Complex Engineering Problem

Rock mechanics (Theory)

COMPLEX ENGINEERING PROBLEM

Submitted to:
Dr. Zaka Emad

Submitted by:
Qamar Shahzad (2016-GE-26)
Nayab Fareed (2016-GE-37)

DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY,
LAHORE

pg. 1
 Complex Engineering Problem

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 3
2 ROCK MASS PROPERTIES ................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Rock mass classes determined by total rating .................................................................... 4
2.2 Formation A ...................................................................................................................... 4
2.2.1 Q - System ................................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Formation B ...................................................................................................................... 5
3 ELASTIC STRESSES OVER RADIAL STRESSES ............................................................... 6
3.1 Kirsch equation ................................................................................................................. 6
4 TUNNEL OPENINGS .......................................................................................................... 7
5 STANDUP TIME ESTIMATION ......................................................................................... 8
5.1 Estimation for support requirements .................................................................................. 8
6 VERIFICATION OF TUNNEL DESIGNE........................................................................... 9
6.1 Minor stresses ................................................................................................................... 9
6.2 Major stresses.................................................................................................................. 10
7 STRENGTH OF ROCK ..................................................................................................... 10
8 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 11
9 DISCUSSION..................................................................................................................... 11
10 REFERENCE ..................................................................................................................... 12

pg. 2
 Complex Engineering Problem

1. INTRODUCTION
Tunnel design is a prime technology in engineering and is significant in various engineering disciplines.
Road tunnels are enclosed roads with access to vehicles that are restricted to portals regardless of
structure type or construction method. Tunnels are beneficial in several ways. Beyond certain depths
they are more economical than open cuts. Tunnels are much safer than bridges or open breaks, which
are better suited for transportation. We carried out other objectives; measured rock mass properties,
determined the in situ stresses with the help of formulas. To determine rock properties is also very
important for such a mega project. We use RMR system and Q system to determine the properties of
the rock present in our field area. Rock mass classification plays important role to determine the
engineering properties of the rocks. It helps us to determine the design of the tunnel.
2. ESTIMATION OF RMR VALUES
Z.T. Bieniawski (1989) has developed the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system. The RMR uses six
parameters, as follows:
 Uniaxial compressive strength of rock
 RQD
 Spacing of discontinuities
 Condition of discontinuities
 Groundwater condition
 Orientation of discontinuities
The ratings for each of these parameters are obtained from Table. The sum of the six parameters
becomes the basic RMR value.
Table 1 calculation of RMR
Parameters Given values Ratings
RQD 80% - 90% 17
Point load index 6.1 Mpa 12
UCS 166 Mpa 12
Un weathered 6
Rough joint surface 5
Spacing None 6
Favourable -2
RMR value = 56

pg. 3
 Complex Engineering Problem

2.1 Rock mass classes determined by total rating

Table 2 classification of rock
Rating 100←81 80←61 60← 𝟒𝟏 40← 𝟐𝟏 < 21
Class 1 2 3 4 5
Number
Rock Type Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor
RMR = 56 = Fair Rock
We can easily find Q by using following equation:
RMR= 9×lnQ + 43
Q = 4.32
2.2. Formation A:
For formation we will find rock mass classification by using Q-
system.
2.2.1. Q- System
The Q-system for rock mass classification is developed by Barton, Lien, and Lunde. It expresses the
quality of the rock mass in the so-called Q-value, on which are based design and support
recommendations for underground excavations.
The Q-value is determined with
𝑹𝑸𝑫 𝑱𝒓 𝑱𝒘
𝑸= × ×
𝑱𝒏 𝑱𝒂 𝑺𝑹𝑭
Here
RQD = 50-75 (Assuming fair formation)
Jn = 1
Jr = 3
Ja = 2
Jw = 0.66
SRF= 10
𝟔𝟐. 𝟓 𝟑 𝟎. 𝟔𝟔
𝑸= × ×
𝟏 𝟐 𝟏𝟎
Q = 6.1875

pg. 4
 Complex Engineering Problem

Using formula
RMR= 9×lnQ + 43
RMR = 59.40
Table 3 classification of rock
Rating 100←81 80←61 60← 𝟒𝟏 40← 𝟐𝟏 < 21
Class 1 2 3 4 5
Number
Rock Type Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor
RMR = 59.40 = Fair
2.3. Formation B
By applying Q-System,
𝑹𝑸𝑫 𝑱𝒓 𝑱𝒘
𝑸= × ×
𝑱𝒏 𝑱𝒂 𝑺𝑹𝑭
Here
RQD = 25-50 (for pretty poor formation)
Jn = 12
Jr = 1
Ja = 4
Jw = 0.33
SRF= 7.5
𝟑𝟕. 𝟓 𝟏 𝟎. 𝟑𝟑
𝑸= × ×
𝟏𝟐 𝟒 𝟕. 𝟓
Q = 0.0343
Using formula:
RMR= 9×lnQ + 43
RMR = 12.64
Table 4 classification of rock
Rating 100←81 80←61 60← 𝟒𝟏 40← 𝟐𝟏 < 21
Class 1 2 3 4 5
Number
Rock Type Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor
RMR = 12.64 = very poor
pg. 5
 Complex Engineering Problem

3. ELASTIC STRESSES OVER RADIAL STRESSES

3.1. Kirsch equation
The Kirsch equations describe the elastic stresses around the hole in an infinite plate in one directional
tension. They are named after Ernst Gustav Kirsch.
Equations
𝑷 𝒂𝟐 𝟒𝒂𝟐 𝟑𝒂𝟒
𝝈𝒓𝒓 = ((𝟏 + 𝒌) (𝟏 − 𝟐 ) − (𝟏 − 𝒌) (𝟏 − 𝟐 + 𝟒 ) 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝟐Ө)
𝟐 𝒓 𝒓 𝒓

𝑷 𝒂𝟐 𝟑𝒂𝟒
𝝈𝜽𝜽 = ((𝟏 + 𝒌) (𝟏 + 𝟐 ) + (𝟏 − 𝒌) (𝟏 + 𝟒 ) 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝟐Ө)
𝟐 𝒓 𝒓

𝑷 𝟐𝒂𝟐 𝟑𝒂𝟒
𝝈𝒓𝜽 = ((𝟏 − 𝒌) (𝟏 + 𝟐 − 𝟒 ) 𝑺𝒊𝒏𝟐Ө)
𝟐 𝒓 𝒓

Where
P = γ×h
γ = 2.771 g/cm³
h = 820 m
p = 2272.22
k = 1.9
r = dia/2 = 4m
a = 0 to 4m
For top angle will be 90
For sides angle will be 0 and radius will also 0
By using kirsch equations
i. For a = 0, Ө = 90:
σrr= 4317.18
σθθ = 2272.22
σrθ = -1022.49
ii. For a = 4, Ө = 90:
σrr= -6134.94
σθθ = 8634.436
σrθ = -3067.497
pg. 6
 Complex Engineering Problem

Stresses on the boundary (sides of the tunnel) i.e. when radius becomes equal to a (r = a).
From these equations
𝜎𝜃𝜃 = 𝑃((1 + 𝑘) + 2(1 − 𝑘)𝑐𝑜𝑠2𝜃)
σrr = 0
σrθ =0
At boundary angle will be zero
σθθ = 2499.42
4. TUNNEL OPENINGS
Opening shape of Tunnel is dependent upon the Physical and mechanical properties of the wall rocks,
the pressure exerted by the ground on the opening, the direction of the pressure, the service life of the
opening, and the material of the support, which in turn, depends upon first four factors. The service life
of a development working influences the choice of the material for mine support and thus determines
the cross-sectional shape of the opening.
Total Width of the Tunnel = B = 90 ft.
𝑅1= 0.55× Total width of the tunnel
𝑅1= 0.55× 90 ft.
R1= 49.5 ft.
R2 = 3/8 ×R1
R2 = 18.5625 ft.
R3 = 2×R1
R3 = 2× 49.5
R3= 99 ft.
C = √(R3² − 2R2(R3 − R1) − R1)
C = 88.959 ft.
R1−R2
Sin β = R3−R2

β = 22.619º
Height of tunnel = R1 +R3 –C
Height of tunnel = 59.541 ft.
Height of tunnel = 18.148 m.
Span of tunnel = D = 2× R1
Span of tunnel = D = 99 ft.
pg. 7
 Complex Engineering Problem

Span of tunnel = D = 30.1752 m.

𝜋 𝜋
Area of tunnel = 2𝑅12 + ( 2 − 𝛽) 𝑅22 + 𝛽𝑅32 − (𝑅1 − 𝑅2)𝐶

Area of tunnel = 218838 sq. ft.

A = 20330.7155 m.
5. STANDUP TIME ESTIMATION FOR AN UNSUPPORTED TUNNEL
After finding the RMR and Q values we can classify the rock type. So RMR value of andesite formation
and formation A, there are lies in fair rock type and the standup time is one week for 5 m span, formation
B lies in very poor category and standup time is 30 minutes for 1 m span for both formations. We have
find this standup time from classification parameters.
5.1. Estimation of support requirements
Bieniawski (1989) published a support system of tunnels on the bases of RMR value. Bieniawski
support system for 10 m span, horseshoe shaped tunnel, constructed using drill and blast, and a
vertical stress are less than 25 Mpa.
The span of our tunnel is 30.1752 that’s why we don’t use this support system.
We use burton’s support system on the basis of Q and tunnel span.
Graph 1 Burton support system

pg. 8
 Complex Engineering Problem

1. Bolt having length approximately 7 m.

2. Distance between bolts is approximately 1.6 to 2m.
6. VERIFICATION OF TUNNEL DESIGN:
Finite element method (FEM) is the numerical method for finding approximate solutions to the
boundary value problems for differential equations. By using Phase-2D final design was verified. Stress
concentration around the opening was minimal. So our tunnel design is good.
6.1 Major stresses

Figure 1

pg. 9
 Complex Engineering Problem

6.2. Minor stresses

Figure 2

7. STRENGTH OF A ROCK MASS

For base purposes, the stability of a rock mass is calculated for a large part by the discontinuities in
the rock mass. Numerical discontinuous rock mass measurements frequently tend to be slow and
inaccurate. Rock mass classification may be a technique which is equivalent or more accurate. For
this function, the Slope Stability Probability Classification System may be used for this purpose. The
objective stability evaluation of the orientation results in a rock mass intensity test based on
classification evidence, e.g. intact rock strength, discontinuity spacing and discontinuity state. Create
the criteria in the sense of a slope stability classification system, nevertheless, there is no explanation
why the criteria for evaluating rock mass intensity is not also valid for other purposes, such as basis
for a discontinuous mass of cement. According to the findings of the 'updated Hoek-Brown strength
criteria' and the rock mass strength as calculated by Bieniawski's classification scheme, the findings
of the strength test are according.

pg. 10
 Complex Engineering Problem

Figure 3 Shear strength criteria for rock

8. CONCLUSIONS
A mouth profile tunnel is designed having 30.1752 m span and 18.148 m. height. Find RMR and
Q values for three rocks, due to less availability of rock mass properties some values are
assumptions based. Apply suitable rock support requirements. By kirsch equations found elastic
and radial stresses and after verification or phase 2 we can see that our stresses showing increasing
trend with increasing depth. We can use flat jack method for measurements of in-situ stresses,
because it is very quick and economical method. Also, the height of the tunnel and cross-sectional
area is very high so, extra height will yield more cost in overall budget. The stability will be the
major problem of larger span of the tunnel.
9. DISCUSSION
In this project, different approaches were used to design the tunnel. Due to the dearth of rock mass
properties some calculations are assumption-based. The in-situ stresses and tangential stresses
magnitude shows that if overburden and span of the tunnel is greater than the stresses acting will be
higher and vice versa and will also affect the stability of tunnel respectively. The selection of support
system is based on Rock mass classification and Rock Quality Index.

pg. 11
 Complex Engineering Problem

10. REFERENCES
Kirsch, 1898, Die Theorie der Elastizität und die Bedürfnisse der Festigkeitslehre. Zeitschrift des
Vereines deutscher Ingenieure, 42, 797–807.
Barton, N.R.; Lien, R.; Lunde, J. (1974). "Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of
tunnel support". Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering. Springer. 6 (4): 189–236. Doi:
10.1007/BF01239496.
Barton, N.R. (1–5 November 1976). "Recent experiences with the Q-system of tunnel support design".
In Bieniawski, Z.T. (Ed.). Proc. Symposium on Exploration for Rock Engineering, Johannesburg. 1.
Balkema, Cape Town. pp. 107–117. ISBN 0-86961-089-9.
Barton, N.R.; Lien, R.; Lunde, J. (1977). "Estimation of support requirements for underground
excavations & discussion". In Fairhurst, C.; Crouch, S.L. (Eds.). Proc. of 16th Symp. On Design
Methods in Rock Mechanics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, U. S. A, 1975. American Society
of Civil Engineers (ASCE), New York. pp. 163–177, 234–241. OL 19853458M.
Barton, N.R. (1988). "Rock Mass Classification and Tunnel Reinforcement Selection using the Q-
system". In Kirkaldie, L. (Ed.). Rock Classification Systems for Engineering Purposes: ASTM Special
Technical Publication 984. 1. ASTM International. pp. 59–88. Doi: 10.1520/STP48464S. ISBN 978-0-
8031-0988-9.
Barton, N.R.; Grimstad, E. (1993). "Updating the Q-system for NMT". In Kompen, C.; Opsahl, S.L.;
Berg, S.L. (Eds.). Proc. of the International Symposium on Sprayed Concrete - Modern Use of Wet Mix
Sprayed Concrete for Underground Support, Fagernes, 1993. Norwegian Concrete Association, Oslo.
pp. 163–177, 234–241. OL 19853458M

pg. 12
Complex Engineering Problem

pg. 13