Planning and Development of

Underground Space in Rock Caverns

(CV6316)

Lecture 4

Rock Mechanics Basics

Lu Ming
Visiting Professor, NTU CEE
AY 2013-2014 Semester 2
1

Pre-Requisite
CV4354 Engineering Geology and Rock Engineering
Engineering geology: plate tectonics, minerals, rock types and rock cycle,
geological structures, geological maps, geological dating and time scale,
geology of Singapore. Rock mechanics: properties of rock materials, rock
fractures and rock masses, rock mass classifications, laboratory testing and
properties of rocks, design methodology for rock foundations, slopes and
tunnels.
CV6315 Engineering Geology and Rock Engineering
Engineering geology: plate tectonics, minerals, rock types and rock cycle,
geological structures, rock dating and geological time scale, geological maps,
hemispherical projection, geology of Singapore. Rock mechanics: rock mass
classifications, laboratory measurements of strength and deformation
properties of rocks, failure criteria, shear strength of discontinuities.
Applications: rock foundations, stability of rock slopes, underground rock
excavations.

Assessment
Group project 40%
Homework assignment 10%
Final exam 50%

 Lu Ming (
Visiting professor
NTU-JTC Industrial Infrastructure Innovation
Centre
N1-B1c-22

OUTLINE
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
5

Introduction
Strength and deformability of rock
Stress-strain relations
Stress around cavern/tunnel and excavationinduced displacement
Rock mass classification
In-situ rock stress
Special stress-induced tunnel stability problem
Other rock mechanics problems

1. INTRODUCTION
1) Special features of rock

Discontinuity
Heterogeneity
Anisotropy
Infinity
In-situ rock stress
Water in rock (pore fluid and joint water)

2) Intact rock and rock mass

Impact of rock joints
Strength and deformability

3) Study method for rock mechanics

1) Lab test vs field study
6

2. STRENGTH AND DEFORMABILITY OF ROCK

1)
2)
3)
4)

Strength of intact rock

Mechanical properties of rock joints
Strength of rock mass
Deformability of intact rock and rock mass

Strength of Intact Rock

a) UCS and shear strength
b) Laboratory tests
ISRM suggested test methods
Unconfined uniaxial compression test for UCS
Triaxial compression test for shear strength c and

c) Other tests
Point load test for UCS
Brazilian test for tensile strength
d) Data base

Uniaxial compression test

UCS: c
Youngs modulus: E
Poissons ratio:

Triaxial compression test

Shear strength calculation

Strength envelope

Mechanical Properties of Rock Joints

a) Mechanical and physical characteristics of rock joints

Roughness
Surface hardness
Undulation
Aperture, opening and closing
Formed in sets
Spacing
Bridges (persistence)
Infilling
Orientation: Strike, dip and dip direction
Residual shear strength

b) In compression
c) Shear strength of joint
14

Direct shear test of rock joint

Compression test of rock joint

A hyperbolic relation with
a maximum closure wm

Joint Roughness Coefficient JRC

Shear strength of joints

Coulomb criterion

n tan c

B-B model

'n tan( i )
peak

JCS
res
JRC log10
'n

Tensile strength of joints is often ignored

Major difference between

Coulomb and B-B models
Coulomb model
Friction angle is constant

B-B model
Friction angle is dependent upon roughness and
normal stress
Joint damage post peak shear strength

Strength of Rock Mass

a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)

20

Mohr-Coulomb strength criterion

Hoek-Brown shear strength of jointed rock mass
Estimate of H-B parameters
Variations of H-B
Comparison of H-B and M-C
Conversion from H-B to M-C
Strain softening
Software RockData

Mohr-Coulomb Failure (Yield) Criterion

n tan c
1
1
( 1 - 3 ) = c cos - ( 1 + 3 ) sin
2
2

1 = c + 3 tan2 (45 + )
2

1 - 3 N + 2c N = 0

c = 2c tan(45 + )
2

: Friction angle
c: Cohesion

N =

1 + sin
1 - sin

Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion

1 - 3 m ci 3 s ci2

140
GSI=25, mi=10, mb=0.6866, s=0.0002404, ci=25

120

GSI=75, mi=30, mb=12.2845, s=0.06218, ci=80

1 (MPa)

100

ci: UCS of intact rock

1> 2> 3
compression positive

80

Hard Rock

m and s: material parameters

s=1 for intact rock

60
40

Generalised Hoek-Brown Criterion

Soft Rock
20
0
-2

3 (MPa)

10

Estimate of parameters for H-B Failure Criterion

ci: Directly from lab test
100
)
93
100
mb=miexp(
)
2814

s=exp(

GSI: Geological Strength Index

D: a factor which depends upon the degree of disturbance to
which the rock mass has been subjected by blast damage and
stress relaxation (0-1)
mb and mi: m value for rock mass and intact rock respectively
a=0.5 for GSI>25 and a=0.65-GSI/200 for GSI<25, or

Estimate of GSI

Determination of mi
Lab triaxial tests
Confining pressure 0 - i/2
At least 5 specimens

Estimate of mi

Estimate of D

Variation forms of H-B

Hoek and Brown 1980

Hoek and Brown 1997

1 - 3 m ci 3 s ci2

1 3 ci mb

3
s
ci

1 3 3

mb
c c c

Shah 1992

Carranza-Torres and Fairhust 1999

where
1
s

S1 m m 2
b ci
b

3
s
S

3 m
2
m
b
ci
b

S1 S 3 S 3

Practical estimates of rock mass strength

E. Hoek and E.T. Brown

Published in the International Journal of Rock

Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Vol 34, No 8,
1997, pages 1165-1186

Software RocData/RocLab
A tool for
analyzing rock
properties
Estimate of H-B
parameters
Converting H-B
to M-C
parameters
Rock property
database
Analyzing lab
test data

M-C vs H-B
M-C
H-B
Developed from
Empirical
lab tests
Linear
Curved
May overestimate N/A
shear strength at
high confining
pressure

Conversion from H-B to M-C

Tensile and Compressive Strength of Rock Mass

From H-B

1
2
T ci (mb - mb 4s )
2

c s ci

34

Strain Softening and Brittle Failure

Stressstrain curves for Tennessee Marble at different confining stresses

(after M. Cai)

Deformability of Intact Rock and Rock Mass

a) Uniaxial compression test for E-modulus of intact
rock
b) Estimate of E-modulus of rock mass
c) Software RockData

37

Uniaxial Compression Test

Graphic presentation
of axial and diametric
stress-strain curves

Calculation of E-modulus and Poissons ratio

from UC test result

Deformability of rock mass

For c<100MPa

For c>100MPa

When GSI>50

** Assuming (1) D=0 and (2) GSI=RMR

40

Other Lab Tests

1. Point load test for UCS
2. Brazilian test for tensile strength

41

Point load test for UCS

Index test for strength
classification of rock specimen
Compressing of a rock sample
between conical steel platens
until failure occurs
Specimen shape: core, block,
irregular lump
Portable equipment
performed in field
Index: Is50 (Load strength
index corrected to 50 mm
specimen)
42

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

Diametral test
Axial test
Block test
Irregular lump test

50 =

2 = 2
2

4
=

43

Point load test for UCS

UCS=KIs50
K=20-25

44

Brazilian test for tensile strength

Cylindrical specimen
T=0.636P/Dt

T: uniaxial tensile strength

P: load at failure
D: diameter of specimen
t: thickness of specimen

45

3. STRESS-STRAIN RELATIONS
1. Elasticity matrix for isotropic rock
2. Elasticity matrix for stratified rock
3. Stress-strain relation for plastic materials

46

Elasticity matrix for isotropic rock

47

Elasticity matrix for isotropic rock

48

Elasticity matrix for anisotropic rock

Five independent parameters:
E1 , 1 , E2 , 2 , G2

49

Stress-strain relation for plastic materials

Strain softening/hardening

4. STRESS AROUND CAVERN/TUNNEL AND

EXCAVATION-INDUCED DISPLACEMENT
1. Analytical solution for circular tunnel in elastic rock
2. Analytical solution for circular tunnel in plastic rock
For M-C criterion
For H-B criterion

3. Numerical analysis
Continuum method
Discontinuum method

51

Analytical solution for circular tunnel in elastic rock

subjected to anisotropic in-situ stresses [1]

at tunnel surface

Example: P=30MPa, a=1m, K=1, E=10GPa, =0.2

Distribution of radial stress

Distribution of tangential stress

Distribution of radial displacement

Analytical solution for circular tunnel in plastic rock

Mohr-Coulomb Criterion [2]
Radius of yield zone
Elastic zone
Yielding zone

Rock mass

Tunnel

Radius of
yield zone

Example

Distribution of radial stress

Distribution of tangential stress

Distribution of radial displacement

Analytical solution for circular tunnel in plastic rock

Hoek-Brown Criterion

Elastic zone
Yielding zone

Rock mass

Tunnel

Radius of yield zone

Analytical solution for circular tunnel in plastic rock

Hoek-Brown Criterion
The radius of the
yield zone
where

2
2
re a exp N (mr r Pi sr c ) 2
mr r

1 m mP0
M
s
2 4
c

N
The radial stress
at r=re is given by

2
mr c

m
8

(mr c P0 sr - mr M )
2
c

re P0 - M c

2
c

Analytical solution for circular tunnel in plastic rock

Hoek-Brown Criterion

Pi is internal pressure.

Example

Distribution of radial stress

Distribution of tangential stress

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
Advantages of numerical analysis
Arbitrary shape of cavern/tunnel
Complicated rock condition
Discontinuity
Heterogeneity
Anisotropy
Initial stress

Complicated material model for rock

Yielding criterion
Stress-strain relation

Any type of loading

Dynamic load
Thermal load
Fluid pressure
62

Numerical Techniques
Continuum modelling

Finite Element method (FEM)

Boundary Element Method (BEM)
Finite Difference Method (FDM)

Discontinuum modelling

Distinct Element Method (DEM)

Discontinuous Displacement Analysis (DDA)

Coupled methods

FEM+BEM

DEM+BEM

DDA+FEM

A New method - Numerical Manifold Method

Other tools: Unwedge, Slide

Continuum Modelling

Procedure of Finite Element Method

1. Discretise the region
2. Assume a variation of unknown ()
inside each element; Shape function
3. Find element response matrix:
Element stiffness matrix K

K e

DBdv

4. Assemble the element matrices:

Global stiffness
5. Solve the system equations

K F

6. Compute additional variables as required

FEM Formulation
Element Stiffness Matrix [K]e

Strain Matrix [B]

Stress-strain Matrix [D]

K e

N i
x

0
Bi N
i

N i

E (1 - )

D
(1 )(1 - 2 )

DBdxdydz

N i
y

0
N i
x
N i
z
0

N i
z
0
N i
y
N i
x

1- v

1- v

1- v

1
1 - 2
2(1 - v )

Symmetri c

0
1 - 2
2(1 - v )

1 - 2

2(1 - v )
0

Simulation of rock joint in FEM

Goodmans joint element

Kn
3
1

Ks

Kn
0

0 n Fn

K s s Fs

 FEM is the most widely used numerical method in

rock engineering
It can be used in solving almost any type of problems
for rock engineering
Particularly applicable to the rock mass with
complicated material properties
Not so good for simulating individiual rock joints

Input for continuum modelling

Mechanical input
For rock:
Deformability: E,
Strength parameters (M-C or H-B)

For joints
Stiffness
Strength

Geometrical input
Geometry of tunnel or slope

Special Features of Rock Mass

Discontinuity
Heterogeneity
Anisotropy
Infinity
Initial stress
Others

Plasticity
Creep (time-dependent)
Dilatancy
Multi-phase
Coupled temperature-flow-stress analysis

Representative commercial codes

ABAQUS
FLAC
FLAC3D
Phase2

Discontinuum Modelling

Discontinuous Modelling for Rock Mechanics

Discrete methods
Block interactions
Simulate opening and sliding of joints
Distinct element method (DEM)
Discontinuous Deformation Analysis (DDA)
Numerical manifold method
Boundary element method
Particle modelling

Input data
Applicability

Block interactions

Distinct Element Method

Theoretical basis:
Force-displacement law: block contact problems

Fn K n n

Fs K s s
Newtons second law of motion for each block acceleration

F
a u
m

Velocity

v u udt

Distinct Element Method

Strain

Stress

ui u j

x j xi

F a v

Distinct Element Method

A UDEC model for Gjvik cavern

DISCONTINUOUS MODELLING

Other discontinuous modelling methods

Discontinuous Deformation analysis (DDA)

Key block theory
Numerical manifold method
Boundary element method
Particle modelling

Basics of DDA: Special features

DDA is a numerical method for analysing static and dynamic responses
of jointed rock masses. It can also be used for any type of structures
including discontinuities. Special features include:
Complete block kinematics and its numerical realisation
The global equilibrium equations are established by minimising the
total potential energy. No any artificial terms
Displacement method. The basic unknowns are displacements and
deformations of rock blocks: [u0, v0, r0, x, y, xy]T, where u0, v0 and r0
are translation in x and y directions and the rotation at a point in a
rock block; x, y, xy are the normal and shear strains of the block
The penalty method is used to prevent rock blocks from penetration
Large displacement and large deformation
Both dynamic and static problems can be readily handled in the same
way

Basics of DDA: Physical aspect

DDA handles a system of elastic rock blocks bounded by preexisting discontinuities (joints).
The interaction between rock blocks are simulated with
normal and shear springs which have a unified stiffness. The
stiffness can be either input or calculated automatically by
the DDA program as EL in which E is the E-modulus of the
rock blocks and L is the average block diameter.
The Mohr-Coulomb law and tensile strength are used to
regulate contact behaviour, and friction loss along the
contacts is the sole source of energy consumption.
Penetration and tension of rock blocks are prevented.
Large displacement and large deformation are implemented
by accumulating small deformation in each time step.

Basics of DDA: Global equilibrium equation

K11
K
21
K 31

K n1

K12

K13

K 22

K 23

K 32

K 33

Kn2

K n3

K1n
K2n

K 33

K nn

D1 F1
D F
2 2
D3 F3
=



Dn Fn

Basics of DDA: Displacement within a rock block

0
( y - y 0) / 2
u 1 0 -( y - y0 ) ( x - x 0)
=
0
( y - y0)
( x - x 0)
v 0 1 ( x - x 0 )

u 0
v0

r0
=TiDi
x
y

xy

Key Block Theory

Particle Analysis
Modelling movement and interaction of assemblies of
particles
The particles may represent individual grains in a granular
material or they may be bonded together to represent a
solid material, in which case, fracturing occurs via
progressive bond breakage.
Slip and/or separation along bonds.
Cracking and fragmentation can be simulated
Commercial code: PFC
Resource demanding

PFC simulation of downhole explosive detonation

Stress evolution simulated

with an axisymmetric model

Representative commercial code: UDEC

UDEC and 3DEC
Major functions

Joint generation
Deformable and plastic blocks
Meshing in blocks
Different mechanics models for joints
Support modelling: Bolting and shotcreting
Fluid flow
Thermal analysis
Dynamics

Features of UDEC

Input data for discontinuous modelling

Mechanical input
For blocks
For joints
Stiffness
Strength

Geometrical input
Geometry of rock blocks

Mechanical Input for Discontinuous Modelling

Strength properties of discontinuities
M-C model: p, r, c, Direct shear test
B-B model: JCS, JRC, r, Tilt tests, joint profiling test, Schmitt
hammer
Difficulties: Representative joints, undisturbed samples

Stiffness properties of discontinuities

Constant?

Fn K n n

Fs K s s

Remarks on discontinuous modelling

Acquisition of input data for discontinuous modelling
is much more complicated and expensive than
continuous modelling
Block models are best suited to slope stability
problems
Stability of underground works is dependent on joint
pattern around the opening which is almost
impossible to obtain exactly

Rock Mass Classification for Numerical Analysis

Applicability of Continuous and Discontinuous Modelling

Rock slope stability: Discontinuous modelling
Stability of underground works: Continuous
modelling
Dam foundation: Discontinuous modelling
Crack propagation: NMM
Rock fragmentation: Particle model
Rolling stone: 3-D DDA
This is my personal opinion!

Hydraulic Fracturing crack propagation

New crack

p (Q)
Original crack

Continuous modelling versus discontinuous

modelling

Continuous modelling was developed earlier

Continuous modelling is more mature
Continuous modelling is simpler
Continuous modelling requires less computing resources
Continuous modelling is faster
Continuous modelling is hopeless for analysing objects
containing a great number of discontinuities (this is no
longer true!)

5. ROCK MASS CLASSIFICATION

1. Introduction
2. Rock mass classification systems

Q-system
RMR system
GSI system
RMi system
Index conversion

3. Application of rock mass classification system

99

Introduction
Rock mass is complicated material. Rock mass
classification systems use numbers to express
the overall quality of rock mass.
They can be used in feasibility study.
If used properly they may become a powerful
tool for design of underground structures.
Despite criticisms more and more engineers
use them.

Rock Mass Quality (Q)-system

by Barton and Grimstad

Estimate of RQD
=

10

100%

118

RQD=200 100%=59%

RQD(%)

Rock Quality

<25

Very poor

25-50

Poor

50-75

Fair

75-90

Good

90-100

Excellent

Calculation of RQD from the number of joints per m3

RQD=115-3.3Jv
Jv is the number of joints per m3

Estimate of Jn

Estimate of Jr

Estimate of Ja

Estimate of Jw

Estimate of SRF

Estimate of SRF

Rock Mass Rating (RMR)-system

by Bieniawski
Algebraic sum of following six ratings
(1) Strength of intact rock (UCS)
(2) RQD
(3) Spacing of discontinuities
(4) Condition of discontinuities
(5) Ground water condition
(6) Joint orientation

Strength of intact rock

RQD

Spacing of discontinuities

Condition of discontinuities

Ground water condition

Adjustment for joint orientation

Rock mass classes determined by RMR

RMi-system (First presented by Palmstrm in 1995)

For jointed rock

RMi = c JP
Jointing parameter JP =0.2 jC vbD (D = 0.37 jC - 0.2 )
jC = jR jL/jA
jR = the joint roughness, jA = the joint alteration, and jL =
the joint length
Charts available

For massive rock (applied for cases where f > JP)

RMi=c f
massivity parameter f given as f = c (0.05/Db)0.2
(Db = block diameter). In most cases f 0.5

Classification Index Conversion

RMR 9lnQ+44 (Bieniawski)

RMR 15 logQ+50 (Barton)

Correlation between E-modulus/seismic velocity

and RMR/Q
= 2 100

(RMR>50)

= 10(10)/40

( < 50)

= 10 1/3

=
100
3.5 + log

(in km/s)

6. IN-SITU ROCK STRESS

1. Introduction
2. Methods of in-situ stress measurement and
estimate

Overcoring
Hydraulic fracturing
Other methods

3. Variation of in-situ stress with depth

4. Cavern shape and in-situ rock stress

128

Introduction
In-situ rock stress
consists of
gravitational, tectonic
and residual
components
v=h
H=K1v+C1
h=K2v+C2

World Stress Map

www.world-stress-map.org

Gjvik
Olympic
Mountain
Hall
Span: 61m

Xiaolangdi
powerhouse in
China

In-situ stress measurement by overcoring

Procedure
(1) Advance 76mm diameter main borehole to measurement depth.
Grind the hole bottom using the planning tool.
(2) Drill 36mm diameter pilot hole and recover core for appraisal.
Flush the borehole to remove drill cuttings.
(3) Prepare the probe for measurement and apply glue to strain
gauges. Insert the probe in installation tool into hole.
(4) Tip of probe with strain gauges enters the pilot hole. Probe
releases from installation tool through a latch, which also fixes the
compass, thus recording the installed probe orientation. Gauges
bonded to pilot hole wall under pressure from the nose cone.
(5) Pull out installation tool and retrieve to surface. The probe is
bonded in place.
(6) Allow glue to harden overnight. Overcore the probe and record
strain data using the built-in data logger. Break the core after
completed overcoring and recover in core barrel to surface.

3-D stress measurement by overcoring by SINTEF

3-D stress measurement by overcoring by SINTEF

3-D stress measurement by overcoring by SINTEF

138

139

2-D stress measurement by doorstopper by SINTEF

140

2-D stress measurement by doorstopper by SINTEF

141

Interpretation
Elastic solution for far-field in-situ rock stress
software have been developed

DISO (Determination of In-situ Stress by Overcoring)

A Monte-Carlo type statistical analysis provides the most likely and most
reliable in-situ rock stress state, represented by means and deviations, of
principal stresses
Automatic removal of erroneous readings
Intuitive graphic presentation of in-situ stress state by using histogram
and stereonet plots
Fast computation and on-site measurement of elastic parameters by
using bi-axial tests makes it possible to adjust test program on site
Incorporation with 2-D doorstopper measurement enhances reliability
with limited extra cost
Can also be used for transversely isotropic rock
Have been thoroughly tested and verified by Finite Element analysis and
applied to evaluation of hundreds measurements in the past 15 years

143

DISO result presentation

SINTEF Rock and Soil Mechanics
Project: KIHANSI

Code: DISO 3.5

*************************************
* In Situ Stress Measurement Report *
*************************************

Date: 2000-05-23

Client Name: Norplan A.S

ORIENTATION OF MEAN PRINCIPAL STRESSES

Project Name: Niche 1465

Borehole Name: Ch. 1856

Report Number: Prelim

Borehole orientation:

Overburden:

Trend

94.0

Elevation angle

6.0

725.0
MEASUREMENT RESULT

DEPTH
(m)

RELATIVE FREQUENCY (%)

25

15

5
0
0

10

15

20

PRINCIPAL STRESSES (MPa)

144

3381405
2551450
2401420
2051180
2601165
2101065
1301240
1651125

45
695
315
595
455
610
410
405
345

405-250
485 -90
380-195
320-285
365-195
400-175
325-115
235-230

45
110
215
125
-15
110
210
155
140

E
(GPa)

380 945
4701055
300 770
205 665
335 755
180 595
220 550
360 815

45
775
965
625
610
735
525
515
735

90
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

nu

rho
(kg/m3)

45 135
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0

.12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.12
.12

2680
2680
2680
2680
2680
2680
2680
2680

******************************************************************************
*
IN-SITU STRESSES IN VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONS
*
*
STRESS
MAGNITUDE
ORIENTATION
*
*
*
*
VERTICAL STRESS
12.77
*
*
MINIMUM HORIZONTAL STRESS
2.91
178.4
*
*
MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL STRESS
11.49
88.4
*
******************************************************************************

10

-5

2-D READINGS
Theta=225

******************************************************************************
*
STATISTICAL RESULTS OF IN-SITU STRESSES
*
*
MEAN
AVERAGE DEVIATION
STANDARD DEVIATION
TREND
PLUNGE *
*
*
* SIGMA1
16.31
2.37
2.96
100.0
50.4 *
* SIGMA2
8.52
1.87
2.30
251.6
36.0 *
* SIGMA3
2.34
1.69
2.20
352.2
14.2 *
******************************************************************************

MAGNITUDE OF PRINCIPAL STRESSES

20

a
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5
10.0
10.5
11.0
11.5

3-D READINGS
Theta=90

Theta=0

25

******************************************************************************
*
GRAVITY STRESS
*
*
VERTICAL STRESS:
19.04
HORIZONTAL STRESS:
2.55 *
******************************************************************************

In-situ stress measurement by hydraulic fracturing (HF)

There is no theoretical limit to the depth of measurement, provided a
stable borehole can access the zone of interest and the rock is elastic and
brittle.
Classical interpretation of an HF test is possible only if the borehole axis is
parallel to one of the principal stresses and is contained in the induced
fracture plane. The initiation of en echelon fractures may indicate that
the borehole axis is not along a principal stress. Excessive deviation
invalidates the classical method of interpretation of test results.
Principal stress directions are derived from the fracture delineation on the
borehole wall under the assumption that fracture attitude persists away
from the hole.
Evaluation of the maximum principal stress in the plane perpendicular to
the borehole axis assumes that the rock mass is linearly elastic,
homogeneous, and isotropic. It involves considerations of pore pressure
effects, often difficult to ascertain, and requires an assessment of the rock
tensile strength.

Typical test setup (a) HF and (b) Impression

(a)

(b)

A typical
measurement
record
350

80
Water pressure

Pf

Flow

300

70

Pressure (bar)

50
200

Pr

Pr

40

150
Ps

Ps

30

Ps

100

20

50

10

0
0

148

flow (liter/sek)

60

250

Time (min)

10

15

Fracture delineation by
impression packer

A typical measurement record

149

Interpretation
Minimum horizontal principal stress
Magnitude: Vertical HFs are oriented perpendicular to
the direction of the minimum horizontal principal stress.
h=Ps
Ps is the shut-in pressure
h direction = direction of normal to vertical HF
Maximum horizontal stress
H=T+3h Pb
T is tensile strength
Pb is breakdown pressure

In-situ stress measurement by hydraulic test on pre-existing

fractures (HTPF)
There is no theoretical limit to the depth of measurement,
provided a stable borehole can access the zone of interest.
The method assumes that isolated pre-existing fractures, or
weakness planes, are present in the rock mass, that they are
not all aligned within a narrow range of directions and
inclinations, and that they can be mechanically opened by
hydraulic tests. When the straddled interval includes multiple
fractures, it is necessary to verify that only one single fracture
has been opened, for the opening of pre-existing fractures
change the local stress field.
Fractures used in stress computations are delineated on the
borehole wall under the assumption that their orientation
persists away from the hole.

In-situ stress measurement by hydraulic test on pre-existing

fractures (HTPF)
For a complete stress tensor determination, the method
requires a theoretical minimum of six tests, each conducted
on pre-existing non-parallel fractures; but additional tests are
recommended in order to correct for uncertainties. However,
when combined with HF tests, only threefour HTPF results
are necessary for the maximum horizontal and vertical stress
components determination.
The method is valid for all borehole orientations. It is
independent of pore pressure effects and does not require
any material property determination.
It assumes that the rock mass is homogeneous within the
volume of interest. When tested fractures are distant from
one another by more than 50 m, a hypothesis on stress
gradients is required.

7. SPECIAL STRESS-INDUCED TUNNEL STABILITY

PROBLEMS
Rock burst
A rock burst is a spontaneous, violent fracture of rock that
often occurs in deep cavern/tunnels at high in-situ rock stress
condition.

Squeezing
Squeezing stands for large time-dependent convergence during
tunnel excavation. It takes place when a particular combination
of induced stresses and material properties pushes some zones
around the tunnel beyond the limiting shear stress at which
creep starts. Deformation may terminate during construction
or continue over a long period of time

154

8. OTHER ROCK MECHANICS PROBLEMS

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)

155

Rock dynamics
Creep (time-dependent)
Dilatancy
Coupled temperature-flow-stress analysis
Multi-phase problems

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

156

Brady B.H.G. and Brown E.T. (2004) Rock mechanics for underground
mining. Kluwer Academic publishers.
Rocscience (2011) Phase 2 Stress analysis verification manual
Barton N. and Choubey V. (1977) The shear strength of rock joints in theory
and practice, Rock Mechanics, 10, pp. 1-54.
Singh B. and Goel R.K. (1999) Rock mass classification. Elsevire.
NGI (1997) Practical use of the Q-system.
ISRM Suggested Methods
Hoek E. and Brown E.T. (1997) Practical estimates of rock mass strength.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, Vol 34, No 8,
pp. 1165-1186