See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327417259

2D and 3D Analysis of Rock Slopes Case Study

Presentation · September 2018

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.11897.31844

CITATIONS READS

0 481

3 authors, including:

Timothy Malcolm Johnson Neil Bar

Red Rock Geotechnical BHP Billiton Limited
5 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    50 PUBLICATIONS   116 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Rockfalls: experimental testing, modelling, design of protection measures View project

Anisotropic Rock Masses and Directional Shear Strength Models View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Timothy Malcolm Johnson on 04 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2D and 3D Analysis of Rock Slopes
Case study

Tim Johnson
BSc MEngSc MAusIMM(CP Geotech)

Engineering Geology & Rock Mechanics Seminar - 31 August 2018

Co-author Acknowledgements
• Neil Bar
(Gecko Geotechnics, Cairns)

• Geoffrey Weekes
(Red Rock Geotechnical, Perth)

2
Anisotropy is everywhere. Isotropy is rare.
• Round stones are collectors’ items, and any almost cubic blocks are
photographed, as they are the exception. (Barton & Quadros, 2014)

3
Anisotropic Rock Masses
• Iron Ore – Banded Iron Formation interbedded with weak shales
• Coal strata and surrounding mudstones, siltstones and sandstones
• Pervasive but discontinuous joint sets or fabrics.

4
Types of Anisotropy
• Fabric Anisotropy: define intact rock properties: e.g. cleavage, schistosity, bedding. Measurable at
laboratory scales.
• Rock Mass Anisotropy: defined by rock layering on bench or larger scale. E.g. lithological banding,
zones of shear, intercalated rock layers of different strength.
• Secondary Anisotropy: e.g. cross jointing, crenulation cleavage.
Rock mass (intercalated shale and Banded Iron Formation)

5
Concept of Directional Shear Strengths
• Applying different shear strengths in different directions!

FOS=1.29 FOS=0.77
when when weak
isotropic bedding
behavior considered
modelled

6
 Concept of Directional Shear Strengths
• Transition from rock mass or intact rock
strength to discontinuity strength can be
difficult to predict.
• Back-analysis of failures, or stable slopes often
helps..
• Software such as Slide have many options:
• Anisotropic Strength (sine-curve)
• Anistropic Linear (assumes a linear transition)
• Anisotropic Function “pinwheel” (user-defined)
• The direction of anisotropy has generally had
to be user defined.

Bar, Johnson & Weekes. 2016.

7
 Limitations of 2D Anisotropy Modelling
• Anisotropy (or true dip) can only be correctly modelled in three-
dimensions. When creating two-dimensional vertical cross-sections of
a slope, the representation of any anisotropy is inherently likely to
result in an ‘apparent dip’.
• This usually means one of two things:
• 3D: Discontinuities that do not fully daylight or do not have potential for
planar sliding but may appear to be problematic in 2D. I.e. 2D worse than
actual
• Apparent dip is shallower than true dip and discontinuities that do daylight
and have potential for planar sliding may appear slightly more favourable in
2D than in 3D (due to appearing “flatter” than the critical dip angle for
sliding). I.e. 2D better than actual.

Bar et al. 2016; Bar & Weekes, 2017.

8
3D methods – automated orientation of anisotropy.

Slide V7 model

Complex enough in
2D, try this manual
build in 3D!

9
 3D methods
• Incorporation of anisotropy where this is variable (such as folded bedding)
can be time consuming or not practical (especially in slope scale 3D
models).
• Automated methods that enable anisotropic shear strengths to be assigned
automatically to the correct defect orientation are required (i.e. in the case
of this study – follow bedding folding)
• Methods using 3D Limit equilibrium: Slide3DTM, SVSlopeTM (both methods
reference structural / stratigraphic boundaries to interpolate directional
anisotropy).
• Methods using FLAC3D (Itasca 2012):
• UJRM (ubiquitous joint rock mass) method (Sainsbury 2013, Wines 2015)
• Extended IUCM (improved unified constitutive model) method (Vakili, 2016)

Itasca. 2012, Sainsbury. 2013, Wines. 2015, Vakili. 2016

10
Case study – 2D vs 3D. Iron Ore cutback
350m high cutback, Pilbara Region, Western Australia.

Banded Iron Formation (BIF) and

shales
Transected by narrow dolerites
and one major fault zone.
Above water table

Johnson et al. 2016.

11
Geotechnical Design History
Earlier studies based on 2D limit equilibrium methods.
Recommended flattening the slope. Potential deferral of a large quantity of ore to the next cutback.
Note preceding cutback was mined without any large scale stability issues. But was not mined to full
depth due to rockfall issues (concurrent mining).

1.12 1.03

Johnson, et al. 2016, Bar. 2012

12
Geotechnical Design History - Issues
Shear strength model: The anisotropic model used has a large influence on analysis results.

Anisotropic Strength Anisotropic Linear

FoS = 0.87

FoS = 1.42
1.423

900mRL

Unit Weight Cohesion Water

Material Name Color Strength Type Phi Ru
(kN/m3) (kN/m2) Surface

J2 32 Mohr-Coul omb 445 56.3 None 0 175.348

WS2 29 Mohr-Coul omb 190 46 None 0 800mRL

WS1 29 Mohr-Coul omb 190 46 None 0 52°

DG3 35 Mohr-Coul omb 239 46.6 None 0

DG2 35 Mohr-Coul omb 239 46.6 None 0

DG1 32 Mohr-Coul omb 239 46.6 None 0

MCS 20 Mohr-Coul omb 93 39.1 None 0

670mRL
Dol eri te 21 Mohr-Coul omb 148 48.6 None 0

FWZ 30 Mohr-Coul omb 211 48.6 None 0

FZ 25 Mohr-Coul omb 20 35 None 0

Mega Jt 20 Mohr-Coul omb 0 10 None 0

MTS 20 Mohr-Coul omb 168 48.2 None 0

Johnson, et al. 2016, Bar. 2012

13
Geotechnical Design History - Issues
Apparent dip: for much of the slope (In particular the high western wall)
bedding dips outside the planar siding envelope. 2D analysis using
anisotropic strengths assumes the apparent bedding is true bedding.

Strike of bedding perpendicular to the slope face

Johnson, et al. 2016, Bar. 2012

14
Geotechnical Design History - Issues
3D confinement: The cutback slope is semi-circular in plan. The sections
returning a low FoS are located within the concave part of the slope and
are therefore laterally confined. 2D analysis is conservative.

Johnson, et al. 2016.

15
Design solution – Fabric Anisotropy
3D numerical model (FLAC3D) developed by Itasca. UJRM method enabled rock mass
anisotropy to be incorporated into the model.
• Step 1 characterise rock mass strength taking into account anisotropy – synthetic rock
mass in 3DEC (explicit structure)

Johnson, et al. 2016

16
Design solution- Fabric Anisotropy
Anisotropic strength curve developed for each rock mass unit.
• Block size was derived from the quantitative GSI chart proposed by Cai et al. (2007) and
modified by Hoek (2013).
• Ground truthed against field observations

Johnson, et al. 2016

17
Design solution – Rock Mass Anisotropy
• Incorporate shale partings at logged/mapped intervals in 3DEC for closely intercalated
units.
• Some widely spaced shale bands and joint structures explicitly incorporated as weak
planes in the FLAC3D model.

Explicit shale bands and faults simulated within the FLAC3D

Johnson, et al. 2016
18
Design solution
• Strength curves for different material types – weaker zones such as shale units have
flatter curves as the contrast between intact rock strength and defect shear strength is
lower than for stronger BIF units

Johnson, et al. 2016

19
Design solution
Step 2: Slope scale FLAC3D model must be calibrated to match that predicted by 3DEC. This
is carried out using “ubiquitous joints” or planes of weakness in simulated triaxial tests
within FLAC3D. For this case study Ubiquitous joints refer to both bedding an cross jointing.

25m

50m

Johnson, et al. 2016

20
Design solution
Step 3: The orientation of the ubiquitous joints are matched to the structural geology
model triangulations in the FLAC3D model.
a)

Ubiquitous joint orientation

(light blue, bedding only)

Provided DXF (Blue)

b)

Johnson, et al. 2016

21
Design solution
Step 4: Calibration against existing pit using monitoring data

Johnson, et al. 2016

22
Design solution
Results & outcome?
Original Design Revised (steeper) design
Final Pit

Johnson, et al. 2016

23
Design solution
Evolution….maintenance of models as mining progresses is essential. Geology updates and
calibration
Extended south wall model Addition of more shale bands

FoS < 1.0

1.00 < FoS < 1.10
1.10 < FoS < 1.20
1.20 < FoS < 1.25
1.25 < FoS < 1.30
1.30 < FoS < 1.40
1.40 < FoS < 1.50
FoS > 1.5

Johnson, et al. 2016

24
Bottom Line
Previous cutback

Shallower single batter

Design (2D LE)

FE Ore contact

Lower Ramp)
Steeper design Ore that would
have been deferred
original design

Wide 20m berm

Ore that was

gained

Johnson, et al. 2016

25
This was long term project, complex, and required a lot of time and
effort.

BUT

Its getting easier for practioners…….3D limit equilibrium options.

Examples:

26
 Case studies using 3D limit equlibrum: Gold
Mine WA
• Bedding favorably dipping into slope (i.e. not daylighting)

2D FOS=1.57 2D FOS=1.42 3D-EXT FOS=1.55 FULL-3D FOS=1.61

when isotropic with anisotropic with anisotropic when anisotropic
behavior modelled behavior modelled behavior modelled behavior modelled

Bar & Weekes, 2017.

27
 2D vs 3D Case Study 2: Iron Ore WA
• Bedding variable – complex geology and pit design interaction
• 3D model identifies critical
failure mechanisms between
selected 2D cross-sections
(which were chosen by experienced
principal engineer)

Bar & McQuillian, 2018 (in press).

28
 Case studies using 3D limit equlibrum: Iron
Ore WA (2)
• Sub-horizontal bedding – added 3D roughness or waviness in
anisotropy.
• Pit curvature effects

2D FOS=0.82

2D FOS=1.19
Bar & McQuillian, 2018 (in press).
29
References
Barton, N. and Quadros, E., 2015, Anisotropy is Everywhere, to See, to Measure, and to Model, Rock Mechanics & Rock
Engineering Journal, 48-4, 1323-1330.
Bar N, Johnson TM, Weekes G (2016) Using directional shear stress models to predict slope stability in highly anisotropic rock
masses. In Ulusay et al. (eds.), Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering: From the Past to the Future; Proc. ISRM int. symp.
Eurock 2016, Cappadocia, 29-31 August 2016: pp 595-600.
Bar, N. and Weekes, G., 2017, Directional shear strength models in 2D and 3D limit equilibrium analyses to assess the stability
of anisotropic rock slopes in the Pilbara Region of Western Australia, Australian Geomechanics Journal, 52-4, 91-104.
Cai, M, Kaiser PK, Tasaka, Y & Minami, M 2007, Determination of residual strength parameters of jointed rock masses using
the GSI system, International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, vol. 44, pp. 247–265.
Hoek, E, Carter, TG & Diederichs, MS 2013, Quantification of the Geological Strength Index chart, in 47th US Rock
Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, ARMA 13-672, San Francisco.
Johnson, T.M. Pere, V. Dixon, R. de Graaf, P. Wines, D.R. Hebert, Y. (2016) Geotechnical Optimisation of Southern Ridge
Cutback 3 at Tom Price mining operations. In Dight, P. (ed.), Proceedings of the First Asia Pacific Slope Stability in Mining
Conference, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp 183-199.
Sainsbury, DP & Sainsbury, BL 2013, Three-dimensional Analysis of Pit Slope Stability in Anisotropic Rock Masses, in PM Dight
(ed.) Proceedings of the International Symposium on Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and Civil Engineering, Australian
Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 683–696.
Vakili A. 2016. An improved unified constitutive model for rock material and guidelines for its application in numerical
modelling, Computers and Geotechnics 80 (2016) pp261-282. Elsevier
Wines, DR 2015, ‘A Comparison of Slope Stability Analyses in Two and Three Dimensions’, in Proceedings of Slope Stability
2015: International Symposium on Slope Stability in Open Pit Mining and Civil Engineering, SAIMM.

30
View publication stats