mosaic block (essella- tion models according to the surveyed block geometry is discussed in Chapter 6. The shear strength of closely jointed masses is discussed in Chapter 4. The description of block geometry and stability using vector methods or " stereo-graphical projections are discussed in Chapter 8. 3.14 DISCONTINUITY DESCRIPTION USING DRILE CORE AND'DRILL HOLE ANALYSIS Carefully planned and executed core drilling followed by detailed core analysisGeomechanical characterization of discontinuities 97 ROD 2 4 8 10 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 Figure 3.38. Relationship benveen RQD (ordinate) and discontinuity frequence (abscissa) (number of discontinuity per meter). 1) Linear approximation: RQD =~ 3.68A + 110.4 for 6 << 16: 2) Theoretical cure: ROD = 100e*" (OIA 4 1): 3) Points obtained by experimental data (after Priest & Hudson, 1976). tests and hole inspection can improve the quiatitative description of discontinui- ties carried out using a rock exposure sur The true orientation of discontinuities can be obtained from a single drill core if orientation devicéare employed during the drilling process. Drill holé inspection using special television cameras and periscopes can provide a measurement of orientation discontincities. In this case the hole size has to be large enough to permit the camera to enter. The discontinuity spacing has been correlated with the Rock Quality Des tion (RQD) values which are determined by the drill core (Priest & Hudson. 1976). RQD (Deere. 1968) is determined by the drill core and is given by: RQD=100 >) x/L where .v, are the lengths of individual core pieces in a drill run having lengths of 0.1 m or greater and L is the total length of the drill run. The empirical correlation which allows one to estimate RQD from discontinu- ity spacing measurements (or mean frequency A = n / X, where ¥ is the mean spacing and » the sample size) is reported in Figure 3.38 3.15 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS A common non-destructive rock slope site investigation method is the measure- ment of physical anomalies within the near surface rock mass using a range of98 Rock slope stability analysis geophysical techniques. These techniques consist of seismic and sonic surveys which measure the velocity of shock or sound waves through the rocks. resistivity which measures the electrical resistance within the sub-surface profile. magnetic and gravity surveys which determine anomalous levels of iron rich materials and materials with low or high density, Other geophysical methods include EM which uses electromagnetic fields such as the georadar which has a very high resolution capability. Application of a geophysical survey to the rock mass description is usually devoted 10 whole blocky systems and not to single features. Seismic refraction has been used to indicate the high velocity material level which may define the surface of probable sliding. Rock structures can be singularly examined by energizing some points in a rock wall and by recording the time of the first arrival and attenuation of seismic waves with geophones placed in different points on a second wail. Tomographic techniques can be used to assess weaker zones inside the rock mass. Resistivity can idemify levels of water concentrations which may be associated with a failure plane.CHAPTER 4 Shear strength 1 BASIC CONCEPTS 4.1.1 Imact rock strength envelope If a series of identical intact rock isotropic material specimens are sheared in a direct shearing device and their maximum strengths S are plotted versus their normal loads N. a maximum shear strength envelope. similar to that shown in Figure 4.1, is obtained. The inclination of this envelope, is commonly called internal shearing resistance angle 4, (Deere et al., 1967). The value of 6, is usually between 35° and 65° (Patton, 1966), decreasing with normal load increment, ‘Sinc®the shear failure surface is pre-determined in a direct shearing device, triaxial tests can be used to determine a maximum strength envelope and correspondent shear strength features. If the displacements are continued on the same sheared specimens by th¢ direct shearing device, the shearing resistance will drop until it finally reached)an asimptotic minimum value corresponding 10 a residual shear stress (Figure 4.2) Figure 4.3 shows two drawn envelopes and the maximum and minimum values of shear strength obtained from each specimen. The vertical distance between the two envelopes indicates the shear strength lost with continued displacements. 4.1.2 Types of strength criterion In general terms, peak strength criterion expresses a relationship between the stress components so that the peak strength developed under various stress combinations can be predicted. Residual strength criterion is defined using a relationship able to predict residual strength under various stress conditions (Brady & Brown, 1985). Since effective stresses control strength behaviour, a strengih criterion is best written in effective stress terms, However, as the pore pressures are usually low (if not 0), total and effective pressures are almost the same. General forms of peak strength criterion express maximum principal stress as a100 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.1. Typical maximum shear resistance enve- 4g lope for anintact rock. peak residual Figure 4.2. Typical shear stress-shear displacement diagram. Figure 4.3. Maximum (a) and residual (b) shear resistance diagrams. function of minimum and intermediate principal stresses, or when referring to a particular plane, the shear strength as a function of the normal siress acting on the plane, Because the available data (Brady & Brown, 1985) indicates that the interme- diate principal stress G, has less influence on the peak strength than the minimum principal stress G3, all the criteria used in pratice are reduced to the form: 0, =f(03)Shear strength 101 41:3 Coulomb shear-strengtucriterion Coulomb determined (1776) that the soil and rock shear strengths are the sum of two components, one due to a constant cohesion, the other due to a friction strength dependent on the normal stress acting on the plane on which the shear strength is mobilized. Coulomb expresses his ‘strength criterion’ in terms of forces. This criterion, with reference to a plane, can instead be expressed in terms of stresses as: t=c+o, tang where.c is the cohesion-atidsi¢ithe:angle of internabifrietion. By applying the Siress transformation equations to the case of Figure 4.4 one obtains: 6, ='A(G, + 53) + A(G, — 03)cos 2B and 1 ='A(6, - 95) sin 2B By substituting the above expressions obtained for 6, and t in the criterion equation the stress limit conditions can be obtained on any plane defined by the angle Bas: 2c + o4{sin 2B + tan 6 (1 -cos 28)] sin 2B ~tan 6 (1 + cos 2B) The plane on which all the available shear strength is firstly reached, for increments of o}, is called ‘critical plane’. The orientation of this critical plane can be obtained by constructing the Mohr circle (Figure 4.5a) and by obtaining the analytical expression for the angle B: poz4! Figure 4.4. Shear failure on the AB plane102 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.5. Coulomb criterion in the t - 6, plane (a) and in the 6, ~G plane (b). The criterion can be expressed in terms of principal stresses 6, and 6, by considering sin 2B = cos 4: _ 2c cos +0(1+ sing) 1-sing i Oo; Figure 4.Sb reports this linear relationship between o, and the peak value of 6}. The angle y of Figure 4.5b can be related to 6 by the equation: L+sind =sing and a theoretical value for the uniaxial compressive strength can be obtained as a function of the cand 6 shear strength characteristics: tany 2ccos 1-sing By extrapolating, the shear strength Coulomb envelope, for 0, =0 (Figure 4.5 b), an apparent value Gy of the uniaxial tensile strength can be obtained as: 2c cos Te a l+sing However, the Coulomb criterion is not Suitable Yor prediction of the shear strength conditions when a tension stress is applied perpendicular to a shear failure plane. Experimental results, both on indirect and direct tensile tests, show that as the strength behaviour in a tensile field is different from the extrapolated Coulomb envelope, the uniaxial lensile strength values are usually lower. Although widely used, the Coulomb criterion is not a particularly satisfactory peak stréngth criterion for rock material. The reasons for this are (Brady & Brown, 1985): 1. It implies that a major shear fracture exists at peak strength. Observations such as those made by Wawersik & Fairhurst (1970) show that this is not always the case.Shear strength 103 2. It implies a direction of shear failure which does not always agree with experimental observations, 3, Experimental peak strength envelopes are generally non-linear. They can be considered only over a limited range of 6, or 03, For these reasons. other peak shear strength criteria are preferred for intact rock, Zeven thougin in a slope stability problem, the values of 6, ase generally low enough to justify a Jinear strength envelope assumption. The Coulomb criterion may instead be applied to shear strength behaviour in residual conditions and particularly for rock discontinuity residual conditions. 4,2. ROCK DISCONTINUITY SHEAR STRENGTH 4.2.1: Planar discontinuity surfaces The surface shape of natural rock discontinuities can be ayditatively described (Chapter 3) as planar. undulated or stepped. Ata lower scalé every surface can still be described as rough. smooth or slickenslide. Planaripolishedsurfaces of mineral specimens give a variety of surface frictions depending on the degree off$mi ness and the surface moisture conditions (Horn & Deere, 1962). In nature, however. rock surfaces are rarely monominerallic or highly polished and sliken- side surfaces areceldom encountered. Patton (1966) suggested that, with large displacements, initially polished rock surfaces becomecratchi ind gougedand the angle of frictional sliding resistence 6, increases from initial low values 102 value ,. which is similar to what one obtains if the prepared surface is sawn planar but not polished. On the other hand, if the original surface is quite rough, it becomes progress- ively smoother with increasing displacements and the angle of frictional sliding resistance progressively decreases, from an initial high value. by reaching an asymplotic value: The residual value 6, (Deere at al., 1967) The friction angle of a discontinuity can be defined using the following terms which refer to the displacements obtained during shear movements (Krahn & Morgenstem, 1979: Barton, 1980, Krahn & Morgenstem, 1980): 1. Peak-friction-angle, is evaluated on natural discontinuities, in corespon- dence to the maximum shear strength determined by roughness failure or overstep: 2 Batic-srietion-angle'd, is evaluated on an artificially planar slickensided surface and is characteristic of the tock mineralogy; 3. Residual friction angle, is evaluated when.the shear strength is stabilized ona minimum value. It is obtained on altered and smooth surfaces, by represent- ing the shear strength of thethiialteration discontinuity surface level, This isthe lowest value. Sometimes, with reference to direct laboratory shear tests carried out on a shear box, the discontinuity friction angle is called ultimate (@,) (first residual), second104 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.6. Typical shear strength envelope ob- © tained on flat discontinuity surfaces. residual and so on down to the residual value (6,) in relationship to the number of, shear cycles. For every shear cycle, in the Hoek box for example, the maximum surface displacement is | cm. In this sense the two angles (@, and ¢,,) are of similar magnitude (Deere et al., 1967). Barton & Choubey (1977) found that the residual friction angle , of a joint (the theoretical minimum, with all roughness{worR, away) is a function of the relative strengths of the joint wall material (see Chapter 3) and the stronger unweathered material in the interior of each block: 6, = (b, — 20°) + 20° GAR) where R is the Schmidt hammer rebound on the sawn surfaces (unweathered) and ris the Schmidt hammer rebound on the wet joint surfaces (weathered) When the wall material is unweathered 4, = 4, : Figure 4.6 shows a typical shear strength envelope obtained froft direct shear tests carried out on a series of rock specimens with a relativeh iycfiae surface, for a stress range of normal stresses of 0-1.5 MPa. The value of the. e residual friction angle 6, for most rocks is usually between 25° and 35° The following range of ultimate friction angles were obtained for rocks in the Department of ‘Georisorse e Territorio’ of the ‘Politecnico di Torino’ laboratory using the Hoek shear box (Plate 4.1): Rock Degrees (°) Basalt 40-42 Calcite 40-42 Compact sandstone 34-36 Dolomit limestone 30-38 Filladic schist 26-36 Graphitous schist 21-23 Gypsum 34-35 Micaceous quartzite 38-40 Micaschist 28-30 Minute gneiss 39-41 Shale 28:39 Taleschist 20-30Shear strength 105 es ed Plate 4.1, Hoek shear machine al the laboratory of the ‘Georisorse & Territorio” Deparment of the Technical University of Turin, 4.2.2 Inclined discontinuitysurfaces If the shearing surfaces are inclined at an angle to the direction of the shearing stress, then the shearing resistance for displacements along the inclined surface is given by t=6 tan (6, +1). Figure 4.7 illustrates the shear strength envelopes for two inclined surfaces, one inclined at the i angle, the other at ~ i angle and the correspondent two laboratory specimen figures and stress directions. The inclination is called positive when the upper half of the specimen rises from the lower one as a consequence of the shear displacement and shear resistance increases. The inclination is called negative when the upper half slides down and shear resistance decreases. lt can be noticedsthat the maximum valve of the inclination of a surface for which there is still a possibility of the upper half sliding under the action of a shear force, gives the following equilibrium equation (Figure 4.7): Scosi-Ssinitang, from which one obtains: tan i-tang,= 1 and 6 += 90° For this reason, when rough surfaces have asperities inclined so that, +12 90°,106 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.7. Shear strength envelope for inclined discontinuity surfaces: a) Negative inclina- tion; b) Positive inclination. the failure movements of the surfaces will occur together with the failure of the asperities and not with the sliding along the surfaces. When the inclination is negative, the upper half will slide when || = 4), 4.2.3, Multiple inclined discomtimity surfaces The theoretical situation of multiple inclined surfaces has been examined by Patton (1966) and Deere et al. (1967). This case was taken to closely study the influence of the asperities and the phenomenon of Gnterlockitig on the strength envelopes. A horizontal surface containing a number Of regular ‘teeth’ was considered in order to reduce the number of variables. The size and the shape of the teeth were identical, each having a surface inclined at an angle i to the direction of application of the shearing force. In addition, the teeth had a constant internal strength identical to the rock mass itself. Figure 4.8 iJlustrates specimens with different j values. Patton (1966), tested kaoline and rough filaster’surface mixed with different ‘teeth’ inclination angles (i= 25°, 35°, 45°) and a different number of asperities. He found that the strength envelope of the specimens with j = 25° can be represented by a straight line (A) (Figure 4.8). However, for specimens with i = 35° and i = 45°, each envelope has to be represented by «wo straight lines (B and. C). Line (D) represents the residual strength of all the three series and its valué is £1° of the sliding friction of the flat surfaces , depending on the plastér-kaoline mixture. The inclinations of the upper parts of Jines B and C are. very close to 6, (6, = 6,) and the lower parts are within one degree of 6, + 7. The abrupiichanges in the slope of lines B and C are related to the mode of failure chat Below this change point, the maximum shear strengths are related to the frictional resistence due to the teeth inclination. In the case of envelope C, the transition occurs at a lower load and in envelope A it does not occur because the value of the normal load used. is not high enough to reach transition in the failure mode.Shear strength 107 aS (bs) 500 400 2 : D 300, a a 200

Nv (Ibs) bo) 360 A } $ (ads) " 400 | 300 7 4 TL. restauet 200 a 100 3 kaolinitesplaster (1:1) tp a o 190 700 300 Figure 4.8. Shear strength envelopes for specimens with different teeth inclination (a); and for different numbers of teeth (b) (after Patton, 1986). =~ Wh Obs) (o)108 Rock slope stability analysis The Patton results, obtained by increasing the number of asperities, are shown in Figure 4.8b, by means of shear strength envelopes for specimens with different teeth numbers. The initial envelope curves sti)] have the same inclination of the (6, + angle. Doubling the number of asperities from two to four and maintaining the specimen size constant, results in an abrupt change of the strength envelope slope up to a higher normal load. The upper part of the strength envelope/almost’ doubles. oes The Patton (1966) bi-linear relationship which describes the strength envelopes shown in Figure 4.8a-b was related to two different modes of failure. A first linear tract of the envelope is obtained at low normal loads where the maximum shearing strength is related to the frictional resistance along the inclined surface. The frictional resistance along the inclined surface is equal to the internal shearing resistance of the teeth at failure point. Shearing strengths related to the first tract are accompanied by displacements perpendicular to the shearing force direction (dilatant behaviour). A second linear tract is obtained at high normal loads, where the maximum shearing strength is unrelated to sliding along, the.inclined surfaces. The horizontal displacements occurred when the teeth were sheared at their base. Displacements perpendicular to the shearing force are very small in comparison to those occurring for tests in the first tract range It can be seen that ifougly there is no cohesion interception, there is a real contribution of the interwaI“cohesive’ strength of the teeth to all normal loads other than zero. This contribution of the internal ‘cohesive’ teeth strength reaches a maximum value when the teeth are sheared off at their base and remain constant for higher normal loads. For the first tract, the mobilized cohesion is directly proportional to the normal load, for the second tract it is independent. The second envelope line can be represented by the equation: S=K+Nian oy where K. previously called ‘cohesive strength’, is constant and equal to the ordinate of the intersection with the shear force axis of the straight line of the second part of the envelope. However (Patton, 1966) such a bi-linear relationship is not obtained in natural joint shear tests because there are different teeth superimposition types anda more complicated nature of asperity failure. 4.2.4 Ladanyi & Archambault criterion Two failure modes occur simultaneosly during shearing along an irregular surface: Shearing and sliding. In Figure 4.9 the two specimen halves which include an irregular discontinuity surface are schematized as triangles in a vertical section. A, (A, = LA A,) is the rough surface projected area portion where the asperities are sheared off; A-A, is the remaining portion of the projected area where the sliding occurs,Shear strength 109 s = a Figure 4.9. Definition of the dilation rate v and the shear area ratio: as V = dy/dx, as S=AASA The shear force mobilized for sliding may be divided into three components (Rowe et al., 1964) SS, and Sy S, is the shear force component due to external work carried out in order to dilate against the external normal force N; Sy is the shear force component due to the additional friction dilatancy intemal work: Sy is the shear force component due to the work of intemal friction, if the specimen does not change in volume during shearing. The three component expressions can be obtained (Figure 4.9) as: dy S\=N jtan i= MV, dv V being the rate of dilation at failure dy /dx; S. tan /tan 6, = SV tan 6, Vian 6, The sum of these three shear components gives: S$, #5, +S,=N tani + Stan itand, +N tan 6, =S or S/N =tani+S/N tani tan, + tan 6, =tan (9, +4) which is the same as the result obtained by Patton (1966). ‘The shear force $, which occurs as a result of the teeth shearing may be determined by assuming thas the portion A, of the teeth are sheared off at the base, thereby obtaining: Sy= 3K +Mtan 6,110. Rock slope stability analysis where K and 6, are the Coulomb parameters related to the strength of the rock substance. The following expression can be obtained for shear strength by adding all the four components: S_6,(1-a,)V + tan $,) +(G, tan, + K)a, A 1-(-a,)Vtand, when V = 0 (flat surfaces and persistence lower than 100%): 156,(1-a,) tang, +.,(6, tang, + K) To overcome the difficulty of determining the value of K and 9, and taking into account that the Mohr envelope is an initially curved shape as a result of different multiples of asperity heights and inclinations which are sheared off at different stages, Ladanyi & Archaumbault (1969) used the parabolic law proposed by Fairhurst (1964) to describe the shear resistance of the material ‘adjacent’ to the discontinuity surfaces 1: o =} [i ey tS n G, 7 Where ois the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock material ‘adjacent’ to the discontinuity which may be lower than that of the uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock because of weathering or alteration of the discontinuity surface; nis the ratio between uniaxial compressive 6, and uniaxial tensile 6, strength of the intact rock. Hoek (1968) suggested that, for most hard rocks, 1 is approximate equal to 10. The two extreme situations of the strength envelopes are: = Extremely low normal stress and no shearing of the asperities; — Normal stress high enough to completely shear off the asperities In the fist situation: s 470 A,30 Votani while in the second: A, 1 and V— 0. Approximate values of a, and V can be obtained from the following relation within the extreme situations 0< 6, <6, o,\° 1-[1-=] ani 6 i a, and \K 1 s| tani \ 6) where, for rough surfaces, the empirical values found by Ladanyi & Archam- bault, on the basis of a large number of shear tests, are: K=4,L = 1.5,Shear strength 41 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 12 Pe Figure 4.10. Shear strength envelopes for the cases where 6 = 30° and i= 10°: a) Fairhurst equation for the rock material failure; b) Ladanyi & Archambault criterion equation; €) Pation equation: &) Residual strength for stickenslide and planar surface equation. The ratio between the effective normal stress acting on the discontinuity and the unisxial compressive strength af the material forming such a surface is reported in the abscissa; the ratio berveen the shear resistance and the uniaxial compressive swengih is yeporied in ordinate (afier Hock & Bray. 1981). Figure 4.10 reports (Hoek & Bray, 1981) different shear strength envelopes obtained by using: The Fairhurst equation for rock material failure, the Ladanyi & Archambault criterion equation, the Patton cquation for dilation of rou and residual strength of slickenside and planar surface equation ‘As can be seen from Figure 4.10. the assumption of a bilinear envelope for discontinuity shear strength may be described for the firsi (dilatant) line using the Patton equation and for the second using the Fairhurst equation for rock material failure. The Ladanyi & Archambault equation represents a criterion more adhe- rent to the reality of the physical phenomenon which involves a transition zone due to progressive shearing of the asperities and superimposition of the teeth of the upper wall discontinuity surface. h surfaces 4.2.5 Rough discontinuity surfaces In nature, the discontinuity surface shape is not as regular as that which is described in Sections 4.2.1, 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 but is almost random (Plate 4.2)112 Rock slope stability analysis BETAS, Plate 4.2. Above: Mechanical messurement of roughnesses un discontinuity surfaces. By A.M, Ferrero, Below: Roughness contour diagram. The standard discontinuity profiles proposed by Banton & Choubey (see Chapter 3) are typical examples of randomly distributed asperities and undula~ tions along a surface profile. Natural discontinuity shear strengih can be described as a function of sev parameters (Cunha, 1990):Shear strength 13 — Applied normal stress or staie of stress in general terms; ~ Wall roughness characteristics; ~. Strength and deformability of'the asperities and of the walls in general; ~ ‘Thicknessaype and physical properties of any filling material: Contact area (fatchedsor mismatched joints) and distribution of apertures and contacts between the walls; — Orientation of the shearing piane and direction of shearing forces: ~ Discontinuity dimension with respect to the shear direction and the cross direction. Itis difficult both to evaluate these parameters and to analytically formulate a strength criterion equation which takes all these parameters into account. Empirical approaches relate shear behaviour observations to a limited number of parameters which mainly govem the phenomenon. 4.2.6. Barton criterion The Barton criterion (1971, 1973, 1976. 1980, 1982, 1988 and 1990) is empirical and able-to:predict'and:describe the peak.shear strength of roekediscontinuities. One of the advantages of using this criterion is the relative facility of determining the parameters which govern the criterion equation. The analytical expression is: t=6, tan (IRC log,,JCS/o,) +6,] where JRC is the joint roughness coefficient representing a scale roughness factor and which varies approximatively within the range 0 and 20 increasing with wall surface roughness; JCS is the joint compressive strength already defined in Chapter 3 (the JCS estimation, using the Schmidt hammer, is also reported in Chapter 3); 6, is the residual friction angle which represents the theoretical minimum strength value of a planar and slickenside surface obtained when the roughness is completely worn away, ‘The basic friction value obtained on ar- tificially cut discontinuities is sometimes used for practical:purposes due to the difficulties of the last residual value, even though the two angle values are not always equal Barton considered the shear strength of natural discontinuities as being made up of three components: 1. A basic frictional component given by 6,5 2. A geometrical component controlled by surface roughness JRC); 3. An asperity failure component controlled by the ratio (JCS/o,). The shear strength envelopes using the Barton equation, for different joint roughness coefficients, are illustrated in Figure 4.11 Shear strength envelopes for rough-undulated surfaces (class (a) of Figure 4.11) are steeper for low values of normal effective stress. However. by taking the safety factors required for roc structure engineering into account. Barion suggested not considering artan t/G,, values greater than 70°114 Rock slope stability analysisShear strength 115 or every possible intercept cohesion. Consequently, the envelopes in the left part of Figure 4.11 are characterized by a lower linear part (when JCS/o,, > 100) and by a second upper non-linear tract The uniaxial compressive strength of the joint wall JCS strongly infuences the shear sirength of rough joints (Figure 4.1L) where the normal stress levels are as low as in the largest part of the rock slope stability problems. The wide shear strength envelope variation obtained for the class A JRC value is analogous to those experimentally determined (Figure 4.12). The peak shear strength is less influenced by the JCS values with smoother wall surfaces. as the asperity failure is of an importance which decreases with the JRC value. The joint shear strength mainly depends on the rock mineralogy for sniooth and slickenside planar surfaces. © paragneiss O clay shale + micaschist © phyllite © jimestone % granite © calch schist orthogneiss B schist graphitous = dolomit. limestone 4f shale sandstone & serpentine 3 o [MPa] a Figure 4.12. Peak shear resistance envelopes for natural discontinuities. (experimental data obtained from direct shear tests carried out at the laboratories of ISMES and the ‘Georisorse ¢ Territorio’ Department, Technical University of Torin),116 Rock slope stability analysis Because the geometrical component of shear strength controlled by the JRC value and the asperity failure component controlled by the ratio JCS/o, are not independent of the scale effect, it is important to determine shear strength parameter measurements free of scale effect and scale correction factors for the scale-dependent parameters. 4.2.7 Scale effects Bandis et al. (1981) examined the scale effects of the shear behaviour of discontinuities by means of experimental studies. The examined scale effects are as follows: ~ Scale effect on peak displacement; — Scale effect on dilatancy value; Scale effect on JRC value; Scale effect on asperity failure; — Scale effect on size and distribution’of the contact area; — Scale effect on limit size of Specimens; on ultimate shear resistance and on strongly jointed rock mass, for different values of normal stress. Figure 4.13 shows the scale dependence of the laboratory specimen size on the three components of the shear strength of natural discontinuities. Figure 4.13, in particular, illustrates how, by increasing the size of a specimen with a discontinuity, one obtains: ~ A gradual increase of the peak displacement; Figure 4.13. Dependence of the specimen size on the three components of the shear strength natural discontinvities. A: Component due 10 asperity failure; B: Dilatance component; C: Residual frictional component; D (D = A + B) represents the contribution to the shear resistance given by the wall discontinuity roughness; E (E=A + B + C) represents the peak resistance angle: = 6, + (afier Bandis etal. 1981),Shear strength 117 = An apparent transition zone from a “brittle® to “plastic” mode of shear failure; — Adecreasing of the peak friction angle as a consequence both of the decrease of the peak dilotation angle d, and of the component 5, due to the asperity failure: : — A decrease of the ultimate shear strength (the term ultimate is used with reference-fo the friction angle definition reported in Section 4.2.1). Adfurthehscale effect has been examinated (Bandis et al., 1981) bY comparing the behaviour of the joints: 1) By shearing a block on a singlejoint, and 2) by shearing multiple blocks on a joint with the same roughness-f€atures. A heavily jointed rock mass exhibits a reduced gtiffnes® by increasing the degree of freedom of the individual joint blocks which are able to rotate and mobilize all the roughness resistences at different scales. Consequently, as demonstrated by joimed model experiments (Bandis et al.. 1981), small blocks in a densely jointed mass may mobilize higher JRC values than larger blocks in a mass with wider-spaced joints. The scale effect on peak shear strength implies that there should be a minimum size concerning the lest specimen considered as technically acceptable. Barton & Choubey (1977) suggested considering, as a first approximation, the natural block size of the rock mass or more specifically, the spacing of cross-joints. 4.2.8 Joint Roughness Coefficient measurementsfrom large scale index tests Tilt, pull and push (ests represent (Bandis et al., 1981) a very Cheap:method of assessing a JRC value such as a large scale index test. The drawing of the tilt and pull tests are reported in Figures 4.14 and 4.16. In a tilt test, the JRC value may be obtained (Figure 4.15) by using the following equation: where 0: isthe tilt angle for which the upper half slides on the lower half: G,, is the normal stress which occurs when sliding takes place. Ina pulitest. the JRC values may be obtained by pulling the block from the rock wall with an external force directed parallel to the deepest line of the block base plane, The pull tests are prefentially carried out for block contact joints with high [RC values The JRC value may be obtained (Figure 4.16) by using the following equa- tion:M8 Rock slope stability analysisShear strength 19 Figure 4.16. "In sits’ pull test (after Bandis et a al., 1981) two adjacent blocks opened with a drilled tine: Vis the normal component of the block weight (I and: Ay is the joint area. “The Schmidt hammer may be used for JCS estimation. The roughness surface “Slope angle dependence on joint length L is shown in the tilt test by means of a modification of the Patton (1966) law: T=6, tan (0, + i(L)) where, by referring to the Barton criterion: i{L) = JRC log, (ICS/o,) Consequently, the reduced tilt angle & may be attributed to an effective reduction in fand therefore to a joint roughness reduction with an increase in length. The size of this scale effect for a tilt test can be calculated using the empirical formulas given by Barton & Bandis (1982) and Banton & Bakhtar (1983) and based ona large number of ‘in situ’ and laboratory experiments (Plates 4.3-4.4): IRC = IRCA IL, /Lgh OR 44) cs . JCS = 1, IL, Lg} 209RCH320 Rock slope stability analysis Plate 4.3, Different sizes of rock specimens used to assess discontinuity shear strength scale effect by means of tilt tests. By L, Reinavdo. Plate 4.4. Laboratory tiltiest. By L.Reinaudo,Shear strength 121 where L, and Ly are the lengths referring to ‘in situ* scale and to the laboratory scale respectively. By taking the Patton law into account: IRC g(L/L py ROflog.g(ICSp /6,) + log(L/L gy Ro] and when L = Ly i ig = IRCy log g(ICSo/6,) Ina tlt test the normal siress acting on the joint when sliding accurs may be given approximately by: WV cos «/A, where Wis the weight of the upper block, @ is the till angle and A is the sliding area. In the hypothesis of a block which slides at a 66° tilt angle with a unit weight of 25 kN/m* and a height of 0.1 m one obtains: Weose _yhA cos & AA Therefore tor a JCS value of 100 MPa, the value of 5 is obtained for log, ICS,/6, and therefore. ig = SIRCp. Jig = (L/L gy 0860 [5 + logyp(L/ Ley O¥R 0} /5 h cos &= 0.001 MPa Referring to Figure 4.15, the tilt angle «is given by the expression: a=o.47 andathen L=Lo, Op = 0, + ig from which one obtains Gl Gy = O,10%9(1 = Hig) + HHiy The above equation stows that the surface slope or angle i decreases with an increase of L. as 6, is not considered scale dependent. Atthis point it is important to note (Swan & Zongai, 1985) that f has been assumed that 1. The value of /, for a given normal load. is a single value; 2. The reference line MM defining the shear plane (Fi remains parallel to the measured surface A-A. Prediction of tilt angle is therefore based on a triangular roughness representa- tion and the scale effect is evaluated by assuming a roughness median line. constant in inclination (always horizontal), for each joint length, Before continuing with the objective and the free of scale methods for JRC assessment, it ig important to determine the influence of JRC on the slope stability, If one considers the equilibrium of the block resting on a 30° inclined joint plane (Figure 4.17), the parameters of the Barton criterion have been obtained by ure 4.15) always122 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.17, Equilibrium of a block analyzed using the Bunion criterion equation. means of tilt test measurements with: Ly = 10. em, JCSp = 50 MPa. Oy = 612, 6, = (0, — 20°) + 20°r/R) = 25°, where g, = 30° and r/R =075.6,, = 0.00126 MPa o, IRCy= = 78 ICS, 5, lozyy The scale effect on the length of the joint may be examined by means of Equation 4.1 and the JRC value for the examined block stability is: IRC = IRCy(L/Lpy ORO = 4.88 the correspondent ICS value is: ICS = ICSy(L/Lyy007RC0 = 24.80 MPa where L = 2m. The safety factor for the block sliding is: Fe Wcos ct [tan URC log) ICS/6, + $,)] - W sin o =1.36 where 6, = 0.052 MPa A safety factor calculated without taking into account the scale factor and by using JRC =7.8 and JCS = 50 MPa should give F = 1.94, with a difference of 42% with respects to the scale corrected safety factor. The JRC parameter, determined on a potentially sliding surface, greatly influences the safety factor estimation. An objective estimation and a correct evaluation of the scale effect on the JRC length is consequently fundamental in order (o obtain reliable resulis, Tilt tests carried out at larger scale than the laboratory ones involve a slightShear strength 123 difference between the determined JRC value and the real scale JRC value and therefore a limited error of the mere application of Equation 4.1 empirical relationships on the scale effect. Equation 4.1 refers (0 JRC and JRCy in exponential forms. As the joint profiles are rougher, the scale effect increases. IF one considers, for example, a L/Lg ratio of 20 and a JRC = 20, and using Equation 4.1, JRC becomes: IRC = 20-204 =6 which is more than three times lower than 20. 4.2.9 Statistical methods for JRC determination and shear behaviour prediction Statistical representations of joint roughness (Wu & Ali, 1978; Tse & Cruden, 1979: Reeves. 1985) are carried out in order to reach a JRC objective estimation and 10 predict shear discontinuity behaviour. The main purposes of the statistical parameter introduction, to describe discontinuity roughness profiles, are: — Toavoid the subjectivity of the estimation based on the comparison between the examined profiles and the Barton & Choubey siandard profiles; — To include the effects of different asperity sizes and profile undulations on shear behaviour in a statistical mode! of roughness profile Statistical parameters (Swan & Zongqi, 1985), determined on roughness profiles were applied in order to individuate periodic roughness components which occur because of the incrementing of the surveyed profile and to determine the statistical arigin of the scale effects. Tse & Cruden (1979) proposed mathematical formulations to characterize numerically the roughness of discontinuity surfaces and to determine an objective estimation of the joint roughness coefficient (JRC). Two statistical parameters Z, and SF (respectively the root mean square and the mean square of the first derivative of the profile) were found in particular to be closely correlated with values of the joint roughness coefficient The equations: IRC = 32.20 + 32.42 log Z, IRC = 37.28 + 16.58 log SF have been proposed for the JRC estimation The parameter Z) may be numerically determined on a roughness profile (Figure 4.18a) by using the following expression: pug yr [wor where © is the number of amplitude discrete measurements; y is the amplitude of the roughness about the center line and Dx is a constant distance lag.124 Rock slope stability analysis y B en) Re URC c) Figure 4.18. 2) Asperity height mea- surement; b) Relationship between JRC and Z,: c) SF parameters for the 10 Barton & Choubey standard rock discontinuity profiles (after Tse & Cruden, 1979). 6 where Lis the let atthe dictance y jane length L. h of the profile and f(x) is the amplitude of the asperity heightShear strength 125 Figure 4,18b illustrates the relationship between the JRC and log (Z;) parame- ters for the Barton & Choubey standard roughness protiles whilst Figure 4.18¢ illustrates the relationship between JRC and log SF. Swan & Zongqi (1985) set up a tribological model based upon the roughness statistics and mechanical properties of real joints to predict shear joint behaviour. They considered three parameters for the scale effect analysis and a numerical characterization of roughness profiles: The mean roughness profile slope j, the standard deviation i_,, and all the ordinate standard G, deviations ‘The mean roughness profile slope is defined by the least square line fitted to the ordinate data profile (Figure 4.192) THC fue Value, called the roughness envelope angle, may be calculated with the Rengers (1971) method which provides information approximately equivalent 10 the perfonning of a shear test with nominal normal load (i.e. with negiigible asperity damage). i mean ay a NS ime 1) (a) > 5 i) 0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 io. shear displacement, (mm) alculated using gitized profile (2) Figure 4,19, a) Roughness profife and reference line: b) Dilatancy enveloy ihe Rengers method (1) and with a numerical simulation of sliding on 2 (after Swan & Zongqi, 1985).126 Rack slope stability analysis An altemative method of computing ipa, values is to use a numerical model developed for simulating sliding obtained from given digitized profilometric data (Swan, 1983). In either case, the simulation is a good representation of the tilt test (Figure 4.19b). The three parameters means ing, APG G, are Measured on roughness profiles with a length Lo: subsequently, in order to determine scale effects, scaled lengths L of the base length Ly are obtained by successive divisions. such as Lo/2. Lg/4 etc. Scale effects were investigated on experimental joint profiles for two line definition reference cases: — A least square line obtained for the profile length Ly was taken to be common toll scaled lengths of L. L <0 (Case §): - A least square line was Hitted consistently to each scaled length L (Case 2) Swan & Zonggi determined average tilt angles o& for forward and reverse ideal shear conditions by assuming a near interlocked state of wall joint surfaces. In the hypothesis of simulating tilt tests upon rock blocks with discontinuities and examining profile different lengths L (L< Ly) one obtains: @ 0,43 Where = £ fgg + Kling! «and 6, is considered independent of the length and K=1 The determined variations of Gye, and of G, with the dimensionless joint length ratio L/L, allowed Swan & Zongqi to arrive at the following conclusions on the JRC joint length scale dependency’ — The abserved mean profile slope is not constant with the length inclination and the assumption that 7 = fjy,- With fyeaq = 0. for every length of the same profile may lead to the underestimation of the tilt angle variation: = The assumption of a simple triangular profile model to predict the tilt angle does not produce conclusive evidence of a scale effect: = For the roughness defined using a consistent reference line (Case 2). scale effects are primarily of statistical origin, i.e. the larger the asperity sample. the greater the probability of finding asperities with extreme heights. Thus. an increased roughness with scale was obtained and this increase depends on the random or periodic character of roughness with scale. The Swan & Zonggi statistical joint protile analysis showed that roughness amplitude exhibits an increase of magnitude with scale in contrast to the Barton- Bondis model. Swan & Zongqi. in particular, pointed out thal the reference line of a discontinuity wall surface which determines the shear plane is not a constant slope with increasing joint surface and conscquently, there are larger scale roughnessess which should be considered in wider scale discontinuity shear behaviour, The author is not able to give a conclusive answer on the reliability of the different examining formulations to predict joint roughness surface scale effect but only to offer some observations.Shear strength 127 The geologic: origin of a discontinuity can help to assess if a reference line maintains a constant slope over determined joint lengths such as those assumed in the Barton-Bandis model This may represent a biased condition from some statistical model points of view: but may occur. ie. in laminated structures, schistosities. or in tension joints, where roughness symmetry characteristics exist and only some scales of rough- ness are present in joint surfaces. The application of the Barton empirical equation for peak shear strength to slope stability analysis leads to the determining of safety factors which decrease for triangular slopes with the increase of the sliding surface area. Consider the example of Figure 4.20 and the following gcometrical and physical characteristics of the slope stability problem: IRC = & (assumed to be constant with length), ¢, = 25°, JCS = 50 MPa (assumed to be constant with Jength), @=45°. sliding surface L, = 141 m, sliding surface Ly = 14.14 m. weight force W, = 1.31, weight force Wy = 1301 f, =Wicosatan GRC ogi9(ICS/5,.)*6) _ 4g W, since where W, S o= 154. 0,065 MPa 4 IV, cos oetan URC logyg ICS/S,2) +9.) _ | 4 W, sina \here 6,, = 0.065 MPa. The safety factor decreases, being constant JRC and JCS values, with normal stress increasing. according to the non linearity of the shear strength envelope. 10 m Figure 4.20. Triangular slope with parallel sliding surfaces.128 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.21. Siability of rock stabs with differ- ent lengths: 9) L= 0.1 m:b) L = 2m Two different slope stability analysis schemes may be examined in the hypo- thesis of maintaining constant normal stress and varying JRC and JCS with the length (Figure 4.21). Firstly consider the case of Figure 4.21a in which a cubic block set rests on an inclined plane. The physical and geometrical characteristics of the slope stability problem are: IRCy=8. JCSy = 50 MPa. 6, = 25° cos = 0.00184 MPa 1 where &=45°.L,=0.1 m=Ly. WV, =0.1841 The safety factor of a cubic block is given by: p_RURC Ios UCSIOI+8_ | 166 tan a Using the Barton-Bandis model for the scale length effect for the stability problem of Figure 4.21b, the JRC and JCS values become for a joint length of 2m: IRC = IRC (L/L) PPR = 4.95 ICS = ICS (L/L g)0 9/80 = 24.36 MPa and the correspondent safety factor F = 1.01. The Barton-Bandis model assumption, in order to take JRC scale effect on joint lengths into account, leads to the determining of the safety factor as being lower on a surface on which a monolith rests than on a surface on which an adjacent and contacting blocky system rests. A realistic hypothesis, to justify the experimentalShear strength 129 (a) (bo) 2) Monolith resting on a rough surface: b) System of blocks resting on 3 rough Figure 4. surface. evidence on which the Barton-Bandis model is based, is that of considering that the joint surface match decreases with joint length and consequently the inter- locked state between the joint surfaces also decreases (see Figure 4.22). The applicability of the Swan & Zongqi tribological model is limited te fresh and clean joints analysis. 4.2.10 Fractal characierization of joint surface roughness for estimating shear strength Several works have been carried out (Turk et al., 1987; Carr & Warriner, 1987; MacWilliam et al., 1990; etc.) to estimate joint shear strength by means of a fractal characterization of joint roughness profiles. The fractal method was firstly applied to coastal length determination (Man- delbrot, 1967) and an example of the use of the coastal Jength fractal calculation is here described. Figure 4.23 shows the outline of an imaginary island. A ruler could be used to measure the length of the coast and could be placed end to end around the coast The Jength L of the coast will then be: L=Nvy where y is the ruler length and N the number of rulers. If the process of measuring the length of the coastis repeated, but with a shorter ruler, itis found that length L, measured with the shorter ruler is greater than that measured with the longer ruler, since shorter rulers allow one to better follow the most indented coast lines. The relationship between the total coast Jength and the ruler length can be expressed as L=N-y? where D is the fractal dimension (Mandelbrot. 1982). The equation can be rewritten (Carr & Warriner. 1987) as: Ly-PsN and, by nonwalizi 1 L = I, one obtains:130 Rock slope stability analysis Figure 4.23. Coastal length computed using differ- ent length rulers: 1) Natural profile; 2) Length ruler = yy 3) Length moles and taking the base logy, =D logy() Fractal dimensions of rock joint surfaces may also be described using the ruler technique. Thus. the joint roughness coefficient or the roughness angle of the joint profile is related to the fractal dimension of the rough surface, Different correlations between JRC and fractal dimensions have been pro- posed. Carr & Warriner (1987) proposed wo linear correlations determined on the basis of experimental rock joint profile analysis: JRC =-1022.55 + 1023.92D JRC = 1000(D - 1) Turk et al. (1987) devcloped a procedure tor the estimation of the roughness angle of a rock surface from the fractal dimension. This procedure was applied to the Barton & Choubey standard profiles and to the Silurian sandstone joint profile analysis, This procedure refers to the profile length of the fractal dimension and the unit step length (ruler) yz logy L = logy) K+ (1 ~D)logiyy Where K is a constant, The Barton & Choubey standard joint profiles were analyzed using the unit sizes of 2, 6. 20 and 60 mm. The log-plot of the measuring steps and {otal joint profile length for different profiles are shown in Figure 4.24. From a study of Figure 4.24 it was decided to estimate the fractal dimensions of the joint profiles from the slope of the line corresponding to a6 mm measuring step length. The estimation of the roughness angle / of the rock surface was determined as: i=cos Ii? where 1, is the considered direct length of the joint profile or, for the general case: sexp se? where x is a constant.Shear strengih 131 standard Leg t JRC profile profile number 2 4 6 9 1 pee L —_ ~ 2 8 LO, 1 18 Log & Figure 4.24, Log-plot of step size (E) versus measured lengih (L) for JRC standard profiles (after Turk et al.. 1987), Table 4.1. The roughness angles and fractal dimension of the Barton & Choubey standard joint roughness coefficients (after Turk etal., 1987) JRC i=cos4/1,(°) Fractal dimension 0-2 0 1.0 24 4a 1.0019 46 41 1.0027 68 16 1.0049 8-10 66 1.0054 10-12 46 1.0045 1214 42 1.0077 14-16 9.2 1.0070 16-18, V2 1.0104 18-20 120 1.0170 +1 is the joint trace lengih. This equation (Turk et al., 1987) is the fundamental equation for estimating the joint roughness angle from the fractal dimension Table 4.1 gives the estimated roughness angles and fractal dimensions of the Barton & Choubey standard profiles.132 Rock slope stability analysis The following comments can be made on the fractal method application to the Joint shear strength estimation: ~ Two correlation methods between joint surface roughness and fractal dimen- sion of roughness profiles have been proposed. The first (Carr & Wariner, 1987) correlates the fractal dimension to the JRC value: the second, the fractal dimen sion to the average roughness angle of the joint surface. = The first correlation was empirically determined. ~ The roughness angle determined by the second correlation takes not only the primary but also the secondary asperities into account and gives the upperbound valves. — The joint roughness is expected to be constant, irrespective of the joint size. Moreover (Turk et al., 1987) this makes it possible to determine the roughness of large rock joints from the fractal dimension of small joint profiles. = The fractal method was applied to the estimation of the IRC of the Barton & Choubey standard profiles. Empirical data given by Barton & Choubey and fractal method application results are not always in agreement. Because of the difficulty in finding a better correlation between the joint roughness coefficients and the fractal dimensions of joint profiles, some research ers in this field (MacWilliams, 1990) are not convinced that the 2-D work profile is able to solve the 3-D problems of rock joint shear strength estimation. 4.2.11. Geostatistical operators applied 10 the rock joint shear strength prediction Practical geostatistic applications to rock slope engineering problems have mainly deen carried out recently for spatial variability analysis and modelling of the characteristics of rock joints. Geostatistical operators such as the variogram or covariance and geostatistical methods such as different types of kriging have then been applied to rock mechanics regionalized variables. The geostatistical application to rock joint modelling and to the estimation of regional average joint orientation input parameters for stability analysis are discussed in Chapter 6 together with some outlines of the basic principles of linear geostatistics. Methods based on the analysis of the variogram function for joint roughness profile characterization are here discussed. Variogram analysis has been carried out (Ferrero & Giani, 1990; Giani & Ferrero, 1990) in order to relate the particular structure of the geostatistic operator to the shear strength resistance components given by the roughness and waviness of the joint profiles. The regionalized variable of the problem is the asperity height at every point of the examined profile, while the reference axis for height measurements is assumed to be horizontal. If this axis, which represents the mean height line is not horizontal and the discontinuity profile is therefore inclined, the application of the