8 UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTIONS

Underground constructions can be divided into two main types with regard to the distance
from the surface and which factors govern the stability, see Figure 8.1. The first type of
underground construction comprises those that are built at such great depth that the ground
surface does not affect the stress conditions near the construction. With this type of
excavation stability problems arise either through the secondary stresses becoming so great
that the strength of the rock mass is exceeded, or through parts of the boundary being relieved
of load which can lead to sliding along joints. The other category comprises excavations near
the surface. The greatest threat to stability in such an installation is usually a lack of stress
which leads to the separation of, and the sliding along the natural joints in the rock mass.

a) b)

Figure 8.1. Tunnel located a) at great depth, and b) at shallow depth.

8.1 Underground excavations constructed at great depth

A stability analysis of a tunnel or an excavation which shall be constructed at great depth, see
Figure 8.1, firstly comprises an analysis of the stress conditions on the boundary, and possibly
in the surroundings, of the excavation. To analyse stability the strength of the rock mass must
be known, or estimated. One of the major problems in rock mechanics is, however, the
determination of the strength characteristics of a rock mass, which is discussed in Chapter 5.
8.1.1 Stress analysis

The stress analysis can be carried out with the aid of analytical solutions or by using
numerical methods. Previous sections have shown that even a relatively simple two-
dimensional geometry such as an ellipse gives complicated mathematical expressions for the
stress around a cavity. For individual excavations with complicated geometries there are no
ready-made solutions that are of practical use. This also applies to groups of excavations with
non-circular cross-sections and are located at such a distance that they affect each other.
Stress analysis of such excavations can be carried out using numerical methods.

Stress analysis with analytical solutions also implies limitations regarding which constituent
models can be used to describe the behaviour of the rock mass. It can theoretically be possible
to carry out analyses where the rock mass behaves in a more complicated manner than
linearly elastic. It is, however, in practice often not possible to carry out anything other than
linear elasticity analyses as the analysis time and complexity increase dramatically when the
constitutive relationships are refined.

When the stress analysis is carried out with numerical methods it is on the other hand
relatively simple to also use complex constitutive models. One advantage of these
constitutive models is that the entire failure process that leads to macroscopic failure surfaces
can be studied. The time required for calculation and the number of material parameters
however increase with increased complexity.

The numerical methods can be divided into continuum and discontinuum models. In the
continuum models the rock mass is described as a continuous material where the effects of
the discontinuities are included. In a discontinuum model on the other hand the rock mass is
described with a coupled model where the intact rock and the discontinuities are described
separately.

In this book we will in the following describe the procedure of stability analysis carried out
without a computer and under the assumption that the rock mass is linearly elastic.
8.1.2 The strength of the rock mass

The characteristics, orientation, distance and length of joints, and the number of joint sets
affect the strength of the rock mass. The scale of joints and defects varies so that the rock
material and the rock mass will demonstrate strength characteristics that are dependent on
volume.

In the case of a drill-hole whose diameter is much smaller than the joint distance the volume
considered in the stability analysis is so small that the strength of the rock mass and the
strength of the rock type are the same. If the rock mass has few joints the strength of the intact
rock even on a larger scale can determine the stability of a tunnel or an excavation. In many
cases the number of joints is, however, so great and the distance between them so small
compared with the height and width of the tunnel that the influence of the joints on the
stability must be taken into account, see Figure 8.2.

Tunnel
Borehole

Large cavern

Figure 8.2 The effects of scale that can give rise to differences in behaviour.

If the predominant joint orientations (main joint sets) are few in number the rock mass will
behave anisotropically. The same applies if the predominant joint orientations are too similar,
for example if the strike or the dip of the joint sets is concentrated within a narrow angle
interval as shown in Figure 8.3.

Figure 8.3 Predominant joint orientations.

With an increasing number of main joint sets whose orientation is evenly spread in every
possible direction (not within narrow limits) the anisotropy of the rock mass will decrease
with regard to mechanical characteristics. If one of these main joint sets demonstrates a much
lower strength than the others this will, however, give rise to anisotropic behaviour.

When analysing the stability of an excavation the failure mechanism and failure surface are
usually not known, as opposed to the case when analysing slopes and bedrock under load. It is
also important that the correct failure criterion is used. There is otherwise the risk that failure
can occur earlier than predicted.

If the rock mass has few joints, is isotropic and brittle it is reasonable to assume that spalling
can occur. If, however, the rock mass is soft or contains many major joint sets but is still
isotropic one can assume that shear failure will occur.
8.1.3 Stability analysis – Monitoring of failure initiation at high stress levels

The stability of the excavation is analysed by calculating the stress state on the boundary and
then comparing this with the strength. This procedure is followed because the risk of failure
initiation usually is greatest on the boundary. The analysis can then be described in the
following points:

1. Calculate σθ , σζ , σr .
2. Determine σ1 , σ2 , σ3 .
3. On which scale can failure take place: intact rock or the rock mass?
4. Determine the strength, σ1s.
5. Compare the major principal stress, σ1, with the value of the major principle stress that
the rock/rock mass can bear, σ1s. If σ1 ≥ σ1s ⇒ Risk of failure initiation!
6. If σ3 < 0 ⇒ Risk of tensile failure/unloading!
7. Try to design and orientate the excavation as optimally as possible with regard to the
virgin stresses (e.g. "streamlined")
8. If several excavations shall be excavated, one should seek a mining sequence that is as
optimal as possible from a stability point of view.

8.1.4 The effect of the stress condition and the cross-section on the failure process

In the above analysis, only what occurs on the boundary of the excavation is studied. To study
how the stress condition varies with the distance from the boundary, tunnels of circular and
square cross-sections respectively have been studied. In this analysis the virgin stress
condition has been chosen to represent the stresses at a depth of about 100 m in the
Scandinavian bedrock according to Equations (4.7.1) – (4.7.3) (Stephansson, 1993).

In the model that has been studied none of the virgin stresses vary with depth but are constant.
The roof, for example, is therefore not subject to the gravitational stresses that are caused by
its own weight and the weight of the immediate surroundings. It is reasonable to make this
simplification as the effect of gravity on the stress condition around an underground
excavation at great depth is by and large negligible. With excavations near the surface,
however, gravity must be taken into account.

The variation of stress along a horizontal line starting from the centre of the wall and along a
vertical line starting from the centre of the roof has been studied. Furthermore, the variation
of stress with the distance from a corner of the tunnel with a square cross-section has been
analyzed, see Figures 8.4. These analyses are illustrated in the Figures 8.5 – 8.10.

a)
σv

y
a
σH = 2.5σv
x
-a a
⊗ σh = 1.7σv
-a

b) σv

y x'

a
0
σH = 2.5σv
-a a x
⊗ σh = 1.7σv
-a

Figure 8.4 Geometric model of a tunnel with a) a circular cross-section and b) a square
cross-section.

Each figure comprises two different types of diagram. The first diagram illustrates the relative
principal stresses, σ1 /σv , σ2 /σv , σ3 /σv, as a function of the distance from the boundary. The
analyses have been made under the assumption that excavation takes place under conditions
of plane strain.
The stress state has been reported in two ways:
i) only the stresses in the plane of the cross-section are taken into account.
ii) the stresses in the plane of the cross-section and the stress in the longitudinal direction of
the tunnel are taken into account.

The first diagram therefore comprises two solid curves and a broken curve, see e.g Figure 8.5.
The solid curves are the principal stresses in the plane of the cross-section and the broken
curve is the principal stress that is added if the stresses in the longitudinal direction of the
tunnel are taken into account.

The diagram shall be interpreted in the following way:

Case i) The solid part of the curve which has the highest value represents the value of the
major principal stress ( σ 1p / σ v ) in the plane of the cross-section while the part of the

curve which has the lowest value represents the value of the minor principal stress
( σ 3p / σ v ) in the plane of the cross-section.

Case ii) The part of the curve that has the highest value, irrespective of whether the curve is
solid or broken, represents the value of the major principal stress ( σ 1 / σ v ). The part

of the curve that has the lowest value, irrespective of whether the curve is solid or
broken, represents the value of the minor principal stress ( σ 3 / σ v ) while the part of

the curve that has a value that is smaller than σ1 and greater than σ3, regardless of
whether the curve is solid or broken represents the value of the intermediate principal
stress ( σ 2 / σ v ).

The remaining six diagrams (see e.g. Figure 8.6) illustrate Mohr’s stress circles at three
different distances from the boundary. In the three first diagrams only the stresses in the plane
of the cross-section are taken into account while the stresses in both the plane of the cross-
section and the longitudinal direction of the tunnel are taken into account in the last three
diagrams.

a)
s
 3

huvudspänningar
stresses
2
Relativaprincipal
Relative

1
y

0 Tunnel

-a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/a
-a 0 a x
b)
3 3
Relative principal stresses

Relative principal stresses

Relativa huvudspänningar

Relativa huvudspänningar

2 2

1 1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/a x/a

Figure 8.5 a) Relative principal stress as a function of relative distance to the boundary,
b) the stresses in the plane of the cross-section and along the tunnel,
c) stresses in the plane of the cross-section of the tunnel.
 3

huvudspänningar
stresses
2

Relativaprincipal
Relative

1
y

0 Tunnel

-a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/a
-a 0 a x

Mohr’s stress circles in

Mohrs spänningscirkel the plane plan
i tvärsnittets of the cross-section
τ / σv τ /σv τ /σ v
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3
1 1 1

0 0 0
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
-1 σ /σv -1 -1
σ /σv σ /σv

Mohr’s stress circles for

Mohrs spänningscirklar förplane state of strain
plant deformationstillstånd
τ /σ v τ /σv τ /σ v
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3
1 1 1

0 0 0
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
-1 σ / σv -1 σ / σv -1 σ / σv

Figure 8.6 Variation of stress along a horizontal line starting from the middle of the wall.
 8

5
y/a
4

y 2

a 1

0 Tunnel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Relativaprincipal
Relative huvudspänningar
stresses
-a
-a 0 a x

Mohr’s stress circles iintvärsnittets

Mohrs spänningscirkel the planeplan
of the cross-section
τ / σv τ / σv τ / σv
y/a = 1 y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3
3 3 3
2 2 2
1 1 1
0 0 0
-1 5 -1 5 -1 5
-2 -2 -2
-3 -3 -3
σ / σv σ / σv σ /σv

Mohr’s stress circles for

Mohrs spänningscirklar för plane state of strain
plant deformationstillstånd
τ / σv τ / σv τ / σv
y/a = 1 y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3
3 3 3
2 2 2
1 1 1
0 0 0
-1 5 -1 5 -1 5
-2 -2 -2
-3 -3 -3
σ / σv σ / σv σ / σv

Figure 8.7 Variation of stress along a vertical line starting from the middle of the roof.
 3

huvudspänningar
stresses
2

Relativaprincipal
1

y Relative
0
a

0 Tunnel

-a 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/a
-a 0 a x

Mohrs spänningscirkel
Mohr’s stress circles ini tvärsnittets
the plane ofplan
the cross-section
τ /σ v τ /σ v τ /σv
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3
1 1 1

-1 1 2 -1 1 2 -1 1 2
-1 -1 -1
σ /σ v σ /σ v σ /σv

Mohr’s stress circles for

Mohrs spänningscirklar förplane
plant state of strain
deformationstillstånd
τ /σ v τ /σ v τ /σ v
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3
1 1 1

-1 1 2 -1 1 2 -1 1 2
-1 σ / σv -1 σ /σv -1 σ / σv

Figure 8.8 Variation of stress along a horizontal line starting from the middle of the wall.
 8

5
y/a
4

y 2

0 Tunnel 1 2 3 4
Relative
Relativa principal stresses
huvudspänningar
-a

-a 0 a x

Mohrsstress
Mohr’s spänningscirkel
circles ini the
tvärsnittets
plane ofplan
the cross-section
τ /σ v τ /σ v τ /σ v
y/a = 1 y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3
3 3 3
2 2 2
1 1 1
0 0 0
-1 5 -1 5 -1 5
-2 -2 -2
-3 -3 -3
σ /σ v σ /σ v σ /σv

Mohr’s
Mohrs stress circles forför
spänningscirklar plane
plantstate of strain
deformationstillstånd
τ /σ v τ /σ v τ /σ v
y/a = 1 y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3
3 3 3
2 2 2
1 1 1
0 0 0
-1 5 -1 5 -1 5
-2 -2 -2
-3 -3 -3
σ /σ v σ /σv σ /σv

Figure 8.9 Variation in stress along a vertical line starting from the middle of the roof.
 10
9

huvudspänningar
stresses
8
7
6

Relativaprincipal
5
y x' 4
3

Relative
0
a
2
0 Tunnel 1
0
-a
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
-a 0 a x x' / a

Mohr’s stress circles in

Mohrs spänningscirkel the plane of
i tvärsnittets the cross-section
plan

τ /σ v τ /σ v τ /σ v
r/a = 0 r/a = 0.5 r/a = 2
3 3 3
The stress condition in
Spänningstillståndet
2 the corner
2 2
i hörnet påofranden
the
1 är inte definierat
boundary is not defined 1 1
0 0 0
-1 5 -1 5 -1 5
-2 -2 -2
-3 -3 -3
σ/ σv σ / σv σ /σ v

Mohr’s stress circles for

Mohrs spänningscirklar förplane
plant state of strain
deformationstillstånd
τ /σv τ /σ v τ /σv
r/a = 0 r/a = 0.5 r/a = 2
3 3 3
The stress condition in
Spänningstillståndet
2 2 2
the corner
i hörnet påofranden
the
1 boundary is not defined
är inte definierat 1 1
0 0 0
-1 5 -1 5 -1 5
-2 -2 -2
-3 -3 -3
σ /σ v σ / σv σ / σv

Figure 8.10 Variation in stress along a diagonal line starting from the corner of the roof.
The secondary stress condition that arises when rock is removed to create an excavation is a
function of the virgin stresses, the mechanical characteristics of the rock and the shape and
orientation of the excavation. The difference in the secondary stress condition around a tunnel
of square cross-section and a tunnel of circular cross-section is substantial which is apparent
from the Figures 8.6 – 8.10. One observation, for example, is that the stresses on the
boundary of a tunnel of square cross-section are lower than the corresponding stresses for a
tunnel of circular cross-section. Of course, this does not apply to the area nearest the corners
which is apparent from Figure 8.10. In a sharp corner the stress is not defined. If the sharp
corner is replaced by a small or a large radius the stress state in the “corner” can be defined
and calculated. The major principal stress, σ1 , will then be very high on the boundary in the
“corner” but it decreases dramatically with the distance from the boundary, see Figure 8.11.
The minor principal stress is zero on the boundary but increases very quickly with distance
from the boundary. A stress state that can initiate fracture can in other words easily arise on
the boundary (in the “corner”). If the rock can be retained, the risk of a progressive failure
with subsequent fall-outs from the corner areas can be prevented as the stress state is only
critical on the very boundary.
10
stresses
huvudspänningar
Relativaprincipal

y x'
5
0
a
Relative

0 Tunnel

-a
0
-a 0 a x
0.00 0.05 0.10
x' / a
Mohrs cirkel
Mohr’s circle
τ /σ v τ /σ v
r/a = 0 r/a = 0.01

5 5

0 0
5 10 15 5 10 15
-5 -5
σ /σ v σ / σv

Figure 8.11 The principle for the stress variation very near to the round corner.
In the roof and walls, however, the stress varies more as a function of the distance from the
boundary for the circular cross-section than for the case with the square cross-section. The
differences are due to the square cross-section as a result of its shape causing a greater
disturbance in the stress field than the circular cross-section. The reason is its angular shape
and its plane boundary surfaces. The circular cross-section is characterized by round shapes
and curve boundary surfaces and is therefore more streamlined in shape with regard to the
virgin stresses than the square cross-section. A study of the stress trajectories (the
“streamlines” of the stress state) also shows that the stresses more easily “sneak” past and in a
better way follow the shape of the boundary when the cross-section is circular than when it is
square. The stresses must take a fairly large detour around the square cross-section which
brings a risk of unloaded zones being formed near the wall and roof. This leads to a poor
arching effect and to the stress state being disturbed by the existence of the tunnel at a large
distance from the boundary. The circular cross-section, however, provides a large arching
effect. The disturbance of the stress field caused by the tunnel decreases rapidly with the
distance from the boundary. The optimal cross-section, in this virgin stress field, should no
doubt be rather elongated in the x-direction with a soft, curved and convex shape.

The analysis that is illustrated in the Figures 8.6 – 8.10 has, as was previously mentioned,
been carried out with a virgin stress state that can be considered to be representative for the
Scandinavian bedrock. In other geological environments the vertical virgin stress can be
greater than the horizontal stresses. This gives other stresses than those accounted for above,
but as these cross-sections have the same shape in the roof and the wall the results in Figures
8.6 – 8.10 can also be used to estimate the state of stress around these cross-sections even
when the vertical stress is greatest. The stresses in the roof and the wall only change places.
For other types of cross-sections the stresses on the boundary can be estimated with the aid of
the results that are presented in Chapter 4. The major and the minor principal stresses in the
rock mass near the excavation can for some cross-sections be determined with the aid of
results that are presented in Appendix C.
8.1.5 The influence of single joints on the stability of an excavation at depth

In most cases one cannot take into account every joint in the neighbourhood of a tunnel,
excavation or shaft. The rock mass must be looked at as a material with isotropic or
anisotropic characteristics. If, however, single joints in a rock mass that is otherwise almost
free of joints, or single joints with much lower strength than the other joints in the rock mass
cross the excavation, or are in the vicinity they can influence the stability.

To investigate the consequences of the existence of the joint or joints one can naturally carry
out an analysis with a computer program that is based on discontinuum models. But a simpler
engineering analysis can also be carried out with analytical methods.

This analysis method can be summarised as follows:

1. Assume that the joint/joints have no significance, that is to say the rock mass behaves
independently of its/their existence.
2. Calculate the stresses on the boundary of the tunnel/excavation and possibly in its
surroundings.
3. Check that the assumption is valid by checking if there is a risk of separation and/or
sliding in the joint/joints.
4. If this check shows that movement occurs on the joint/joints it has in any case been
possible to determine that there is, for example, sliding along the joint or that the
surfaces of the joint separate. The stress that has been calculated assuming that the
material is homogenous and without joints is, however, not valid.
5. To determine the actual stresses and deformations for a case where sliding or
separation of joints takes place one must use a computer program that can simulate the
behaviour of the joints in the vicinity of the excavation.

The influence of a joint crossing a tunnel with circular cross-section

Assume that a tunnel of circular cross-section is crossed by a joint as shown in Figure 8.12.
The strength of the joint is described by the relationship τ p = ±σ n tan φ p .
 σy

α
A

θ σx
B
θ1

Figure 8.12 Tunnel that is transected by a joint.

σθ A

θ-α
τ
σn
Figure 8.13 Element A on the boundary of the tunnel.

Force equilibrium for Element A in Figure 8.13 gives

: σ n = σ θ cos 2 (θ − α ) (8.1)

: τ = σ θ sin(θ − α ) cos(θ − α ) (8.2)

where (Kirsch’s solution (4.12.7b))

 σ θ = σ x + σ y − 2(σ x − σ y ) cos 2θ (8.3)

Control of sliding on the joint.

The shear strength of the joint is described by the relationship τp = -σn tan φp. The shear
strength is negative as τ < 0 according to the definition, see Equation (8.2). The shear stress
has been defined in this way as τ = τrθ when θ = α and τ = τxy when θ = α = 0 and θ = α =
90° respectively. The condition for sliding not to take place on the joint then becomes
τ >τp (8.4)

The Equations (8.1) – (8.4) then give the condition under which no sliding can take place on
the joint at element A

θ −α <φp when 0° ≤ θ − α ≤ 90° (8.5)

− (θ − α ) < φ p when − 90° ≤ θ − α ≤ 0° (8.6)

In a corresponding manner the condition under which sliding can not occur on the joint at
element B is

180° − (θ 1 − α ) < φ p when 90° ≤ θ 1 − α ≤ 180° (8.7)

180° + θ 1 − α < φ p when − 180° ≤ θ 1 − α ≤ - 90° (8.8)

Control of separation of the joint

No separation takes place in the joint if the normal stress across the joint always is
compressive; that is to say if

σn > 0 (8.9)

With the aid of the expression for normal stress and the tangential stress the relationship (8.9)
can be expressed as
 σ n = [σ x + σ y − 2(σ x − σ y ) cos 2θ ] cos 2 (θ − α ) > 0 (8.10)

which is satisfied independently of the value of the term cos2 (θ - α) since it always is > 0.

This gives the inequality

σ x + σ y − 2(σ x − σ y ) cos 2θ > 0 (8.11)

or

σx +σy
cos 2θ < (8.12)
2(σ x − σ y )

Since cos 2θ ≤ 1 the inequality (8.12) is always satisfied if

σx +σy
>1 (8.13)
2(σ x − σ y )

which after simplification can be written

σx
<3 (8.14)
σy

Separation accordingly never occurs if σx < 3σy. If, however, σx ≥ 3σy separation never occurs
when

⎡ σx ⎤
⎢ σ +1 ⎥
θ > ± 1 arccos ⎢ y ⎥ (8.15)
2 ⎢ ⎛σx ⎞⎥
⎢ 2⎜⎜ σ − 1⎟⎟ ⎥
⎣ ⎝ y ⎠⎦
The condition (8.15) is illustrated in Figure 8.14.

30

20

10

θ [°] 0 Separation

-10

-20

-30
3 4 5 6
σx /σy

Figure 8.14 Angles at which separation of joint surfaces take place.

A special case of particular interest occurs when θ = α, see Figure 8.15. The risk of sliding
disappears on the boundary as, according to (8.2), the tangential and radial shear stress (τrθ)
always is zero on the boundary.

With regard to the risk of separation there will be no difference from the general case. There
can, however, be a risk of sliding at some distance from the boundary in those cases where θ
≠ 0° and θ ≠ 90°.
 a) b)

Joint

c)

Figure 8.15 Special case where θ = α. a) θ = 0°, b) θ = 90°, c) θ = 45°,

With the aid of the Equations (8.1) – (8.3) the ratio between shear stress and normal stress
can be determined. When this ratio is equal to, or greater than tanφp there is a risk of sliding.
The critical angle of friction, which is necessary to prevent sliding on the joint, is defined as

⎛τ ⎞
φ crit = arctan ⎜ ⎟ (8.16)
⎜σ n ⎟
⎝ ⎠

where φcrit < φp means that no sliding takes place. The critical angle of friction as a function of
the distance from the boundary as per (8.16), for the case when θ = 45°, is illustrated in
Figure 8.16.
 30
σx = 0.3σy

20

σx = 0.5σy
10
Critical friction angle, φkrit [°]

σx = 1.5σy
-10

σx = 2σy
-20

-30 σx = 3σy
σx = 2.5σy
σx = 5σy
-40
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
r/a

Figure 8.16 Critical angle of friction.

Any sliding movements on the joint mean that the solution we have used hitherto is no longer
valid in determining the stresses in the vicinity of the tunnel. These stresses must then be
determined with the aid of numerical methods based on discontinuum models where sliding
on the joints can be simulated.

The influence of a joint in the vicinity of a tunnel with circular cross-section

Assume that there is a joint in the vicinity of a tunnel as shown in Figure 8.17. The strength of
the joint is described by the relationship τ p = ±σ n tan φ p .
 σy

Joint
x

c
r
θ σx

Figure 8.17 Tunnel with joint in its vicinity.

σn

θ
τrθ
τ rθ
σr
σθ

Figure 8.18 Triangular element along the joint.

Force equilibrium for the triangular element in Figure 8.18 gives

σ n = 1 (σ θ + σ r ) + 1 (σ θ − σ r ) cos 2θ + τ rθ sin 2θ (8.17)

2 2
 τ = − 1 (σ θ − σ r ) sin 2θ + τ rθ cos 2θ (8.18)
2

where σn and τ are normal and shear stresses, respectively, along the joint. The stresses σθ , σr
and τrθ are defined by the relationships (4.12.3). In the same way as in the case with a joint
that crosses the tunnel, a critical friction angle that is defined by the relationship (8.16) can be
determined, where φcrit < φp means that no sliding occurs. The critical friction angle as a
function of the distance x/a (defined in Figure 8.17), is illustrated in Figure 8.19.

35

30

25

20

15
Critical friction angle, φkrit [°]

10

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35
-7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
x/a

Figure 8.19 Critical friction angle.

8.1.6 Stability analysis for blocks and wedges in walls and roofs

The natural joints in the rock mass can also interact to form wedges and blocks. The stability
of these blocks and wedges must be analysed. When the predominant joint orientations (the
joint sets) are known any wedges and blocks that can become unstable and fall or slide out
into the excavation can be identified with the aid of spherical projections. The simplified
analysis that is described in Appendix G is, however, only valid if gravity conditions apply,
that is to say if the stress situation surrounding the excavation is disregarded. The analysis can
thus only be expected to give reasonable estimates of the stability of a wedge or block under
unloaded conditions. If, however, the secondary stresses are of the same or greater size than
that of the stress that is caused by the weight a different analysis must be carried out.

Since the boundary surfaces of a three-dimensional wedge consist of three joints, each of
which are characterized by a strike and a dip, an analysis of the stability of such a wedge
becomes rather complicated. The stability analysis has therefore here been carried out for a
two-dimensional wedge, that is to say a block that is triangular in cross-section. The joints
that comprise the triangular cross-section in this case strike parallel to the longitudinal axis of
the excavation. The wedges can slide out of the wall, or slide or fall out of the roof as the
wedge is cut off by joints that are perpendicular, or almost perpendicular to the longitudinal
axis of the excavation, see Figure 8.20.

Longitudinal direction
Joints striking parallel to
of the excavation
the longitudinal direction
of the excavation

Joints cutting
the wedge

Figure 8.20 Two-dimensional wedge.

8.2 Shallow underground excavations

When analyzing the stability of a tunnel or an excavation that shall be located at a shallow
depth, see Figure 8.1, the stress situation is determined on the boundary and, possibly, in its
vicinity. To be able to analyze the stability it is necessary that the strengths of the rock mass
and the joints are known or can be estimated. Since the stress level often is low the risk of
unloading of the rock mass in the vicinity of the excavation is high. This means that the risk
of gravitational falls and sliding of wedges and blocks normally can be considered to be the
most probable stability problem for excavations located at shallow depths. Situations occur,
however, where the shallow part of the rock mass is very jointed and weathered which means
that the strength is low. Even if the absolute level of stress is low it can nevertheless in such a
case be so great that stress induced failures and stability problems can arise.

8.2.1 Stress analysis

The stress analysis can be carried out with analytical solutions or through the use of
numerical methods. For excavations located near a free surface the stress analysis must
probably in most cases be carried out using a numerical method. This analysis is carried out
most suitably by assuming that the rock mass is linearly elastic as the aim mainly is to
estimate the stress levels in the vicinity of the excavation. If the rock mass has very low
strength so that there is a risk of failure induced by stress numerical methods with more
refined constitutive relationships can be used.

8.2.2 Stability analysis

Since the absolute stress levels are low at shallow depth stability problems in the form of falls
of wedges and blocks usually are those that are most critical. For these types of failures the
failure surfaces are known and the risk of fully formed failure is controlled. The stability
analysis can be described in the following points:

1. Calculate σ// , σζ , σ⊥ .
2. Determine σ1 , σ2 , σ3 .
3. Since the stress levels are low there is a great risk of blocks and wedges sliding out as
well as of purely gravitational falls.
4. Check which structurally governed failures are possible kinetically.
 5. Endeavour to construct excavations of such a shape that a load-bearing roof arch (and
preferably also a wall arch) is formed.
6. Endeavour to orientate and shape the excavation so that the effects of the structures
are minimized.
7. If several excavations shall be made, one should endeavour to obtain an excavation
sequence that is as optimal as possible from the point of view of stability.

If the rock mass has very low strength the following points must also be taken into account:

8. On what scale can failure take place: intact rock or massive rock?
9. Determine the strength, σ1s.
10. Compare the major principal stress, σ1, with the greatest value of the major principal
stress that the rock/rock mass can bear, σ1s. If σ1 ≥ σ1s ⇒ Risk of initiation of failure!

8.2.3 The influence of the stress condition and the cross-section on the stability of
tunnels

To show how the stress condition varies with the distance from the boundary a tunnel with a
circular and a square cross-section respectively have been studied. In this analysis the virgin
stress condition has been chosen in accordance with Figure 8.21. In the studied model the
virgin stresses vary with the depth. The variation in stress along a horizontal line starting
from the middle of the wall and along a vertical line starting from the middle of the roof
respectively have been studied. These analyses are illustrated in the Figures 8.22 – 8.25
according to the same principles as in the Figures 8.6 – 8.10. In the analyses the rock cover
has been 2a in accordance with Figure 8.21.
 a)
y
3a

z
a σv
σH = 2.5σv
a x
-a
⊗ σh = 1.7σv
-a

b) y
3a

z
a
σv
σH = 2.5σv
-a a x
⊗ σh = 1.7σv
-a

Figure 8.21 Model geometry for tunnels with a) a circular, and b) a square cross-section.
 3

y/a
y 2

a 1

0 Tunnel 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

Huvudspänningar
Principal [MPa]
stresses [MPa]
-a
-a 0 a x

Mohr’s stress circles ini tvärsnittets

Mohrs spänningscirkel the plane ofplan
the cross-section

τ [MPa]
y/a = 1 τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.5 0.5 0.5
y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3

Mohr’s circles
Mohrs cirkel

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0

-0.5 -0.5 -0.5

σ [MPa] σ [MPa] σ [MPa]

Mohr’s stress circles forför

Mohrs spänningscirklar plane
plantstate of strain
deformationstillstånd

τ [MPa]
y/a = 1 τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.5 0.5 0.5
y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3

Mohr’s
Mohrs circles
cirklar

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 1.0
0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0

-0.5 -0.5 -0.5

σ [MPa] σ [MPa] σ [MPa]

Figure 8.33 The variation in stress along a vertical line starting from the middle of the
roof.
 0.5

0.4

[MPa]
stresses [MPa]
0.3

Huvudspänningar 0.2

0.1
Principal

0.0
y

0 Tunnel

-a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/a
-a 0 a x

Mohr’s stress circles in

Mohrs spänningscirkel the plane plan
i tvärsnittets of the cross-section
τ [MPa] τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.2 0.2 0.2
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4

-0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa]

Mohr’s stress circles for

Mohrs spänningscirklar förplane state of strain
plant deformationstillstånd
τ [MPa] τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.2 0.2 0.2
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4

-0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa]

Figure 8.34 Variation in stress along a horizontal line starting from the middle of the wall.
 3

y/a
y 2

0 Tunnel 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

Huvudspänningar [MPa]
Principal stresses [MPa]
-a

-a 0 a x

Mohr’s stress circles ini the

Mohrs spänningscirkel plane ofplan
tvärsnittets the cross-section
τ [MPa] τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.5 0.5 0.5
y/a = 1 y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0

-0.5 σ [MPa] -0.5 σ [MPa] -0.5 σ [MPa]

Mohr’s stress circles forför

Mohrs spänningscirklar plane
plantstate of strain
deformationstillstånd
τ [MPa] τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.5 0.5 0.5
y/a = 1 y/a = 1.5 y/a = 3

0.0 0.0 0.0

0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0

-0.5 σ [MPa] -0.5 σ [MPa] -0.5 σ [MPa]

Figure 8.35 The stress variation along a vertical line starting from the middle of the roof.
 0.5

[MPa]
Principal stresses [MPa]
0.4

0.3

Huvudspänningar
0.2

0.1
y
0.0

0 Tunnel

-a 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
x/a
-a 0 a x

Mohr’s stress circles ini tvärsnittets

Mohrs spänningscirkel the plane ofplan
the cross-section
τ [MPa] τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.2 0.2 0.2
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3

0.0 0.0
-0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4

-0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa]

Mohr’s stress circles forför

Mohrs spänningscirklar plane
plantstate of strain
deformationstillstånd
τ [MPa] τ [MPa] τ [MPa]
0.2 0.2 0.2
x/a = 1 x/a = 1.5 x/a = 3

0.0 0.0
-0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.4

-0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa] -0.2 σ [MPa]

Figure 8.36 Variation of stress along a horizontal line starting from the middle of the wall
The most important difference between the stress condition around a tunnel located at a
shallow and a great depth is that the level of stress decreases with decreasing depth. At great
depth the stress condition is mainly disturbed by the excavation. When the distance from the
boundary is sufficiently great (> 7 radii for a circular cross-section) the influence of the tunnel
on the stress condition is negligible. At a great distance from an excavation the virgin stress
condition therefore prevails.

For shallow underground excavations the stresses are not only disturbed by the existence of
the excavation but also by the ground surface. When the distance from the excavation
increases the distance to the ground surface decreases. The stress level at the ground surface
is low according to the Figures 8.22 and 8.25, which is due to the fact that the virgin
horizontal stress in the numerical analyses could not be greater than zero at the ground
surface. However, in reality the horizontal virgin stresses at the ground surface can be greater
than zero, see Equation (4.7.1).

One interesting observation is that the major principal stress at the ground surface is
compressive in the case of the square cross-section, but is zero for the circular cross-section.
This can be explained by the “stream lines” of the stress having to take a longer detour around
the square tunnel than round the circular tunnel. A distinctive stress arch is formed on the
boundary of the circular cross-section while the stresses are more evenly distributed in the
rock mass between the roof and the surface in the case of the square cross-section. The
horizontal load that the rock between the roof and the ground surface conveys is, however, by
and large the same for both cross-sections. The distinctive stress arch that is formed in and
near the roof of the circular cross-section is to be preferred since it prevents disintegration and
subsequent falls and slides from the roof.

8.2.4 Stability analysis for blocks and wedges in walls and roofs

The natural joints and structures in the rock mass constitute the largest threat to a stable
underground excavation at shallow depth. A stability analysis of the roof and wall can be
carried out with the aid of spherical projections. Such an analysis provides information as to
whether blocks and wedges can be formed that possibly can become unstable and fall or slide
out into the excavation. To explain the ideas behind the stability analysis that can be carried
out using spherical projections an analysis of a two-dimensional wedge, e.g. a block of
triangular cross-section, is carried out here. The joints that comprise the triangular cross-
section in this case strike parallel to the longitudinal axis of the excavation. The wedge can
slide out of the wall, or slide or fall out of the roof as a result of the wedge being intersected
by joints that are almost perpendicularto the longitudinal axis of the excavation, see Figure
8.20.

Wedges in the walls

Consider a wedge that is formed in the wall of a tunnel, see Figure 8.26. The wedge is two-
dimensional, e.g. it is of the same shape and area in all cross-sections along the tunnel. Since
the level of stress is low it is assumed that unloaded conditions prevail, e.g. joint I will not
have an affect on sliding as it can be considered to be open which means that no normal stress
exists and there is thereby no friction force either.

θI θI

bv mg θI + θII
mg

θII τII

θII σIIn
hv

Figure 8.26 Wedge in the wall.

The equilibrium equations for the wedge, assuming that the wedge becomes unstable as a
result of sliding taking place along joint II, give the condition for stability and instability
respectively. The condition for the wedge being stable then becomes:
 θ II < φ II . (8.19)

Wedges in the roof

Assume that a wedge is formed in the roof of a tunnel. The wedge is two-dimensional, e.g. it
has the same shape and area at all cross-sections along the tunnel. The boundary is also here
assumed to be unloaded, which means that the wedge will always fall out of the roof if θI > 0
and θII > 0. There can, however, be a risk for sliding if θI > 0 and θII < 0 if θI < 0 and θII > 0
respectively, see Figure 8.27.

θI < 0, θII > 0 θI > 0, θII < 0

τI τII
α β
σIn σIIn

mg
mg

Figure 8.27 Wedges in the roof.

The equilibrium equations for the wedge assuming that the wedge becomes unstable as a
result of sliding taking place along joint I and along joint II, respectively, give the condition
for stability and instability, respectively.
The condition for the wedge being stable then becomes:

θ I < φ I − 90° when θ I < 0 and θ II > 0 (8.20)

θ II < φ II − 90° when θ II < 0 and θ I > 0 . (8.21)