ROCK MASSES and ENGINEERING GEOLOGICAL

FEATURES

A. Discontinuities and Geometrical Properties

Discontinuities are the planes of weakness in rock mass.

General Classification

I. Primary Discontinuities

 Features developed during formation of a rock

They are roughly;

 Bedding or Stratification in sedimentary rocks,

Schematic of the primary geometrical properties of discontinuities in  Cooling Joints

rock (Hudson, 1989).  Flow Structures in igneous rocks,

 Foliation
 Schistosity planes in metamorphic rocks.

 Type II. Secondary Discontinuities

 Number of sets (J1,J2, .,Jn)
 Location & Orientation (&)  Features developed after formation of a rock.
 Spacing (d or S)
 Frequency (k)
 Persistence They are in general;
 Degree of Seperation ()
 Aperture (b)  Fold Axes
 Roughness (R)  Fractures
 Filling
 Joints
 Fluid Seepage
 Wall strength  Faults

Brittle behavior – Faults and Joints

Diagram illustrating rock mass properties (Wyllie, 1999).
Ductile deformation – Folds
Kayhan Develi, PhD 1
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
  Number of Discontinuity Set

Depending joint patterns, block shapes in a rock mass may be

referred to be blocky, irregular, tabular or columnar as
sketched on the upper left.

Examples for typical joint patterns

Different types of joints sets are also illustrated in the figure on

the lower left. Sets of discontinuities may be recognized in the
field. Or, they may alternatively appear on stereograms.

Examples for joint sets

Kayhan Develi, PhD 2

Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
  Orientation (Strike And Dip)

Beds (layers), joints, and faults are planar features in rock masses,
whose orientation is described by their strike and dip. Thus, strike
and dip are measurements that are needed to define the orientation
of a plane (e.g., a layer or a joint, etc.). Planes are defined by 4
characteristics. These are

A. Strike
a. Strike Line
b. Strike Angle ()
B. Dip
a. Dip Direction
b. Dip Angle ()

If a inclined plane (1) intersects with a horizontal plane (2), the

intersection between the two plates is a linear line and it is termed
as the strike line. The angle between the strike line and the North
(N) direction is strike angle (). This angle describes the deviation
of the strike line from the North direction. In the other word, strike is
the compass direction of a line formed by the intersection of an
inclined plane with a horizontal plane.

The angle between the horizontal plane and the slope vector (e)
of the inclined plane, which is located within a vertical plane
perpendicular to the strike line, is the dip angle ( ). Dip angle
measured in this way is true dip. The direction of the slope vector
(e) defines the dip direction. There is right angle (90o) between dip
and strike.

Notice that any dip angle measured in a vertical plane which is

not perpendicular to the strike line is apparent dip. Apparent dip
angle is always smaller than the true dip angle. Thus, the true dip is
the steepest one which an inclined plane may have.

Linear features are measured with very similar methods, where

"plunge" is the dip angle and "trend" is analogous to the dip
direction value.
Kayhan Develi, PhD 3
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology

Relationship between apparent (Sapp or dapp) and true spacing
(S or d) for a set of discontinuities.
Classification of discontinuity spacing
(after ISRM Commission. 1978).
Kayhan Develi, PhD
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 Spacing
Spacing is the perpendicular distance between two consecutive
discontinuities which belong to the same discontinuity set. Spacing
is denoted by the symbols d or S. If spacing between the parallel
discontinuities of a discontinuity set (i.e., Discontinuity set 1, DS1)
varies between 20 and 35 cm, this is expressed symbolically to be;
d1= 20 – 35 or d135
20
If there are three different discontinuity sets in a rock mass, then, an
expression to be;
d1max max max
min x d2min x d3min
will define the largest and the smallest block (unit rock) sizes within
the rock mass. A display style as
d135 60 30
20 x d240 x d310
will express us the max and min block sizes to be 35 x 60 x 30 cm3
and 20 x 40 x 10 cm3, respectively. Discontinuity spacing (d) is
reciprocal of the discontinuity frequency or linear discontinuity
density (k). [d= 1/k]. Spacing controls not only matrix block size but
also fracture intensity. Spacing is also a factor used in many rock
mass classification schemes. Table on left gives the terminology
used by the ISRM Commission (1978).
4
  Frequency (or Linear Discontinuity Density)

Linear discontinuity density (1D fracture density, k) is the number of

discontinuity traces (nDtrace) of a particular discontinuity set (DS), per
unit length (L) measured in a direction perpendicular to the
discontinuity plane.
nDtrace
k
L
It is the reciprocal of discontinuity spacing. It should be noted that
both the spacing and the frequency are the properties which have to
be measured within the planes perpendicular to the discontinuity
sets in a rock mass.

On the other hand, a more general, avearge discontinuity frequency

parameter is also defined and shown by the symbol kstini . It defines
the ratio between the number of discontinuity traces of any
discontinuity set along any selected scanline and the length of that
scanline.

nDS1  nDS 2  .......  nDSi

(k stini ) 
L
 Persistence

Persistence is the term used to describe the areal extent or size of a

discontinuity within a plane. It can be crudely quantified by observing
the trace lengths of discontinuities on exposed surfaces. It is one of
the most important rock mass parameters but one of the most
difficult to determine. The figure on left shows a set of simple plane
sketches and block diagrams used to indicate the persistence of
various sets of discontinuities in a rock mass. Clearly, the
Illustration of persistence of various sets of discontinuities and persistence of discontinuities will have a major influence on the
classification of discontinuity persistence shear strength developed in the plane of the discontinuity and on the
(after ISRM Commission. 1978). fragmentation characteristics, cavability and permeability of the rock
mass (Brady and Brown, 2005).
Kayhan Develi, PhD 5
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
  Roughness

By the simplest definition, roughness is a measure of the

deviation of a surface from planarity. The wall roughness of a
discontinuity has a potentially important influence on its shear
strength, especially in the case of undisplaced and interlocked
features (e.g. unfilled joints). The importance of roughness
declines with increasing aperture, filling thickness or previous
shear displacement (Brady and Brown, 2005). The ISRM
(1978) suggests that the terms listed in the table given below
and illustrated in the figure on left may be used to describe
roughness, qualitatively. The important influence of roughness
on discontinuity shear strength and hydraulic properties will be
discussed later.

Classification of discontinuity roughness

(after ISRM Commission. 1978).

Typical roughness profiles and suggested nomenclature. Profile lengths are

in the range 1 to 10 m; vertical and horizontal scales are equal (after ISRM .
Commission. 1978a).
Kayhan Develi, PhD 6
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology

Suggested definition of the aperture of open discontinuities and the
width of filled discontinuities (after ISRM Commission. 1978a).
Aperture dimensions (ISRM Commission, 2007).
Kayhan Develi, PhD
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 Aperture
Aperture is the perpendicular distance separating the adjacent rock
walls of an open discontinuity in which the intervening space is filled
with air or water. Aperture is thereby distinguished from the width of
a filled discontinuity (see figures on left). Aperture and its areal
variation will have an influence on the shear strength of the
discontinuity. Perhaps more important, however, is the influence of
aperture on the permeability or hydraulic conductivity of the
discontinuity and of the rock mass (Brady and Brown 2005).
Aperture is denoted by the symbol b.
 Filling
Filling is the term used to describe material separating the adjacent
rock walls of discontinuities. Such materials may be calcite, chlorite,
clay, silt, fault gouge, breccia, quartz or pyrite, for example. Filling
materials will have a major influence on the shear strengths of
discontinuities. With the exception of those filled with strong vein
materials (calcite, quartz, pyrite), filled discontinuities will generally
have lower shear strengths than comparable clean, closed
discontinuities. The behavior of filled discontinuities will depend on a
wide range of properties of the filling materials. The following are
probably the most important and should be recorded where possible:
(a) mineralogy of the filling material taking care to identify low-friction
materials such as chlorite
(b) grading or particle size
(c) water content and permeability
(d) previous shear displacement
(e) wall roughness
(f) width of filling
(g) fracturing, crushing or chemical alteration of wall rock (Brady and
Brown 2005).
.
7
 Use of Borehole Logging Data for the Geometrical
Characterization and Classification of Rock Masses.

Rock Quality Designation (RQD)

In classifying rock masses for engineering purposes, it is common

practice to quote values of Rock Quality Designation (RQD), a
concept introduced by Deere (1964) in an attempt to quantify
discontinuity spacing. RQD is determined from drill core and is given
by

where xi are the lengths of individual core pieces in a core run

having lengths of 10 cm or greater, and L is the total length of the
core run. The lengths of the pieces of core should be measured from
tip to tip, along the core center line (Brown, 2003, Goodman, 1993,
ISRM Commission, 1978a, Brady and Brown, 2005).

Σ length of core pieces ≥10 cm in length

RQD (%) = Total length of core run

If a core equal or longer than 10 cm is broken by handling or by the

forces of drilling operation, in which case fractures are fresh and not
Procedure for calculation of RQD (After Deere, 1989) natural, the broken pieces is counted as one piece and taken into
consideration in the RQD calculation. The cores including vertical or
almost vertical fractures (i.e., much or less parallel to the core axis)
RQD (%) Rock Quality are used in the calculation. RQD is applicable only for rock cores
95 – 100 Excellent (not used for soils). According to the RQD values, rock mass quality
75 – 90 Good is classified as given on left.
50 – 75 Moderate
25 – 50 Poor Note that recording logging profiles of core is conducted over a
25 Very Poor given length of core and this length is termed as “logging run” or
“logging interval”. Logging interval is defined as the length of hole
drilled for a given exercise controlled by equipment details such as
Classification according to RQD values
core barrel length which is mostly 3 or 3.05 m in Turkey and in most
countries.
Kayhan Develi, PhD 8
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 Also, total core recovery (TCR) and solid core recovery (SCR)
is applied using borehole data for the quantification of core
recovery efficiency.

Total Core Recovery (TCR)

Σ length of all pieces of recovered core

TCR (%) = length of logging interval

In the calculation of TCR, if the core is highly fragmented, the

length of such portions is estimated by assembling the
fragments and estimating the length of core that the fragments
appear to represent.

Solid Core Recovery (SCR)

Σ length of core recovered as solid intact pieces

SCR (%) = length of logging interval

Comparison between the procedures of CR & RQD calculations Fragmented pieces are not taken into consideration. Just the
solid intact core pieces in the shape of cylinder is taken into
account in the calculation.

Fracture (Discontinuity) Frequency (FF)

Fracture frequency (FF) is another calculation from borehole

core loggings in order to quantify discontinuity spacing using.

It is defined as the number of natural discontinuities

intersecting a unit length of recovered core.

Number of discontinuity
FF = logging interval
[No. of disc. x m-1]

Note that logging interval is given in meter. RQD and FF are

inversely proportional to each other.
Kayhan Develi, PhD 9
Ulusay, R. JEO439-21 Engineering Geology Course Notes
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 B. Mechanical Properties of Discontinuities

Shear Strength of Discontinuities

The shear response of rock fracture is usually obtained by

using a direct shear machine or shear box. The two halves of a
fracture are cast in two platens using a proper mix of cement,
plaster and sand. A normal constant load, N, is applied across
the horizontal fracture. A shear load, T, is then applied and the
fracture shear displacement and normal displacement are
recorded. At the end of the shear test, a larger constant normal
load is applied and the test is repeated.

Direct shear box device (Develi, 2006)

The normal and shear load are usually expressed in terms of

normal (n) and shear stresses () by dividing N and T by the
planar area (A) of the joint (area of a mean plane passing
through the rough fracture surface). The shear stress () and
normal displacement (v or v) are usually plotted versus the
horizontal shear displacement (h or u). The diagram in the
figure on left shows the shear stress vs. shear displacement
and normal displacement vs. shear displacement (dilation
response) of a tension fracture (joint) tested by Barton (1976).

For a constant value of normal stress (n); shear stresses () versus
horizontal shear displacement (h), and horizontal shear
displacement (h) versus normal displacement (v) curves for a
tension joint (Barton, 1976).
Kayhan Develi, PhD 10
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 Some of Most Known Shear Strength Criteria

 Patton’s Model

Patton (1966) performed a series of shear test under different

values of constant normal stresses on saw-tooth joint models
with a certain values of roughness angle (i) prepared from a
proper mixture of kaolin and plaster. A bilinear model was
proposed in his study for discontinuity shear strength that
accounts for two phenomena that have been observed
experimentally:

i. overriding of asperities at low normal stress levels

Shearing along a saw-tooth surface (Patton, 1966)
p = n tan ( + i) when n  t

ii. Shearing through asperities at higher normal stress levels.

p = ca + n tan r when n  t

where
r : residual friction angle
 : basic friction angle
ca : apparent cohession
i : roughness angle

Patton’s bilinear shear strength criterion

Amadei, B. CVEN 5768 Lecture Notes 10

Kayhan Develi, PhD 11

Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
  Barton’s Model

In order to predict peak shear strength (p) of discontinuities,

Barton (1973) proposed a technique based on the shear
strength behavior of artificially produced rough, clean “joints”.
The following empirical equation is used in this technique;

where JRC is the joint roughness coefficient, JCS is the

compressive strength of the rock at the fracture surface (joint
wall compressive strength), σn is the normal stress, and b is
the basic friction angle (also equal to ). The value of JRC is
determined by comparing the roughness profile taken from the
discontinuity surface being analyzed with standard profiles
listed in the table on left. The compressive strength of the joint
wall (JCS) can be estimated using a Schmidt hammer on the
joint surface (Wyllie and Mah, 2005).

Note that this criterion is very popular in practical rock

engineering. Yet, characterization of the whole surface
roughness of the joint with a roughness profile extracted from
the surface through a line, and the subjectivity in determining
the JRC value of this roughness profile by comparing it with
the standard roughness profiles using personal judgement are
the disadvantageous of this criterion.

Standard roughness profiles and corresponding range of JRC (joint

roughness coefficient) values (ISRM,1981).

Kayhan Develi, PhD 12

Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 C. HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF DISCONTINUITIES

The Concept of Parallel Plate Model and Cubic Law

Fluid flow through a single rock fracture is commonly

approximated by the parallel plate model where laminar flow
between two perfectly smooth parallel plates, separated from each
other by a constant distance is assumed. According to this model,
the permeability in the fracture, kfr, is defined as (Brown, 1987 and
Bear et al., 1993)

In this equation, the parameter “b” defines the separation distance

Parallel Plate Model
between the plates and it is called as aperture.

On the other hand, laminar fluid flow through porous media is

modelled by Darcy’s law. It is simply presented by the following
expression (Todd and Mays, 2005, Lucia, 2007)

where, Q: flow rate through the sample [m3/s]

k: permeability [m2]
A: cross-sectional flow area [m2]
P: pressure drop [Pa]
: fluid viscosity [Pa.s]
L: sample length [m]

In the case where the permeability of a rock is just caused by a

single fracture and rock material is impermeable itself, the parameter
k in the equation (2) can be considered as fracture permeability if the
product of the fracture width (w), perpendicular to the flow direction,
and the fracture aperture (b) is substituted as cross-sectional area
(A) of fracture in the same equation.

Kayhan Develi, PhD 13

Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 If the expression in Equation (1) is substituted into the Equation (2)
by taking cross-sectional flow area of fracture as A = wb
(Zimmerman and Bodvarsson, 1996; Chen et al., 2000; Watanabe et
al., 2005) then a new equation is derived which is called as cubic
law

where the volumetric flow rate, Q, varies as the cube of the

separation distance (aperture), b, between the plates (Brown, 1987).
Comparison of equations (2) and (3) reveals that the term kA in the
first equation is equal to the term wb3/12 of the second equation.

The terms on both sides of this equality have been introduced as

fracture transmissivity (Zimmerman and Bodvarsson, 1996).

The unit for the transmissivity (T) is [m4]. As it is seen in the equation
(4), the transmissivity (T) is proportional to the cube of the aperture
(b). Thus, transmissivity yielded by parallel plate model is also known
as the “cubic law” (Elsworth and Doe, 1986; Zimmerman and
Bodvarsson, 1996; Jeager et al., 2007).

Darcy’s law is a linear expression applicable for laminar flows in

porous media. Similarly, cubic law is a linear expression assuming
linear proportional relationship between the flow rate and pressure
drop for fractures. Main assumption in the cubic law is that laminar
flow exists between two smooth parallel plates (Zimmerman and
Bodwarsson, 1996).

Kayhan Develi, PhD 14

Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 Real rock fractures in nature present considerable roughness on their
facing surfaces.

 perfectly matching and tightly closed

entire contact between the walls «with no aperture» ,theoretically
(Wang et al., 1998)

 perfectly matching but open

the relative displacement of the adjacent walls in vertical direction
(normal displacement) «constant aperture structure»

 sheared under shear forces (mismatching fracture walls)

the relative displacement of the adjacent walls in horizontal direction
(shear displacement)

Sheared surfaces usually contact each other at some local zones.

Void spaces in different sizes and shapes surround these zones
(Ghaffari et al., 2013)
«variable aperture structure»

As seen, unlike a pair of smooth parallel plates of a uniform aperture,

real rock fractures mostly exhibit a wide variety of quite complex
geometries. The terms;

“roughness”
“contact area”
Different modes of a rough rock fracture “aperture structure”

are the major geometrical parameters for the characterization of real

rock fractures.

Kayhan Develi, PhD 15

Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology
 Fr1SN Fr3SN These parameters cause flow to exhibit channelled character,
generally following one or more twisted paths with many inflection
points. This property of the channeled flow paths is expressed by the
term “tortuosity”.

In the case of flow between two rough fracture surfaces, different flow
regimes can be observed. Some laboratory flow tests exposed linear
dependency between the flow rate and pressure (Hakami and Larson
1996; Watanabe et al., 2005). Nevertheless, non-linear flow
Fr4SN Fr7SN behaviors have commonly been experienced in the most of
experiments or simulations (e.g., Konzuk and Kueper 2004;
Zimmerman et al., 2004; Javadi et al., 2010). Even though the flow
rate is low and the flow field is laminar, the geometrical fracture
parameters;

 “roughness”
 “contact area”
 “aperture structure”
Experimental visualization of fluid flow through rough fractures
(Develi and Babadagli, 2015) may cause

 inertial losses
 variation in flow velocity and direction due to constrictions or
obstructions (3D, non-uniform, tortuous flow field)
 initiation of turbulence due to localised eddy flow formation

These features may result in the rectilinear streamlines of the parallel

plate model to depart from linearity and thus non-linear behavior of
flow (Zimmerman and Bodvarsson, 1996; Chen et al., 2000; Murata
et al., 2002; Brush and Thomson, 2003; Murata and Saito, 2003).
Finally, the cubic law;

 does not take fracture geometrical parameters into account

 is an oversimplified approach for rough fracture flow (Tsang,
1984; Genabeek and Rothman, 1999)
 overestimates the flow rate than the actual value for a real
fracture (Tsang, 1984), thus, a deviation from the cubic law
occurs (Oron and Berkowitz, 1998; Berkowitz, 2002).
Kayhan Develi, PhD 16
Asst. Prof. JEO431E Engineering Geology