Rock Engineering

Practice & Design

Lecture 4:
Kinematic
Ki ti A
Analysis
l i I
(Slopes)

1 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Author’s Note:
The lecture slides provided here are taken from the course
“Geotechnical Engineering Practice”, which is part of the 4th year
Geological Engineering program at the University of British Columbia
(V
(Vancouver, Canada).
C d ) The
Th course covers rock k engineering
i i andd
geotechnical design methodologies, building on those already taken
by the students covering Introductory Rock Mechanics and Advanced
Rock Mechanics.
Mechanics
Although the slides have been modified in part to add context, they
of course are missing the detailed narrative that accompanies any
l
lecture. It is also
l recognizedd that
h these
h lectures
l summarize,
reproduce and build on the work of others for which gratitude is
extended. Where possible, efforts have been made to acknowledge
th vvarious
the ri us ssources,
urc s with
ith a list of
f references
r f r nc s being
b in provided
pr vid d att the
th
end of each lecture.

Errors, omissions, comments, etc., can be forwarded to the

author at: erik@eos.ubc.ca

2 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Rock Slope – Continuum or Discontinuum
Discontinuum??
In a moderately
d l jointed
d rock
k mass, slope
l failure
f l is generally
ll dictated
d d
directly by the presence of discontinuities, which act as planes of
weakness within the rock mass. These interact to control the size and the
direction of movement of the slope failure.

planar failure

wedge failure

3 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

 Discontinuity Mapping
Scanline mapping
Hudsson & Harrisson (1997)

Window mapping

4 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Mapping

Wyllie & Mah (2004)

5 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Mapping – Remote Sensing

Strouth & Eberhardt (2006)

Remote sensing techniques like LiDAR and phtogrammetry, provide a means

to collect rock mass data from slopes that would otherwise be inaccessible
or dangerous.
dangerous Discontinuity orientation
orientation, persistence
persistence, and spacing data can
be extracted from the 3-D point cloud of the scanned surface.

6 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Stereonets – Pole Plots
Plotting dip and dip direction,
direction pole plots provide an immediate visual
depiction of pole concentrations. All natural discontinuities have a certain
variability in their orientation that results in scatter of the pole plots.
However, by contouring the pole plot, the most highly concentrated areas of
poles, representing the dominant discontinuity sets, can be identified.

It must be remembered though, that it may be difficult to distinguish which set

a particular discontinuity belongs to or that in some cases a single discontinuity
may be the controlling factor as opposed to a set of discontinuities.

7 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Pole Plots & Modes of Slope Instability
Typical pole plots for different
modes of rock slope failure.

Wyllie & Mah (2004)

8 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Persistence
Persistence refers to the areal extent or size of a discontinuity plane
within a plane. Clearly, the persistence will have a major influence on the
shear strength developed in the plane of the discontinuity, where the intact
rock segments
g are referred to as ‘rock bridges’.
g

rock
k
bridge

increasing persistence
9 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition
Discontinuity Persistence
Together with spacing, discontinuity persistence helps
to define the size of blocks that can slide from a
rock face. Several procedures have been developed
to calculate persistence by measuring their exposed
trace lengths on a specified area of the face.

scan Step 1
1: define a mapping area on the rock face
line with dimensions L1 and L2.
t
c
Step 2: count the total number of discontinuities
t (N’’)) of a specific set with dip  in this area,
(N area and
c
the numbers of these either contained within (Nc)
L1 or transecting (Nt) the mapping area defined.
c c
t t For example, in this case:
c
N’’ = 14
 Nc = 5
L2 Nt = 4
Pahl (1981)

10 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Persistence
Step 1: define a mapping area on the rock face
Pahl (1981) with dimensions L1 and L2.

Step 2: count the total number of discontinuities

t (N’’) of a specific set with dip  in this area, and
c the numbers of these either contained within (Nc)
t or transecting (Nt) the mapping area defined.
c
L1 Step 3: calculate the approximate length, l, of
c c the discontinuities using the equations below.
t t
c


L2

Again, for this case:

If L1 = 15 m, L2 = 5 m and  = 35°, then H’ = 4.95 m and m = -0.07.
this the average length/persistence of the discontinuity set l = 4.3
From this, 4 3 m.
m

11 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Spacing
Spacing is a key parameter in that it controls the block size
distribution related to a potentially unstable mass (i.e. failure of a
massive block or unravelling-type failure).

12 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Roughness
From the practical point of view
of quantifying joint roughness,
only one technique has received
some degree of universality – the
Joint Roughness Coefficient
(JRC). This method involves
comparing discontinuity surface
profiles
l to standard roughness
curves assigned numerical values.

ey (1977)
on & Choube
Barto
13 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition
 Dilatancy and Shear Strength
In the
h case of f sliding
ld of
f an
unconstrained block of rock from a
slope, dilatancy will accompany
shearing of all but the smoothest
discontinuity surfaces. If a rock
block is free to dilate, then the
second-order asperities will have a
di i i h d effect
diminished ff t on shear
h strength.
t th
04)
Wyllie & Mah (200

By increasing the normal force

across a shear surface by adding
tensioned rock bolts, dilation can
be limited and interlocking along
the sliding surface maintained,
allowing the second-order
asperities to contribute to the
shear strength
strength.

14 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Mechanical Properties of Discontinuities

2004)
Wylllie & Mah (2
15 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition
Discontinuity Data – Probability Distributions
Discontinuity properties can vary over a wide range,
even for those belonging to the same set. The
distribution of a property can be described by means
of probability distributions.
distributions

A normal distribution is applicable where a particular

property’s mean value is the most commonly occurring.
This is usually the case for dip and dip direction.
direction

A negative exponential distribution is applicable

for properties of discontinuities, such as spacing
and persistence, which are randomly distributed.

Negative
exponential function:

Wyllie & Mah (2004)

16 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Discontinuity Data - Probability Distributions

Negative
N i
exponential function:

Wyllie & Mah (2004)

From this
this, the probability that a given value
will be less than dimension x is given by:

For example, for a discontinuity set with a mean spacing of 2 m, the

probabilities
b bl that
h the
h spacing will
ll be
b less
l than:
h

1 m

5 m

17 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Structurally-
Structurally -Controlled Instability Mechanisms
Structurally-controlled instability means that blocks formed by
discontinuities may be free to slide from a newly excavated slope
face under a set of body forces (usually gravity). To assess the
lik lih d of
likelihood f such
h failures,
f il an analysis
l i off the
th kinematic
ki m ti admissibility
dmi ibilit
of potential wedges or planes that intersect the excavation face(s)
can be performed.

18 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Kinematic Analysis – Planar Rock Slope Failure
To consider the kinematic admissibility of plane instability,
instability five
necessary but simple geometrical criteria must be met:
(i) The plane on which sliding occurs
must strike
ik near parallel
ll l to the
h
slope face (within approx. ±20°).
(ii) Release surfaces (that provide
n li ibl resistance
negligible sist nc tto slidin
sliding)) must
be present to define the lateral
slide boundaries.
(iii) The sliding plane must “daylight”
daylight in
the slope face.
(iv) The dip of the sliding plane must be
greater than the angle of friction.
friction
(v) The upper end of the sliding surface
either intersects the upper slope, or
terminates in a tension crack.
Wyllie & Mah (2004)

19 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Kinematic Analysis – Rock Slope Wedge Failure
Similar to planar failures,
failures several conditions relating to the line of
intersection must be met for wedge failure to be kinematically
admissible :

(i) The dip of the slope must exceed

the dip of the line of intersection
of the two wedge forming
di
discontinuity
ti it planes.
l
(ii) The line of intersection must
“daylight” on the slope face.
(iii) The dip of the line of intersection
must be such that the strength of
the two planes are reached.
( ) Th
(iv) The upper end d of
f the
h line
l of
f
intersection either intersects the
upper slope, or terminates in a
tension crack.
Wyllie & Mah (2004)

20 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Kinematic Analysis – Daylight Envelopes
Daylight Envelope: Zone within which all
poles belong to planes that daylight, and are
therefore potentially unstable.

slope
faces

Lisle (2004)
daylight
d li ht
envelopes

21 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Kinematic Analysis – Friction Cones
Friction Cone: Zone within which all poles belong
to planes that dip at angles less than the
friction angle, and are therefore stable.

on (2000)
Harriison & Hudso
22 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition
Pole Plots - Kinematic Admissibility

Having determined from the

daylight envelope whether
friction block failure is kinematically
cone permissible, a check is then
made to see if the dip angle
of the failure surface (or
li
line of
f intersection)
i i ) iis
slope steeper than the with the
face friction angle.

daylight
envelope Thus, for poles that plot
inside the daylight
y g envelope, p ,
but outside the friction
circle, translational sliding is
possible.

23 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Pole Plots - Kinematic Admissibility

 < f


 > f

Wyllie
y & Mah (2004)

24 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Wedge Failure – Direction of Sliding
Scenario #1: If the dip directions of the two
planes lie outside the included angle between i
(trend of the line of intersection) and f (dip
direction of face),
face) the wedge will slide on both
planes.

2004)
Example scenario #2: If the dip directions of one

Wylllie & Mah (2

plane (e.g. Plane A) lies within the included angle
between i (trend of the line of intersection) and
f (dip direction of face), the wedge will slide on
only that plane.
plane

25 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization
felder)
Fisher (Kleinf
Couurtesy - B. F

A rock slopep with a

history of block failures
is to be stabilized
through anchoring. To
carry y out the design,
g a
back analysis of earlier
block failures is first
performed to obtain
jjoint shear strength
g
properties.

26 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

 Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization
elder)
Courrtesy - B. Fissher (Kleinfe

27 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization

Assume: Water in tension crack

@ 50% the tension crack height &
water along discontinuity.
discontinuity

28 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization

elder)
Courrtesy - B. Fissher (Kleinfe
29 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition
Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization

Given:
• Unstable Rock Slope
• 40 ft tall
t ll
• About 55 degrees
• Joint Set Dips 38 degrees
• ’ + i ~ 38 - 40 degrees

55 deg slope

From previous back analysis

of failed block below bridge
abutment.

30 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization

1. “Worst case” tension crack

distance is 8.6 ft for a “dry”
condition
condition.
9.9’

2. Assume 50% saturation for

tension crack.

3. Estimate “super bolt” tension

55 deg slope
given desired bolt inclination.

4. Distribute “super bolt” tension

over slope face based on
available bolts.

5. Make sure and “bolt” all

unstable blocks.

31 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization
Results:

1. 22 kips tension/ft required at

5 deg
d d
downward d angle
l ffor F =
9.86’
1.5
2. Slope face length is equal to:

V 55 deg slope

32 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization

Recommendations:

1. 8 rows of bolts (40/5 = 8)

2. Try to bolt every block
3. Grout length determined by
contractor
4. Rule of thumb, grout length;
UCS/30 < 200 psi adhesion 55 deg slope

5. Contractor responsiblel for

f
testing or rock bolts
6. Engineer responsible to “sign
off”
ff” on Contractors tests

33 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Case History: Rock Slope Stabilization

her (Kleinfellder)
Courttesy - B. Fish
34 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition
 Computer-
Computer-Aided Planar Analysis

(R cscience – RocPlane)
(Rocscience R cPlane)

35 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition

Lecture References
Barton, NR & Choubey, V (1977). The shear strength of rock joints in theory and practice. Rock
Mechanics 10: 1–54.
Hoek, E, Kaiser, PK & Bawden, WF (1995). Support of Underground Excavations in Hard Rock.
Balkema: Rotterdam.
Hudson, JA & Harrison, JP (1997). Engineering Rock Mechanics – An Introduction to the Principles .
Elsevier Science: Oxford.
Lisle, RJ (2004). Calculation of the daylight envelope for plane failure of rock slopes. Géotechnique
54: 279-280.
279 280
Pahl, PJ (1981). Estimating the mean length of discontinuity traces. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics & Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts 18: 221-228.
Strouth,, A & Eberhardt,, E ((2006).
) The use of LiDAR to overcome rock slope
p hazard data collection
challenges at Afternoon Creek, Washington. In 41st U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics: 50 Years of
Rock Mechanics, Golden. American Rock Mechanics Association, CD: 06-993.
Wyllie, DC & Mah, CW (2004). Rock Slope Engineering (4th edition). Spon Press: London.
W lli DC & Norrish,
Wyllie, N i h NI (1996).
(1996) Rock
R k strength
t th properties
ti andd their
th i Measurement.
M I Landslides:
t In L d lid
Investigation and Mitigation – Special Report 247. National Academy Press: Washington, D.C., pp. 372-
390.

36 of 36 Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering ISRM Edition