The Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion



One of the most challenging problems encountered in the design of rock engineering projects is the estimation of strength and deformation properties of rock masses containing joints, bedding planes, and other geotechnical defects. Currently, one of the commonly used empirical failure criteria in rock engineering is the Hoek-Brown (HB) failure criterion. The main breakthrough of the HB criterion is that it opened up for empirically estimating rock mass strength and deformation properties at the engineering scale. The HB criterion started with intact rock properties and then it was extended to estimate the rock mass strength by using the Geological Strength Index (GSI) and the disturbance factor D to reduce intact rock properties. A number of empirical models have been proposed in parallel with the HB failure criterion to estimate the rock masses properties such as deformation modulus, UCS and shear strength parameters.


  1. Balmer G (1952) A general analytical solution for Mohr’s envelope. Am Soc Test Mater 52:1269–1271Google Scholar
  2. Barton N (1987) Rock mass classification, tunnel reinforcement selection using the Q-system. In: Proceedings of the ASTM Symposium on Rock Classification Systems for Engineering Purposes. Cincinnati, OhioGoogle Scholar
  3. Barton N (1996) Estimating rock mass deformation modulus for excavation disturbed zone studies. In: International Conference on Deep Geological Disposal of Radioactive Waste, Winnepeg, EDZ workshop. Canadian Nuclear Society, pp 133–144Google Scholar
  4. Barton N (2002) Some new Q value correlations to assist in site characterisation and tunnel design. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 39:185–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bieniawski Z (1973) Engineering classification of rock masses. Trans S African Inst Civ Engrs 15(12):335–344Google Scholar
  6. Bieniawski Z (1978) Determining rock mass deformability—experience from case histories. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 15:237–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown E (2008) Estimating the mechanical properties of rock masses. In: Proceedings of the 1st southern hemisphere international rock mechanics symposium: SHIRMS 2008, Perth, Western Australia, vol 1, pp 3–21Google Scholar
  8. Carranza-Torres C (2004) Elasto-plastic solution of tunnel problems using the generalized form of the Hoek-Brown failure criterion. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 2004; 41(3):480–1. In: Hudson JA, Feng X-T, editors. Proceedings of the ISRM SINOROCK 2004 symposiumGoogle Scholar
  9. Fairhurst C (1964) On the validity of the “Brazilian” test for brittle materials. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 1(4):535–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fu W, Liao Y (2010) Non-linear shear strength reduction technique in slope stability calculation. Comput Geotech 37:288–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffith AA (1921)The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Philos Trans R Soc Lond (Ser A) 221(2), 163–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Griffith AA (1924) Theory of rupture. In: Proceedings of the 1st international congress on applied mechanics. Delft, The Netherlands, pp 55–63Google Scholar
  13. Hoek E (1983) Rankine lecture: strength of jointed rock masses. Géotechnique 33:187–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hoek E (1990) Estimating Mohr-Coulomb friction and cohesion values from the Hoek-Brown failure criterion. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 27(3):227–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hoek E, Brown E (1980a) Underground excavations in rock. Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoek E, Brown E (1980b) Empirical strength criterion for rock masses. J Geotech Eng Div 106(GT9):1013–1035Google Scholar
  17. Hoek E, Brown E (1988) The Hoek-Brown failure criterion: a 1988 update. In: Proceedings of the 15th Canadian Rock Mech. Symp (Edited by Curran J. C.), pp 31–38Google Scholar
  18. Hoek E, Brown E (1997) Practical estimates of rock mass strength. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 34(8):1165–1186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoek E, Brown E (2018) The Hoeke-Brown failure criterion and GSI-2018 edition. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng. Scholar
  20. Hoek E, Carranza-Torres C, Corkum B (2002) Hoek-Brown criterion e 2002 edition. In: Hammah R, Bawden W, Curran J, Telesnicki M (eds) Mining and tunneling innovation and opportunity, proceedings of the 5th North American rock mechanics symposium and 17th tunnelling association of Canada conference. Toronto, Canada. University of Toronto, Toronto, pp 267–73Google Scholar
  21. Hoek E, Diederichs M (2006) Empirical estimation of rock mass modulus. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43:203–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hoek E, Martin C (2014) Fracture initiation and propagation in intact rock e a review. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 6(4):278–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kumar P (1998) Shear failure envelope of Hoek-Brown criterion for rockmass. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 13(4):453–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mogi K (1966) Pressure dependence of rock strength and transition from brittle fracture to ductile flow. Bull Earthq Res Inst 44:215–232Google Scholar
  25. Palmström A (1996) Characterizing rock masses by RMi for use in practical rock engineering (Part 1: the development of the rock mass index (RMi)). Tunn Undergr Space Technol 11(2):175–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Palmström A, Singh R (2001) The deformation modulus of rock masses-comparisons between in situ tests and indirect estimates. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 16(3):115–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Priest S (2005) Determination of shear strength and three-dimensional yield strength for the Hoek-Brown criterion. Rock Mech Rock Eng 38(4):299–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Read S, Richards L (2014) Correlation of direct and indirect tensile tests for use in the Hoek-Brown constant mi. Rock Engineering and Rock Mechanics: Structures in and on Rock Masses. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Schwartz A (1964) Failure of rock in the triaxial shear test. In: Proceedings of the 6th rock mechanics symposium. University of Missouri, Rolla, USA, pp 109–151Google Scholar
  30. Serafim J, Pereira J (1983) Considerations on the geomechanical classification of Bieniawski. In: Proceedings of the symposium on engineering geology and underground openings. Lisboa, Portugal, pp 1133–1144Google Scholar
  31. Stephens R, Banks D (1989) Moduli for deformation studies of the foundation and abutments of the Portugues Dam—Puerto Rico. In: Rock mechanics as a guide for efficient utilization of natural resources: Proceedings of the 30th US symposium, Morgantown. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 31–38Google Scholar
  32. Shen J, Karakus M, Xu C (2012a) Direct expressions for linearization of shear strength envelopes given by the Generalized Hoek-Brown criterion using genetic programming. Comput Geotech 44:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shen J, Priest SD, Karakus M (2012b) Determination of Mohr-Coulomb shear strength parameters form generalized Hoek-Brown criterion for slope stability analysis. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45:123–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ulusay R, Hudson J (2007) The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization, testing and monitoring: 1974-2006. ISRM Turkish National Group, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  35. Zuo J, Li H, Xie H, Ju Y, Peng S (2008) A nonlinear strength criterion for rocklike materials based on fracture mechanics. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 45(4):594–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zuo J, Liu H, Li H (2015) A theoretical derivation of the Hoek-Brown failure criterion for rock materials. J Rock Mech Geotech Eng 7(4):361–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanics and Civil EngineeringChina University of Mining & Technology-BeijingBeijingChina
  2. 2.Institute of Port, Coastal and Offshore EngineeringZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations