Zulfahmi 2021 IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 882 012052

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Structural Design According to Constructal
Geotechnical structure interpretation from Theory in Architecture
Aseel Abdulhaleem Latif and Bahjat
borehole wall imagery at Mamput Block, Central Rashad Shahin
- Research on the Influence of

Kalimantan, Indonesia Interconnectivity Structure Parameters to
Stability of Stratified Rock Slope
Gao Xue-chi, Feng Zhong-ju, Long Hou-
To cite this article: Z. Zulfahmi and Z. Pulungan 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 882 012052 sheng et al.
- Structural Design of Prefabricated

Sidewalk in Sponge City
Xuejun Wen and Ming Huang
View the article online for updates and enhancements.
This content was downloaded from IP address 115.146.166.198 on 23/05/2023 at 11:17

International Seminar on Mineral and Coal Technology IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 882 (2021) 012052 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/882/1/012052
Geotechnical structure interpretation from borehole wall

imagery at Mamput Block, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia
Z. Zulfahmi* and Z. Pulungan

R&D Center for Mineral and Coal Technology, Jalan Jenderal Sudirman No. 623,
Bandung 40211, Indonesia
*Corresponding author’s e-mail: zulfahmi66@gmail.com
Abstract. One of the considerations in mining excavation is geotechnical conditions especially

structure orientation. Its observations can be done on the surface or through the drill core.
However, if there is no free vertical plane on the surface and core observation, then it is difficult
to find the direction of dip and strike, which then the televiewer technology is used. This study
aims to reveal the structural conditions and to observe the strike and dip of rock layers using the
High-Resolution Acoustic Televiewer (HIRAT) apparatus. This apparatus is an accurate and
reliable method for recording structural data and has widely used in mining activity. Analysis of
the structural conditions was carried out with a reading density of 0.20 m. The observations show
that the discontinuity plane is generally trending to Northeast - Southwest, with a dip generally
below 30o. The results of the structural interpretation of the borehole have various features that
are bedding plane, filled fracture/joint, minor/major open joint, broken zone, and washout. This
study gives many advantages especially in preparing data for project feasibility related to
excavation, underground tunneling, or other constructions.
1. Introduction
Rock stability is one of the most important factor in mining excavation or openings due to its relationship
with safety, equipment security and the smooth running of mining activity. Generally, this stability is
controlled by several factors, including the geometry of the openings, rock characteristics,
hydrogeological conditions and structural conditions of strata rock. Identification of rock structure
conditions is one of the most important stages of work in a series of geotechnical analyzes at a project
site. To determine the orientation and identification of rock discontinuities on the surface, it is normally
doing by measuring the strike and dip of the discontinuity plane on the slopes that have been formed
and analyzed using the kinematic method [1]. The method will be difficult to perform when there is no
measurable vertical plane. Geotechnical experts usually use drill core data as the basic data in the
analysis, namely by looking at the percentage of 200 cm drill core recovery [2–4] which is better known
as RQD (rock quality designation). However, RQD can only assess rock quality in general, it cannot
measure with certainty the direction and slope of the naturally occurring fracture orientation. In addition,
the influence of the equipment used to extract the core, such as the core barrel and the type of drilling
machine, is very dominant in influencing the quality of the core extraction.
Currently, survey borehole wall imagery is the right choice to determine the condition of the rock
structure in the virgin area where it is impossible to measure the orientation of the structure on the
surface. The borehole wall imagery has widely used also for geotechnical investigation [5,6] and
identification of groundwater layer [7,8]. The borehole wall imagery (borehole televiewer) survey has
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
developed widely since the discovery of the borehole TV (BHTV) probe and the advanced technology
HIRAT (high-resolution acoustic televiewer) [9–13]. Borehole televiewer imaging enables geologists
or geophysicists to characterize subsurface conditions, lithological conditions, identified fractures,
layering, and veins in subsurface rock layers. It also allows them to facilitate characterization of
intrusions in mining and geotechnical assessments as detailed [5,14,15]. Such subsurface surveys require
instrumentation that can determine the visual condition of the borehole walls using multi-sensors to see
the condition of the cracks, the angle of the bedding plane and the angle of inclination [16]. Borehole
wall imagery or drill hole imaging tools will be able to provide an overview of the condition of the
borehole walls based on the contrast of the physical properties of the rock. Today, there are a wide
variety of imaging tools that generally fall into the optical and acoustic categories. In mine geology, drill
hole images are obtained from digital images from logging tools. Image recording data represent
measurements of rock formations taken from the surface of the well. Borehole imaging provides high-
resolution images of borehole walls that contain information about seam properties, fracture, and
sediment structure. The interpretation of these drill hole data will provide important information to
geologists in various fields, especially in the environment of oil and gas exploration as well as mineral
and coal mining.
The HIRAT method is capable to clearly observe the fracture conditions, layering areas and the
orientation of these fields in the borehole by sending high-resolution images continuously by translating
the ultrasonic signal by travel time and amplitude signal sent from the borehole wall. The probe used
has a sensor that is packaged in the form of a fixed acoustic transducer and rotating acoustic mirror,
which can scan the borehole walls simultaneously. This method is very good to be used to see the
condition of subsurface structures accurately. However, this tool really depends on the driller's ability
to maintain the condition of the walls as a whole. The use of HIRAT can accurately determine the
horizontal pressure orientation using the borehole breakout stress measurement method [17,18]. Kirsch
[19] was the first researcher to demonstrate that an-isotropic stress fields produce tangential stress
variations around the borehole, with maximum and minimum stress concentrations in the parallel
direction with the minimum and maximum horizontal stress concentrations, respectively. This theory
has helped explain the occurrence of breakout in nearly vertical boreholes [20–22]. A borehole breakout
is a spalling and fracturing zone on the opposite side of a vertical or nearly vertical borehole whose
cross-section extends towards the minimum horizontal principal stress [23–29]. This method provides
good information about stress orientation but is poor in quantity to estimate the amount of stress [30,31].
This paper does not intend to explain in detail the stress conditions around the borehole but only
explains the analysis process of the results of visual data collection of borehole wall imagery which
describes the condition of the rock bed structure in a coal mining company in Central Kalimantan,
Indonesia. The results of the analysis are needed to complement the feasibility study data, especially the
direction and slope of the bed and the condition of the vertical rock structure as a basis for evaluating
geotechnical conditions which are an important part of the consideration of the development of open pit
and underground coal mining [14,15,20].
The scopes of the study are conducted literature reviews, especially local and regional geological
conditions, previous exploration data and other administrative data. The next work is to record borehole
wall imagery from the probe of HIRAT and collected other supporting data such as density log record
results to see bedding conditions based on rock density and porosity data. Furthermore, pre-processing
is carried out for sorting the HIRAT data by evaluating the quality of the data obtained at the time of
recording the data. Pre-processing has a key role in the analysis because the drilling process and
configuration of the data acquisition system can cause a number of errors that cannot be justified at the
time of interpretation. Evaluation of recording data uses either acoustics or optics televiewer requires
high-quality images with un-bias fractures [9,32–34]. A series of pre-processing techniques including
median filtering, sub-sampling, decentralization compensation, and histogram equalization were
performed to improve image quality. Because the length of the borehole images varies from a few meters
to hundreds of meters, the images are partitioned into smaller sections for easier processing. Pre-
processing is an important step to reduce noise from borehole images and other problems such as the
2
problem of decentralization of probes and wells full of cuttings and other debris that is not properly
cleaned after the drilling process. These recording errors often appear as vertical lines or affect the
contrast quality of borehole data, and thus will affect feature extraction and characterization. Data pre-
processing and processing are carried out using the licensed WellCad version 5.1 software. Several other
references are needed to see the suitability of the data with the actual conditions.
2. Materials and Methods

The equipment used for this study is a set of geophysical logging tools consisting of RG-Winches units
that can work up to a depth of 300 m. In this study, the authors used RG-Winches with a maximum
depth of 600 m. To capture and record the condition of the borehole wall imagery, a HIRAT probe and
a data logger (micro-logger II) are needed to store all data readings. Furthermore, by using a data logger
(micro-logger II), borehole wall imagery was transferred and recorded according to the required format.
In addition, several additional tools such as a tripod equipped with a rotary encoder, power unit and data
cable are also needed.
The HIRAT probe uses a fixed acoustic transducer and a rotating acoustic mirror to scan the borehole
walls with a focused ultrasound beam. The amplitude and travel time of the reflected acoustic signal are
recorded and transferred to the datalogger and read by Winlogger software. To processing and analyzing
data, additional software is needed, that is WellCad software version 5.1. This software can combining
excellent display, editing and analysis capabilities of wall imagery technically.
To interpret the HIRAT data, additional data in the form of secondary data such as local and regional
geological data is also required. Therefore, the stages of study activities include secondary data
collection, pre-processing, data processing, evaluation, documentation of the results of each borehole
data processing and reporting. To validate the data that has been obtained from the results of the borehole
wall imagery recording, processed it by using WellCad Version 5.1 software. Not all interpretations
made by the software are correct, some errors may occur due to disturbances when reading wall imagery.
To evaluated the condition of the borehole wall structure is carried out by considering the regional
geological structure conditions and correcting the structural conditions analyzed by the software. The
Next step, checking the value of structure condition of the borehole after evaluation, do it repeatedly
until the appropriate result is obtained. If it un-matching back to step of data processing and repeat the
next step. If it matching create the result document of the evaluation process of borehole wall imagery
and on this step, the processing of HIRAT is finish. The sequence of work carried out is illustrated in
Figure 1.
2.1. Location and geological condition

The location of study is on Mamput Block at Central Kapuas District, Kapuas Regency, Central
Kalimantan that including Buhut and Baronang Villages. The location is about 140 Km from the capital
of Central Kalimantan, Palangkaraya. This location can be accessed via Palangkaraya - Buntok axis road
for approximately 5 hours, then continued through a wooden log road for up to 3 hours. The morphology
of the study location appears to be undulating hills with topographical conditions that are not too
prominent in each area. The Mamput Block consists of the morphology of gently sloping hills and wavy
hills that are moderate to high. The Kuatan River as a tributary of the Kapuas River divides the Mamput
Block from north to south, the flow pattern of the tributaries Kuatan rivers is sub-dendritic and trellis.
3
Figure 1. Processing of HIRAT data.
Regionally, Mamput Block is the marginal part of the Barito basin which houses the Tertiary
sediments. The oldest series of sedimentary rocks from the Tertiary sediments that have interbedded
with coal seams regionally is shown in the Geological Map of the Muarateweh sheet [35] in the north
and the Geological Map of the Buntok sheet [36] in the south. The concession area includes 3
sedimentary formations namely Tanjung Formation (Tet), Purukcahu Formation (Tomc) and Berai
Formation (Tomb), where coal resources are found. The Tanjung and Purukcahu Formations consist of
quartz sandstone, siltstone, claystone and interbedded coal seams. The Tanjung Formation was formed
in the Late Eocene and this formation overlaps un-conformably on top of the Metamorphic Rocks. The
coal bearer formation sequence includes sandstone, claystone, siltstone and coal. The coal seam naming
system and stratigraphy are provided by the company with validation-modification by the exploration
contractor to ensure consistency according to sectional interpretation and correlation of lithological and
geophysical logs. H and G seams are the most economically significant seams.
The direction of distribution and continuity of coal in the block varies from sector to sector. In Sector
1, the distribution of coal has a southwest-northeast direction and a dip of 5° to 78°. The developing
structure is an upward fault trending southwest-northeast, normal faults generally trending northwest-
southeast. The distribution of coal in Sectors 2 and 7 has a generally southwest-northeast direction and
4
dip 5°-74°. The developing structure is an upward fault with a southwest-northeast direction, normal
fault in the east trending southwest-northeast, normal fault in the west and northwest-southeast direction.
The distribution of coal in Sector 4 South has a generally southwest-northeast direction and a dip of 5°
to 28°, the developing structure is an upward fault trending southwest-northeast. The distribution of coal
in Sector 6 has a generally northwest-southeast direction and a dip of 8° to 75°. The developing structure
is an upward fault trending southwest-northeast, horizontal faults trending southwest-northeast, and
horizontal faults traversing northwest-southeast.
The spread of coal in Sector 8 has a general direction relatively west-east and dip 3° to 68 °, the
developing structure is an upward fault in the west trending west-east, the right shear fault in the east is
northwest-southeast, horizontal faults trending southwest-northeast. Based on the Geological Map of
the Muarateweh and the Buntok sheet, the basement rock of the basin is Pre-tertiary rock consists of
(from old to young) Busang complex, Haruyan volcanic rocks, and Selangkai group. In more detail,
from the results of geological mapping carried out by the company in 2006 the Mamput Block area
consists (from the old to the young) of the Busang Complex, the Tanjung Formation, the Purukcahu
Formation which extends to the Berai Formation, and the Sintang Intrusion. Stratigraphic of Barito basin
that simplified described (from old to young) is shown in Figure 2.
Tertiary sediment geology in Mamput Block shows the distribution of the Berai Formation (Tomb)
deposited above the Tanjung Formation (Tet). This Tanjung Formation is the Coal bearer in the South
Mamput Block. The structures that have developed in the Mamput Block are folding and fault. This
structure is thought to have been controlled by volcanic activity in an era roughly the same as the
depositional era, namely the Sintang intrusion (Toms) volcanic activity, which also appeared in the
Mamput Block area, including in Sector 1, Sector 4 North, Sector 5, Sector 6, and Sector 8.
2.2. Data Collection

Observation of rock structure using the borehole televiewer method, both optical (BHTV) and acoustic
(HIRAT), is influenced by drilling mud, formation pressure and the equipment used. Good drilling mud
can withstand the pressure of the formation so that the natural fracture conditions can be clearly depicted.
In addition, the bubbles that often appear in drilling water or drilling mud can bias the image of the
borehole walls [12,30]. Drilling equipment can also affect the accuracy of the borehole wall imagery
interpretation. If the drilling rod often collides with the wall, it will cause defects that can obscure the
discontinuity of the rock. When the conditions of the borehole are good, the weak areas at each depth in
the borehole walls will be clearly visible, so that they can be analyzed easily.
Eight drill holes have been prepared for the televiewer survey and all images of the drill hole walls
have been recorded. However, in this paper, only one drill point will represent it. Data collection is in
accordance with the right procedure by keeping the HIRAT probe centrally located in the center of the
wellbore. The installation of a centralizer is helpful to prevent the probe from remaining in the center of
the borehole, although some company personnel has suggested removing the centralizer for worried that
HIRAT will be stuck by rock collapse from the wall.
If the condition of the borehole is good, and the recording point is always in the center of the hole,
then the weak field at each depth of the borehole wall will be clearly visible, so that it can be analyzed
easily. Applying of drilling-practice in accordance with strata conditions and the use of appropriate mud
practice is very important in drilling. Based on drilling and mud practice, the causes of the instability of
the borehole wall are the high flow rate of the mud in the annulus, the friction of the drill pipe against
the borehole wall, the presence of pressure surge or suction when lifting and inserting the handlebar or
drill bit, the pressure from inside the formation and the presence of filtration water or mud that enters
the formation. Rock types that are less stable are usually layers that are deposited in marine basins,
especially mudstone, siltstone, and claystone [11]. The effect of high pressure and temperature will
cause this rock type to change into shale.
5
Figure 2. Barito Basin Stratigraphy [37].
3. Result and Discussions

The results of HIRAT shows that most of the discontinuity plane is trending Northeast - Southwest, with
dips generally below 30o as shown in Figure 3. In general, the diameter of the well is about 200 mm
(7.87"), except on the surface to a depth of 4.65 meters borehole length (m) with a diameter of 300 mm
(11.81"). The results of the structural interpretation of the borehole include a bedding plane, the filled
fracture/joint, the minor open joint, the broken zone and washout. Analysis of the structural conditions
was carried out with a reading density of 0.20 m.
6
The following description (see Table 1) explains the structural conditions in the form of vertical and
horizontal cracks as shown from the image of the borehole wall by tracing each drilling depth.
Figure 3. Structure orientation of rock at the borehole wall.
Tabel 1. Description of structural conditions each depth completely.

Depth (m) Descriptions
5.20 - 10.40 At the direction of 90o to the east and 270o to the north, in this depth as continually
to a depth of 21.70 m, a vertical fracture was found which was probably caused
by the collision of drilling equipment (induced fracture) with the varying level of
damage. Meanwhile, fractures of horizontal were found at least seventeen points
with different types of cracks. The cross-sectional shape of the drill hole at this
depth is a key seat form
13.80 - 14.00 Found four interface points or bedding plane, three points filled fracture/joint, one
major open joint, one minor open joint, six broken zone or undifferentiated points
and two partially open joints. At this depth, a cavity of about 20 cm was found as
7

a broken zone or washout which indicated a weak plane with an orientation
tending to be in the same direction as the bedding plane.
15.00 - 23.40 Six points of bedding plane were found and vertical wall damage was found along
that depth in the direction 0o - 90o to the east and at 270o to the north. Meanwhile,
at a depth of 20.00 - 23.80 m, there was scouring which was probably caused by
equipment (induced fracture).
24.20 - 26.00 At the side 90o to the east and 270o to the north a form like a breakout was found,
it cannot be interpreted as a natural fracture and may be due to equipment (induced
fracture). At some depths, found a bedding plane
26.00 - 26.20 Found a broken zone where the rock had been eroded (washout). This shape can
be interpreted as a major fracture with an undifferentiated orientation. This
condition repeated at 27.00 - 27.50 m depth with a larger washout scale of about
50 cm.
23.40 - 28.40 Found four interface/bedding planes, three fracture points, one minor open joint,
five undifferentiated points, and one partially open joint
28.40 - 31.00 Found two points partially open joint/fracture and one point filled fracture/joint.
31.30 - 31.40 Found a broken zone (undifferentiated) which seems discontinuous.
33.20 - 38.40 Found three fracture points and five undifferentiated points. At some depths was
found a washout zone that forms open fractures such as at 34.60 - 34.80 m, 35.20
- 35.40 m and 35.90 - 36.05 m depth but it is difficult to measure the structural
orientation of these fractures.
38.40 - 43.40 Found the traces of drilling equipment and it is quite difficult to distinguish
between the bedding plane and these traces.
44.20 - 44.40 Found the zone of destruction appears to be an open fracture, but it is difficult to
define whether this open fracture is a major joint or a washout. This condition was
repeated 45.30 - 45.40 m and 46.10 - 46.20 m depth. In this condition, the cross-
section of the drill hole is in the form of a key seat. At this depth, four points of
broken zone / undifferentiated were identified and 1 point of layering area.
48.25 - 50.22 The fractures zone was identified such as at 48.69 m (major joint), 48.80 m (minor
joint) and 49.39 m (broken zone) with a gentle dip relatively
51.68 - 54.24 Four fracture points were identified, namely at 51.81, 53.88 and 53.94 m as a
feature of bedding plane and at 53.64 m a feature of filled joint.
56.90 - 59.02 Two fracture points were identified, namely at 57.22 m as broken zone and 58.49
m as a major open joint.
60.41 - 62.86 Three fracture points were identified, namely at 60.68 and 62.65 m as minor open
joints and 62.26 m in as major open joints.
64.30 - 66.98 Eleven fracture points were identified, namely at 64.48, 64.63 and 64.67 m as
interface layers, at points of 64.99, 65.22, 65.97 and 66.26 m as major open joints,
at points of 65.35, 66.46 and 66.62 are broken zone / undifferentiated and points
of 66.11 m are minor open joints.
66.98 - 68.80 Found a widening of the borehole walls to the northeast to the southeast. This
condition indicates the weakness of the rock layer, but in this zone, it is difficult
to ascertain the discontinuous plane. Therefore, this zone is considered a broken
or undifferentiated zone.
69.24 - 71.33 Seven discontinuity zone were identified such as at 69.24 m in the form of
interface/bedding plane, at point 70.11 m as a major open joint, at a point of 70.64
m in the form of partially open joint/fracture and at points of 69.63, 70.82, 70.95
and 71.33 m as a broken zone features.
8

71.83 - 74.08 Six discontinuous planes were identified, such as at a depth of 72.00 m as a filled
joint, four points at 72.11, 72.45, 73.05 and 73.59 m depth as a broken zone and
73.40 m in the form of a minor open joint/fracture.
78.41 - 80.76 Identified eight discontinuous zone such as at a depth of 78.59 and 78.68 m as a
broken zone at 79.16, 79.48 and 79.61 m depth as a major open joints and at a
depth of 80.26, 80.39 and 80.51 m as bedding plane.
81.14 – 82.98 Identified five discontinuous zones such as two points 81.41 and 82.02 m depth
as major open joint/fracture; one point at 82.14 m depth as a partially open
joint/fracture; at point of 82.19 and 82.66 m depth as filled fracture/joint.
83.97 - 85.82 Identified six discontinuous planes such as at 84.20, 84.99, 85.18 and 85.38 m
depth as bedding planes and at a depth of 84.57 and 84.79 m as filled
fractures/joints.
86.57 - 89.46 Identified three discontinuous planes, such as at a depth of 86.72 m as a minor
open joint/fracture and at 88.21 and 89.29 m depth as filled fractures/joints.
93.37 - 95.15 Three discontinuous planes were identified, namely at a depth of 93.88, 93.99 and
94.11 m as bedding planes.
97.00 - 99.20 Four discontinuous planes were identified, such as at a depth of 93.99 and 94.11
m as bedding planes and at a depth of 98.21 and 98.37 m as a feature of broken
zone.
100.49 - 103.06 Identified three discontinuous planes, such as at a depth of 100.81 and 101.11 m
as interface layers at a depth of 102.34 m as a broken zone.
106.36 - 108.21 Three discontinuous areas were identified, such as at a depth of 106.94 and 106.98
m as a broken zone and at 107.34 m as a major joint.
108.85 - 109.73 Two discontinuous zone were identified as interface layers. From 86.87 to 109.73
m depth were found the vertical fractures were probably due to geotectonic
stresses or induced fractures which tend to take the form of breakouts.
Table 2 shows the interpretation results of the structural orientation and feature type of rock at that
depth. Figure 4 shows an example of the structural condition analysis results visually which has been
described in Table 1 above based on the image of the borehole wall at 23.40 – 28.40 m depth.
Table 2. Structure orientation of rock at a depth of 86.87-109.73 m.

Depth (m) Dip Azimuth (o) Dip (o) Feature Type
86.72 332.18 6.47 Minor open joint/fracture
88.21 78.12 13.42 Filled fracture/joint
89.29 10.59 18.51 Filled fracture/joint
93.88 64.06 7.61 Interface/ Bedding/banding/foliation
98.21 83.09 11.35 Broken zone/undifferentiated
107.34 286.61 28.96 Major open joint/fracture
9
Figure 4. Borehole wall imagery analysis at 23.40 – 28.40 m depth.
4. Conclusion
Data of geotechnical structure that has been collected from the results of televiewer observations of the
borehole walls provides sufficient information to solve geotechnical problems. Further evaluation surely
requires additional data. From the geotechnical aspect, the detailed display of the discontinuity fields
shown in the borehole wall image provides many advantages, especially in preparing data for project
feasibility related to excavation, underground tunneling, or other constructions. The structural
orientation information helps design engineers to set a dip direction or orientation of the excavation or
opening on the underground with a higher level of accuracy.
However, other additional data such as a result of the geomechanical laboratory tests can expand the
benefits of the structural geotechnical orientation that has been collected through the televiewer
observation. Other geophysical data such as density and gamma-ray logging mutually support the
accuracy of the drill hole data so that it can reflect the real conditions of the in-situ rock strata that have
not been disturbed by excavation. Structure orientation bias due to several things, as discussed in the
previous chapter of borehole imagery data collection, can be reduced by using Terzaghi's correction.
These corrections can be used to provide a better understanding of the borehole orientation bias.
Taking data and analyzing the condition of the geological structure through this Televiewer survey
requires accuracy and considerable time. Available software such as WellCad can make it easier to
evaluate the condition of structures that have been recorded by the HIRAT probes automatically.
However, expertise in data interpretation by experienced geotechnical engineer is needed to give results
that really match the actual conditions.
10
References
[1] Shariati M and Fereidooni D 2021 Rock slope stability evaluation using kinematic and kinetic
methods along the Kamyaran-Marivan road, west of Iran J. Mt. Sci. 18 779–93
[2] Choi S Y and Park H D 2004 Variation of rock quality designation (RQD) with scanline
orientation and length: a case study in Korea Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 41 207–21
[3] Ragan D M 2009 Structural Geology An Introduction to Geometrical Techniques (Cambridge
University Press)
[4] Zhang L 2016 Determination and applications of rock quality designation (RQD) J. Rock Mech.
Geotech. Eng. 8 389–97
[5] De Fredrick F, Nguyen T, Seymour C and Dempers G 2014 Geotechnical data from optical and
acoustic televiewer surveys AusIMM Bull. 62 64-6
[6] Gwynn X, Brown M and Mohr P 2013 Combined use of traditional core logging and televiewer
imaging for practical geotechnical data collection Proceedings of the 2013 International
Symposium on Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and Civil Engineering (Australian Centre
for Geomechanics, Perth) pp 261–72
[7] Crow H L, Ladevèze P, Laurencelle M, Benoit N, Rivard C and Lefebvre R 2013 Downhole
geophysical logging and preliminary analyses of bedrock structural data for groundwater
applications in the Montérégie Est area, Québec
[8] Williams J H and Johnson C D 2004 Acoustic and optical borehole-wall imaging for fractured-
rock aquifer studies J. Appl. Geophys. 55 151–9
[9] Massiot C, Nicol A, McNamara D D and Townend J 2017 Evidence for tectonic, lithologic, and
thermal controls on fracture system geometries in an andesitic high-temperature geothermal
field J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 122 6853–74
[10] Ask M V S, Ask D, Elvebakk H and Olesen O 2015 Stress Analysis in Boreholes Drag Bh and
Leknes Bh, Nordland, North Norway Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 48 1475–84
[11] Otto G H 1938 The Sedimentation Unit and Its Use in Field Sampling J. Geol. 46 569–82
[12] Tiensuu K and Heikkinen E 2016 KBS-3H Geophysical logging of borehole K08028F01
[13] Wedge D, Holden E-J, Dentith M and Spadaccini N 2015 Automated Structure Detection and
Analysis in Televiewer Images ASEG Ext. Abstr. 2015 1–4
[14] Goodfellow S, Simser B, Drielsma C and Gerrie V 2017 In situ stress estimation using acoustic
televiewer data Proceedings of the First International Conference on Underground Mining
Technology (Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth) pp 487–96
[15] Miró J, Jurado M J, Oms O, Martín-Martín J D, Ibáñez J, Anadón P, Crespo J, Gómez de Soler
B, Campeny G and Agustí J 2016 Borehole image techniques applied to identification of chert
and dolomite layers in lacustrine sediments 16 575–8
[16] Al-Sit W, Al-Nuaimy W, Marelli M and Al-Ataby A 2015 Visual texture for automated
characterisation of geological features in borehole televiewer imagery J. Appl. Geophys. 119
139–46
[17] Yousefi M, Moussavi S M and Khatib M M 2019 Analysis of fold and fault-related fracture
systems development using image logs at Asmari Formation in the Rag Sefid Anticline, SW
Iran Geopersia 9 279–92
[18] Zoback M D, Moos D, Mastin L and Anderson R N 1985 Well bore breakouts and in situ stress
J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 90 5523–30
[19] Kirsch G 1898 Die Theorie der Elastizitat und die Dedufhisse der Fertigkeirslehre Zeitschrift der
Vereines Dtsch. Ingenieure 42 797–807
[20] Pavičić I, Galić I, Kucelj M and Dragičević I 2021 Fracture System and Rock-Mass
Characterization by Borehole Camera Surveying: Application in Dimension Stone
Investigations in Geologically Complex Structures Appl. Sci. 11 764
[21] Srinivas K N S S S, Rao M S, Kishore P P, Gopinadh D, Raza H, Arora K and Satyanarayana H
V S 2018 Delineation of Fractures through Acoustic Televiewer Log J. Geol. Soc. India 91
569–74
11
[22] Thomas R, Fenton J, Wilson H and Lamb P 2015 Structural interpretation from Televiewer
surveys Proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Field Measurements in Geomechanics
(Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth) pp 729–41
[23] Ask D 2003 Evaluation of measurement-related uncertainties in the analysis of overcoring rock
stress data from Äspö HRL, Sweden: a case study Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 40 1173–87
[24] Ask D 2007 Forsmark site investigation - Evaluation of the overcoring results from borehole
KFM01B, DBT-1 and DBT-3 and hydraulic stress measurements in boreholes KFM01A,
KFM01B, KFM02A and KFM04A at the Forsmark site SKB Rep. 80
[25] Bell J S and Gough D I 1979 Northeast-southwest compressive stress in Alberta evidence from
oil wells Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 45 475–82
[26] Engelder T and Sbar M L 1984 Near-surface in situ stress: Introduction J. Geophys. Res. 89
9321–2
[27] Fiume B, Fernandes A J, Barbosa M B, Hirata R and Bertolo R A 2020 Integrated application of
geophysical loggings and fracture survey on rock exposures for identifying transmissive
fractures in crystalline aquifer: case study in the city of São Paulo Brazilian J. Geol. 50
[28] Hakala M, Hudson J A and Christiansson R 2003 Quality control of overcoring stress
measurement data Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 40 1141–59
[29] Han Z, Wang C, Hu S and Wang Y 2019 Application of Borehole Camera Technology in
Fractured Rock Mass Investigation of a Submarine Tunnel J. Coast. Res. 83 609
[30] Al-Ajmi A 2006 Wellbore stability analysis based on a new true-triaxial failure criterion (School
of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), KTH Royal Institute of Technology)
[31] Lindfors U, Perman F and Sjöberg J 2005 Evaluation of the overcoring results from borehole
KFM01B Sven. Kärnbränslehantering AB 64
[32] Massiot C, McNamara D D, Lewis B, Price L and Bignall G 2012 Statistical corrections of
fracture sampling bias in boreholes from acoustic televiewer logs Proc. 34th NZ Geotherm.
Work.
[33] McKenna G T C and Roberts-Kelly S L 2016 Televiewer imaging of boreholes; benefits and
considerations for interpretation in the absence of physical rock core Proc. 5th Int. Conf.
Geotech. Geophys. Site Characterisation, ISC 2016 1 291–6
[34] Zhang Y, Ji H, Li W and Hou K 2021 Research on Rapid Evaluation of Rock Mass Quality Based
on Ultrasonic Borehole Imaging Technology and Fractal Method ed X Hao Adv. Mater. Sci.
Eng. 2021 1–9
[35] Supriatna S, Sudrajat A and Abidin H Z 1994 Peta geologi lembar Muaratewe, Kalimantan
Geological map of the Muaratewe quadrangle, Kalimantan (Bandung, Indonesia)
[36] Hasan K, Soetrisno S, Supriatna S, Rustandi P and Sanyoto S 1994 Peta Geologi Lembar Buntok,
Kalimantan (Bandung, Indonesia)
[37] MSI 2017 Final Report Manajemen Proyek Eksplorasi di Lokasi PKP2B PT. Asmin Bara
Bronang (ABB) Blok Mamput, Kabupaten Kapuas, Kalimantan Tengah
12

Zulfahmi 2021 IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 882 012052

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Zulfahmi 2021 IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 882 012052

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Research on the Influence of

- Structural Design of Prefabricated

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 115.146.166.198 on 23/05/2023 at 11:17

Geotechnical structure interpretation from borehole wall

Z. Zulfahmi* and Z. Pulungan

*Corresponding author’s e-mail: zulfahmi66@gmail.com

Abstract. One of the considerations in mining excavation is geotechnical conditions especially

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Location and geological condition

Figure 1. Processing of HIRAT data.

2.2. Data Collection

Figure 2. Barito Basin Stratigraphy [37].

3. Result and Discussions

Figure 3. Structure orientation of rock at the borehole wall.

Tabel 1. Description of structural conditions each depth completely.

Depth (m) Descriptions

Depth (m) Descriptions

Table 2. Structure orientation of rock at a depth of 86.87-109.73 m.

Figure 4. Borehole wall imagery analysis at 23.40 – 28.40 m depth.

You might also like