01 - Sulphuric Plant

ETI BAKIR CO.
SULPHURIC
PLANT MAZIDAĞI/MARDİN
GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION
SULPHURIC PLANT
Zemar
DRILLING and GROUND IMPROVEMENT
27.11.2014
1
CONTENTS
page no
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 3
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT AREA ................................................................................................... 3
3. REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND TECTONICS...................................................................................... 5
3.1 Geology.................................................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Tectonics................................................................................................................................ 6
4. SEISMIC CODE ISSUES AND HAZARD ASSESSMENT .................................................................. 6
5. BOREHOLE INVESTIGATION ...................................................................................................... 6
6. ROCK LABORATORY TESTS ........................................................................................................ 8
7. SPECIFICATIONS OF COMPACTION WITH PLATE LOADING TEST ............................................ 11
8. SOIL/ROCK GROUPS AND LOCAL SITE CLASSES ...................................................................... 13
9. Rock Mass Properties ............................................................................................................. 15
9.1 Rock Mass Classification ...................................................................................................... 15
9.2 Rock Mass Description ........................................................................................................ 16
9.3 Rock mass strength.............................................................................................................. 16
9.4 Hoek-Brown criterion .......................................................................................................... 16
9.5 Generalized Hoek-Brown Criterion ..................................................................................... 17
9.6 Modulus of Deformation ..................................................................................................... 21
9.7 Mohr-Coulomb Criterion ..................................................................................................... 21
9.8 Rock Mass Strength ............................................................................................................. 23
9.9 Estimation of Disturbance Factor D ..................................................................................... 23
9.10 Geological Strength Index (GSI)........................................................................................ 25
10. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................... 29
11. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 31
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Location Map of the Project Site
Appendix 2 Satellite Image of the Study Area
Appendix 3 Borehole Location Map with Topography
Appendix 4 Elevation Zones
Appendix 5 Slope Zones and Slope Direction Maps
Appendix 6 Borehole Logs and Core Box Photos
1
Appendix 7 Ground Profiles
Appendix 8 Laboratory Test Results
Appendix 9 Plate Load Test Results
Appendix 10 The Quantitative Description of Discontinuities in Rock Masses
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Coordinates of project area ................................................................................................. 4
Table 2 Elevation Zones of the Project Area (before cut and fill) ..................................................... 4
Table 3 Slope Zones of the Project Area ........................................................................................... 5
Table 4 Seismic Zoning of Turkey and maximum ground acceleration values (AIGM, 1996) ........... 6
Table 5 Borehole locations................................................................................................................ 7
Table 6 Laboratory test results for rocks .......................................................................................... 9
Table 7 Plate Load Test Results ....................................................................................................... 12
Table 8 Compacted man-made fill properties ................................................................................ 13
Table 9 Soil/Rock Groups (AIGM, 2007) .......................................................................................... 14
Table 10 Local Site Classes (AIGM, 2007)........................................................................................ 14
Table 11 Field estimates of uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock ...................................... 18
Table 12 Values of the constant mi for intact rock, by rock group ................................................. 20
Table 13 Most common GSI ranges and Characterisation of blocky rock masses on the basis of
interlocking and joint conditions (Marinos and Hoek, 2000, 2001) ................................................. 26
Table 14 Rock Mass Properties at project site ................................................................................ 27
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Distribution of natural and dry unit weights ..................................................................... 10
Figure 2 Distribution of Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS) ....................................................... 11
Figure 3 Relationships between major and minor principal stresses for Hoek-Brown and
equivalent Mohr-Coulomb Criteria (Hoek and Brown, 2002)........................................................... 22
Figure 4 Guidelines for estimating disturbance factor D (Hoek et al, 2002) ................................... 24
Figure 5 Rock mass parameters for Chert with interbedded limestone and clay bands ................ 28
2
ETİ BAKIR CO. MAZIDAĞI SULPHURIC PLANT MAZIDAĞI/MARDİN
GEOTECHNICAL SITE INVESTIGATION
Sulphuric Plant Site
1. INTRODUCTION
The main concept of this investigation is to get the soil and rock properties of the Sulphuric Plant
Site at the ETİ BAKIR Co. Project Site by means of the field work and laboratory tests and to
propose some necessary recommendations on the basis of the test results and the analysis.
Therefore, the general geology of the region, the ground profile, the index and engineering
properties of the layers in this ground profile, and ground water conditions are discussed.
Allowable bearing capacity and settlement behaviour of the site are explained and some necessary
recommendations on the basis of the test results are proposed.
The site work has been carried out between 07/06/2014 and 14/07/2014. Geotechnical Site
investigation program has been carried out for this planned industrial plant in accordance with the
agreement signed between ETİ BAKIR Co. and ZEMAR 2000.
9 boreholes were drilled with a total depth of 123.50m. Depths of boreholes were between 5.50m
and 28.50m. Laboratory tests were also completed on 27.07.2014.
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT AREA
Eti Bakir Co. Mazidaği Sulphuric Site Plant Area are established in the district of Mazidagi in
Mardin. A detailed investigation has been carried out between the co-ordinates as given in Table
1, an area of approximately 28 275.00 square metres. The area is located at the near field of the
Mazıdağı Town of Mardin Province, next to Şanlıurfa-Mardin D-400 highway, and it is
approximately 62 km from the centre of Mardin and 68 km from Diyarbakır, and 520 km to the
Port of Iskenderun. The study area is 18 km away from the Mazıdağı town centre (Appendix 1 and
Appendix 2). In Appendix 3, detailed topography is given with borehole locations.
3
Table 1 Coordinates of project area
BOUNDARY COORDINATES
Natural Ground
Corner No X (East) Y (North)
Elevation (m)
C-1 620369.35 4153382.05 876.33
C-2 620492.23 4153533.46 861.00
C-3 620379.20 4153624.28 866.32
C-4 620256.31 4153472.87 870.59
The study area is under the influence of the Mediterranean and Continental climates. Summers
are hot and winters are cold. The number of days with snow does not exceed 10 days and the
number of days below zero does not exceed 60 days. About 100 days of the year was above 30 °C.
Annual average rainfall is 713 mm.
The natural topographic elevations are changing between 860.88m-876.33m (Table 2 and
Appendix 4). Topographic slopes are grouped into 8 zones which are changing from 0.00 to 140.00
%. Most slopes are between 0.00 and 10.00 % (Table 3 and Appendix 5). Groundwater and spring
waters are not observed at the site.
Table 2 Elevation Zones of the Project Area (before cut and fill)
ELEVATION ZONES
No Minimum Elevation (m) Maximum Elevation (%) Area (m2)
1 860.00 861.00 341.73
2 861.00 862.00 2479.27
3 862.00 863.00 1918.91
4 863.00 864.00 1753.77
5 864.00 865.00 2038.62
6 865.00 866.00 2248.00
7 866.00 867.00 2675.78
8 867.00 868.00 3108.75
9 868.00 869.00 2576.42
10 869.00 870.00 2729.58
11 870.00 871.00 2099.53
12 871.00 872.00 2012.70
13 872.00 873.00 1170.38
14 873.00 874.00 621.90
15 874.00 875.00 359.53
16 875.00 876.00 136.16
17 876.00 877.00 3.87
4
Table 3 Slope Zones of the Project Area
SLOPE ZONES
No Minimum Slope (%) Maximum Slope (%) Area (m2)
1 0.00 10.00 23895.28
2 10.00 20.00 3809.14
3 20.00 30.00 319.19
4 30.00 40.00 101.54
5 40.00 50.00 118.07
6 50.00 60.00 17.81
7 60.00 70.00 13.47
8 70.00 140.00 0.37
3. REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND TECTONICS

3.1 Geology
A large part of the project area and its immediate vicinity is composed of karstic limestone and
chert. In addition, basalt, marl, clay, phosphate rock and alluvial deposits are also observed.
The extensive alluvium deposits in the region are highly variable ranging from clays to gravel and
boulders, sometimes well graded elsewhere poorly graded adjacent to rivers. Alluvium associated
with streams draining from the uplands is often coarse grained with rounded gravel, cobbles and
boulders of various rocks. The soil is relatively light coloured and less rich in organic material
compared to lowland alluvium. Most of the settlement areas are founded on old alluvium deposits
in the region.
The study area and its near environment are represented by the rock formations from Pre-
Palaeozoic to Quaternary as well as the rocks of the Southeast Anatolia. The region is just located
next to the rising zone of Mardin-Bozova.
The project site is located in the Upper Cretaceos Karababa formation, and it is composed of the
Karsık Member of Karababa formation that covers almost 30.00 square kilometer in the region.
Kasrık member is mainly composed of limestones, chert, dolomitic limestones and also phosphate
levels up to 5 to 10 m in thickness. Clayey chert and limestone, shelled limestone, brecciated
fractured limestone, unfractured compact chert, succession of clay, chert and fossiliferous
limestone are very common and observed at the site.
White, very hard, fractured, fragile, shelly broken surfaces, medium layered cherts, white, clayey
limestones and white kaolinite bands are very common.
5
3.2 Tectonics
Tectonics of the study area is characterized by the Mardin-Derik anticlinal axis, and many of
gravitation faults. The northwest part of the anticlinal axis is extending in the direction of the EW,
and then it is almost extending in the NS direction with a sharp folding. The southern part of the
axis was deformed at Derik. The axis, at the east of Sadan, is again in the direction of EW, and
finally it is directed to the SE. In general, it is in E-W direction.
4. SEISMIC CODE ISSUES AND HAZARD ASSESSMENT
The seismic hazard zonation map of Turkey was published by the Ministry of Public Works and
Settlement of Turkey (Turkish Earthquake Code, AIGM 1996). Based on this map, Turkey is divided
into five subclasses of seismic zone with peak ground acceleration (PGA=amax) values of >0.4g, 0.3–
0.4g, 0.2– 0.3g, 0.1– 0.2g and <0.1g for zones ranging from I to V, respectively (Table 4). The
Project Area is located in the 3rd degree Seismic Hazard Zone.
Table 4 Seismic Zoning of Turkey and maximum ground acceleration values (AIGM, 1996)
Seismic Hazard Zonation Maximum Ground Acceleration (PGA=amax)
1st Degree Seismic Hazard Zone amax ≥ 0.40g
2nd Degree Seismic Hazard Zone 0.30g ≤ amax<0.40g
3rd Degree Seismic Hazard Zone 0.20g ≤ amax<0.30g
4th Degree Seismic Hazard Zone 0.10g ≤ amax<0.20g
5th Degree Seismic Hazard Zone amax< 0.10g
5. BOREHOLE INVESTIGATION
9 boreholes were drilled to recover undisturbed and disturbed samples for laboratory testing in
order to investigate the subsurface conditions with a total depth of 123.50m. Borehole depths are
changed from 5.50 to 28.50m. Borehole locations are given on various topographic maps in
Appendix 3, Appendix 4 and Appendix 5 successively. Detailed borehole logs with core box
photographs are given in Appendix 6. Appendix 4 indicates borehole locations in elevation zones
whereas slope directions and percentage are given in Appendix 5. Table 4 presents general
properties of boreholes. Boreholes elevations represent the borehole elevation at the time of
drilling and just after or before the cut and fill process.
6
Table 5 Borehole locations
BOREHOLE Elevation Z (m) Elevation Z (m)
No X (East, m) Y (North, m) Depth (m)
NO (time of drilling) (after cut and fill)
1 BH-18 620380.49 4153591.44 862.83 867.37 12.00
2 BH-19 620413.68 4153566.66 862.11 867.35 15.50
3 BH-21 620343.34 4153536.10 866.64 867.70 15.00
4 BH-22 620411.10 4153488.44 866.76 867.68 28.50
5 BH-23 620307.43 4.153505.03 868.26 867.94 15.00
6 BH-24 620368.36 4153469.77 869.08 867.89 15.00
7 BH-25 620276.08 4153468.99 870.89 868.19 8.00
8 BH-26 620323.29 4153435.21 871.93 868.17 9.00
9 BH-27 620356.27 4153399.98 874.68 868.20 5.50
In general, the project site is composed of two units with various mass properties; man-made fill
and bedrock that is limestone with interbedded chert or it can be also described as chert with
interbedded limestone. The thicknesses of the man-made fill are changing between 1.50 and
8.30m. The borehole descriptions of chert and limestone are as follows;
BH-18: weak to moderately strong, highly to moderately weathered, crushed to closely fractured
with very poor to fair RQD
BH-19: moderately strong, moderately weathered, closely fractured with fair to good RQD
BH-21: very strong, slightly weathered, wide to closely fractured with poor to excellent RQD
BH-22: weak to moderately strong, slightly to highly weathered, crushed to moderately fractured
with poor to excellent RQD
BH-23: strong, slightly to moderately weathered, wide to closely fractured with poor to excellent
RQD
BH-24: weak to moderately strong, moderately to highly weathered, closely fractured with poor to
fair RQD
BH-25: weak, highly weathered, crushed with very poor RQD
BH:26: very strong, slightly to moderately weathered, crushed and closely fractured with very
poor to poor RQD
7
BH:27: strong, slightly weathered, crushed with very poor RQD
Based on borehole logs, ground profile are given in Appendix 7 for 6 ground profile alignments
with different directions.
6. ROCK LABORATORY TESTS
Undisturbed (UD) and core samples (C) were recovered from boreholes in the project site and soil
and rock laboratory tests were carried out at the Zemar Soil Research Ltd. Co. in Adana. The
company has authorized by the Ministry of Public Works and Settlement for soil and rock
laboratory tests. Detailed soil and rock laboratory test results are given in Appendix 8. TS 1900-1
(2006), TS 1900-2 (2006) and ASTM suggested test methods were applied in the laboratory work.
Especially for tests in rock mechanics, the methods were followed as described in the ISRM (2007).
Test result of rock mechanics are summarised in Table 6.
Natural unit weights of the rocks are ranging from 22.94 kN/m3 to 26.27 kN/m3 whereas dry unit
weights are changing between 21.57 kN/m3 and 26.27 kN/m3. Average values are of 24.91 kN/m3
and 24.68 kN/m3 respectively (Figure 1).
Uniaxial compressive strengths are between 12.10 MPa and 34.30 MPa. Based on the compressive
strength, rocks are weak and moderately (medium) strong (Figure 2). The mean value was 21.89
MPa (weak).
8
Table 6 Laboratory test results for rocks
Uniaxial
Natural Unit Dry Unit Point Load
Borehole Sample Compressive
Sample No Depth (m) Weight Weight Index Is(50)
No Type Strength
(kN/m3) (kn/m3) (MPa)
(MPa)
BH-19 chert D-1 1.50-2.00 24.22 24.02 32.70 ---
BH-19 chert D-3 9.00-10.00 25.88 25.78 34.30 ---
BH-19 chert D-4 11.00-12.00 24.51 24.41 16.50 ---
BH-19 chert D-5 14.00-15.00 24.41 24.31 13.60 ---
BH-21 chert D-2 5.50-6.00 25.39 25.20 19.00 ---
BH-21 chert D-3 8.50-9.00 23.53 23.14 12.70 ---
BH-21 chert D-4 11.00-11.50 25.49 25.29 18.70 ---
BH-22 chert D-1 4.00-5.00 25.29 25.10 18.80 ---
BH-22 chert D-2 7.00-8.00 25.39 25.20 19.40 ---
BH-22 chert D-3 11.00-12.00 26.27 26.27 17.80 ---
BH-22 chert D-4 16.00-17.00 25.78 25.49 23.00 ---
BH-22 chert D-5 20.00-21.00 22.94 22.75 12.60 ---
BH-22 chert D-6 27.00-28.00 23.63 23.43 13.90 ---
BH-23 chert D-1 5.00-5.50 24.22 24.12 28.50 ---
BH-23 chert D-2 7.50-8.00 24.90 24.71 23.80 ---
BH-23 chert D-3 9.50-10.00 22.94 21.57 12.10 ---
BH-23 chert D-4 11.00-11.50 25.78 25.69 32.70 ---
BH-23 chert D-5 12.50-13.00 25.88 25.59 21.00 ---
BH-24 chert D-1 3.70-5.00 24.31 24.12 27.80 ---
BH-24 chert D-2 7.00-8.00 25.49 25.29 28.30 ---
BH-24 chert D-3 10.00-11.00 25.39 25.20 19.60 ---
BH-24 chert D-4 12.00-13.00 25.29 25.10 19.60 ---
BH-24 chert D-5 14.00-15.00 25.88 25.69 27.10 ---
BH-25 chert D-1 3.50-4.00 27.47
BH-25 chert D-2 4.50-5.00 23.43 23.04 13.70 ---
BH-25 chert D-3 6.50-7.00 25.39 25.20 24.60 ---
BH-26 chert D-1 5.00-5.50 25.39 25.20 24.60 ---
BH-26 chert D-2 7.50-8.00 25.59 25.39 28.80 ---
BH-27 chert D-1 3.50-4.00 --- --- 27.68 ---
9
Natural Unit Weight Distribution
27.00
26.27
25.88 25.88 25.88

26.00 25.78 25.78
25.59
25.49 25.49
25.39 25.39 25.39 25.3925.39
25.29 25.29
24.9
Unit Weight (kN/m3)
25.00
24.51
24.41
24.22 24.22 24.31
24.00
23.63
23.53
23.43
22.94 22.94
23.00
y = 0.0153x + 24.697
22.00 R² = 0.0161
21.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Dry Unit Weight Distribution

30.00
26.27
25.78 25.49 25.6925.59 25.69
25.2 25.29 25.1 25.2 25.29 25.2 25.1 25.2 25.2
24.4124.31 24.71
25.00 24.02 24.12 24.12
23.14 23.43 23.04
22.75
21.57
20.00
Unit Weight (kN/m3)
15.00
10.00 y = 0.0063x + 24.565

R² = 0.0019
5.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Figure 1 Distribution of natural and dry unit weights
10
Uniaxial Compressive Strength Distribution
40.00
35.00 34.30
32.70 32.70
y = 0.1578x + 19.601
R² = 0.0381
30.00 28.80
28.50 28.30
27.80 27.68
Uniaxial Compressive Strength (MPa)
27.10
24.60 24.60
25.00 23.80
23.00
21.00
19.40 19.60 19.60

20.00 19.00 18.70 18.80
17.80
16.50
15.00 13.90 13.70

13.60
12.70 12.60
12.10
10.00
5.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Figure 2 Distribution of Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS)
7. SPECIFICATIONS OF COMPACTION WITH PLATE LOADING TEST
Compaction of man-made fill was verified with plate loading tests according to DIN 18 134 (2001),
with a 0.1590 m2 (0.450 cm in diameter) load plate. The plate loading or bearing tests allowed a
direct evaluation of the stiffness and strength of the compacted soil layer. 6 tests were carried out
just after the man-made fill compaction has completed for the upper layer surface.
It is common to specify that the ratio EV2/EV1 (reloading modulus/first loading modulus) should
not exceed a given maximum value. In general, specification required over 100 % laboratory
maximum dry density and reloading modulus EV2 in excess of 100 MPa in the plate load test. For
compaction control, the modulus for second loading EV2, rather than the modulus for first loading
EV1, was usually considered most relevant. The second deformation modulus EV2 of the each
layer was at minimum 80.00 MN/m2 where the proportion EV2/EV1 was less than 2.2. The
specification was that each layer of the structural backfill had a minimum first deformation
modulus EV1 of 60 MN/m2 with EV2/EV1 less than 2.2.
11
The distributions of deformation modulus values and ratios are given in Table 7. Details of each
test results are given in Appendix 9. The minimum value of first loading modulus EV1 is 14.96
MPa. The maximum first loading is 27.34 MPa whereas the mean value is 20.03 MPa. The result of
the test in the form of the EV1 value is to be considered simply an indicator of the deformability of
the compacted soil under standard conditions.
Table 7 Plate Load Test Results

Parameters Test_01 Test_02 Test_03 Test_04 Test_05 Test_06
1st Loading Deformation

25.38 14.96 26.74 27.34 15.39 10.36
Modulus EV1 (MPa)
2nd Loading Deformation

70.58 41.40 70.09 45.76 39.60 36.92
Modulus EV2 (MPa)
Subgrade Reaction
75.22 44.31 79.23 81.01 45.59 30.69
Modulus ks (MN/m3)
EV2/EV1 2.78 2.77 2.62 1.67 2.57 3.56
The minimum value of second or reloading loading modulus EV2 is 36.92 MPa. The maximum
second loading modulus is 70.58 MPa whereas the mean value is 50.72 MPa (less than design
value 80 MPa). The specification requirements should therefore be approved.
The coefficient or modulus of subgrade reaction (ks) was also determined from the slope of the
pressure-settlement curve of the plate loading test (Appendix 9). The minimum of modulus of
subgrade reaction is 30.69 MPa/m. The maximum modulus of subgrade reaction is 81.01 MPa/m
whereas the mean value is 59.34 MPa/m (6052.85 ton/m3).
Due to large blocks and gravels in the fill, the SPT N values resulted with rebound. The compacted
man-made fill parameters, used in bearing capacity calculation, were evaluated and defined from
the plate load test and Soil Vision Pro software (SoilVision, 2014). Laboratory tests are limited so
that Soil Vision Pro is also used for the estimation and management of compacted fill properties
which is a knowledge-based database software system. The parameters, used in bearing capacity
calculations, are given in Table 8.
12
Table 8 Compacted man-made fill properties
Compacted Man-Made Fill Properties
1 Initial Element Loading --- Field Stress and Body Force ---
2 Elastic Type --- Isotropic ---
3 Poisson Ratio ν 0.35 ---
4 Deformation Modulus E 20.03 MPa
5 Failure Criterion --- Mohr Coulomb ---
6 Peak Tensile Strength σt 0.00 kPa
7 Peak Friction Angle ° 38 degree
8 Peak Cohesion c 10.00 kPa

3
9 Unit Weight γ 21.00 kN/m
8. SOIL/ROCK GROUPS AND LOCAL SITE CLASSES

Soil/rock groups and local site classes to be considered as the bases of determination of local
ground conditions are given in Table 8 and Table 9, respectively in accordance with state and local
codes (AIGM, 2007). Values of soil/rock parameters in Table 8 are to be considered as standard
values given for guidance only in determining the soil/rock groups.
The foundation of the structures would be placed in man-made fill with different thickness. The
thicknesses of the man-made fill are changing between 1.50-8.30m.
If the structure foundation is placed on man-made fill, the soil/rock group is B3 and the local site
class is Z1. Spectrum Characteristic Periods, TA and TB, depending on Local Site Classes defined in
Table 10, are 0.10s and 0.30s respectively.
13
Table 9 Soil/Rock Groups (AIGM, 2007)
Unconf. Shear
Standard Relative
Soil/rock Compres. Wave
Description of Soil/rock Group Penet. Density
Groups Strength Velocity
(N/30) (%)
(kPa) (m/s)
(A) 1 Massive volcanic rocks, - - >1000 >1000
Unweathered sound metamorphic
rocks. stiff cemented sedimentary
rocks
2 Very dense sand, gravel >50 85-100 - >700
3 Hard clay, silty clay >32 - >400 >700
(B) 1 Soft volcanic rocks such as tuff and - - 500-1000 700-1000
agglomerate, weathered cemented
sedimentary rocks with planes of
discontinuity
2 Dense sand, gravel 30-50 65-85 - 400-700
3 Very stiff clay. silty clay 16-32 - 200-400 300-700
(C) 1 Highly weathered soft - - <500 400-700
metamorphic rocks and cemented
sedimentary rocks with planes of
discontinuity
2 Medium dense sand and gravel 10-30 35-65 - 200-400
3 Stiff clay, silty clay 8-16 - 100-200 200-300
(D) 1 Soft deep alluvial layers with high - - - <200
water table
2 Loose sand <10 <35 - <200
3 Soft clay, silty clay <8 - <100 <200
Table 10 Local Site Classes (AIGM, 2007)

Soil Group according to Table 9 and Spectrum Characteristic Periods
Local Site Class
Topmost Layer Thickness (h1) TA (s) TB (s)
Group (A) soils

Z1 0.10 0.30
Group (B) soils with h1 ≤ 15 m
Group (B) soils with h1 > 15 m

Z2 0.15 0.40
Group (C) soils with h1 ≤ 15 m
Group (C) soils with 15 m < h1 ≤ 50 m

Z3 0.15 0.60
Group (D) soils with h1 ≤ 10 m
Group (C) soils with h1 > 50 m

Z4 0.20 0.90
Group (D) soils with h1 > 10 m
14
9. ROCK MASS PROPERTIES
Rock mass properties were defined according to Hoek-Brown criteria. Geological strength index
(GSI) was applied to the project site to define the rock mass strength characteristics.
There has always been a tendency to equate rock mechanics with laboratory testing of rock
specimens and hence laboratory testing has played a disproportionately large role in the subject.
This does not imply that laboratory testing is not important. It would be suggested that only about
10 percent of a well-balanced rock mechanics program should be allocated to laboratory testing
(Hoek, 2006).
Laboratory testing techniques have been borrowed from civil and mechanical engineering and
have remained largely unaltered for the past 25 years. An exception has been the development of
servo-controlled stiff testing machines which permit the determination of the complete stress-
strain curve for rocks. This information is important in the design of underground excavations
since the properties of the failed rock surrounding the excavations have a significant influence
upon the stability of the excavations.
9.1 Rock Mass Classification

A major deficiency of laboratory testing of rock specimens is that the specimens are limited in size
and therefore represent a very small and highly selective sample of the rock mass from which they
were removed. In a typical engineering project, the samples tested in the laboratory represent
only a very small fraction of one percent of the volume of the rock mass. In addition, since only
those specimens which survive the collection and preparation process are tested, the results of
these tests represent a highly biased sample.
In an attempt to provide guidance on the properties of rock masses a number of rock mass
classification systems have been developed. Probably the most widely known classifications are
the RMR system of Bieniawski (1973, 1974) and the Q system of Barton, Lien and Lunde (1974).
The classifications include information on the strength of the intact rock material, the spacing,
number and surface properties of the structural discontinuities as well as allowances for the
influence of subsurface groundwater, in situ stresses and the orientation and inclination of
dominant discontinuities. These classifications were developed primarily for the estimation of the
support requirements in tunnels but their use has been expanded to cover many other fields.
15
9.2 Rock Mass Description
The rock mass is described in detail in accordance with ISRM (2007) as given in Appendix 10.
The limestone with interbedded chert or chert with interbedded limestone of the site has very
close spacing with low persistence, rough to slickensided roughness profile, slightly to highly
weathered with fresh to highly weathered rock materials, weak to very strong, closed to open
apertures, four or more joint sets, common crushed zones, irregular and crushed block size, and
large and very small blocks.
The filling materials show signs of outwash, and continuous of flow of water is possible. The
discontinuities are damp but no free water is present.
9.3 Rock mass strength

One of the major problems confronting designers of engineering structures in rock is that of
estimating the strength of the rock mass. This rock mass is usually made up of an interlocking
matrix of discrete blocks. These blocks may have been weathered or altered to varying degrees
and the contact surfaces between the blocks may vary from clean and fresh to clay covered and
slickensided.
Determination of the strength of an in situ rock mass by laboratory type testing is generally not
practical. Hence this strength must be estimated from geological observations and from test
results on individual rock pieces or rock surfaces which have been removed from the rock mass.
This question has been discussed extensively by Hoek and Brown (1980) who used the results of
theoretical (Hoek, 1968) and model studies (Brown, 1970, Ladanyi and Archambault, 1970) and
the limited amount of available strength data, to develop an empirical failure criterion for jointed
rock masses. Hoek (1983) also proposed that the rock mass classification system of Bieniawski
could be used for estimating the rock mass constants required for this empirical failure criterion.
This classification proved to be adequate for better quality rock masses but it soon became
obvious that a new classification was required for the very weak tectonically disturbed rock
masses associated with the major mountain chains.
9.4 Hoek-Brown criterion

The original Hoek-Brown criterion is defined by the equation (Hoek and Brown, 1980);
16
0.50
 σ′ 
σ1′ = σ3′ + σc′  m 3 + σ  ..........................................................................................(1)
 σc′ 
where σ1’ and σ3’ are the major and minor effective principal stresses at failure σc’ is the uniaxial
compressive strength of the intact rock material (see Table 11) and m and s are material
constants, where s = 1 for intact rock. Hoek (1994) also introduced the concept of the Generalized
Hoek-Brown criterion in which the shape of the principal stress plot or the Mohr envelope could
be adjusted by means of a variable coefficient a in place of the square root term in equation 1.
Hoek and Brown (1997) attempted to consolidate all the previous enhancements into a
comprehensive presentation of the failure criterion and they gave a number of worked examples
to illustrate its practical application. In addition to the changes in the equations, it was also
recognised that the Rock Mass Rating of Bieniawski was no longer adequate as a vehicle for
relating the failure criterion to geological observations in the field, particularly for very weak rock
masses. This resulted in the introduction of the Geological Strength Index (GSI) by Hoek, Wood
and Shah (1997), Hoek (1992) and Hoek, Kaiser and Bawden (1994). This index was subsequently
extended for weak rock masses in a series of papers by Hoek, Marinos and Benissi (1998), Hoek
and Marinos (2000a, 2000b) and Marinos and Hoek (2001).
9.5 Generalized Hoek-Brown Criterion

Generalized Hoek-Brown Criterion is expressed by (Marinos and Hoek, 2000);
a
 σ′ 
σ1′ = σ3′ + σc′  mb 3 + σ 
 σc′  ............................................................................................(2)
Where mb is a reduced value of the material constant mi (see Table 12) and is given by
 GSI − 100 
m=
b mi ⋅ exp   ............................................................................................(3)
 28 − 14D 
17
Table 11 Field estimates of uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock
s and a are constants for the rock mass given by the following relationships:
 GSI − 100 
s = exp   ......................................................................................................(4)
 9 − 3D 
1 1 −GSI/15
a=+ e
2 6
(
− e−20/3 )
........................................................................................(5)
18
D is a factor which depends upon the degree of disturbance to which the rock mass has been
subjected by blast damage and stress relaxation. It varies from 0 for undisturbed in situ rock
masses to 1 for very disturbed rock masses. Guidelines for the selection of D are discussed in a
later section.
The uniaxial compressive strength is obtained by setting σ3’=0 in equation 2, giving:
σc =σci ⋅ σa ........................................................................................................................(6)
and, the tensile strength is:
σ ⋅ σci
σt =−
mb .......................................................................................................................(7)
Equations 6 and 7 are obtained by setting σ1’=σ3’=σt in equation 1. This represents a condition of
biaxial tension. Hoek (1983) showed that, for brittle materials, the uniaxial tensile strength is equal
to the biaxial tensile strength.
Normal and shear stresses are related to principal stresses by the equations published by Balmer
(1952).
σ '1 + σ '3 σ '1 − σ '3 dσ '1 / dσ '3 − 1

=
σ 'n + ⋅
2 2 dσ '1 / dσ '3 + 1 .................................................................(8)
dσ '1 / dσ '3
τ= ( σ '1 − σ '3 ) ⋅
dσ '1 / dσ '3 + 1 ........................................................................................(9)
19
Table 12 Values of the constant mi for intact rock, by rock group
20
9.6 Modulus of Deformation
The rock mass modulus of deformation is given by:
 D σci
Em (GPa) = 1 −  ⋅ ⋅ 10((GSI−10)/40) ...........................................................(10a)
 2  100
Equation 10a applies for σci ≤100 MPa. For σci >100 MPa, use equation 10b.
 D
Em (GPa) = 1 −  ⋅ 10((GSI−10)/40) ........................................................................ (10b)
 2
The original equation proposed by Hoek and Brown (1997) has been modified, by the inclusion of
the factor D, to allow for the effects of blast damage and stress relaxation.
9.7 Mohr-Coulomb Criterion

Since most geotechnical software is still written in terms of the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion, it
is necessary to determine equivalent angles of friction and cohesive strengths for each rock mass
and stress range. This is done by fitting an average linear relationship to the curve generated by
solving equation 1 for a range of minor principal stress values defined by σt<σ3<σ’3max, as
illustrated in Figure 3. The fitting process involves balancing the areas above and below the Mohr-
Coulomb plot. This results in the following equations for the angle of friction and cohesive
strength:
 −1 6 ⋅ a ⋅ mb ⋅ (σ + mb ⋅ σ '3n )a −1 
φ ' =σin  a −1  ..............................(11)
 2 ⋅ (1 + a) ⋅ (2 + a) + 6 ⋅ a ⋅ mb ⋅ (σ + mb ⋅ σ '3n ) 
σci ⋅ [(1 + 2a) ⋅ σ + (1 − a) ⋅ mb σ '3n ] (σ + mb σ '3n )a −1

c' =
........................(12)
(1 + a)(2 + a) 1 + (6amb (σ + mb σ '3n )a −1 / ((1 + a)(2 + a))
21
Figure 3 Relationships between major and minor principal stresses for Hoek-Brown and
equivalent Mohr-Coulomb Criteria (Hoek and Brown, 2002)
Where
σ3n =σ '3 max / σci
The Mohr-Coulomb shear strength τ, for a given normal stress σ, is found by substitution of these
values of and c’ and φ’in to the equation:
τ= c '+ σ ⋅ τan φ ' ...............................................................................................................(12)
The equivalent plot, in terms of the major and minor principal stresses, is defined by:
2c 'coσ φ ' 1 + σin φ '

=σ '1 + ⋅ σ '3 .................................................................................(13)
1 − σin φ ' 1 − σin φ '
22
9.8 Rock Mass Strength
The uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass σc is given by equation 6. Failure initiates at
the boundary of an excavation when σc is exceeded by the stress induced on that boundary. The
failure propagates from this initiation point into a biaxial stress field and it eventually stabilizes
when the local strength, defined by equation 1, is higher than the induced stresses and σ’1 and σ’3.
Most numerical models can follow this process of fracture propagation and this level of detailed
analysis is very important when considering the stability of excavations in rock and when designing
support systems.
However, there are times when it is useful to consider the overall behaviour of a rock mass rather
than the detailed failure propagation process described above. This leads to the concept of a
global “rock mass strength” and Hoek and Brown (1997) proposed that this could be estimated
from the Mohr-Coulomb relationship:
2c 'coσ φ '
σ 'cm =
1 − σin φ ' ............................................................................................................(14)
With c’ and φ’ determined for the stress range σt<σ’3<σ’ci/4 giving
(mb + 4σ − a(mb − 8σ))(mb / 4 + σ)a −1

σ 'cm =
σci .................................................(15)
2(1 + a)(2 + a)
9.9 Estimation of Disturbance Factor D

Experience in the design of slopes in very large open pit mines has shown that the Hoek-Brown
criterion for undisturbed in situ rock masses (D = 0) results in rock mass properties that are too
optimistic. The effects of heavy blast damage as well as stress relief due to removal of the
overburden result in disturbance of the rock mass. It is considered that the “disturbed” rock mass
properties, D = 1 in equations 10a and 10b, are more appropriate for these rock masses (Figure 4).
23
Figure 4 Guidelines for estimating disturbance factor D (Hoek et al, 2002)
24
9.10 Geological Strength Index (GSI)
Reliable estimates of the strength and deformation characteristics of rock masses are required for
almost any form of analysis used for the design of surface excavations.
The Geological Strength Index (GSI) was introduced by Hoek in 1994 and this Index was
subsequently modified and expanded as experience was gained on its application to practical rock
engineering problems. Marinos and Hoek (2000, 2001) published the chart reproduced in Table 13
for use in estimating the properties of heterogeneous rock masses.
In addition to the GSI values presented in Table 13, it is necessary to consider the selection of the
other “intact” rock properties σci and mi for heterogeneous rock masses such as site rocks.
Therefore, a “weighted average” of the intact strength properties of the rock units was used.
Intact rock strength of the rocks is changing from 12.10 to 34.30 MPa. Based on the uniaxial test
results given in Figure 2, intact uniaxial rock strength is characterised with 24.00 MPa. Natural unit
weight of the intact rock material is represented with 24.91 kN/m3.
Using Hoek-Brown General Failure Criteria and GSI, rock mass properties of geological units at the
project site were then calculated. These calculations, together with many more related to the
Hoek-Brown criterion were performed by the program RocLab (Rocscience, 2014). The results are
given in Table 14 and Figure 5.
25
Table 13 Most common GSI ranges and Characterisation of blocky rock masses on the basis of
interlocking and joint conditions (Marinos and Hoek, 2000, 2001)
26
Table 14 Rock Mass Properties at project site
Chert with interbedded limestone and clay bands
Parameters (defined)
Intact uniaxial strength (MPa) σci 24.00
Geological Strength Index GSI 28.00
Hoek-Brown constant mi 10.00
Disturbance Factor D 0.70
Modulus Ratio MR 400
Intact Rock Modulus (MPa) Ei 9600
Natural Intact Rock Unit Weight (kN/m3) γN 24.91
Hoek-Brown Criteria (calculated)
Hoek-Brown constant mb 0.191
Hoek-Brown constant s 2.94x10-5
Hoek-Brown constant a 0.526
Mohr-Coulomb Fit (calculated)
Cohesion (MPa) c 0.465
Friction Angle (degree) φ 14.41
Rock Mass Parameters (calculated)
Tensile Strength (MPa) σt -0.004
Uniaxial Strength (MPa) σc 0.100
Global Strength (MPa) σcm 1.199
Deformation Modulus (MPa) Erm 320.29
Poisson Ratio ν 0.30
27
Figure 5 Rock mass parameters for Chert with interbedded limestone and clay bands
28
10. CONCLUSIONS
The main concept of this investigation is to get the soil and rock properties of the Sulphuric Plant
Site at the ETİ BAKIR Co. Project Site by means of the field work and laboratory tests and to
propose some necessary recommendations on the basis of the test results and the analysis.
• A detailed investigation has been carried out for an area of approximately 28 275.00 square
metres.
• The natural topographic elevations are changing between 860.88m-876.33m.
• Topographic slopes are grouped into 8 zones which are changing from 0.00 to 140.00 %. Most
slopes are between 0.00 and 10.00 %.
• Groundwater and spring waters are not observed at the site.
• A large part of the project area and its immediate vicinity is composed of karstic limestone and
chert. In addition, basalt, marl, clay, phosphate rock and alluvial deposits are also observed.
• The Project Area is located in the 3rd degree Seismic Hazard Zone.
• 9 boreholes were drilled to recover undisturbed and disturbed samples for laboratory testing
in order to investigate the subsurface conditions with a total depth of 123.50m. Borehole
depths are changed from 5.50 to 28.50m.
• In general, the project site is composed of two units with various mass properties; man-made
fill and bedrock that is limestone with interbedded chert or it can be also described as chert
with interbedded limestone.
• Natural unit weights of the rocks are ranging from 22.94 kN/m3 to 26.27 kN/m3 whereas dry
unit weights are changing between 21.57 kN/m3 and 26.27 kN/m3. Average values are of 24.91
kN/m3 and 24.68 kN/m3 respectively.
• Uniaxial compressive strengths are between 12.10 MPa and 34.30 MPa. Based on the
compressive strength, rocks are weak and moderately (medium) strong. The mean value was
21.89 MPa (weak).
• The limestone with interbedded chert or chert with interbedded limestone of the site has very
close spacing with low persistence, rough to slickensided roughness profile, slightly to highly
weathered with fresh to highly weathered rock materials, weak to very strong, closed to open
29
apertures, four or more joint sets, common crushed zones, irregular and crushed block size,
and large and very small blocks. The filling materials show signs of outwash, and continuous of
flow of water is possible. The discontinuities are damp but no free water is present.
• Intact rock strength of the rocks is changing from 12.10 to 34.30 MPa. Based on the uniaxial
test results, intact uniaxial rock strength is characterised with 24.00 MPa. Natural unit weight
of the intact rock material is represented with 24.91 kN/m3.
• Using Hoek-Brown General Failure Criteria and GSI, rock mass properties of geological units at
the project site were then calculated.
• The foundation of the structures would be placed in man-made fill with different thickness.
• Finished surface of the site consists of man-made fill and its thicknesses are changing between
1.50 and 8.30m. The slope gradient of the finished surface is 0.51% where the elevations are
between 867.24 and 868.23 m after 29 450 cubic meters cut and 47 175 cubic meters fill have
been completed.
• If the structure foundation is placed on man-made fill, the soil/rock group is B3 and the local
site class is Z1. Spectrum Characteristic Periods, TA and TB, depending on Local Site Classes, are
0.10s and 0.30s respectively.
30
11. REFERENCES
AİGM (1996) Türkiye deprem bölgeleri haritası. T. C. Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı Afet İşleri Genel
Müdürlüğü. Deprem Araştırma Dairesi Başkanlığı (in Turkish).
AİGM (2007) Afet bölgelerinde yapılacak yapılar hakkında yönetmelik. T.C. Bayındırlık ve İskan
Bakanlığı Afet İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü (in Turkish)
ASTM D1557-12 (2012) Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil
Using Modified Effort (56,000 ft-lbf/ft3 (2,700 kN-m/m3)). American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM), 10p.
Balmer, G. (1952) A general analytical solution for Mohr's envelope. Am. Soc. Test. Mat. 52, 1260-
1271.
Barton, N.R., Lien, R. and Lunde, J. (1974) Engineering classification of rock masses for the design
of tunnel support. Rock Mech. 6(4), 189-239.
Bieniawski, Z.T. (1973) Engineering classification of jointed rock masses. Trans S. Afr. Inst. Civ.
Engrs 15, 335-344.
Bieniawski, Z.T. (1974) Geomechanics classification of rock masses and its application in tunnelling.
Proceedings of the Third International Congress on Rock Mechanics, vol. 11A. International
Society of Rock Mechanics, Denver, pp. 27–32.
Deere, D.U. (1964) Technical description of rock cores for engineering purposes. Rock Mechanics
and Rock Engineering 1, 17–22.
DIN 18134 (2001) Determining the deformation and strength characteristics of soil by the plate
loading test. German Standards.
Franklin, J.A., Broch, E., Walton, G. (1971) Logging the mechanical character of rock. Transactions
of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy 80A, 1–9.
Goodman, R.E. (1989) Introduction to Rock Mechanics, 2nd edition. Wiley, New York. 562 pp.
Hadjigeorgiou, J., Scoble, M.J. (1990) Ground characterization for assessment of ease of
excavation. In: Singhal, R.K., Vavra, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium
on Mine Planning and Equipment Selection, Calgary, AB. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 323–331.
31
Hoek E. and Brown E.T. (1980) Underground Excavations in Rock . London: Instn Min. Metall. 527
pages
Hoek, E. (1968) Britle failure of rock. In Rock Mechanics in Engineering Practice, K.G.Stagg and O.C.
Zienkiewicz, eds., J.Wilwy and Sons, London, pages 99-124.
Hoek, E. (1983) Strength of jointed rock masses, 23rd. Rankine Lecture. Géotechnique 33 (3), 187-
223.
Hoek, E. (1994) Strength of rock and rock masses, ISRM News Journal, 2 (2), 4-16.
Hoek, E. (2006) Practical Rock Engineering. Rockscience.342p
Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. (1997) Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Intnl. J. Rock Mech. &
Mining Sci. & Geomechanics Abstracts. 34 (8), 1165-1186.
Hoek, E. and Marinos, P. (2000) Predicting Tunnel Squeezing. Tunnels and Tunnelling International.
Part 1 – November 2000, Part 2 – December, 2000
Hoek, E., Bray, J.W. (1981) Rock Slope Engineering, 3rd ed. Institute of Mining and Metallurgy,
London. 358 pp.
Hoek, E., Brown, E.T. (1997) Practical estimates of rock mass strength. International Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts 27 (3), 227–229.
Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C., Corkum, B. (2002) Hoek–Brown Failure Criterion-2002 Edition. In:
Hammah, R., Bawden, W., Curran, J., Telesnicki, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of NARMSTAC 2002,
Mining Innovation and Technology. Toronto-10 July2002. University of Toronto, pp. 267–273.
Hoek, E., Diederichs, M.S. (2006) Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus. International Journal
of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 43, 203–215.
Hoek, E., Marinos, P. and Benissi, M. (1998) Applicability of the Geological Strength Index (GSI)
classification for very weak and sheared rock masses. The case of the Athens Schist Formation.
Bull. Engg. Geol. Env. 57(2), 151-160.
Hoek, E., Wood D. and Shah S. (1992) A modified Hoek-Brown criterion for jointed rock masses.
Proc. Rock Characterization, Symp. Int. Soc. Rock Mech.: Eurock ‘92, (ed. J.A. Hudson), 209-214.
London, Brit. Geotech. Soc.
32
International Society for Rock Mechanics ISRM (1981) Rock characterization, testing and
monitoring. In: Brown, E.T. (Ed.), ISRM Suggested Methods. Pergamon Press, Oxford, p. 211.
International Society for Rock Mechanics ISRM (1985) Point load test, suggested method for
determining point load strength. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences
& Geomechanics Abstracts 22, 51–60.
International Society for Rock Mechanics ISRM (2007) The Complete ISRM Suggested Methods for
Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring: 1974-2006. Edited by R. ULUSAY and J. A.
HUDSON. Commission on Testing Methods International Society for Rock Mechanics. Ankara,
628p.
Ladanyi, B. and Archambault, G. (1970) Simulation of shear behaviour of a jointed rock mass. Proc.
11th Symposium on Rock Mechanics, published by AIME, New York, pages 105-125.
Marinos, P. and Hoek, E. (2001) Estimating the geotechnical properties of heterogeneous rock
masses such as Flysch. Bull. Engng. Geol. Env. 60, 85-92,
Marinos, P., Hoek, E. (2000) GSI: a geologically friendly tool for rock mass strength estimation.
Proceedings of the GeoEng2000 at the Int Conference on Geotechnical and Geological
Engineering, Melbourne. Technomic publishers, Lancaster, pp. 1422–1446.
Marinos. P, and Hoek, E. (2001) Estimating the geotechnical properties of heterogeneous rock
masses such as flysch. Accepted for publication in the Bulletin of the International Association
of Engineering Geologists
Palmstrom, A. and Broch, E. (2006) Use and misuse of rock mass classification systems with
particular reference to the Q-system. Tunnels and Underground Space Technology, 21, 575-
593.
Rocscience (2014) Rocklab. Software for rock mass strength properties.
SoilVision (2014) Soil Vision Pro; A Knowledge-Based Soils Database. Computer Software.
SoilVision Systems Ltd., Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
33
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1
Location Map of the Project
Site
N
0 20 40 km
scale
Project
Area
Bulgaristan Karadeniz Ermenistan
Yunanistan
İstanbul Kars A
ze
rb
ey
Ankara ca
n
Ege Denizi
İzmir
Diyarbakır
Adana Mardin
Antalya Iran
Mersin
Akdeniz Suriye Irak

APPENDIX 2
Satellite Image of the Study
Area
fit 3000
km 1
APPENDIX 3
Borehole Location Map with
Topography
APPENDIX 4
Elevation Zones
APPENDIX 5
Slope Zones and Slope
Direction Maps
APPENDIX 6
Borehole Logs and Core Box
Photos
BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
BORING METHOD ROTARY
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-18
1/1
BOREHOLE LOCATION Mazıdağı DATE COMMENCED 10.07.2014

GROUND LEVEL 867.255m DATE COMPLETED 10.07.2014
BOREHOLE DEPTH 12.00m GROUNDWATER LEVEL No groundwater level
----
X 620380.49 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153591.44 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)
STANDART PENETRATION TEST

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
Number of Blows Graph LEGEND
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
01.00
R
02.00
Man-Made Fill 50
03.00 R (0.00-05.80m)
04.00
R
05.00
05.80m
06.00
Limestone with III III Cl 50 56
07.00 interbedded Chert
(5.80-12.00m) II III Cl 50 16
08.00
II IV Cr 50 --
09.00 weak to moderately
strong,
III III Cl 50 45
moderately to highly
10.00 weathered,
crushed to closely II IV Cr 50 --
fractured with
11.00
very poor to fair RQD
II IV Cr 50 --
12.00m
12.00
END OF BOREHOLE
13.00
14.00
FINE GRAINED SOILS COARSE GRAINED SOILS SPT : Standart penetration test
N=0-2 Very soft N=0-4 Very loose N : Standart penetration resistance
N=3-5 Soft N=4-10 Loose D : Disturbed sample
N=6-9 Firm N=10-30 Medium dense UD : Undisturbed sample
N=10-16 Stiff N=30-50 Dense
C : Core sample
N=17-30 Very stiff N >50 Very dense
N >30 Hard X : X-ray diffraction sample
STRENGTH (Rocks) Rock Quality Designation (RQD) FRACTURE INDEX/m (F) WEATHERING
I Very weak (1-5 MPa) <1 Wide W VI Residual soil
0-25 % Very poor V Completely weathered
II Weak (5-25 MPa) 1-2 Moderate M
25-50 % Poor IV Highly weathered
III Moderately strong (25-50 MPa) 2-10 Close Cl
50-75 % Fair III Moderately weathered
IV Strong (50-100 MPa) 10-20 Intense I
75-90 % Good II Slightly weathered
V Very strong (100-250 MPa) >20 Crushed Cr
90-100% Excellent I Fresh/Unweathered
VI Extremely strong (>250 MPa)
Drilling Engineer : Signature:

BH-18 CORE BOX (depth: 0.00m-7.00m)
BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-19
1/2

----
X 620413.68 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153566.66 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
01.00
R
02.00
Man-Made Fill
03.00 R (0.00-08.30m)
04.00
50
R
05.00
06.00 R
07.00
R
08.00
08.30m
09.00
III III Cl 100 56
Limestone with
III III Cl 100 65
(8.30-15.50m)
11.00
III III Cl 100 80
moderately strong,
12.00 moderately weathered,
closely fractured with III III M 100 81
fair to good RQD
13.00
III III Cl 100 70
14.00
III III Cl 100 85
15.00m
C : Core sample

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-19
2/2

----
X 620413.68 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES (ED-50)
Y 4153566.66 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
15.50m
END OF BOREHOLE
16.00
Limestone with
(8.30-15.50m)
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
25.00
26.00
27.00
28.00
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-21
1/1

----
X 620343.34 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153536.10 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
Man-Made Fill
01.00
(0.00-04.00m)
R 68
02.00
03.00 R
04.00m
04.00
IV III M 42 --
05.00
V II Cl 100 40
Limestone with
06.00
interbedded Chert
(4.00-15.00m) V II Cl 100 65
07.00
V II W 100 67
08.00
V II W 100 91
09.00
V II Cl 100 95
10.00 very strong, slightly
weathered, V II Cl 100 62
11.00 wide to closely
fractured with
poor to excellent RQD V II Cl 100 82
12.00
V II Cl 100 73
13.00
V II Cl 100 77
14.00
V II Cl 100 58
END OF BOREHOLE 15.00m
C : Core sample

BH-21 CORE BOX (depth: 11.00-14.50m)
BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-22
1/2

X 620411.10 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153488.44 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
01.00 Man-Made Fill

R (0.00-02.80m) 100
02.00
02.80m
03.00
II IV Cr 50 --
04.00
III II Cl 100 82
05.00
II IV Cr 100 --
06.00
II II Cl 100 --
07.00
Limestone with
interbedded Chert
(2.80-28.50m) III II M 100 96
08.00
II II Cl 100 --
09.00
III II Cl 100 67
10.00 weak to moderately
strong, slightly to III II Cl 100 34
11.00 highly weathered,
crushed to closely
fractured with III II Cl 100 21
12.00 poor to excellent RQD
III II Cl 100 56
13.00
III IV Cr 100 24
14.00
III II Cl 100 67
15.00m
C : Core sample

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-52
2/2

X 620411.10 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES (ED-50)
Y 4153488.44 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
15.00m
III II M 100 84
16.00
III II M 100 71
17.00
Limestone with
interbedded Chert III II Cl 100 65
18.00 (2.80-28.50m)
III II Cl 100 35
19.00
III III Cl 100 32
20.00 moderately strong,
slightly weathered, III II W 100 74
21.00 moderate to closely
fractured with
very poor to good RQD III II Cl 100 53
22.00
III II Cl 100 22
23.00
III II Cl 100 65
24.00
III II Cl 100 50
25.00
III II Cl 100 87
26.00
III II Cl 100 71
27.00
III II Cl 100 85
28.00
28.50m
END OF BOREHOLE
29.00
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-23
1/1

X 620307.43 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153505.03 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
01.00
R Man-Made Fill 66
02.00 (0.00-04.00m)
03.00 R
04.00m
04.00
IV III Cl 50 35
05.00
IV II W 100 92
06.00
IV II Cl 100 73
07.00
IV II Cl 100 54
08.00 Limestone with
interbedded Chert
(4.00-15.00m) IV II W 100 98
09.00
IV III W 100 92
10.00 strong, slightly to
moderately weathered, IV II M 100 87
11.00 wide to closely
fractured with
poor to excellent RQD IV II W 100 97
12.00
IV III Cl 100 56
13.00
IV II Cl 100 40
14.00
IV II W 100 91
C : Core sample

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-24
1/1

X 6203368.36 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153469.77 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
01.00
R Man-Made Fill 100
02.00 (0.00-04.00m)
03.00 R
04.00m
04.00
III III Cl 100 61
05.00
III III Cl 100 67
06.00
III III Cl 100 44
07.00
III III Cl 100 70
interbedded Chert
(4.00-15.00m) III III Cl 100 71
09.00
II IV Cl 100 61
10.00 weak-moderately strong,
moderately-highly II IV Cl 100 34
11.00 weathered,
closely fractured with
poor to fair RQD II IV Cl 100 38
12.00
II IV Cl 100 34
13.00
II IV Cl 100 33
14.00
II III Cl 100 63
C : Core sample

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-25
1/1

X 620276.08 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153468.99 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
Man-Made Fill 100

01.00
(0.00-02.00m)
R
02.00m
02.00
II IV Cr 60 --
03.00
Limestone with
interbedded Chert II IV Cr 90 --
04.00 (02.00-08.00m)
II IV Cr 100 24
weak, highly weathered,
05.00
crushed with very
poor RQD II IV Cr 100 --
06.00
II IV Cr 100 18
07.00
II IV Cr 85 14
08.00m
08.00
END OF BOREHOLE
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
C : Core sample

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-26
1/1

X 620323.29 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 4153435.21 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
01.00
R Man-Made Fill
02.00 (0.00-04.00m) 75
03.00 R
04.00m
04.00
V II Cr 50 --
interbedded Chert V III Cl 100 16
06.00 (04.00-09.00m)
very strong, slightly- V III Cl 100 --
07.00 moderately weathered,
crushed and closely
V III Cr 100 15
fractured with very
08.00 poor-poor RQD
V III Cr 100 26
09.00m
09.00
END OF BOREHOLE
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
C : Core sample

BOREHOLE
BOREHOLE
Zemar
PROJECT ETİ BAKIR
LOG
NO
PAGE
NO
BH-27
1/1

X 620356.27 REMARKS-1
COORDINATES
Y 415399.98 REMARKS-2
Depth (m)

water (m)
Weathering
Recovery %
Depth to
Samples
F, Fracture
CR, Core
Index/m
Strength
GEOTECHNICAL
RQD %
0-15 15-30 30-45
DESCRIPTION
cm cm cm
N 10 20 30 40 50
00.00m
Man-Made Fill 50
01.00 (0.00-01.50m)
01.50m
02.00
Limestone with
interbedded Chert
03.00 (01.50-05.50m)
IV III Cr 32 --
strong, slightly weathered,
04.00
crushed with very poor
RQD
05.00
05.50m
END OF BOREHOLE
06.00
07.00
08.00
09.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
C : Core sample

APPENDIX 7
Ground Profiles
APPENDIX 8
Laboratory Test Results
APPENDIX 9
Plate Load Test Results
PLATE LOADING TEST Test_1
Report No Test_1 Time of Start 10:00

Test Location X Coordinate 0 Time of Completion 10:45
Test Location Y Coordinate 0 Soil Type Man-Made Fill
Test Location Z Coordinate 0 Soil Layer No 1
Weather Conditions Açık Plate Diameter (m) 0.4500
Date 06.07.1905 Plate Area (m2) 0.1590
Test Method DIN 18134-TS 5744
Gauge Pressure Applied Plate Load and Stress Settlements

No
bar atm kg/cm2 kg kN kPa MPa 1 (mm) 2 (mm) 3 (mm) Ave (mm)
1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.12
3 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 0.34 0.27 0.31 0.31
4 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 0.52 0.63 0.54 0.56
5 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 0.66 0.75 0.69 0.70
6 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 0.75 0.85 0.81 0.80
7 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 0.90 0.93 0.92 0.92
8 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.07 1.09 1.10 1.09
9 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.17
10 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 1.22 1.22 1.23 1.22
11 100 98.69 101.97 101.97 1000.00 101.97 0.10 1.31 1.32 1.35 1.33
12 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.26 1.25 1.27 1.26
13 25 24.67 25.49 25.49 250.00 25.49 0.03 1.21 1.18 1.21 1.20
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.91 0.86 0.89
15 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.97 0.99 0.97 0.98
16 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 1.00 1.04 1.01 1.02
17 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 1.05 1.10 1.06 1.07
18 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 1.10 1.17 1.12 1.13
19 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.14 1.20 1.16 1.17
20 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.19 1.24 1.21 1.21
21 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.22 1.28 1.24 1.25
22 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.30 1.35 1.31 1.32
23 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 1.36 1.41 1.38 1.38
Normal Stress σ0 (MPa)
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0.00
0.50
Settlement s (mm)
1.00
1.50
2.00
1st Loading Stage Intermediate Stage 2nd Loading Stage
Layer Thickness (cm) 60.00 Pass Number 8
1st Loading Stage (EV1) 2nd Loading Stage (EV2)

σ0max MPa 0.1020 0.0918
a2 mm/(MN2/m4) -67.4760 7.6326
a1 mm/(MN/m2) 20.1760 4.0814
a0 mm -0.0365 0.9360
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) MPa 25.38 70.58
EV2/EV1 2.78
Corrected Settlement s0 mm 0.0688
Standard Reading (DIN 18134) s1 mm 1.2500
ks settlement s mm 1.3188
Settlement Stress σ0 MPa 0.0940
Subgrade Reaction Modulus (DIN
ks MPa/m 75.22
18144)
2
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) kg/cm 1413.33 5702.11
EV2/EV1 4.03
ks kN/m3 7.52E+04
18144)

Date 06.07.1905 Plate Area (m2) 0.1590

No
1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22
3 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 0.46 0.49 0.47 0.47
4 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 0.60 0.65 0.63 0.63
5 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 0.75 0.79 0.78 0.77
6 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.16 1.18 1.19 1.18
7 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.38 1.35 1.38 1.37
8 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.60 1.50 1.57 1.56
9 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.80 1.69 1.76 1.75
10 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 2.05 2.16 2.11 2.11
11 100 98.69 101.97 101.97 1000.00 101.97 0.10 2.25 2.33 2.30 2.29
12 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.08 2.24 2.17 2.16
13 25 24.67 25.49 25.49 250.00 25.49 0.03 1.95 2.13 2.06 2.05
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.24 1.45 1.31 1.33
15 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 1.52 1.67 1.60 1.60
16 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 1.70 1.82 1.77 1.76
17 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 1.78 1.86 1.82 1.82
18 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 1.89 1.92 1.90 1.90
19 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.01 1.98 1.99 1.99
20 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 2.07 2.03 2.05 2.05
21 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 2.16 2.10 2.13 2.13
22 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 2.25 2.15 2.21 2.20
23 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 2.36 2.23 2.27 2.29
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0.00
0.50
Settlement s (mm)
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00

σ0max MPa 0.1020 0.0918
a2 mm/(MN2/m4) 21.9690 -22.6200
a1 mm/(MN/m2) 20.3270 10.2280
a0 mm 0.0058 1.5248
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) MPa 14.96 41.40
EV2/EV1 2.77
Corrected Settlement s0 mm -0.0285
ks MPa/m 44.31
18144)
2
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) kg/cm 1413.33 5702.11
EV2/EV1 4.03
ks kN/m3 4.43E+04
18144)

Date 06.07.1905 Plate Area (m2) 0.1590

No
1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.57 0.72 0.65 0.65
3 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 0.74 1.00 0.86 0.87
4 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 0.90 1.15 0.97 1.01
5 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 0.96 1.22 1.08 1.09
6 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.06 1.32 1.21 1.20
7 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.17 1.41 1.33 1.30
8 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.28 1.50 1.42 1.40
9 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.35 1.55 1.49 1.46
10 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 1.42 1.59 1.54 1.52
11 100 98.69 101.97 101.97 1000.00 101.97 0.10 1.51 1.64 1.58 1.58
12 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.47 1.61 1.52 1.53
13 25 24.67 25.49 25.49 250.00 25.49 0.03 1.41 1.56 1.47 1.48
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.02 1.21 1.10 1.11
15 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 1.15 1.33 1.21 1.23
16 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 1.20 1.39 1.32 1.30
17 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 1.25 1.45 1.38 1.36
18 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 1.30 1.49 1.43 1.41
19 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.34 1.54 1.48 1.45
20 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.39 1.57 1.54 1.50
21 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.43 1.62 1.59 1.55
22 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.47 1.64 1.61 1.57
23 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 1.52 1.68 1.65 1.62
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0.00
0.50
Settlement s (mm)
1.00
1.50
2.00

σ0max MPa 0.1020 0.0918
a2 mm/(MN2/m4) -152.6200 -19.6710
a1 mm/(MN/m2) 28.1840 6.6205
a0 mm 0.2151 1.1706
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) MPa 26.74 70.09
EV2/EV1 2.62
ks MPa/m 79.23
18144)
2
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) kg/cm 1413.33 5702.11
EV2/EV1 4.03
ks kN/m3 7.92E+04
18144)

Date 06.07.1905 Plate Area (m2) 0.1590

No
1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.43 0.20 0.37 0.33
3 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 0.60 0.32 0.49 0.47
4 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 0.73 0.44 0.57 0.58
5 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 0.83 0.55 0.66 0.68
6 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 0.92 0.68 0.81 0.80
7 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.01 0.85 0.92 0.93
8 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.09 0.96 0.98 1.01
9 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.16 1.10 1.15 1.14
10 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 1.24 1.28 1.31 1.28
11 100 98.69 101.97 101.97 1000.00 101.97 0.10 1.36 1.40 1.42 1.39
12 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.14 1.27 1.25 1.22
13 25 24.67 25.49 25.49 250.00 25.49 0.03 1.02 1.18 1.12 1.11
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.83 0.79 0.77
15 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.90 0.98 0.97 0.95
16 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 0.99 1.07 1.08 1.05
17 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 1.05 1.13 1.16 1.11
18 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 1.12 1.20 1.23 1.18
19 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.20 1.27 1.28 1.25
20 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.29 1.34 1.38 1.34
21 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.36 1.42 1.44 1.41
22 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.41 1.51 1.53 1.48
23 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 1.49 1.60 1.62 1.57
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0.00
0.50
Settlement s (mm)
1.00
1.50
2.00

σ0max MPa 0.1020 0.0918
a2 mm/(MN2/m4) -34.5230 2.8102
a1 mm/(MN/m2) 15.8650 7.1175
a0 mm 0.0995 0.8879
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) MPa 27.34 45.76
EV2/EV1 1.67
ks MPa/m 81.01
18144)
2
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) kg/cm 1413.33 5702.11
EV2/EV1 4.03
ks kN/m3 8.10E+04
18144)

Date 06.07.1905 Plate Area (m2) 0.1590

No
1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.10 0.08
3 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 0.55 0.30 0.28 0.38
4 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 1.00 0.48 0.35 0.61
5 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 1.22 0.85 0.73 0.93
6 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 1.43 1.07 1.01 1.17
7 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 1.61 1.30 1.27 1.39
8 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 1.76 1.42 1.39 1.52
9 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 1.95 1.73 1.65 1.78
10 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 2.06 1.93 1.89 1.96
11 100 98.69 101.97 101.97 1000.00 101.97 0.10 2.25 2.09 2.01 2.12
12 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.17 1.81 1.73 1.90
13 25 24.67 25.49 25.49 250.00 25.49 0.03 2.03 1.64 1.56 1.74
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.85 1.44 1.40 1.56
15 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 1.99 1.55 1.51 1.68
16 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 2.06 1.69 1.59 1.78
17 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 2.11 1.74 1.68 1.84
18 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 2.19 1.88 1.75 1.94
19 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.25 1.97 1.83 2.02
20 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 2.32 2.09 1.98 2.13
21 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 2.40 2.16 2.04 2.20
22 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 2.48 2.24 2.14 2.29
23 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 2.57 2.39 2.22 2.39
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0.00
0.50
Settlement s (mm)
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00

σ0max MPa 0.1020 0.0918
a2 mm/(MN2/m4) -40.6130 7.7367
a1 mm/(MN/m2) 26.0760 7.8137
a0 mm -0.0965 1.6065
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) MPa 15.39 39.60
EV2/EV1 2.57
Corrected Settlement s0 mm -0.0332
ks MPa/m 45.59
18144)
2
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) kg/cm 1413.33 5702.11
EV2/EV1 4.03
ks kN/m3 4.56E+04
18144)

Date 06.07.1905 Plate Area (m2) 0.1590

No
1 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 0.79 0.93 0.65 0.79
3 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 1.23 1.41 1.31 1.32
4 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 1.56 1.85 1.77 1.73
5 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 1.95 2.11 2.02 2.03
6 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.49 2.24 2.34 2.36
7 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 2.75 2.59 2.61 2.65
8 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 2.97 2.85 2.74 2.85
9 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 3.20 3.15 2.98 3.11
10 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 3.45 3.37 3.17 3.33
11 100 98.69 101.97 101.97 1000.00 101.97 0.10 3.67 3.59 3.62 3.63
12 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.53 2.36 2.41 2.43
13 25 24.67 25.49 25.49 250.00 25.49 0.03 2.29 2.13 2.22 2.21
14 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.03 1.85 2.26 2.05
15 10 9.87 10.20 10.20 100.00 10.20 0.01 2.11 1.94 2.31 2.12
16 20 19.74 20.39 20.39 200.00 20.39 0.02 2.19 2.05 2.33 2.19
17 30 29.61 30.59 30.59 300.00 30.59 0.03 2.30 2.14 2.39 2.28
18 40 39.48 40.79 40.79 400.00 40.79 0.04 2.43 2.32 2.46 2.40
19 50 49.35 50.99 50.99 500.00 50.99 0.05 2.49 2.37 2.54 2.47
20 60 59.22 61.18 61.18 600.00 61.18 0.06 2.57 2.49 2.65 2.57
21 70 69.08 71.38 71.38 700.00 71.38 0.07 2.66 2.60 2.70 2.65
22 80 78.95 81.58 81.58 800.00 81.58 0.08 2.76 2.71 2.83 2.77
23 90 88.82 91.77 91.77 900.00 91.77 0.09 2.88 2.84 2.91 2.88
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12

0.00
0.50
1.00
Settlement s (mm)
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00

σ0max MPa 0.1020 0.0918
a2 mm/(MN2/m4) -206.7300 13.3570
a1 mm/(MN/m2) 53.6650 7.9161
a0 mm 0.1786 2.0328
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) MPa 10.36 36.92
EV2/EV1 3.56
ks MPa/m 30.69
18144)
2
EV 1.5*r/(a1+a2.σ0max) kg/cm 1413.33 5702.11
EV2/EV1 4.03
ks kN/m3 3.07E+04
18144)
APPENDIX 10
The Quantitative Description of
Discontinuities in Rock Masses
APPENDIX 10:
THE QUANTITATIVE DESCRIPTION OF DISCONTINUITIES IN ROCK MASSES
Table A10. 1 Spacing Description (ISRM, 2007)

Description Spacing
Extremely close spacing <2 cm
Very close spacing 2-6 cm
Close spacing 6-20 cm
Moderate spacing 20-60 cm
Wide spacing 60-200 cm
Very wide spacing 200-600 cm
Extremely wide spacing >600 cm
Table A10. 2 Persistence description (ISRM, 2007)

Description Persistency
Very low persistence < 1m
Low persistence 1-3 m
Medium persistence 3-10 m
High persistence 10-20 m
Very high persistence >20 m
Table A10. 3 Roughness description (ISRM, 2007)
Small Scale (several cm) Intermediate scale (several metres)
Rough or irregular Stepped

Smooth Stepped
Slickensided Stepped
Rough or irregular Undulating

Smooth Undulating
Slickensided Undulating
Rough or irregular Planar

Smooth Planar
Slickensided Planar
Table A10. 4 Weathering grade of rock mass (ISRM, 2007)
Term Description Grade
No visible sign of rock material weathering:

Fresh perhaps slight discolouration on major discontinuity I
surfaces.
Discolouration indicates weathering of rock

material and discontinuity surfaces. All the rock
Slightly weathered material may be discoloured by weathering and II
may be somewhat weaker externally than in its
fresh condition.
Less than half of the rock material is decomposed

and/or disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discoloured
Moderately weathered III
rock is present either as a continuous framework or
as corestones.
More than half of the rock material is decomposed

and/or disintegrated into a soil. Fresh or
Highly weathered IV
discoloured rock is present either as a
discontinuous framework or as corestones.
All rock material is decomposed and/or

Completely weathered disintegrated to soil. The original mass structure is V
stil largely intact.
All rock material is converted to soil. The mass

structure and material fabric are destroyed. There
Residual Soil VI
is a large change in volume, but the soil has not
been significantly transported.
Table A10. 5 Weathering grade of rock material (ISRM, 2007)
Term Description
Fresh No visible sign of weathering of the rock material.
The colour of the original fresh rock material is changed. The

degree of change from the original colour should be indicated. If
Slightly weathered
the colour change is confined to particular mineral constituents
this should be mentioned.
The rock is weathered to the condition of a soil in which the

Moderately weathered original material fabric is stil intact, but some or all of the mineral
grains are decomposed.
The rock is weathered to the condition of a soil in which the

Highly weathered original fabric is stil intact. The rock is friable, but the mineral
grains are not decomposed.
Table A10. 6 Weathering zones of rock mass (ISRM, 2007)
Table A10. 7 Manual index tests for determining discontinuity wall strength (ISRM, 2007).
Approx.
Range of
uniaxial
Grade Description Field Identification compressive
strength
UCS (MPa)
S1 Very soft clay Easily penetrated several inches by fist < 0.025
S2 Soft clay Easily penetrated several inches by thumb 0.025 - 0.05
Can be penetrated several inches by thumb

S3 Firm clay 0.05 - 0.10
with moderate effort
Readily intended by thumb but penetrated only

S4 Stiff clay 0.10- 0.25
with great effort
S5 Very stiff clay Readily intended by thumbnail 0.25 - 0.50
S6 Hard clay Intended with difficulty by thumbnail > 0.50
RO Extremely weak rock Intended by thumbnail 0.25 - 1.0
Crumbles under firm blows with point of

R1 Very weak rock geological hammer, can be peeled by a pocket 1.0 - 5.0
knife
Can be peeled by a pocket knife with difficulty,

R2 Weak rock shallow indentations made by firm blow with 5.0 - 25
point of geological hammer
Cannot be scraped or peeled with a pocket

R3 Medium strong rock knife, specimen can be fractured with single 25 - 50
firm blow of geological hammer
Specimen requires more than one blow of

R4 Strong rock 50 - 100
geological hammer to fracture it
Specimen requires many blows of geological

R5 Very strong rock 100 - 250
hammer to fracture it
Specimen can only be chipped with geological

R6 Extremely strong rock > 250
hammer
Grades S1 to S6 apply to cohesive soils, for example clays, silty clays, and combinations
of silts and clays with sand, generally slow draining. Discontinuity wall strength will
Note
generally be characterised by grades R=-R6 (rock) while S1-S6 (clay) will generally
apply to filled discontinuities.
Table A10. 8 Aperture description (ISRM, 2007).
Aperture Description
< 0.1 mm. Very tight
0.1-0.25 mm. Tight “CLOSED” features
0.25-0.5 mm. Partly open
0.5-2.5 mm. Open
2.5-10 mm. Moderately wide “GAPPED” features
>10 mm. Wide
1-10 cm. Very wide
10-100 cm. Extremely wide “OPEN” features
>1 m. Cavernous
Table A10. 9 Description of water content and permeability of filled discontinuity (ISRM, 2007)
Grade Description
The filling materials are heavily consolidated and dry, significant flow
W1
appears unlikely due to very low permeability
W2 The filling materials are damp, but no free water is present
W3 The filling materials are wet, occasional drops of water
The filling materials show signs of outwash, continuous flow of water

W4
(estimate litres/minute)
The filling materials are washed out locally, considerable water flow along
W5 out-wash channels (estimate litres/minute and describe pressure i.e. low,
medium, high)
The filling materials are washed out completely, very high water pressures
W6 experienced, especially on first exposure (estimate litres/minute and
describe pressure)
Table A10. 10 Seepage description for unfilled discontinuities (ISRM, 2007)
Seepage rating Description
The discontinuity is very tight and dry, water flow along it does
I
not appear possible
II The discontinuity is dry with no evidence of water flow
The discontinuity is dry but shows evidence of water flow, i.e.
III
rust staining, etc.
IV The discontinuity is damp but no free water is present
The discontinuity shows seepage, occasional drops of water,
V
but no continuous flow
The discontinuity shows a continuous flow of water. (Estimate
VI
lt/min and describe pressure i.e. low, medium, high)
Table A10. 6 Seepage description for filled discontinuities (ISRM, 2007)

The filling materials are heavily consolidated and dry,
I
significant flow appears unlikely due to very low permeability.
II The filling materials are damp, but no free water is present
III The filling materials are wet, occasional drops of water
The filling materials show signs of outwash, continuous flow of
IV
water (estimate lt/min)
The filling materials are washed out locally, considerable water
V flow along out-wash channels (estimate lt/min and describe
pressure i.e. low, medium, high)
The filling materials are washed out completely, very high
VI water pressures experienced, especially on first exposure
(estimate lt/min and describe pressure i.e. low, medium, high)
Table A10. 7 Seepage description for rock mass (e.g. tunnel wall) (ISRM, 2007)
I Dry walls and roof, no detectable seepage
II Minor seepage, specify dripping discontinuities
Medium inflow, specify discontinuities with continuous flow
III
(estimate lt/min/10m length of excavation)
Major inflow, specify discontinuities with strong flows (estimate
IV
lt/min/10m length of excavation)
Exceptionally high inflow, specify source of exceptional flows
V
(estimate lt/min/10m length of excavation)
Table A10. 8 Description of joint sets (ISRM, 2007)
Grade Description
I Massive, occasional random joints
II One joint set
III One joint set plus random
IV Two joint sets
V Two joint sets plus random
VI Three joint sets
VII Three joint sets plus random
VIII Four or more joint sets
IX Crushed rock, earth-like
Table A10. 9 Description of block size (ISRM, 2007)
No Term Description
1 Massive Few joints or very wide spacing
2 Blocky Approximately equidimensional
3 Tabular One dimension considerably smaller than the other two
4 Columnar One dimension considerably larger than the other two
5 Irregular Wide variations of block size and shapes
6 Crushed Heavily jointed to “sugar cube”
Table A10. 10 Description of volumetric joint count (ISRM, 2007)
Description Jv (joints/m3)
Very large blocks < 1.0
Large blocks 1-3
Medium-sized blocks 3-10
Small blocks 10-30
Very small blocks > 30
Values of Jv>60 would represent crushed rock, typical of a clay-free crushed zone
Table A10.16 Block size sletches of rock masses (ISRM, 2007)

01 - Sulphuric Plant

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

01 - Sulphuric Plant

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ETI BAKIR CO.

2. LOCATION OF PROJECT AREA

3. REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND TECTONICS

4. SEISMIC CODE ISSUES AND HAZARD ASSESSMENT

1 BH-18 620380.49 4153591.44 862.83 867.37 12.00

2 BH-19 620413.68 4153566.66 862.11 867.35 15.50

3 BH-21 620343.34 4153536.10 866.64 867.70 15.00

4 BH-22 620411.10 4153488.44 866.76 867.68 28.50

5 BH-23 620307.43 4.153505.03 868.26 867.94 15.00

6 BH-24 620368.36 4153469.77 869.08 867.89 15.00

7 BH-25 620276.08 4153468.99 870.89 868.19 8.00

8 BH-26 620323.29 4153435.21 871.93 868.17 9.00

9 BH-27 620356.27 4153399.98 874.68 868.20 5.50

BH-25: weak, highly weathered, crushed with very poor RQD

6. ROCK LABORATORY TESTS

BH-19 chert D-1 1.50-2.00 24.22 24.02 32.70 ---

BH-19 chert D-3 9.00-10.00 25.88 25.78 34.30 ---

BH-19 chert D-4 11.00-12.00 24.51 24.41 16.50 ---

BH-19 chert D-5 14.00-15.00 24.41 24.31 13.60 ---

BH-21 chert D-2 5.50-6.00 25.39 25.20 19.00 ---

BH-21 chert D-3 8.50-9.00 23.53 23.14 12.70 ---

BH-21 chert D-4 11.00-11.50 25.49 25.29 18.70 ---

BH-22 chert D-1 4.00-5.00 25.29 25.10 18.80 ---

BH-22 chert D-2 7.00-8.00 25.39 25.20 19.40 ---

BH-22 chert D-3 11.00-12.00 26.27 26.27 17.80 ---

BH-22 chert D-4 16.00-17.00 25.78 25.49 23.00 ---

BH-22 chert D-5 20.00-21.00 22.94 22.75 12.60 ---

BH-22 chert D-6 27.00-28.00 23.63 23.43 13.90 ---

BH-23 chert D-1 5.00-5.50 24.22 24.12 28.50 ---

BH-23 chert D-2 7.50-8.00 24.90 24.71 23.80 ---

BH-23 chert D-3 9.50-10.00 22.94 21.57 12.10 ---

BH-23 chert D-4 11.00-11.50 25.78 25.69 32.70 ---

BH-23 chert D-5 12.50-13.00 25.88 25.59 21.00 ---

BH-24 chert D-1 3.70-5.00 24.31 24.12 27.80 ---

BH-24 chert D-2 7.00-8.00 25.49 25.29 28.30 ---

BH-24 chert D-3 10.00-11.00 25.39 25.20 19.60 ---

BH-24 chert D-4 12.00-13.00 25.29 25.10 19.60 ---

BH-24 chert D-5 14.00-15.00 25.88 25.69 27.10 ---

BH-25 chert D-1 3.50-4.00 27.47

BH-25 chert D-2 4.50-5.00 23.43 23.04 13.70 ---

BH-25 chert D-3 6.50-7.00 25.39 25.20 24.60 ---

BH-26 chert D-1 5.00-5.50 25.39 25.20 24.60 ---

BH-26 chert D-2 7.50-8.00 25.59 25.39 28.80 ---

BH-27 chert D-1 3.50-4.00 --- --- 27.68 ---

25.88 25.88 25.88

Dry Unit Weight Distribution

10.00 y = 0.0063x + 24.565

Figure 1 Distribution of natural and dry unit weights

19.40 19.60 19.60

15.00 13.90 13.70

Figure 2 Distribution of Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS)

7. SPECIFICATIONS OF COMPACTION WITH PLATE LOADING TEST

Table 7 Plate Load Test Results

1st Loading Deformation

2nd Loading Deformation

EV2/EV1 2.78 2.77 2.62 1.67 2.57 3.56

2 Elastic Type --- Isotropic ---

3 Poisson Ratio ν 0.35 ---

4 Deformation Modulus E 20.03 MPa

5 Failure Criterion --- Mohr Coulomb ---

6 Peak Tensile Strength σt 0.00 kPa

7 Peak Friction Angle ° 38 degree