Skip to main content
Log in

Putting Geological Focus Back into Rock Engineering Design

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The trend today to ever increasing modelling sophistication demands that much more attention be paid by practitioners to achieving better appreciation and characterization of geology and rockmass variability, so that rock–structure interaction effects can be analysed more realistically in better calibrated models. This paper is thus directed towards focussing attention on risk-based geological characterization as basis for helping modellers and designers improve calibration of their models. A sequential approach of appropriate input parameter refinement is outlined as a path forward methodology for consistently achieving maximum reliability in modelling. Processes that are needed for identifying key controlling geological structural features and rockmass domain characteristics that may be critical influences on true rockmass behaviour are explored so that rationalization steps can be followed in model building to ensure that actual behaviour drivers are not only properly represented, but are reliably characterized through rigorous calibration. Suggestions for the use of the observational and quantitative GSI charts at various scales appropriate to specific geological domains are presented as a means for achieving such calibration. Illustration is then given of how quantification can be achieved of rock quality variability throughout the complete range of rock competence, from intact pseudo-homogeneous high strength rockmasses subject to brittle spalling, through blocky, folded or foliated rockmasses, where kinematic controls are typically of paramount importance, through to completely degraded, fault process core zones and saprolites, where material matrix strength almost entirely dominates behaviour. Guidelines are given for suggested ranges of classification applicability for use with the Hoek–Brown failure criterion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anon (1977) The description of rock masses for engineering purposes. Geological Society Engineering Group Working Party Report. Q J Eng Geol 10:355–388

  • Anon (1978) Suggested methods for the quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses. International Society for Rock Mechanics Working Group Compilation Report. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 15:319–368

  • Barla G, Einstein H, Kovari K (2013) Manuscripts using numerical distinct element methods. J Rock Mech Rock Eng 46:655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett WP, Carter TG (2020) Structural domaining for engineering projects. In: Proceedings of the 54th US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium, Golden, Colorado. ARMA Paper 20-2105

  • Bartlett WL, Friedman M, Logan JM (1981) Experimental folding of rocks under confining pressure Part IX wrench faults in limestone layers. Tectonophysics 79:255–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton NR (1976) Recent experiences with the Q-system of tunnel support design. In: Bieniawski ZT (ed) Proceedings of the symposium on exploration for rock engineering. A.A. Balkema, Johannesburg, pp 107–117

  • Barton NR, Lien R, Lunde J (1974) Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock Mech 6(4):189–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bieniawski ZT (1973) Engineering classification of jointed rock masses. Trans S Afr Inst Civ Eng 15:335–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieniawski ZT (1976) Rock mass classification in rock engineering. In: Bieniawski ZT (ed) Proceedings of the symposium on exploration for rock engineering. A.A. Balkema, Johannesburg, pp 97–106

  • Bieniawski ZT (1989) Engineering rock mass classifications: a complete manual for engineers and geologists in mining, civil, and petroleum engineering. Wiley, New York, p 251

    Google Scholar 

  • Brox D (2020) Hydroelectric waterway inspections—risks and causes. TunnelTech Article. http://www.tunneltalk.com/TunnelTECH-Mar2020-Hydroelectric-tunnel-inspections.php

  • Carter TG (1992) Prediction and uncertainties in geological engineering and rock mass characterization assessment. In: Proceedings of the 4th Italian rock mechanics conference, Torino, pp 1.1–1.22

  • Carter TG (2010) Applicability of classifications for tunnelling—valuable for improving insight, but problematic for contractual support definition or final design. In: Proceedings of the world tunnelling conference (WTC 2010), 36th ITA Congress. Vancouver, Paper 00401, Session 6c

  • Carter TG (2014) Guidelines for use of the scaled span method for surface crown pillar stability assessment. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on applied empirical design methods in mining, Lima-Perú, 9–11th June

  • Carter TG (2015) On increasing reliance on numerical modelling and synthetic data in rock engineering. In: Proceedings 13th ISRM international congress of rock mechanics, 10–13 May, Montreal, Canada (paper 821)

  • Carter TG (2018) Suggested standards for improving structural geological definition for open pit slope design. In: Proceedings of the XIV Congreso Internacional de Energia y Recursos Minerals: Slope Stability, 10–13 April, Sevilla

  • Carter TG (2019) A suggested visual approach for estimating Hoek-Brown mi for different rock types. In: Proceedings of the 14th ISRM congress on rock mechanics and rock engineering, Sept. 13–18, Foz do Iguassu, Brazil, Paper #14356

  • Carter TG, Carvalho JL (2020) Suggested tensile test data interpretation for estimating Hoek-Brown mi. In: Proceedings of the 54th US rock mechanics conf., Paper ARMA 201860, Golden, Colorado

  • Carter TG, Marinos V (2014) Use of GSI for rock engineering design. In: Proceedings of the. 1st international conference on applied empirical design methods in mining, Lima-Perú, 9–11th June, 2014

  • Carter TG, Marinos V (2020) Characterization of rockmass strength based on rock matrix competence (to be submitted for publication in Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering)

  • Carter TG, Diederichs MS, Carvalho JL (2008) Application of modified Hoek-Brown transition relationships for assessing strength and post yield behaviour at both ends of the rock competence scale. In: Proceedings of the 6th international symposium on ground support in mining and civil engineering construction, 30 March–3 April 2008. Cape Town, South Africa, pp 37–59. J S Afr Inst Min Metall 108:325–338

  • Carvalho JL, Carter TG, Diederichs MS (2007) An approach for prediction of strength and post yield behaviour for rock masses of low intact strength. In: Proceedings 1st Can-US rock mechanics symposium, meeting society’s challenges & demands, Vancouver, Canada, pp 249–257

  • Castro LM, Carvalho J, Sá G (2013) Discussion on how to classify and estimate strength of weak rock masses. In: Dight PM (ed) Proceedings of the 2013 International Symposium on Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and Civil Engineering, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp 205–217

  • Coates DF (1970) Rock mechanics principles. Mines Branch Monograph 874, Mining Research Centre, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Canada

  • Day JJ, Diederichs MS, Hutchinson DJ (2019) Composite geological strength index approach with application to hydrothermal vein networks and other intrablock structures in complex rockmasses. Geotech Geol Eng 37:5285–5314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-019-00980-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deere DU (1964) Technical description of rock cores for engineering purposes. Rock Mech Eng Geol 1(1):17–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Deere DU (1968) Geological considerations. In: Stagg K, Zienkiewicz OC (eds) Rock mechanics in engineering practice. Wiley, London, pp 1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Deere DU, Miller R (1966) Engineering classification and index properties for intact rock. Tech. Report No AFNL—AFWL-TR-65-116. Air Force Weapons Lab., Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico

  • Dershowitz WS, Herda H (1992) Interpretation of fracture spacing and intensity. In: Proceedings, 32nd US rock mechanics symposium, Santa Fe, New Mexico

  • Dershowitz W, Doe T, Uchida M, Hermanson J (2003) Correlations between fracture size, transmissivity, and aperture. In: Essen, P. Culligan, H. Einstein, and A. Whittle (eds) Soil Rock America. Proceedings of the 39th US rock mechanics symposium, Cambridge, MA. VGE, pp 887–891

  • Diederichs MS, Carvalho JL, Carter TG (2007) A modified approach for prediction of strength and post yield behaviour for high GSI rock masses in strong, brittle ground. In: Proceedings of 1st Can-US rock symposium. Meeting Society’s Challenges and Demands, June, Vancouver, pp 277–285

  • Douglas KJ (2002) The shear strength of rock masses. Unpublished Doctoral thesis. University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

  • Feng X, Jimenez R (2014) Bayesian prediction of elastic modulus of intact rocks using their uniaxial compressive strength. Eng Geol 173:32–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganye J, Vasileiou A, Perras MA, Carter TG (2020) Influence of grain size and interlock on intact rock strength. In: Proceedings of the 54th US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium, Golden, Colorado: ARMA Paper 20-2097

  • Hoek E (1983) Strength of jointed rock masses. 1983 Rankine Lecture. Geotechnique 33(186):187–223

  • Hoek E (1994) Strength of rock and rock masses. News J Int Soc Rock Mech 2(2):4–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E (1999) Putting numbers to geology—an engineer’s view-point. Q J Eng Geol 32(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Brown ET (1980a) Empirical strength criterion for rock masses. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 106(GT9):1013–1035

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Brown ET (1980b) Underground excavations in rock. Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, London, p 527

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Brown ET (1988) The Hoek-Brown failure criterion—a 1988 update. In: Proceedings of the 15th Canadian rock mechanics symposium, pp 31–38

  • Hoek E, Brown ET (2018) The Hoek-Brown failure criterion and GSI—2018 edition. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2018.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Diederichs MS (2006) Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43:203–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Marinos P (2007) A brief history of the development of the Hoek-Brown failure criterion. Soils Rocks (São Paulo) 30(2):85–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Wood D, Shah S (1992) A modified Hoek-Brown criterion for jointed rock masses. In: Hudson JA (ed) Proceedings of the rock characterization, Symp. Int. Soc. Rock Mech.: Eurock‘92. Lond Brit Geotech Soc, 209–214

  • Hoek E, Kaiser PK, Bawden WF (1995) Support of underground excavations in hard rock. Rotterdam: Balkema, reprinted by CRC Press. ISBN 9789054101871

  • Hoek E, Carranza-Torres CT, Corkum B (2002) Hoek-Brown failure criterion—2002 edition. In: Bawden HRW, Curran J, Telesnicki M (eds) Proceedings of the North American Rock Mechanics Society (NARMS-TAC 2002). Mining Innovation and Technology, Toronto, Canada, pp 267273

  • Hoek E, Marinos P, Marinos V (2005) Characterisation and engineering properties of tectonically undisturbed but lithologically varied sedimentary rock masses. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42(2):277–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek E, Carter TG, Diederichs MS (2013) Quantification of the geological strength index chart. In: 47th US rock mechanics/geomechanics symposium, San Francisco: ARMA Paper 13-672

  • Laubscher DH (1977) Geomechanics classification of jointed rock masses—mining applications. Trans Inst Min Metall 86:A1–A8

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauffer H (1958) Gebirgsklassifizierung fur den Stollenbau. Geol Bauwesen 74:46–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Marinos V (2007) Geotechnical classification and engineering geological behaviour of weak and complex rock masses in tunneling. Doctoral thesis, School of Civil Engineering, Geotechnical Engineering Department, National Technical University of Athens (NTUA), Athens (In Greek)

  • Marinos V (2014) Tunnel behaviour and support associated with the weak rock masses of flysch. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6:227–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinos V (2017) A revised, geotechnical classification GSI system for tectonically disturbed heterogeneous rock masses, such as flysch. Bull Eng Geol Environ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-017-1151-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinos V, Carter TG (2018) Maintaining geological reality in application of GSI for design of engineering structures in rock. J Eng Geol 239:282–297. Corrigendum to Maintaining geological reality in application of GSI for design of engineering structures in Rock

  • Marinos P, Hoek E (2000) GSI: a geologically friendly tool for rockmass strength estimation. In: Proceedings of the GeoEng2000 at the international conference on geotechnical and geological engineering, Melbourne, Technomic publishers, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, pp 1422–1446

  • Marinos P, Hoek E (2001) Estimating the geotechnical properties of heterogeneous rock masses such as flysch. Bull Eng Geol Environ 60:82–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinos V, Marinos P, Hoek E (2005) The geological strength index—applications and limitations». Bull Eng Geol Environ 64(1):55–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marinos P, Marinos V, Hoek E (2007) Geological Strength Index (GSI). A characterization tool for assessing engineering properties for rock masses » . In: Romana, Perucho & Olalla (eds) Proceedings of the international workshop on rock mass classification in underground mining held in 1st Canada-US rock mechanics symposium, Also permitted to be published in: Underground works under special conditions. Taylor and Francis Publishing, Lisbon, pp 13–21

  • Mathews KE, Hoek E, Wyllie DC, Stewart SBV (1981) Golder Associates Report 802-1571 to CanMet on prediction of stable excavation spans for mining at depths below 1000 metres in Hard Rock. CanMet Contract No.17SQ.23440-0-9020

  • Muir-Wood AM (2000) Tunnelling: management by design. Published by E & FN Spon. ISBN 0-419-23200. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203477663

  • Murphy WL (1985) Geotechnical descriptions of rock and rock masses. Technical Report GL85-3, Geotechnical Laboratory, Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Corps of Engineers PO Box 631 Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180-0631

  • Palmstrom A (1982) The volumetric joint count - A useful and simple measure of the degree of rock mass jointing. IAEG Congress, New Delhi, pp V.221–V.228

    Google Scholar 

  • Peck RB (1976) Rock foundations for structures. In: Proceedings of the specialty conference on rock engineering for foundations and slopes, vol 2, Boulder, Colorado, pp 1–21

  • Potvin Y, Hudyma MR, Miller HDS (1989) Design guidelines for open stope support. CIM Bull v.82, #926

  • Priest SD, Hudson JA (1976) Discontinuity spacings in rock. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 13:135–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riedel W (1929) Zur Mechanik Geologischer Brucherscheinungen. Zentral-blatt fur Mineralogie, Geologie und Paleontologie B, 354–368

  • Rocscience (2018) https://www.rocscience.com/help/rs3/Geology/Materials/Parameter_Calculator.htm (in RocData Program)

  • Romana M (1985) New adjustment ratings for application of Bieniawski classification to slopes. In: International symposium on the role of rock mechanics ISRM, Zacatecas, pp 49–53

  • Rovida A, Tibaldi A (2005) Propagation of strike-slip faults across holocene volcano-sedimentary deposits, Pasto, Colombia. J Struct Geol 27:1838–1855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlotfeldt P, Carter TG (2019) A new and unified approach to improved scalability and volumetric fracture intensity quantification for GSI and rockmass strength and deformability estimation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 110:48–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheorey PR (1997) Empirical rock failure criteria, 1st edn. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Skempton AW (1966) Some observations on tectonic shear zones. In: Congress of the international society for rock mechanics 1st proceedings, vol 1, pp 329–335

  • Sonmez H, Ulusay R (1999) Modifications to the Geological Strength Index (GSI) and their applicability to Stability of Slopes. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 36:743–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tchalenko JS (1970) Similarities between shear-zones of different magnitudes. Geol Soc Am Bull 81:1625–1640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terzaghi K (1946) Rock defects and load on tunnel supports, introduction to rock tunnelling with steel supports, a book by Proctor, R.V. and White, T.L. Commercial Shearing & Stamping Co, Youngtown

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper has been prepared to address an industry-wide need, recognized by many astute observers, that adequate geological insight is often lacking in the modern design process. While it is impossible to acknowledge the many industry and university colleagues who have contributed to the ideas expressed in this paper, the authors specifically wish to acknowledge the encouragement of Prof. Giovanni Barla extending over several years, for the authors to try to put together some necessary guidelines to help analysts and modellers grasp the significance of correctness in definition of key input data for numerical modelling. Insightful feedback from Dr. Evert Hoek at several stages during the early preparation of this work is also greatly acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vassilis Marinos.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carter, T.G., Marinos, V. Putting Geological Focus Back into Rock Engineering Design. Rock Mech Rock Eng 53, 4487–4508 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-020-02177-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00603-020-02177-1

Keywords

Navigation