Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
I. INTRODUCTION
2. SURFACES OF FAILURE
Rock slopes may fail in a number of direrent modes
(Jennings)- these involve concepts of potential failure along
a plane or combination of plane surfaces, formed largely
along the discontinuities or joints. Two basic forms illustrated
in Fig. 1 are recognised.
ESY
Shror failure
jolt-31 surlorr
along
The average joint properties (items (i) and (iii) ) for the
joints of a set define the average or design joint. These average
properties are obtained quantitatively from an analysis of
joint data obtained in a field survey of the joints occurring
in the rock mass.
The quantitative desi-en joint data from item (i) is introduced into a mathematical model (item (ii) ) to calculate
quantitatively the composition of any given potential failure
surface. Since the design joint properties (item (iii) ) and the
intact rock properties (item (iv)) have been obtained, the
effects that each of these properties has on the strength of the
failure surface, may be measured in laboratory tests (item
(v) ). Knowing the effect on strength of these properties and
the composition of the failure surface, an estimate may be
made of the total strength along the failure surfaces.
Jennings develops a model to represent the failure surface
and this aspect is not considered further.
3. THE JOINT SURVEY
The third geological proposition (Piteau) stating thaf u
reliable model represenring joinling of a rock mass can be
comrructed assumes that the nature of the joints and their
-spatial distribution is known or can be determined. Since it
is impossible to examine each and every joint in the mass
this information must be gained from o sumpIe ojfhe joints
which are selected in a joint sirrvey during which the various
properties of interest can be measured.
These samples must be sufficiently large to ensure that the
information determined from them is sufficiently accurate
for the third geological proposition to be justified. Where the
jointing patterns difTer for various regions (i.e. structural
regions) the sampling must be sufhciently extensive to permit
the detection and definition of joint sets and the definition of
joint properties for each of these structural regions. The
sample data required may be large, as illustrated by the
de Beers mine survey where 9 000 joints with the measurement of 14 features of interest on each joint were required to
determine the joint population for only one lithological
strata type for approximately half of the mine circumference.
The geologist undertaking the. joint survey will have
intimate contact with the rock mass and long hours spent
observing and recording joint data will give him a good
understanding of the properties of the rock mass and how
these may vary from place to place. His assessment of structural regions, or regions likely to cause instability, and of
the effects of other geological features are of utmost importance.
Field survey
Sampling may be conducted on exposed rock faces of
various forms. If the surface is large the number of joints
exposed may also be large and some form of selection may
;have to be applied to reduce the sample size. Techniques
,which rely on the geoIogirts judgment for recognising the
joint sets of importance can greatly reduce the volume of
data and allow the effort to be concentrated on the
apparently significant joint sets, but there is always the risk
of missing or discounting sets which are nevertheless of
considerable importance. This risk is greatly reduced when
using sampling techniques which sample all the joints that
i intersect a face of limited size or line of limited length. Line
jsanrp/itrg, in which all the joints which intersect a given line
j are sampled, has the advantage that the mathematics for the
data analysis is simpler and hence more easily extended than
that for area or surface sampling. For a sampling face or
line of given length the latter yields a smaller sample and
hence is more economical to implement where extensive
surfaces are available for sampling. A more detailed discussion of the method of sampling is presented by Piteaur and
the accuracy of area (surface) and line sampling is further
considered in Section 7.
The bulk of data in measurements of particular properties,
such as roughness on a joint surface and the complex nature
of many of these properties. make it necessary to resort to
classitications which are qualitative rather than quantitative.
i Since numerical values are required for use in the stability
! calculations, it is necessary to determine quantitatively, by
laboratory testing. the ef%cts that each qualitative classification has on the strength along the joint. Such testing permits
the assignment of quantitative values to describe the effects
on strength of each class interval of the qualitative classitication of properties used in the field.
The strength along a potential failure surface is primarily
controlled by its orientation and position in relation to the
slope under consideration and by the amount of intact rock
that must be sheared through. Since the size, number, spatial
orientation and distribution of joints in the rock mass
determine these factors, these are the joint properties which
are of primary interest. The joint features that determine
these properties should be measured with as great an accuracy
as possible. All other features may be coarsely measured by
comparison. Hence, dip and dip direction angles and joint
trace lengths should be individually measured. The other
properties are grouped into classifications of tive class intervals (five finger classification) wherever possible. Such a
grouping has been found to be readily followed in the field
by staff with a minimum of training since the two extreme
values, the middle and the two intermediate values, soon
become apparent.
Sampiing considerarions
Joint surveys are conducted on rock faces associated
outcrops, exposed slope faces, trenches, tunnels, shafts,
hole sides and bore hole cores. In all these cases the
sampled is limited by physical limitations, with the
with
bore
area
area
5
)en
,af -n
eticz
3per
mze
W..
itor.
n In
.ium
rn Ir 1
and
SOI-
nld e
?ady
ninir
jeep
vita
,lanr.
clear
dami
fori
ory p1
lines
-------o_
180
Ia)
Dip
360
direction
(bl
he F.
_ r.
<atIc
4
npoj:
,inee 1
;
aspi,
i
,cctioo
.
NV9
cos le, - e,1 c o s I(& + 6j) - 901
..(I)
D E S I G N J O I N T SURYEY
F O R D E B E E R S XINE
UF A L L .lOKNTS
SECTION
0.1
5.t
L0.C
L5.L
7u.t
:5.1
10.t
3S.!
V0.C
b5.C
5O.C
55.c
i0.C
i5.i
70.:
1S.C
3U.C
85.C
95.c
S0.C
75.c
7o.c
65.0
50.0
55.0
50-u
US.0
UU.0
15.0
30.0
53
SECTION 53
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
0
o
0
o
0
o
L
o
0
o
0
j
f
000053u):
0000000!
L 0 0
0 0 0 0
;
0000000l
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :
0 L J 0
1 0 0
2
0
1
L
1
10
0
0
1 0 0 0
1 L 0 0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
L 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
9 cl 0
1 0 0 0
L 0 0 3 0
,; j
1
0
0
0 0 0 0 I) J
,Laouoou 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 J
,ooooooo 0
0
0
0
0 OOOOJ~bi
0
0
0
0 0000000
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :
)0000200
0
0
0 oooooool
)0000000 0
0
0
0 OOLOOOOl
25.0
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0 ooooonn:
20.0
)0000000
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 4-d I :
1
0
L00000
15.0
0
0
0
0 0000000;
10.0
)0000000
0
0
0
0 0000000~
,ooooooo
5.0
0 . 0
L-O-~Q__O--O~~O__O_-Q-~ .o~-o..o--o~ ~O--D~~O-~Q~-D~~Q~~Q~~~
t l O . O 2 0 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 c o . o 2 6 0 . 0 2 8 0 . 0 ,oo.o
3 2 0 . 0 lkO.0 16S.C
190.0 210.0 230.0 250.0 270.0 290.0
3 1 0 . 0 330.0 3 5 0 . 0
J.0
30.010 0 0
90.0:
6
6
0 0
2 0 1
&e3ecta"q"lar
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0
2
0
3
0
0
i 6
0 0 0
6o.o;o
55.01 0
50.0: 0
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a*o*o
o* u* a
o* 04 0
3
0
0
a
a
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ULz; IO 0
00
00
00
02
00
00
0 I( 0*0*0*0*0 o* o* 0 01 0 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0*0*0*0*0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10.0; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o* 0. a* o* a 0 0 0 0 0 0
25.0; 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 o* o* a* o* o* a* 0 3 0 0 0 0
20.0, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0. o*o* 0.0'0 0 0 0 0 0
~5.0; 0 0 I 0 0 0 o* o* a* o* o* a* 0. o* 0 0 0 0 0
~0.01 0 0 0 0. o* o* 00 o* 0. o* o* a* o* o* o* o* 0. 0 0
5.0: o* o* o* o* a* o* 0. o* aA o* 04 a* o* o* o* o* 0. 0' 0.
O.Ol~O~D?~O~Q-Q~D~-O~~Q~-Q~~D~~Q~~O~-O~~Q~~O~-D~~Q~.D~~Q~-~
35.01
1 8 0 . 0 2 0 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2 u o . o 2 6 0 . 0 2 8 0 . 0 3 0 0 . 0 3 2 0 . 0 340.0 3 6 0 . 0
190.0 210.0 210.0 250.0 270.0 290.0 110.0 330.0 350.0
:
'
90.0
90.0
0
6
0
6
0
2
0
0
0
3
0
2
Rectangular
0
0
0
~
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
.i
0 . 0
2lUOl6
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bias
Fig. 7
Fig. 9
Oireclion
of
l i n e sample
/L
to joint set
. . . . . . . . . . . . .._
The corrected rectangular plots may be rapidly constructed on the computer and have proven to be extremely useful
for the visual definition of joint sets, while the comparison
of different plots indicates whether the sampled data on each
was from the same population, i.e. the same structural region.
5. DETERMINATION OF STRUCTURAL
REGIONS
Many workers in the field of the mechanics of jointed rock
recognise that a rock mass may be divided into zones of
similar jointing or structural regions. Since jointing to a
5 9
SECTION 4
Lsrruc,ura, Rcpron El
DIP DIRECTION A C R O S S A N D D I P A N G L E DOWN
0.0 20.0 uo.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 160.0
10.0 30.0 50.0 70.0 90.0 110.0 130.0 150.0 170.0
0 . 0
5 . 0
10.0
15.0
20.0
z-5 . 0
30.0
35.0
uo.0
45.0
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
EO.0
85.0
85.0
80.0
75.0
70.0
65.0
60.0
55.0
50.0
45.0
L10.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
l&QLp,~Lp~~~~
~~+~~,~ p 9 i i H
(!Yzc3
12'24 z-51 0 0 0 0
0 35' 3.
fi7 0 1 0 0
0~0.'0'8/2 0 10 0 0
0 btll'i; 000000
0 o*o'*o 0 0 0 10 1
0 o*o** 0 0 0 0 0 1
012'0.U
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 o* 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0
0.0 0 0 0
04 0. o* 0. 0
o* 04 09 0' o*
o* o* o* o* 0.
___-_____-_____
0 1 0
10 0
0 1 0
0 0 1
0 01
12 0
0 0 0
0 0 1
I 0 0
0
0 0 01
0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3
0 2
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0
0 0 0
5.
o* c* 0. 0.
0' o* 04 o*
160.0 200.0 220.0 2*0.0 260.0 260.0 300.0 320.0 3YO.O 360.0
0.0
190.0 210.0 230.0 250.0 270.0 290.0 310.0 330.0 350.0
90.0
90.0
0000000000000000102;
20020001l"0000000000~
Fig. I1
structural region. The data for each subset are fed into the
computer. Uncorrected as well as directional bias, standard
length and projection error corrected rectangular plots are
then made. The values reflected on all the plots of a similar
type (i.e. having similar applied corrections) for each structural region are then summed and accumulated plots made.
The most useful of these plots is the accumulated plot for the
structural region in which the subsets of data have been
corrected for directional bias and to standard lengths. Pro-vided at least two approximately perpendicular sections of
sufficient length were sampled in a structural region this
cumulative rectangular plot should be representative of the
total joint population in the structural region. Such a
cumulative plot is shown in Fig. 13.
_-___.
,
!
!
i
!
I
i
I
0.5
s..,
L3.J
LS.,,
2J.J
*>.a
102
15.)
UG.J
*j.O
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
is.0
90.0
35.0
65.0
90.0
75.1)
70.0
SS.0
50.0
IS.0
13.3
us.0
0 . 3
IS.0
10.0
2 5 . 0
2 0 . 0
1 5 . 0
10.0
5 . 0
0 . 0
0 0 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 0 J 0
0~0000000000
~0000000 :: 0 0 0
~~0000G00000
LJJ300350lJ000
ao5oclooooooo
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 II 0
0
2
0
0 3 0 ,, 0 ; 0 0 0 0 0 0
000000050000
000003000000
000010000000
0. 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 0 0
3 9. I* 0 0 0 0 i 0 <* 0 3
0 0 0. 0. IT* 0. 0 0 0 I* 0. 0.
)* 0 o* 0 0. 0 0 0 0. 0 0. o*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 0. C)= u
0 0 o* 0
0 0. 0. 0
0
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0.
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0.
0.
o*
0.
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0.
0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
o*
0
0
0
0.
0
3
0
0.
0
a*
0
0.
0.
0.
0
3
cl*
0.0
I.0
10.0
15 .o
20.0
25.0
10.0
35.0
uo.0
US.0
10.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
60.0
85.0
95.0
60.0
75.0
70.0
65.0
60.0
55.0
so.0
"5.0
Iro.0
35.0
30.0
0
0
0
2
2
1
1
0. 8. O
o*, 6 ,o
O.J/ 0
0 0 0
0 c 0
0. 0 Cl
0 0 0
0. 0 0
o* 0 0
0 0 0
9 c 0
c* J 0
c* 0 0
0 0 0
0 o* 0
0 0. 0
0. 0. o*
0 0. 0
0 0 0
0 o* 0.
0 o* 0.
0000000000302000000
0000000006000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
2
0
1
8
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
3
0
0
1
L
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
L
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
I
2
0
0
1
3 1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,
0
0
2
5
2
1
L
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0190 0
0 016
0 0 0
0
0
0
027
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
101r
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
3
3
1
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
9
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
6
10
1
3
5 II -k-i ,;
3lti ii-r3 ,31 1s 11
2s
r.2
7 2s 32 I
17 11
5
1028L9
23 13 13
1.8
0
1
10 2
9 ; {!H
iY r-1.
1 1
0
3
9
0
1
0
010
0
u
0
0
0
9
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
3
0
1
0
10
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
v
0
0
0
0
2
0
013
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
6
017
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
9 0 0
0
0
7
0
0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
101012
0
0
1
0
L
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
70 0 0
00 0 0
00 0 0
00 0 0
00 10
LO 0 0
00 0 1
00 9 0
00 0 0
00 0 0
00 0 0
00 0 0
00 0 0
01 10
010 1
00
2
1
0
1 15
00
1
Y
0 0
1 2
10
0
2
1 :
1 0
00
0
0
00
0
1
II
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0
0
02
00
00
00
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
0 0
10
0 0
0 0
0 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
:
0
0
I
0
2
2
2
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
180.0 200.0 220.0 2uo.o 260.0 280.0 300.0 320.0 3vo.o 360.0
0 . 3
190.0 210.0 210.0 250.0 270.0 290.0 310.0 330.0 350.0
90.0
90.0
00000000
11110001
0
v
0 3 12000101
6000000000
Fig. 13
160.0 2 0 0 . 0 2 2 0 . 0 2bO.O
i60.0 2 8 0 . 0 3 0 0 . 0 3 2 0 . 0 3 9 0 . 0 160.0
0.0
1 9 0 . 0 2 1 0 . 0 2Jci.O 2 5 0 . 0 2 7 0 . 0 2 9 0 . 0 310.0 330.0 150.0
90.0
90.0
5.
0.
5.
0.
5.
0 .
0
0
0
0
cl
0
1
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
cl
L
2
I
:
!
Fig. 12
6 . D E T E R M I N A T I O N O F JO[NT S E T S A N D
THEIR PROPERTIES
The data are divided into data sets for each structural region.
Since sampling bias correctlons are different for different
sample line bearings, the data sets are sorted into subsets
for the various straight lengths of sample line within each
61
..
.
I
- .
^
-
pen
! .
of .Thc
,etical
Open
3nce 1<
W. J.
itor. Jc
,n lnsti
ium, 0
in lnsti
gnd he
some:;
Id expt
ady de
ining a
eeper F
rital thl.
anning
:early d
imined.;
orum w
Y and I
ies cou
n- 320
d problt
- observed
.tion of
>osium
eers in\
a---a- f i t t e d d = 03L3
5peCt O f
STRUCTURAL REGION I
Trace Length
ttt.1
R E G I O N B JOINT SET a
STRUCTURAL
Sl RUCTURAL R E G I O N
REGION
0
STRUCTURAL
REGION M
1
Trace t ength
trt.j
4.
.
Various functions were tried and it was found that an
exponential function of the form
y = e-=x
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._ (4)
appeared to be the most suitable. In the distributions illustrated the tit of the upper curve is considered to be good and
the lower poor. Of the joint sets for which trace length
distributions were plotted, all except for two could be fitted
with exponential function curves having good fits.
Determination of joint sizes, from length of dip and strike
traces visible in the tunnel, is possible only if the general
shape of the joints is known. Bivariate plots of dip trace
length against strike trace length indicated that, in the homogeneous igneous rock of de Beers mine, these were approximately equal (Robertson and Stamerrg), and joints were
considered to be round. Calculation of the joint sizes of circular joints from trace lengths underestimates the joint sizes
in the relationship (Robertson and StamerP):
/+!A
z-
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._ (6)
i
Since some of the joint sets may have developed simultaneously as a result of a general regional stress, they may
have similar characteristics although they occur in different
structural regions. To test this hypothesis comparisons were
made between trace length distributions for joint sets in
different structural regions but with similar orientations.
The Kilmogorov-Smirnov test for two samples was used
under the null hypothesis that the two observed trace length
samples came from the same population. These tests indicated
that although some of the samples could have come from the
same population, the majority were from different populations. The results of these tests supported conclusions reached
when comparisons of (L, Lf and Ljl were made. It was concluded that the majority of the joint sets must have developed
under different conditions of stress.
TABLE I
JOINT SETS AND THEIR AVERAGE PROPERTIES
Structural
reg.
loint
set
%
Gouge
Gouge
hardness
Calcite
Calcite
Calcite
Ef
RI
Joint
type
Waviness
per cent
5-10
>lO
Shear
Shear
Shear
8
27
7
Ave.
roughness
Hardness
joint sides
:
3
ii:
RS
Calcite
RI
Shear
R5
Calcite
RI
Shear
RS
Calcite
Calcite
:t
Shear
Shear
10
8
R5
R5
Calcite
Calcite
Calcite
RI-R2
RI-R2
Rl-R2
Shear
Shear
Shear
:
8
:
3
R5
R5
R5
Calcite
Calcite
RI-R2
RI-R2
Shear
Shear
8
5
1
-
RS
R5
I
I
/
Gouge
type
23
Calcite
RI
Shear
10
R5
23
Calcite
Rl
Shear
10
R5
Calcite
Calcite
Calcite
:t
RI
Shear
Shear
Shear
8
-
:
3
RS
R5
R5
Calcite
Calcite
Rl
Rl
Shear
Shear
13
7
I
-
R5
R5
Calcite
Calcite
RI
Rl
Shear
Shear
14
6
1
-
:z
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
:i
7
-
i
-
63
23
f
:
I
RI-R2
RI-R2
RI-R2
RI-R2
RI-R2
Rl-R2
n
n
ca
en
e
.J
r. .
Ins
n. .
Ins
ih
,rnE
exi
yd
;ng
per
al tl
min
The various joint set characteristics taken from the rectancular plots for the various structural regions about
de Beers mine are shown in Table 11. Tables I and 11,
together with the average dip and dip direction angles for
the various overlapping sets, define the design joints about
de Beers mine.
7. THE ACCURACY OF JOINT POPULATION
ESTIMATION FROM A SURVEY SAMPLE
The most critical factor determining the strength along a given
potential plane of failure is the continuity of joint surface
on it. As stated earlier this continuity is determmed largely
by the size and spatial arrangement of the join&s of the set
which occur on the plane and in particular by the density
of joints in the set. The accuracy of the determination of
these continuity factors depend on the accuracy with which
the joint characteristics, including density, can be determined.
It is therefore necessary to be able to make an assessment
of the reliability that can be placed on the joint set
properties determined.
wly
line
urn
and
s cc
prot
6
on c.
siur
3s i*
TABLE II
1OINT
SETS;
7
Observed
number
of joints
No.
I_____
Joint
set
Structural
region
lect
:E:F
joints
Estimate
for a.
sq. ft.
Area of largest
expected joint
ft.
No.
sq. ft.
0.534
0.475
0.390
4.47
5.64
8.36
0.174
42.05
0.541
4.34
366
320
0.506
0.343
4.98
10.81
2.23
3.29
:
C
63
185
13
0.365
0.291
0.359
9.56
15.03
9.89
3.09
3.88
3.15
265
240
0.589
0.382
3.66
8.72
720
0.442
6.48
-a
3 5 7
0.414
1.48
13
146
I
0.451
0.310
6.26
13.24
1.004
1.26
0.464
0.465
5.92
5.88
9.45
33.49
:.
I
rJ
C
i
I,:
i*
520
11
15
-__
228
___-
110
:ii
D
I
a
b
E
C
0.367
0.195
116
L
M
ii
206
it
241
25
4
:
e
f
Where :
:
13
~
1
0.834
0.816
0.255
0.990
1.007
0.850
6.50
2.08
806
422
314
305
(min)
ft.
ft.
1 534
196
165
355
225
494
180
127
308
71
&
41
0.6
4.2
4.5
39.2
14.0
12.9
18.9
15.0
22.2
13.4
0.72
0.34
1.35
0.9
1.5
1.0
_
-.
_
_.
2.5
1.1
2.9
2.54
2.75
344
766
222
326
14.9
18.1
0.73
I
(
1.0
2.52
3.64
1.13
_.
__
1.83
1.91
19.58
1.30
I.25
1.77
3.08
102
5.79
244
1.35
1.38
4.44
1.14
1.12
1.33
237
74
E
12
203
1 013
14.2
31.8
2.4
1.3
::
326
14
67::
18.1
3.3
5.2
6.8
. 1.0
2.4
3.6
8.0
2.4
1.8
ii
(I
IS as for equatton (4)
.
Lj is the average Joint length m a set
N is the corrected sample size
,511 is the length of the joint which is expected ro occur once in every 300 ft length taken normal to a joint set
dm IS the average distance between adjacent Joints in a set
64
; 1P
: $;t..
n - ,
............
. 14
m
An unbiased estimate of n is n^ = lP
ln . A
zz
. . . . . . . . . .(lO)
. . . . . . (11)
lVnr(i) = (-L)I.R($)
If joint sets are considered as data sets within a joint
population, then most forms of sampling will show a tendency to sample more of some sets than others. Hence, it is
necessary to determine the accuracy of estimation of each
set individually. A more detailed consideration of the assumptions and limitations inherent in this model is given by
Robertson.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .w
(fi) x ,ooy
= @ar
v
0
D
=
; x 100%
J
. . . . . . . . . . . . (13)
. . . ..__..._............. (14)
Projected
- k,
2
e-* . dt f o r ln > 10
==z
I
--co
joint
1 - tlz
is the standard normal deviate.
where - e
2x
Fig. 17. Illustration of end projection
CoS
ed . cos 8d
In a similar manner equations for estimating joint populations from other forms of joint surveys m a y be derived.
The ratio of the coefficients of variance is a measure of the
relative accuracies of the various forms of surveys. For line
and area sampling
(1 + tan8d. secod)~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
. . . . . . . . (15)
t 9 mpos
BeckSo
6tI_
3-
I-
pelOPme
, Ind the t
WNi
; ,ts It
hat the P
q such P
. describer
,&The SY,
I where W
d practice:
3&j disc1
+!rllS invj
of the Prc.
,,,, providl
;nvolved
: of minin
.imits f o r
Ob
0
20
se rved
.I-
ei0
(I 1
Fig. IS
For the particular case where joints are normal to the line
and face of sampling (and the dip is parallel to the h
dimension of the area sampling face) this equation reduces to
R=l+Sh
z!L
11
20
. . . . _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(16)
66
1.6
l.L
1.2
l-0
150
200
250
300
350
ioo
PROJECTED AREA OF JOINT G(squarc feet)
cso
500
550
Fig. 19
= cj f on tan 6~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *..(17)
The SYIE
Cal Backc
37 Pit Mir
? to Slope
J. van Re
Journal (
litute of 1
xganised
itute of f~
Id at Joh
300 defeg
m from n
slopment
d the tren
S it was
the print;!
ch Pmjec
ribed and
e w-npos,
e world a
rice of pla
"SCUSS ano
nvobed.
sroceedinc
I
des a V~C
in this
9.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18)
sm = cm + aII tan +m
where sf and sm are the strength of the joint and intact rock
material respectively,
cl and cm are the cohesive strength parameters,
41 and +m are the friction angles, and
on is the normal stress on the surface of consideration,
then, provided rigid body mechanics apply and sj and s,,,
are mobilized simultaneously, the strength-of the failure
surface would be given by
s = (I - k) (crfz + on t a n +*) + k (cj + a11 t a n 4j) _ .(19)
w h e r e k is defined as the continuity of joint plane on the
failure surface, and is given by
Cb
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20)
k =
Za -i- Xb
It is recognised that the assumption that sj and srn develop
simultaneously may not be justified. If, as in soil mechanics,
an idealized strength-strain curve such as curve abc in Fig. 21
could be assumed, then at failure the various points along
the failure surface would all lie (at peak strength) along
the portion bc of the curve. This does not hold for either
intact rock material or clean joint surfaces, since they have
idealized stress-strain curves which show a reduction in
strength after peak strength has been reached and may be
represented by idealized curve adef. The strain at which peak
joint strength and intact rock strengths are reached differ,
as does the slope of the portion ad of the respective stressstrain curves. As yet insufficient is known about the
relative contributions to strength from the intact rock and
from joint portions of the failure surface to produce the
combined stress-strain curve. The approach adopted here is
to accept mobilization of peak strengths from all sources
and to design slopes to a suitable factor of safety.
REFERENCES
SbfFfoil
0
53
.75G-G5
Firm soil
Sl
S t i f f roif
SS
Very stifi soil
I
h
-L
4
\
R3
Hard rock
RL
Very hard
rock
The process for determining the apparent strength parameters for a potential failure surface from the parameters
describing joint and intact rock strengths requires considerable further research and development.
9 . T H E E S T I M A T I O N O F cm, I A N D &,
FOR INTACT ROCK MATERIAL
535 00)
RS
very
hard rock
I
100
i
M
UNCONFINED
COMPRESSIVE
10
STRENGTH
lplll qu=2Cu
= O.lOqu
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .._......... (22)
i
These are approximate and discretion and caution should
i be exercised in their application.
j
!
1
,
r
I O . T H E E S T I M A T I O N O F cI A N D 4~
FOR JOINT SURFACES
i
i
c
I
0
1 = tan-2 L
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..__._...... (23)
TABLE III
STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR THE ROCKS ABOUT DE BEERS MINE
Rock 1 De$:~low 1
dolerite
Type
contact
Hardness
classification
I bT%
350
1500
56
240
t::
(0.73) 1.0
Surface to
contact -0
RI-R2
R3
W-31
R2
500
80
31-76
R2
500
80
50
76-127
Black,
Rl-R2
350
56
35
127-134
134-165
RI
200
32
20
165-174
Carbonaceous
174-280
Mudstone
RI
200
32
20
80-290
Owyka Tillite
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R4
3000
480
290-
Melaphyre
_ . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . _ . . .
RS
8ooo
1 280
9
10
slightly
micaceous
shale
shale
_ ..........
. . . . . . . . . . . .
_ . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . _ . . _ . . . . . . . _ . . . .
69
(0.73) 1.0
1.0
The
ical I3
Fen Pi
;e
to
i
1
. J. vi i
tr, Jo1 _
lnstitl .~n
I
m. erg
InstitL
II held
>me 3( i
exper
ly devc !
ing an
per pit
al that
sning S
3rly de: I
hined. 1 :
urn wf :
and pr
s coulc
probler
on of tl
6ium p
31s invc
lect of 1
Cl
= CI#
+I
. . . . . . . . .._.._.. (24)
h# >
TABLE IV
FRlCTlON ANGLES FOR PLASTER MODELLED JOINTS OF VARIOUS ROUCHNESSES
Roughness
category
escription of
-0int surface
4 at low normal
stresses
Contain ng gouge
14
. . . .
..
4 at high normal
stresses
Gouge controls
Gouge controls
25
3 I-40
29)
38-47O
40-50
-
__-
32+
36
42
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes lo thank de Beers Consolidated Mines
for permission lo reproduce certain information and results
in this paper and to express his appreciation to Professor
J. E. Jennings of the University of the Witwatersrand under
whose direction most of the work described was conducted,
for his enthusiasm, encouragement and assistance. The
guidance of R. Stamer of Operation Research Bureau (Pty.)
Ltd. on the statistical concepts, and of D. R. Piteau, on the
engineering geological aspects, is acknowledged with appreciation and thanks.
Cj = cjc
h = +jc
................
CI
REFERENCES
I. BROADBENT. C . D . S l o p e s t a b i l i t y p r o g r a m o f K e n n e c o t t
Copper Corporation, Pre-print for presentation at the annual
meeting of A.I.M.E. February, 1968, New York.
2. EVDOKIMO\~, P. D. and SAPECIN, D. D. Stability, shear and
sliding resistance, and deformation of rock foundations,
70-x%
. . . . (27)
I
6.
J ENNINGS ,
print. 1970.
1 8 . RO B E R T S O N , A. MAcG. and JENKINCS, J. E. Strength parameters for rock slopes, Report on the stability of the side
slopes of the big hole of the de Beers mine, Kimberley,
South Africa, 1968.
19. R O B E R T S O N , A. MAcG. and S T A M E R, R. The interpretation
of joint survey data, Report on the stability of the side slopes
of the big-hole of the de Beers mine, Kimberley, South Africa,
1968.
20. RO S E N G R E N, K. J. Rock mechanics of the Black Star Open
Cut, Mount Isa, Ph.D. Thesis, The Australian National
Uni;ersity, 1968.
21.
Geotech-