JACKING METHODS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Jacking methods are sometimes called 'stress
compensating' methods. The equilibrium of a
rock mass is disturbed by cutting slots on the
surfaces of rock excavations (quarries, gal-
leries, pillars, etc.). This in turn creates defor-
mations that are measured with reference pins
or strain gages placed on either side of the
slots. Finally, equilibrium is restored by insert-
ing a device such as a jack in the slots. Then the
jack is pressurized until all deformations have
vanished. One of the most widely used jacking
methods is the flat jack (or fla~ack) method.
In general, jacking methods are intended for
the determination of surface or near-surface
rock stresses (at depths not exceeding 5-7 m).
In many aspects they can be classified as par-
tial surface relief methods. Jacking methods
can also be used for the monitoring of stress
changes, as discussed in Chapter 10.
6.2 HISTORY
The flat jack method represents one of the first
techniques used in rock mechanics for
measuring in situ stresses in rock. Initially
proposed to characterize the deformability of
rock masses, the method gained popularity in
the 1950s and 1960s for measuring stresses as
well. Numerous records of stress measure-
ments with flat jacks can be found in the
literature (see for instance the Proceedings of the
First ISRM Congress in 1966 (Theme No.4:
Residual stresses in rock masses) and those
of the Symposium on State of Stress in the
Earth's Crust in 1963 Gudd, 1964)). Stresses
B. Amadei et al., Rock Stress and Its Measurement
© Chapman & Hall 1997
6
determined with flat jacks have often been
compared with those determined with the
early version of the USBM gage (e.g. Judd,
1964; Merrill, 1964).
The use of flat jacks to measure absolute
stresses was first investigated in the 1950s in
France. The method called flat jack method
was proposed by Mayer, Habib and Marchand
(1951) and Tincelin (1951) and was later modi-
fied by Panek (1961), Panek and Stock (1964),
Hoskins (1966), Merrill et al. (1964) and Rocha,
Lopes and Silva (1966, 1971). Since the 1960s,
stress measurements with flat jacks have been
reported for a wide variety of rock conditions
ranging between hard rocks and weak and soft
rocks and evaporitic rocks. Examples can be
found in Wareham and Skipp (1974), Bonvallet
and Dejean (1977), Froidevaux, Paquin and
Souriau (1980), Borsetto, Guiseppetti and
Mandfredini (1983), Faiella, Mandfredini and
Rossi (1983), Heusermann and Pahl (1983),
Bertrand and Durand (1983), Tmchon (1986),
Grossman and Camara (1986), Pinto and
Cunha (1986), Zimmerman et al. (1989), Ber-
trand (1994) and Piguet (1994). Beside a few
technological improvements, the flat jack
method used today is essentially the same as it
was 30 years ago.
In general, the flat jack method consists of
measuring the displacement between one or
several sets of pins or strain gages placed on
the surface (or near the surface) of an excava-
tion created by cutting a nearby slot. A flat jack
(consisting of two thin metal plates welded
together) is inserted into the slot, grouted in
place and pressurized until the pin or strain
gage readings have returned to their original
position. This 'cancellation pressure' is used as
278 Jacking methods
3/4"
T r
SECTION
Fig. 6.1 Flat jack set-up used by Merrill and co-workers (1964).
an estimate of the tangential stress normal to
the jack also called 'skin stress'. Figure 6.1
shows an example of the flat jack set-up used
by Merrill and co-workers (1964) in the early
1960s.
From a mechanical point of view, the path
followed by the rock during a flat jack test can
be represented as shown in Fig. 6.2. Here it is
assumed that the rock is elastic (linear or
nonlinear) and is under compression in a
direction perpendicular to the jack surface.
The initial distance between two reference
pins is taken as do and the unknown normal
stress is defined as (J (point A). As a result of
cutting the slot, the normal stress across the
slot is reduced from (J to zero (free surface) and
the distance between the pins is reduced by an
amount 2""d (point B). Pressurization of the
a
PLAN
jack up to the cancellation pressure pc brings
the pins to their original position. Figure 6.3
shows an illustrative example of stress
measurement reported by Bertrand (1994)
showing three sets of unloading-reloading
response curves similar to the theoretical
curve shown in Fig. 6.2. In this example the
rock shows a very good linear elastic behavior.
The measurements were made with three sets
of reference pins placed across one slot
590 mm long, 190 mm deep and 5 mm thick.
The three cancellation pressures give an aver-
age normal stress equal to 1.66 MPa.
Bowling (1976) proposed using a cylindrical
rather than a flat jack to determine the stresses
parallel to a rock surface. The jack consists of a
solid steel core onto which fits a rubber sleeve.
Eight reference pins are first grouted around

A PROCEDURES
B mended by the ASTM.
do-2,id do
Distance between pins, d.
Fig. 6.2 Path followed by a rock during a flat jack
test. The rock is assumed to be elastic (linear or non-
linear) and under compression in a direction per-
pendicular to the jack surface.
the circumference of a circle 250 mm in diam-
eter on a rock surface. The pins form four
reference diameters spaced 45° apart. Then a
hole 150 mm in diameter and 500 mm deep is
drilled at the center of the circle, as in the stress
relief by center hole method of Duvall (1974).
The four diameter changes are monitored.
Finally, a cylindrical jack is inserted into the
hole and pressurized and the pin movements
are measured. The principal stresses and their
orientation in the plane parallel to the rock
surface, as well as the rock's Young's modulus,
are determined from the response curves of
the reference pins obtained during drilling
and pressurizing.
Curved jacks have also been proposed by
Jaeger and Cook (1964) for measuring stresses
in boreholes, at distances of 3 to 6 m into rock
masses, thus eliminating the main disadvan-
tages associated with flat jacks. Several pairs
of jacks need to be used, however. The method
is complex and requires a combination of frac-
turing, pressurizing, destressing and pressure
restoration. It has the advantage of being able
to determine the secondary principal stresses
Techniques, equipment and procedures 279
perpendicular to the boreholes. A method sim-
ilar to that of Jaeger and Cook (1964) has also
been suggested by Helal (1982).
6.3 TECHNIQUES, EQUIPMENT AND
Standards for determining in situ stresses with
flat jacks have been proposed by the American
Society for Testing of Materials (ASTM D
4729-87,1993) and the International Society for
Rock Mechanics (Kim and Franklin, 1987).
Figure 6.4 shows the flat jack set-up recom-
Flat jacks consist of two plates of metal that
are welded together. They can operate at pres-
sures of several thousand psi (tens of MPa).
They are usually square or rectangular with
widths not less than 0.6 m (2 ft). The slots can
be cut by overlapping holes or by using a large
diamond disk saw giving a smooth surface
(Rocha, Lopes and Silva, 1966). Overlapping
holes seem to be more suitable for deep slots
(deeper than 1.5 m) whereas the saw is used
for cutting slots less than 1.5 m in depth. Grout
such as mortar, epoxy resins or plaster is used
to hold the jack in place. The grout must have
similar strength and deformability as the sur-
rounding rock. Grouting of the jack may not be
necessary if the slots are cut with a large saw
(Rocha, Lopes and Silva, 1966). In that case the
jack is also reusable. The method of Rocha,
Lopes and Silva (1966) requires the use of flat
jacks with boundaries in the shape of an arc of
a circle instead of the more conventional
square or rectangular jacks. The pressure is
applied using hydraulic pumps and the pres-
sure should be able to remain constant over a
period of 5 min. The reader should note that
more than one coplanar flat jack can be in-
stalled in a slot, thus increasing the volume of
rock involved in the test.
Rock surface deformations or strains must
be measured in the near vicinity of the slots,
otherwise the deformations or strains would
be too small to be measured with enough
precision. Rocha, Lopes and Silva (1966)
 (a) (b) (c)
2.4 2.4 2.4

2.0 2.0 2.0

1.6 1.6
til til
Q. Q. 'i
e e e
1.2 ~ 1.2 ~
U) U) 1.21
U) U)
~ ~
Q. Q. Q.
0.8 0.8 0.8

0.4 0.4 0.4

" ' , 0 'i! I 0 'I' , 0

-250 -200 -\50 -\00 -50 o -250 -200 -\50 -\00 -50 o -250 -200 -\50 -\00 -50 o
Pin distance b1m) Pin distance (11m) Pin distance (11m)

Fig. 6.3 Example of field measurements with a flat jack. Three response curves are shown here corresponding to three sets of reference pins 1,
2 and 3 placed next to each other. (a) Base pins no. 1, pc = 1.70 MPa, (b) base pins no. 2, pc = 1.70 MPa, (c) base pins no. 3, pc = 1.58 MPa. (After
Bertrand, 1994.)
 Techniques, equipment and procedures 281
cancellation pressure (Goodman, 1989). For
Edge of prepared II' - ,,,' ~ ~[- - - ' ...... " , comparison, Fig. 6.5b shows a typical record
surface ~/I I~ A '\ reported by Hoskins (1966) for a flat jack
I , test carried out in a 19 X 24 X 30 inch
I ,

I
I \
I
I
I
I
I .-eC
I.
I 1 It min
I
I,\
, E
, eEl
, M I
\ I
Measurement points (Typ.)
\
,,
, I
Fig. 6.4 Flat jack set-up and surface measurements.
(After ASTM D 4729-87, 1993. Copyright ASTM.
Reprinted with permission.)
suggested a distance of less than 300 mm.
According to ASTM D 4729-87, the measure-
ment points should be installed within a dis-
tance, L/2 of the flat jack slot, where L is the
flat jack width. Deformation transducers must
be located on the centerline normal to the flat
jacks and include dial gages, Whittemore-type
strain gages and electronic transducers such as
LVDTs or linear potentiometers. The displace-
ments are usually measured with an accuracy
ofO.OOlmm.
Figure 6.5a shows an ideal and generic vari-
ation of pin separation measured across a slot
during a jack test, where do is the initial dis-
tance between two reference pins and pc is the
,
(0.5 X 0.6 X 0.76 m) block of Wombeyan
L .-e B Flat jack
,
"
marble with do = 6 inch (152 mm). In this
U2
r
Grout
I
I
figure, it can be seen that some creep took
I
place over a period of 6 days in between slot
U4 I
I
I
cutting and slot jacking.
1.;0--1 ~ I
" A system of three flat jacks at 45° from each
other in a given plane normal to the axis of an
I
underground opening can be used to deter-
mine the three components of the in situ stress
"
field acting in that plane. If the complete three-
~eF /
//
dimensional state of stress needs to be deter-
/
mined with flat jacks alone, a minimum of six
" , /
jack tests need to be conducted in six different
' ..... _------
directions and at different locations around
Cancellation measurements the periphery of the opening. Any additional
measurements can serve as a measure of
Points S.C} .
O.E Fixed transducer redundancy. As an example, Fig. 6.6a shows
Point C·O Whittemore
the orientation of 16 flat jack tests conducted in
strain gage coal by Tinchon (1986). Figure 6.6b shows
Modulus measurements
another set-up recommended by Pinto and
Cunha (1986) where a total of 12 slots are cut
Points C.O
A'S] O·raI gage along the wall of an underground opening.
E.F extensometer
In general, the flat jack method has several
disadvantages that may limit its range of
applications.
(1) The flat jack method is limited to stress
measurements near the surface of an opening
and therefore may be influenced by the dis-
turbance associated with the process of exca-
vation of the opening. This disturbance could
invalidate the stress measurements altogether.
The disturbance can however be reduced by
using tunnel boring machines or smooth
blasting excavation techniques rather than
the conventional drill and blast method. Also,
flat jack tests should not be conducted near
open natural fractures and major rock
heterogeneities.
(2) When using flat jacks to determine the
in-situ stresses around an underground gal-
lery, knowledge of the stress concentrations
along the wall of the opening is required in
order to relate the measured cancellation
282 Jacking methods

Slotting

Time Jack pressure Pc

CJa = Pc
(a)

0
'2
=c::
0
:;
E 0.002
~
0

0.004

Slot cutting (in) Creep (days) Jack test (psi)

(b)

Fig. 6.5 (a) Theoretical variation of pin separation during a flat jack test. (After Goodman, 1989.) (b) Record
of a test conducted in a block of Wombeyan marble. (Source: Hoskins, E.R. Copyright 1966, with kind
permission from Elsevier Science Ltd, The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, UK.)

pressure to the virgin stresses at infinity. In
general, the stress concentration factors
depend on the shape of the opening as well as
the rock's constitutive behavior.
(3) The results of flat jack tests may be
disturbed by atmospheric conditions (humid-
ity and temperature) and dust (Fidler, 1964).
(4) Many jack tests are necessary to deter-
mine the complete in situ state of stress acting
at infinity. Theoretically, a minimum of six
measurements in six different directions are
required to determine the complete stress
tensor. The rock mass must have similar
mechanical characteristics in the volume
encompassing those measurements.
(5) The pressure may not be entirely trans-
mitted over the whole surface of the jack, in
particular in the vicinity of the jack welded
edges. The contact area may change during
loading. Differences between applied pressure

and actual overall pressure acting against the
rock surfaces as large as 18% were reported by
Rocha, Lopes and Silva (1966). Jaeger and
Cook (1976) suggested that a region of the
order of 0.25 inches (6.3 mm) wide is inoper-
ative around the periphery of a jack due to the
welding joint. Another problem with flat
jacks is that the stresses across the jacks may
(a)
V'
V .)03
78) ~~~
~ l5<:
(b)
Fig. 6.6 (a) Orientation of 16 flat jack tests in coal. (After Tinchon, 1986.) (b) Orientation of flat jack tests
recommended by Pinto and Cunha (1986). In both cases, the three-dimensional stress field can be
determined from the test results.
Techniques, equipment and procedures 283
not be uniform, as is often assumed. This is
particularly problematic when using large flat
jacks (Grossman and Camara, 1986). Indeed,
using flat jacks (in particular large flat jacks)
in areas of high stress gradients or in
sections of underground openings that have
been disturbed may yield erroneous stress
measurements.
~/
196--f~
(220) ./
./
284 Jacking methods
(6) When conducting flat jack tests in soft
rocks, or in swelling or flaking media, the
water used for the mortar or plaster to grout
the jacks in place may soften the rock and give
incoherent stress results. Mayer and Bernede
(1966) identified that problem in chalk and
clay shales and suggested using special pre-
cautions (such as plastic bags in the slot) in
order to avoid the problem.
(7) Some creep may take place following
cutting of the slot (Heusermann and PaW,
1983; Hoskins, 1966; Panek and Stock, 1964).
This phenomenon may occur in soft and weak
rocks as well as in evaporitic rocks such as
rock salt and potash. If creep is allowed to
occur over a long period of time, the cancella-
tion pressure will give an overestimate of the
tangential stress.
On the other hand, the flat jack method has
several advantages. The first and foremost
advantage is that the elastic constants of the
rock do not have to be known in order to
determine the tangential stress at points in the
walls of an excavation. Second, the stresses are
measured directly. Third, the equipment used
in flat jack tests is rugged and stable. Fourth,
the measured stress is an average over an
area (Panek, 1961). Fifth, relatively large rock
volumes can be tested (0.5-2 m 3 ), especially
when one or several coplanar large flat jacks
are used. Finally, as pointed out by Rocha,
Lopes and Silva (1971), the flat jack method
creates only a partial relief of the rock mass,
thus less disturbance to the mechanical
properties of the rock is induced compared
with other methods. This aspect is particularly
important when dealing with weak rock
masses.
In addition to measuring in situ stresses, flat
jacks can also be used to determine the
modulus of deformation of the rock by
measuring displacements which occur when
the slot is cut or by relating the applied pres-
sure to displacements during the pressurizing
phase (e.g. Hoskins, 1966; Jaeger and Cook,
1976; Rocha, Lopes and Silva, 1966; Vogler,
Deffur and Bieniawski, 1976; Zimmerman et
al., 1989). The relative displacement of the two
slot surfaces is measured using deformation
sensors or transducers embedded in the jacks
or in direct contact with the slot surfaces.
Equations for the determination of the rock's
modulus of deformation can be found in
Rocha and Da Silva (1970) and Loureiro-Pinto
(1986).
6.4 THEORY
The analysis of flat jack tests is based on
several major assumptions.
(1) The pressure in the jack at cancellation is
equal to the tangential stress in the rock
(before the slot was cut) normal to the plane of
the jack. This assumes that the stress before the
slot was cut was uniform. The effect of stress
gradients across the jack surface is therefore
neglected.
(2) The rock is elastic (linear or nonlinear)
and therefore the stress relief process is
assumed to be completely reversible. No creep
is assumed to occur. This may be of limited
value in weak and soft rocks, and in rocks
that show plastic and/or time-dependent
deformation.
(3) The rock is isotropic. No anisotropic
solution has been derived for the analysis of
flat jack tests. Anisotropy should have some
effect on the displacement or strain measure-
ments if the planes of rock anisotropy are
neither parallel to the rock surface nor strike
parallel or perpendicular to the jack surface.
Shear stresses could be generated in the rock
near the slot if the anisotropy strikes at an
angle to the jack surface.
(4) Flat jacks are assumed to be aligned with
the principal stresses on the surface of the
opening. Shear stresses cannot be measured
with flat jacks. The presence of shear stresses
can however be detected by measuring varia-
tion in diagonal lengths between different sets
of surface pins. The effect of the rock stress
parallel to the slot is usually assumed to be
negligible. Bonvallet and Dejean (1977) con-
cluded that the effect of that stress component
 Theory 285
could be disregarded for magnitudes up to
5 MPa and that neglecting the effect of the
shear stresses could cause an error of 9%.
Alexander (1960) presented a more complex
theory which relates the cancellation pressure
to the rock stresses normal and parallel to the
jack. The stress parallel to the jack was found
to have a negligible effect.
(5) Flat jacks are assumed to be 100%
efficient over their surfaces.
(6) Flat jacks are mostly used to measure
compressive stresses. However, the method
could also be used to measure tensile stresses
(Bernede, 1974; R.E. Goodman, personal com- Distance between pins, d
munication, 1982). If the rock is under a tensile
stress, a, before cutting the slot (point A), the
response shown in Fig. 6.2 is replaced by that
shown in Fig. 6.7. Instead of getting closer, the (J

pins move further apart from each other by an A

amount 2Ad upon cutting the slot (point B).
Further pressurization of the jack increases the
distance between the pins. Using the tangent Fig. 6.7 Measuring tensile normal stresses with flat
to the pressure-displacement curve at point B, jacks.
the tensile stress a can be estimated.
In view of the above assumptions, the analy-
sis of flat jack tests is not as straightforward as
Let a (J1, a 02 and a 03 be three tangential stresses
initially thought. A correct analysis requires
measured with three flat jacks in the wall of an
several correction factors (Alexander, 1960)
underground opening subjected to a two-
which are often overlooked in practice. Since dimensional in situ stress field with
many of the problems with flat jacks cannot be
components a xo , a yo and Txyo. The three flat
quantified, the cancellation pressure pc is often jacks are oriented parallel to the axis of the
used as a direct measurement of the normal
opening and are perpendicular to the x, y
stress acting across the slots. plane. If the rock is elastic and isotropic, the
Jaeger and Cook (1976) proposed a simple three tangential stresses will be linearly
correction factor to account for the fact that the related to the in situ stress components in a
cancellation pressure does not act over the general form as follows:
whole slot area or even over the whole jack
area (edge effect). If 2c and 2cj are the widths of
the slot and the jack, respectively and if e is the
distance along the edge of the jack (of the
order of 0.25 inches (6.3mm) wide) that is not
[:::J [2: 2: 2:J. [::: J
a03
=
/31 /32 /33 Txyo
(6.2)

operative due to the welding joint, the normal

stress an is related to the cancellation stress pc where the coefficients fij (i,j = 1,3) depend on
as follows: the geometry of the excavation. Then equation
(6.2) can be solved for the three in situ stress
(Co - e) components. For a circular opening with the
an =Pc--
l - (6.1)
C geometry of Fig. 6.8, equation (6.2) becomes
286 Jacking methods
-
(JOlll1 - COS2{)1 1 + COS2{)1 -4Sin2{)ll
l (J02 = 1 - COS2{)2 1 + COS2{)2 -4sin2{)2
l:::-
(J03 1 - COS2{)3 1 + COS2{)3 -4sin2{)3 _
. (6.3)
<xyo
where {)i (i = 1,2,3) is the angle defining the
location of the ith flat jack test from the x-axis
of Fig. 6.8.
In the more general case when the slots are
cut at an angle to the axes of the underground
excavation of interest, each cancellation pres-
sure can be related to the six components of
the in situ stress field by knowing the orienta-
tion of each slot and the stress concentration
txyo
- - - t - - -....
Fig. 6.8 Circular opening in which flat jack test i (i
factors associated with the shape of the exca-
vation. The in situ stress components are then
determined by solving a system of six equa-
tions and six unknowns based on six measure-
ments. If more measurements are available, a
multilinear regression analysis or optimiza-
tion approach can be carried out on the
measurements (e.g. Pinto and Cunha, 1986).
Since the stress concentrations are themselves
functions of the in situ stresses and can have
complex expressions (in particular for open-
ings with complex geometries), determination
of the three-dimensional in situ stress field can
be carried out in an iterative manner by coup-
ling a numerical model for stress determina-
tion and an optimization model (Piguet, 1994;
Tinchon, 1986). In doing so, any rock con-
stitutive behavior can be introduced.
t xyo
= 1,2,3) is conducted.

6.5 TECHNICAL INFORMATION
Additional information about flat jacks, large
flat jacks and associated equipment can be
obtained by contacting directly the following
groups:
1. INTERFELS GMbH, DeilmanstrafSe 5,
D-48455 Bad Bentheim, Germany.
2. Laboratorio Nacional de Engenharia Civil
(LNEC), 101 Avenida do Brasil, P-1799
Lisboa (Lisbon) Codex, Portugal.
3. ROCTEST, 665 Pine Street, St Lambert,
Quebec, Canada J4P 2P4.
REFERENCES
Alexander, L.G. (1960) Field and laboratory tests
in rock mechanics, in Froc. 3rd Australia-New
Zealand Conf. on Soil Mechanics, pp. 161-8.
ASTM D 4729-87 (1993) Standard test method for
in-situ stress and modulus of deformation using
the flatjack method, in 1993 Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Vol. 04-08.
Bernede, I. (1974) New developments in the flat jack
test, in Froc. 3rd Congo Int. Soc. Rock Mech. (ISRM),
Denver, National Academy of Sciences, Wash-
ington, DC, Vol. 2A, pp. 433-8.
Bertrand, L. (1994) Mesure des contraintes in-situ
par la methode du verin plat, in Froc. Seminaire
Formation: Mesure des sollicitations et des contraintes
dans les ouvrages et dans les terrains, Ecole des
Mines, Nancy, Sept. 12-16.
Bertrand, L. and Durand, E. (1983) In situ stress
measurements: comparison of different methods,
in Froc. Int. Symp. on Soil and Rock Investigations by
In-Situ Testing, Paris, Vol. 2, pp. 449-70.
Bonvallet, J. and Dejean, M. (1977) Flat jack test and
determination of mechanical characteristics, in
Froc. Int. Symp. on Field Measurements in Rock
Mechanics, Zurich, Balkema, Rotterdam, Vol. 1,
pp.361-74.
Borsetto, M., Guiseppetti, G. and Mandfredini, G.
(1983) Recent advances in the interpretation of
the flat jack test, in Froc. 5th Congo Int. Soc. Rock
Mech. (ISRM), Melbourne, Balkema, Rotterdam,
pp. AI43-50.
Bowling, A.J. (1976) Surface rock stress measure-
ment with a new cylindrical jack, in Froc. ISRM
Symposium on Investigation of Stress in Rock,
Advances in Stress Measurement, Sydney, The Insti-
tution of Engineers, Australia, pp. 7-11.
References 287
Duvall, W.I. (1974) Stress relief by center hole.
Appendix in US Bureau of Mines Report of Inves-
tigation RI 7894.
Faiella, D., Manfredini, G. and Rossi, P.P. (1983) In
situ flat jack test: analysis of results and critical
assessment, in Froc. Int. Symp. on Soil and Rock
Investigations by In-Situ Testing, Paris, Vol. 2, pp.
507-12.
Fidler, I. (1964) Discussion of the paper by Merrill,
in Froc. Int. Conf. on State of Stress in the Earth's
Crust, Santa Monica, Elsevier, New York, pp.
375-6.
Froidevaux, C, Paquin, C and Souriau, M. (1980)
Tectonic stresses in France: in-situ measurements
with a flatjack. J. Geophys. Res., 85, 6342-6.
Goodman, RE. (1989) Introduction to Rock
Mechanics, 2nd edn, Wiley.
Grossman, N.F. and Camara, RJ.C (1986) About the
rock stress measurement using the LFJ (large flat
jack) technique, in Froc. Int. Symp. on Rock Stress
and Rock Stress Measurements, Stockholm, Centek
Publ., Lulea, pp. 375-83.
Helal, H.M. (1982) Etude et developpement d'une
methode de mesure des contraintes par surcar-
ottage, unpublished PhD Thesis, Ecole des
Mines, Nancy (France).
Heusermann, S. and Pahl, A. (1983) Stress measure-
ments in underground openings by the over-
coring method and by the flatjack method with
compensation, in Froc. Int. Symp. on Field
Measurements in Geomechanics, Zurich, Balkema,
Rotterdam, pp. 1033-45.
Hoskins, E.R (1966) An investigation of the flatjack
method of measuring rock stress. Int. J. Rock
Mech. Min. Sci., 3, 249--64.
Jaeger, I.C and Cook, N.G.W. (1964) Theory and
application of curved jacks for measurement of
stresses, in Froc. Int. Conf. on State of Stress in the
Earth's Crust, Santa Monica, Elsevier, New York,
pp.381-95.
Jaeger, J.C and Cook, N.G.W. (1976) Fundamentals of
Rock Mechanics, 2nd edn, Chapman & Hall,
London.
Judd, W. (1964) Rock stress, rock mechanics and
research, in Froc. Int. Conf. on State of Stress in the
Earth's Crust, Santa Monica, Elsevier, New York,
pp.5-53.
Kim, K. and Franklin, K.A. (coordinators) (1987)
Suggested methods for rock stress determination.
Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr., 24,
53-73.
Loureiro-Pinto, J. (1986) Suggested method for
deformability determination using a large
288 Jacking methods
flatjack technique. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. &
Geomech. Abstr., 23,131-40.
Mayer, A and Bemede, J. (1966) Mesures des con-
traintes dans Ie terrain en place en roches tendres
ou sensibles a l'humidite, in Proc. 1st Congo Int.
Soc. Rock Mech. (ISRM), Lisbon, Lab. Nac. de Eng.
Civil, Lisbon, Vol. 2, pp. 41-4.
Mayer, A, Habib, P. and Marchand, R (1951)
Underground rock pressure testing, in Proc. Int.
Con! Rock Pressure and Support in the Workings,
Liege, pp. 217-21.
Merrill, RH. (1964) In-situ determination of stress
by relief techniques, in Proc. Int. Con! on State of
Stress in the Earth's Crust, Santa Monica, Elsevier,
New York, pp. 343-69.
Merrill, RH. et al. (1964) Stress determination by
flatjack and borehole deformation methods. US
Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation RI 6400.
Panek, L.A (1961) Measurement of rock pressure
with a hydraulic cell. Trans. Am. Inst. Mining Eng.,
220,287-90.
Panek, L.A and Stock, J.A (1964) Development of a
rock stress monitoring station based on the flat
slot method of measurement. US Bureau of Mines
Report of Investigation RI 6537.
Piguet, J.P. (1994) Mesure des contraintes par la
methode du verin plat, in Proc. Seminaire Forma-
tion: Mesure des sollicitations et des contraintes dans
les ouvrages et dans les terrains, Ecole des Mines,
Nancy, Sept. 12-16.
Pinto, J.L. and Cunha, AP. (1986) Rock stress deter-
minations with the SIT and SFJ techniques, in
Proc. Int. Symp. on Rock Stress and Rock Stress
Measurements, Stockholm, Centek Publ., Lulea,
pp.253-60.
Rocha, M. and Da Silva, J.N. (1970) A new method
for the determination of the deformability of rock
masses, in Proc. 2nd Congo Int. Soc. Rock Mech.
(ISRM), Belgrade, Jaroslav Cemi Inst., Belgrade,
Vol. 1, pp. 423-37.
Rocha, M., Lopes, J.J.B. and Silva, J.N. (1966) A new
technique for applying the method of the flat jack
in the determination of stresses inside rock
masses, in Proc. 1st Congo Int. Soc. Rock Mech.
(ISRM), Lisbon, Lab. Nac. de Eng. Civil, Lisbon,
Vol. 2, pp. 57-65.
Rocha, M., Lopes, J.J.B. and Silva, J.N. (1971) A new
technique for applying the method of the flatjack
in the determination of stresses inside rock
masses, in Proc. Int. Symp. on the Determination of
Stresses in Rock Masses, Lab. Nac. de Eng. Civil,
Lisbon, pp. 431-50.
Tmcelin, E. (1951) Research on rock pressure in the
Iron Mines of Lorraine, in Proc. Int. Con! Rock
Pressure and Support in the Workings, Liege, pp.
158-75.
Tinchon, L. (1986) Evolution des contraintes
naturelles en fonction de la profondeur et de la
tectonique aux Houilleres du Bassin de Lorraine,
in Proc. Int. Symp. on Rock Stress and Rock Stress
Measurements, Stockholm, Centek Publ., Lulea,
pp.111-20.
Vogler, V.w., Deffur, RD. and Bieniawski, Z.T.
(1976) CSIR large flat jack equipment for deter-
mining rock mass deformability, in Proc. Symp. on
Exploration for Rock Engineering, Johannesburg,
pp.105-11.
Wareham, B.E and Skipp, B.D. (1974) The use of the
flatjack installed in a sawcut slot in the measure-
ment of in situ stress, in Proc. 3rd Congo Int. Soc.
Rock Mech. (ISRM), Denver, National Academy of
Sciences, Washington, DC, pp. 481-7.
Zimmerman, R et al. (1989) Results of pressurized-
slot measurements in the G-tunnel underground
facility, in Proc. 30th US Symp. Rock Mech.,
Morgantown, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 697-704.