Author's personal copy

Rock Mech Rock Eng

DOI 10.1007/s00603-017-1237-8

ORIGINAL PAPER

Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement

Mix in Rock Fractures
Mohamed El Tani1 • Håkan Stille2

Received: 17 October 2016 / Accepted: 14 May 2017

 Springer-Verlag Wien 2017

Abstract A systematic presentation of the analytic rela- Finally, it is shown that the applied Lugeon theory is not
tions of grout spread to the time period is established. They supported by the analytic relations and needs to be sub-
are divided following the nature of the flow, the property of stantially modified.
the mix and the driving process. This includes channel flow
between parallel plates and radial flow between parallel Keywords Grouting design  Injection period  Grout
discs, nonlinear Newtonian fluids like silica solution, curtain  Stop criteria
polyurethane and epoxy, and Bingham material like
cement-based grout, and three grouting processes at a List of symbols
constant flow rate, constant pressure and constant energy. Ai, A0, A1 A(0), A(t0), A(t1) of any time function A(t)
The analytic relations for the constant energy process are a Radius of the injection hole
new and complete the relations of the constant flow rate b Radius of the mix at the front
and constant pressure processes. The well-known statement c Yield stress or cohesion
that refusal cannot be obtained during finite time for any f Ratio of the viscosity to its initial value
injected material at a constant flow rate or constant injec- f, f0 Local function and derivative defined in
tion pressure is extended to include the energy process. The Appendix
term refusal pressure or energy cannot be supported for F Driving relation
stop criteria. Stop criteria have to be defined considering F Function
confirmed relation of the spread to the time period and of F(0), F(1) Zero order, first-order approximation of F
the flow rate to the pressure and spread. It is shown that it is Fa, Fb, Fc Local function defined in Appendix
always possible to select a grouting process along which G Driving energy
the work will exceed any predefined energy, the conse- H Half-thickness of the planar fracture
quence of which is that jacking is related to the applied L, L0 Spread of the mix and initial spread
forces and not to the injected energy. Furthermore, a Li2 Dilogarithm function
clarification is undertaken concerning the radial flow rate N Number of fractures
of a Bingham material since there are two different for- n Integer index used in Appendix
mulations. Their difference is explained and quantified. p Pressure
P Injection pressure
Q Flow rate
& Mohamed El Tani
Info@rockgro.com
r Radial coordinate
R Reach
Håkan Stille
Hakan.stille@byv.kth.se
S Span
Sp Spence’s function
1
AABuildings, PO Box 11-9054, Beirut, Lebanon T Maturity time
2
Division of Soil and Rock Mechanics, Royal Institute of t Time
Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden t0 Initial time

123
 Author's personal copy
tG Gel time
tP Pot life
u Dummy variable
V Volume of the mix
w Width
W Work
x Dummy variable in Appendix
z Local variable in Appendix
Greek letters
a Fitting parameter
b Ratio of the pseudo-core thickness to the fracture
thickness
g Dynamic viscosity
gi Initial dynamic viscosity
p Pi
n Ratio of the spread to the span
n0 Spread ratio at t0
na Ratio of the injection hole radius to the spread
nr Ratio of the spread to the reach
nr0 Ratio of the spread to the reach at t0
nra Ratio of the radius of the injection hole to the reach
1 Introduction
Grouting rock fractures is intended to reduce the water-bear-
ing capacity of rock mass sections to acceptable levels. This is
carried out with an appropriate selection of the grout material,
driving process and stop criteria at every stage to achieve
acceptable spreads of the grout in reasonable short periods.
There is a great diversity of grouting materials. Among these
are cement mixes and chemical mixes such as silica solutions,
polyurethanes and epoxies (Karol 2003). Each material has its
own application range based on its physical and chemical
properties. For sealing rock mass for tunnel and dam con-
struction, cement mixes and silica solutions are used (Cambe-
fort 1961; Houlsby 1990; Weaver and Bruce 2007). Cement
mixes are suspensions of cement grains in water (Håkansson
1993) and are injected in fractures, whose apertures are greater
than the grains’ size. Silica solutions are complementary
grouting materials of cement mixes for fractures that cannot be
penetrated by super-fine cement mixes (Funehag and Axelsson
2003). Epoxies are used to seal and strengthen structures such
as fractured arch dams (Bruce and de Porcellinis 1990). Poly-
urethane is used for sealing fractures with an elevated water
flow and high water pressure gradients (Andersson et al. 2001;
Walz et al. 2003). Grouting materials are divided into two
groups in regard to their rheological properties. Cement mixes
are Bingham materials, while silica solutions, epoxies and
polyurethanes are nonlinear Newtonian fluids. Their rheologi-
cal properties are needed to determine the grout spread and its
relation to the injection period.
123
M. El Tani, H. Stille
A grout process is the driving relation that will be
applied by the operator during the injection. Examples of
driving processes are grouting at constant flow rate, con-
stant pressure or constant energy. The three mentioned
processes are often used in practical work or combined
sequentially as illustrated in Fig. 1. Grouting processes and
their sequential combinations are also known as grout paths
when they are plotted in the energy diagram, axes of which
are the injected volume and the injection pressure.
The flow of grout in rock fractures can be idealized as
1D rectilinear flow between parallel plates or 2D radial
flow between parallel discs (e.g. Wallner 1976; Hässler
1991). Analytical relations for the grout spread versus the
injection period have been obtained considering constant
flow rate and constant pressure (e.g. Hässler 1991; Gus-
tafson and Stille 2005). The relation between the grout
spread and the injection period can be used to monitor the
grouting process and define new stop criteria. A review of
the relations between spread and grouting period for all the
three types of driving process is missing. And, there are
very few papers discussing the relation between stop cri-
teria and spread. A comprehensive review of grouting
design based on theories of spread of cement-based grout at
constant pressure is given in Stille (2015). There is also
some confusion concerning the basic prerequisites for the
radial flow rate of a Bingham material since there are two
approaches with different flow rate equations obtained by
Dai and Bird (1981) and El Tani (2012). A clarification of
their difference is needed.
The objective of this paper is to review all these defi-
ciencies and confusion and give them adequate answers. The
equations for rectilinear flow between parallel plates and the
corresponding relations for the radial flow between parallel
discs for all driving processes are discussed. The analytic
Fig. 1 Sequential combination of simple driving processes
 Author's personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures
solutions for the constant flow rate and constant pressure can
be found in the literature as mentioned earlier. Those for the
constant energy, for 1D and 2D flows and for nonlinear
Newtonian and Bingham materials, are new. However, all
equations, the known one and the new one, are presented for
the sake of completeness. Also, the different formulations for
the radial flow rate of Bingham material are considered and
their difference detailed and quantified. The energy concept
needs to be explained, and for this the work that is done along
grouting paths is calculated and compared to the energy of
the process. Stop criteria based on the relations between the
grout spread and injection period are discussed, underlining
their best use for an optimal grouting achievement. The
discussion is based on the equations for 1D rectilinear flow
between parallel plates, also called channel flow, because
they take simple parametric forms.
The main results obtained from the idealized conditions
are applied to the case where many identical fractures are
grouted simultaneously. The deviation from non-ideal
conditions such as non-constant aperture, roughness and
intersection of fractures is not discussed. They are impor-
tant issues, which are outside the scope of this paper. Some
discussions can be found in Stille (2015), where the anal-
ysis of many grouting works shows that the idealized
results can be applied for real rock fractures, taking the
average value of the physical apertures into consideration.
2 Channel Flow
2.1 Newtonian Fluids
2.1.1 Rheology
Silica solution, epoxy and polyurethane are modelled as
nonlinear Newtonian fluid with a time-dependent viscosity.
They are mixes where a polymerization is initiated leading
subsequently to an embryonic solid state that gradually
hardens. The transition time at the embryonic state is
generally called the gel time and noted tG. The polymer-
ization is supposed reproducible and programmable. This
allows to consider a time-dependent viscosity that gener-
ally increases moderately at the initiation of the polymer-
ization and accelerates when coming close to the gel time.
The analysis is limited to the yield phase way before the
gel time. It is assumed that the polymerization starts at time
t = 0 and the viscosity takes on the following form
g ¼ gi f ðtÞ; ð1Þ
in which g is the dynamic viscosity, gi its initial value, t the
time and f(t) the ratio of the viscosity to the initial one with
f(0) = 1. A useful quantity that simplifies the analytic
relations in the subsequent development is the viscosity
maturity time that is noted T. It is defined as a function of
the real time, t, and the transient ratio, as:
Zt
du
TðtÞ ¼ t\\tG : ð2Þ
f ðuÞ
0
The viscosity’s maturity time is similar to the maturity
concept used in chemical reactions (Carino and Lew 2001).
It will be seen later on that the spread of viscous materials
with equal initial viscosities, but different transient ratios,
are equal at the same maturity time.
The different periods used when the rheology experi-
ences a time change are: one, the pot life which is the
period the viscosity doubles its value; two, the working
time is the period the injection can proceed; and three, the
gel time.
Funehag and Gustafsson (2008) used to fit the behaviour
of a silica solution the transient ratio f(t) = 1 ? exp(a(t/
tp - 1)) in which tp is the pot life and a a fitting parameter.
Funehag et al. ratio differs from the definition used above.
It is not equal to 1 at t = 0 and the transition time tG is
infinite. Their maturity time is T(t) = t - (tp/
a)ln(1 ? exp(a(t/tp - 1))), which is negative at t = 0.
Many other empirical ratios are mentioned in the literature
and used to fit the viscosity transient behaviour such as the
sigmoidal function or the Boltzmann log-sigmoidal func-
tion (e.g. Teyssandier et al. 2010).
2.1.2 Governing Equations
The channel flow is a 1D rectilinear flow between parallel
rigid plates. The distance between the plates is the opening
or clearance and represents the mean aperture or thickness
of the idealized planar fracture. The clearance or fracture
thickness is noted 2H and is supposed to be much smaller
than the width w. The mix is in contact with the fracture
edges and adheres to the plates. The spread is noted L and
is the distance between the front of the mix and the
entrance at the injection face. A schematic representation
of the 1D channel flow in a planar fracture is illustrated in
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 Schematic representation of a channel flow in a planar fracture
123
 Author's personal copy
M. El Tani, H. Stille

The injected volume of the grout mix, V, is According to Eq. (5), the flow rate will decrease while
V ¼ 2HwL ð3Þ increasing the spread. It is rewritten as a time function,
inserting Eqs. (9) in Eq. (5),
The mass conservation of an incompressible fluid in its
2wH 3 P0 1
homogeneous form is Q¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð10Þ
3gi f L2 þ 0 H ðT  T Þ
2P 2
0 0
dV 3gi
¼ Q; ð4Þ
dt The asymptotic flow rate behaviour is the inverse of the
in which Q is the volumetric flow rate that takes, in case of product of the viscosity ratio and the square root of the
a 1D Poiseuille flow, the following form maturity, 1/f(t)T1/2.
2w PH 3
Q¼ ; ð5Þ 2.1.3.3 Constant Energy The constant energy corre-
3g L sponds to the relation F(P,V,Q) = PV - P0V0. By con-
in which P is the injection pressure; it is the pressure dif- vention, the following notation is used P0V0 = G. The
ference between the injection face and the front of the mix. spread, pressure and flow rate are
The governing equation for the spread is obtained inserting GH
Eqs. (3 and (5) in Eq. (4), which leads to L3  L30 ¼ ðT  T0 Þ ð11Þ
2gi w
dL P H2 G 1
¼ : ð6Þ P¼ qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð12Þ
dt 3g L 2Hw 3 L3 þ GH ðT  T Þ
0 2gi w 0
The governing equation has to be completed with a
driving relation F(P, V, Q) = 0 that represents the grouting GH 2 1
Q¼  2=3 ð13Þ
process. The initial condition L = L0 at t = t0 that should not 3gi f
L30 þ 2g
GH
w ðT  T 0 Þ
i
be confounded with the starting time of the polymerization at
t = 0. The following notations are adopted Ai = A(0), The asymptotic front position is proportional to T1/3,
A0 = A(t0) and An = A(tn) for any time function A(t). pressure to T-1/3 and the flow rate to 1/f(t)T2/3.

2.1.3 Particular Processes 2.1.4 Discussion

2.1.3.1 Constant Flow Rate The driving relation is F(P, The grout spread will increase continuously as long as the
V, Q) = Q - Q0 that implies Q = Q0. Injecting at a con- injection pressure is not zero. No maximum spread exists for
stant rate leads to a constant ratio of pressure to spread and a Newtonian fluid. If the injection proceeds at a constant flow
viscosity, according to Eq. (5). The time–spread relation rate, the injection pressure will increase continuously which
and the time–pressure one are may be harmful and inefficient. Constant pressure and con-
stant energy processes will start with a very high flow rate
Q0
L  L0 ¼ ðt  t0 Þ; ð7Þ that may exceed the capacity of the pumps and then decrease
2Hw with time. The optimal spread that can be obtained in a given
P P0 3gi Q2 time lapse or the working time will depend on the grouting
 ¼ 2 04 ðt  t0 Þ: ð8Þ process, the initial viscosity, its transient ratio, maturity and
f f0 4w H
capacity of the equipment.
The asymptotic front position is proportional to the real In order to demonstrate the different injection processes, the
time, while the pressure increase is nonlinear and is pro- following calculation example has been set up. The following
portional to the product of the time and viscosity ratio tf(t). basic assumptions are used for the three studied processes:

2.1.3.2 Constant Pressure Injection with constant pres-
sure implies that the spread is obtained by considering the
driving relation F(P, V, Q) = P - P0, which leads to
2H 2 P0
L2  L20 ¼ ðT  T0 Þ ð9Þ
3gi
The asymptotic front position is proportional to T1/2.
The spread remains unchanged when the ratio of the
maturity to the initial viscosity is unchanged.
• The grout has a constant viscosity of 0.40 Pas.
• The channel has a width of 10 m and an aperture of
0.3 mm.
• The grouting section is located 20 m below ground
surface, which corresponds to a vertical pressure of
about 0.6 MPa critical for the risk of jacking.
For the different injection processes, the following
quantities are considered:

123
 Author's personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures

Table 1 Constant flow rate—Newtonian and called yield stress, beyond which it flows like a New-
Spread (m) Time (s) Pressure (MPa) Flow rate (l/min)
tonian fluid with a constant viscosity. The setting time of
cement mix is less problematic than the setting time of silica
1 36 1.48 5 solution or other chemical grout. First, it is longer and it is
2 72 2.96 5 used to inject larger fractures that oppose less resistance.
5 180 7.41 5 The yield stress of a Bingham material complicates the
10 360 14.8 5 calculation of the spread relative to a Newtonian fluid. New
variables emerge such as the maximum spread at constant
pressure and constant energy. The maximum spread that is
Table 2 Constant injection pressure—Newtonian achieved by injecting at a constant pressure P is called the
span, noted S, and calculated using
Spread (m) Time (s) Pressure (MPa) Flow rate (l/min)
PH
1 44 0.6 2.4 S¼ ð14Þ
c
2 178 0.6 1.2
5 1111 0.6 0.5
The reach is the maximum spread at constant energy
10 4444 0.6 0.2
PV = G. It is noted R and is calculated using
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
G
R¼ ð15Þ
2wc
Table 3 Constant energy—Newtonian
Relations (14) and (15) are fundamental properties of
Spread (m) Time (s) Pressure (MPa) Flow rate (l/min) the injection of a Bingham material between rigid, parallel
1 6 3 10 plates at a constant pressure and constant energy, respec-
2 47 1.5 2.5 tively. There is an instant relation for channel flow between
5 741 0.6 0.4 the span, reach and spread (El Tani 2009), which is
10 5926 0.3 0.1 R2 ¼ SL ð16Þ
The spread ratio is the quotient of the current spread to the
• The constant flow will be 5 l/min or 8.3 10-5 m3/s.
maximal one. Since there are two different maximal
• The constant pressure will be 0.6 MPa.
spreads, one at a constant pressure and the other at a
• The constant energy will be checked for a G value of 9
constant energy, two ratios are defined. The first is the ratio
000 J.
of the spread to the span, noted n and obtained from
• The initial condition is L0 = 0 at T0 = 0.
L cL
The above equations give the following results that are n¼ ¼ ð17Þ
S PH
shown in Tables 1, 2 and 3.
For practical grouting with a target value for the spread The second is the ratio of the spread to the reach, noted nr
of 10 m, the following conclusions can be set up from the and related to the driving energy G with
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
calculated case. L 2wc
The fastest process to reach the target is grouting with nr ¼ ¼ L ð18Þ
R G
constant flow and in 360 s. However, the pressure increases
linearly with time. The pressure exceeds the critical value The ratio of the current spread to the reach is independent
nearly immediately and jacking will occur. Grouting with of the fracture’s thickness. The instant relation between the
constant pressure will reach the target in 4444 s without two ratios is the following
jacking. Grouting with constant energy will start with a pffiffiffi
nr ¼ n ð19Þ
pressure high above the critical value. The flow will con-
sequently be high and then rapidly decrease. It will take
very long time (5926 s) to reach the target. 2.2.2 Governing Equations

2.2 Bingham Material The 1D flow rate of a Bingham material can be found in
Wallner (1976), Dai and Bird (1981) and Hässler (1991). It
2.2.1 Rheology is written as
wH 2 c ð1  nÞ2 ð2 þ nÞ
Cement mixes are Bingham materials that remain rigid as Q¼ ð20Þ
3g n
the shear stress has not reached a critical value, denoted c,

123
 Author's personal copy
M. El Tani, H. Stille

with
Equation (20) is valid as long as n is in between 0 and 1.
When n is equal to 1, the flow rate is zero. Above one the 2 2ð1  nÞ n
FðnÞ ¼ ln þ ð26Þ
flow rate will remain zero even if the injection pressure is 3 2þn 1n
not zero. This is a fundamental property of the flow of a
and
Bingham material in a planar fracture with a constant
aperture. The pressure that makes Bingham material moves cL0
n0 ¼ ð27Þ
out of an immobile state is the value for which the spread HP0
ratio is turned below one, n B 1.
The spread ratio n(t) is obtained from Eq. (26) by
The position of the front is calculated completing
numerical inversion or from graphical or tabulated values
Eqs. (3), (4) and (20) with a driving process relation
of t versus n. The flow rate is obtained inserting n(t) in
F(P,V,Q) = 0 and the initial condition L = L0 at t = t0.
Eq. (20) and the spread is obtained from n(t) using
Eq. (17).
2.2.3 Particular Processes
2.2.3.3 Constant Energy Constant energy process
2.2.3.1 Constant Flow The flow rate, Eq. (20), is a
implies that pressure will decrease with the increase of the
function of the spread ratio. If the spread ratio remains
injected volume and consequently the flow rate will
unchanged in a given time period, the flow rate will remain
decrease at a faster rate than for constant pressure case. The
constant over that period. Also, the injection pressure
driving relation is PV = G that leads to the following
varies linearly with the spread. The slope of the pressure to
differential equation
the spread is P0/L0 or c/Hn0. If L0 and P0 are known then
Q0 = Q(n0). If L0 and Q0 are known and P0 unknown, this n2r dnr cH
¼ ð28Þ
latter will be obtained from Eq. (17) calculating cL0/Hn0 in ð1  n2r Þ2 ð2 þ n2r Þ dt 6gR
which n0 is obtained inverting numerically or algebraically
Q0 = Q(n0). where R is constant given by Eq. (15) and nr is defined by
In the diagram (V, P), the driving relation of the 1D Eq. (18). A closed form solution is obtained by integration
constant flow path is as
c cH
P¼ V ð21Þ ðt  t0 Þ ¼ Fðnr Þ  Fðnr0 Þ ð29Þ
4wH 2 n0 6gR
The changing spread and pressure are obtained by inte- in which
grations as pffiffiffi
2 n 1 1 þ nr nr
3gQ0 Fðnr Þ ¼  arctan prffiffiffi  ln þ ð30Þ
L  L0 ¼ ðt  t0 Þ ð22Þ 9 2 36 1  nr 6ð1  n2r Þ
2Hw
and
and
L0
3gQ2 nr0 ¼ ð31Þ
P  P0 ¼ 2 0 4 ðt  t0 Þ ð23Þ R
4w H
The spread ratio nr(t) is obtained from Eq. (30) by
The spread and pressure increase linearly with time. numerical inversion or from graphical or tabulated values
of t versus nr. The flow rate is obtained inserting nr in the
2.2.3.2 Constant Pressure Constant pressure will imply following equations that is obtained inserting Eqs. (19) in
that the flow and front velocity will decrease with time. Eq. (20) as
The driving relation of the constant pressure is P = P0.
The following differential equation is obtained cH 2 w ð1  n2r Þ2 ð2 þ n2r Þ
Q¼ ð32Þ
3g n2r
n dn c 2
2
¼ ð24Þ
ð1  nÞ ð2 þ nÞ dt 6gP The spread is obtained from Eq. (18) as
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
The time integration that is obtained by Gustafson and G
L¼ n ð33Þ
Claesson (2005) is 2wc r
c2 The pressure is obtained from the diving relation as
ðt  t0 Þ ¼ FðnÞ  Fðn0 Þ ð25Þ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
6gP 1 cG
P¼ ð34Þ
Hnr 2w

123
 Author's personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures

2.2.4 Discussion Table 4 Constant flow rate—Bingham

Spread (m) Time (s) Pressure (MPa) Flow rate (l/min)
Analytically, some aspects of the processes can be of
interest. 1 36 0.12 5
Injection with constant flow will give a pressure 2 72 0.25 5
increasing linearly with time. There will be no refusal and 5 180 0.61 5
the spread may continue. Hydro-jacking and uplift will be a 10 360 1.23 5
substantial risk. The low pressure in the beginning may
give problems with clogging in small fractures close to the
borehole. This clogging may not break when the pressure Table 5 Constant injection pressure—Bingham
gradually is built up. Spread (m) Time (s) Pressure (MPa) Flow rate (l/min)
Injection with constant pressure is often preferred. The
risk for clogging, jacking and uplift can better be con- 1 2 0.6 37
trolled. In the beginning, the flow will be very high and will 2 10 0.6 17
normally exceed the pump capacity. The flow will be 5 78 0.6 5
reduced and the spread will decrease with time. Refusal 10 524 0.6 1
will first be obtained after a very long time.
Injection with constant energy can lead to high pressure,
Table 6 Constant energy—Bingham
which can give substantial risk for jacking. The reduction of
pressure with increasing the grouted volume will imply a Spread (m) Time (s) Pressure (MPa) Flow rate (l/min)
slower spread and longer grouting time. Refusal will occur after
1 0.3 3 199
a very long time unless the pressure drop is performed stepwise.
2 2.5 1.5 47
In order to illustrate the different injection processes, the
5 5 0.6 5
following calculation example may be set up. The rheo-
10 1 0.3 0
logical and geometrical assumptions are:
• The grout has a viscosity of 0.02 Pas and a yield value will be very high and probably well above the capacity of
of 5 Pa. the pump. Since the reach is 9.5 m, the spread will never
• The channel has a width of 10 m and an aperture of reach the target value. Time goes to infinity.
0.3 mm.
• The grouting section is situated 20 m below ground
3 Radial Flow
surface, which corresponds to a vertical pressure of
about 0.6 MPa critically for the risk of jacking.
3.1 Introduction
For the different injection processes, the following
quantities are assumed: There is a fundamental difference between the flow rates of
the unidirectional rectilinear flow between parallel plate-
• The constant flow is 5 l/min or 8.3 10-5 m3/s.
s and the radial one between parallel discs. This difference
• The constant pressure is 0.6 MPa.
is due to a complementary condition that is used to shorten
• The constant energy is G = 9 000 J.
the local governing equations. The steady state condition of
• The initial condition is L0 = 0 at T0 = 0.
the rectilinear flow is not sufficient in the radial case to
The equations above give the following results that are obtain the flow rate in a closed form. It is supposed that the
shown in Tables 4, 5 and 6. material is a thin layer with one dimension smaller than the
The maximum spread for the constant pressure case or others. This is an essential condition of the lubrication
span is 18 m and by using constant energy the reach will be approximation. The present chapter on the radial flow uses
9.5 m. For practical grouting with a target value of the spread results obtained in the framework of the lubrication mod-
of 10 m, the following conclusions can be established. elling, which are considered by Frigaard et al. (2017)
The fastest process to reach the target is grouting with ‘‘simple estimates’’ and ‘‘gross simplifications’’.
constant flow rate. This will happen in 360 s. However, the The radial flow between parallel discs will be limited to
pressure increases linearly with time and after 180 s the two driving processes that are the constant injection pres-
pressure exceeds the critical value and jacking will occur. sure and energy. The constant flow rate leads to a linear
Grouting with constant pressure will reach the target after time increase of the injected volume and will not be con-
524 s without jacking. Grouting with constant energy will sidered subsequently.
start with a high pressure above the critical value. The flow

123
 Author's personal copy
M. El Tani, H. Stille

Fig. 3 Schematic
representation of a radial flow in
a planar fracture

A schematic representation of a radial flow between par- 2H 2 P0

allel discs is shown in Fig. 3. The radius of the injection hole FðbÞ  Fðb0 Þ ¼ ðT  T0 Þ ð38Þ
3gi
plays an important role in the basic quantities that enter the
radial injection, the associated flow rate and time evolution. with
The radius of the injection hole is noted a and the radius of the  
b 1
front of the mix is noted b. The spread L is defined by the FðbÞ ¼ b ln 
2
ð39Þ
a 2
distance of the front mix to the injection hole and is
This solution was used by Funehag and Gustafsson
L¼ba ð35Þ
(2008) with the maturity time that is mentioned in
The volume of the spread is Sect. 2.1. It was also used by Hatem et al. (2015) to fit
experimental tests on a cement mix even though the latter
V ¼ 2pHðb2  a2 Þ: ð36Þ
is not normally considered a Newtonian material but a
The injection pressure is the difference of pressure between Bingham one. They used it with a constant viscosity, which
the entry and the front of the mix, P = p(a)-p(b). means that f(t) = 1 leading to a maturity T(t) = t.

3.2 Newtonian Fluid 3.2.2.2 Constant Energy Considering a driving constant

energy PV = G gives
3.2.1 Governing Equation HG
FðbÞ  Fðb0 Þ ¼ ðT  T0 Þ ð40Þ
6pgi
The governing equations are made of Eq. (4) for the mass
conservation of an incompressible fluid, Eq. (36) for the with
volume of the spread and Poiseuille volumetric flow rate    
b4 b 1 a2 b2 b 1
that is given by FðbÞ ¼ ln   ln  : ð41Þ
4 a 4 2 a 2
3
4pH P
Q¼ ð37Þ
3g ln ba
3.3 Bingham Material
The time–spread is obtained completing the mentioned
equations with a driving relation and the initial condition 3.3.1 Definition
b = b0 at t = t0; b0 C a.
The span is the maximal radial spread that can be obtained
3.2.2 Particular Processes when injecting at a constant pressure. The span is S = PH/
c and the spread ratio n = L/S are literally similar to the
3.2.2.1 Constant Pressure Considering a constant driv- relations defined in Eqs. (14) and (17). The ratio of the
ing pressure P = P0 the integration of the governing radius of the injection hole to the span is noted na = a/S.
equations gives

123
 Author's personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures

The reach R is the maximal spread when keeping con- 2p H 3 P

stant the product of the injected volume and injection Q¼ ð1  nÞ2 ð2 þ nÞ ð48Þ
3g ln ba
pressure, PV = G. The reach is
G The resulting flow rate equation does not contain the
R3 þ 2aR2 ¼ ð42Þ radial coordinate. It allows to determine the flow rate
2pc
whenever the injection pressure and spread are known.
and its instant relation to the spread and span is After having obtained the flow rate, the governing
R LðL þ 2aÞ equations need to be completed by a driving relation and
¼ ð43Þ the initial condition b = b0 at t = t0 with b0 C a to obtain
S RðR þ 2aÞ
the time–spread.
Contrarily to the span, the reach is not literally independent
of the nature of the flow. Equations (42) and (43) are, 3.3.3 Particular Driving Processes
respectively, different from Eqs. (15) and (16). But, the latter
equations can be obtained from the former when the spread 3.3.3.1 Constant Pressure Considering a constant injec-
and the reach are much smaller than the radius of the injection tion pressure P the time location of the front is obtained
hole on the condition that the width is associated with 2pa. from
The ratio of the spread to the reach is nr = L/R and the ratio
c2
of the injection hole radius to the reach nra = a/R. The fol- FðnÞ  Fðn0 Þ ¼ ðt  t0 Þ ð49Þ
lowing non-dimensional relation is deduced from Eq. (43) as 6gP

nr þ 2nra with
n ¼ n2r ð44Þ
1 þ 2nra Zn  
n n þ na
Again, Eq. (19) can be obtained from Eq. (44) when the FðnÞ ¼ ln 1 þ dn ð50Þ
na ð1  nÞ2 ð2 þ nÞ
reach and spread are much smaller than the radius of the na
injection hole, equally when nra is much larger than one,
The right-hand side of Eq. (50) can be integrated
since nr is always smaller than one.
numerically or analytically. The numerical integration is
straightforward. The analytical integration leads to an open
3.3.2 Governing Equation
form using the usual functions, or to a closed form using
Spence’s function, which is a special mathematical func-
The governing equations are made of the mass conserva-
tion. The open one is tedious with infinite sums and the
tion of an incompressible fluid Eq. (4), the volume of the
closed one is given in ‘‘Appendix 1’’. There is also a closed
spread Eq. (36) and the volumetric flow rate,
zero-order approximation that can be used for a quick
2pH 3 r dp estimation of the time–spread (El Tani 2013). A proof of
Q¼ ð1  bÞ2 ð2 þ bÞ ð45Þ
3g dr the zero-order approximation and its extension to the first
in which b is the thickness ratio of the pseudo-core and order are given in ‘‘Appendix 2’’.
r the radial coordinate. The thickness ratio is the ratio of
the pseudo-core thickness to the fracture thickness. 3.3.3.2 Constant Energy Considering a driving constant
The flow rate equation, Eq. (45), is incomplete since energy PV = G gives
p(r) and b(r) are unknown. Two different approaches to com- Hc
Fðnr Þ  Fðnr0 Þ ¼ ðt  t0 Þ ð51Þ
plete the flow rate can be found in the literature as stated in the 6gR
introduction. The missing relations presented here are deduced
with
by El Tani (2012) from the local form of the mass and
momentum balance, and the integral form of the energy balance Znr  
n nr þ nra nr
as Fðnr Þ ¼ ln 1 þ dnr
ð1  nÞ2 ð2 þ nÞ nr nra
P r nra
p ¼ pðbÞ þ ln ð46Þ
ln ab b ð52Þ
b¼n ð47Þ in which the relation n(nr) is obtained from Eq. (44). The
The pressure decreases logarithmically along the mix, and numerical integration of the right-hand side of Eq. (52) is
the thickness ratio is equal to the spread ratio that is straightforward. A closed analytic integration has not yet
n = c(b-a)/PH. Inserting Eqs. (46) and (47) in Eq. (45) been found.
leads

123
 Author's personal copy
4 Interpretation of the Energy
4.1 Background
The governing equations as it was mentioned previously are
differentiated by the driving relations. Among these, an
energy one was stated as PV = G, in which G is a constant.
Although this relation is identical to the GIN relation of
Lombardi and Deere (1993), it is used in a different context.
In this note, the energy relation is a driving one. The GIN
relation defines a restricted area in the energy diagram, the
upper edge of which is a hyperbola. Lombardi and Deere
infer that grouting within the restricted area up to refusal
reduces the risk of hydro-jacking or uplift. The word ‘‘En-
ergy’’ has an all-purpose meaning, and to avoid confusion,
any connection with mechanics or thermodynamics has to be
clarified. It will be shown that G, whether it is used to define a
driving relation or a restricted area in the energy diagram, is
not the mechanical energy and cannot prevail as an argument
for the uplift risk, but can be interpreted in the case of a
Bingham material at refusal as the enthalpy.
4.2 Mechanical Work
The dissipated energy by friction loss is the mechanical
work in an isothermal process. The mechanical work, noted
W, depends on the grouting process and is calculated using
its definition that is
Z time tG. The cement mix will not move until the pressure
W¼ PdV ð53Þ
PðVÞ
The work done at a constant flow rate considering a 1D
channel flow is
3gQ0
W¼ ðV  V0 Þ ð54Þ
8w2 H 4
Along a constant pressure process, it is
W ¼ P0 ðV  V0 Þ ð55Þ
And along a constant energy process, it is
V
W ¼ G ln ð56Þ
V0
Hence, the mechanical work is not G along the energy
process. It is obvious from Eqs. (54), (55) and (56) that the
dissipated energy will increase with the increase of the
injected volume along any grouting path. The question is
‘‘whether the resulting energy from a combination of simple
processes that satisfy the GIN restriction is smaller than G’’.
For this, the grouting process shown in Fig. 1 is considered.
It is a sequential application of three processes that satisfy the
GIN restriction. The resulting mechanical work is
123
M. El Tani, H. Stille
W 1 V1 V3
¼1 þ ln ð57Þ
G 2 V2 V2
The work done will exceed G whenever
V3 1 V1
ln  ð58Þ
V2 2 V2
Restricting the grouting processes in the energy diagram
to the area PV B G does not imply that the dissipated
energy is smaller than G, independently of the processes. A
restricted area in the energy diagram cannot prevail as a
limitation on the mechanical and dissipated energy. It has
no explicit relation with the uplift risk. If uplift, hydro-
jacking or hydro-fracturing are prevented when satisfying
the GIN restriction, the reasons will be sought in the
applied forces and the resistance properties of the rock
mass.
4.3 Enthalpy
The rheological difference between cement mix and silica
solution has physical and energetic implications. The
physical implications are finite spread under a constant
pressure or energy. The energetic implication is explicit in
the period that precedes yielding. Suppose that injection is
stopped turning off the injection pressure. If the pressure is
raised again, the silica solution will start yielding imme-
diately as long as it is viscous and is far from the transition
attains a critical value at which the spread ratio falls below
one. Rising the pressure at the entrance between the plates
will create a shear stress at the boundaries. When the
pressure is such that the spread ratio is equal to one the
material will start yielding with a zero velocity. If pressure
is increased further, turning the spread ratio below one,
velocity will become nonzero. Hence yielding starts when
the injection pressure is raised to
cL
P¼ ð59Þ
H
The energy at which the mix starts yielding is obtained
from Eqs. (59) and (3) as
VP ¼ 2cwL2 ð60Þ
The left-hand side of Eq. (60) is the enthalpy or the
energy at which a phase transition occurs. The cement mix
changes its status from rigid to yielding. Comparing
Eqs. (60) and (15) and identifying L with R and G with PV,
it is deduced that G is the enthalpy. Hence, G is the energy
that is necessary to reactivate the rest state of a mix, the
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
spread of which is G=2cw. It is also the energy at which
the material will stop yielding and plastify. This property is
used in the design phase of grouting projects to determine
 personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures
the distance between the injection holes of a grout curtain.
This is because grouting up to the moment PV attains G at
a nil flow rate leads to the same spread, independently of
the thickness of the fractures. Practically, a nil flow rate or
refusal cannot be attained in finite time and the spread will
be smaller than the reach.
5 Alternative Flow Rate
5.1 Introduction
In the literature, there is some confusion concerning the
radial flow rate of a Bingham material. There are two
formulations. The first formulation leads to Eq. (48) that
can be integrated exactly to obtain the time–spread at
constant pressure and energy using Eqs. (49) and (51).
The second is due to Dai and Bird (1981). Dai and Bird
formulation was used by Gustafson and Claesson (2005)
to plot the time–spread of a cement mix at a constant
injection pressure. The plotted curves have been used by
Gustafson and Stille (2005) to monitor the spread of
cement mix and extract fitting formulae. Rafi and Stille
(2015) confronted graphically the time-spread of the two
formulations and noted that they lead to close predictions.
Their closeness is explained and quantified in the subse-
quent section.
5.2 Dai and Bird Formulation
Dai and Bird (1981) completed Eq. (45) with the following
relation
c 1
b¼ ð61Þ
H dp
dr
The thickness ratio b(r) depends on the radial coordi-
nate. The pressure p(r) is obtained integrating the inverse
of the thickness ratio along the mix. Inserting Eqs. (61)
into Eq. (45), the following equation is obtained
3g Q ð1  bÞ2 ð2 þ bÞ
¼ ð62Þ
2pH 2 c r b 6.1 Basic Considerations
Dai and Bird gave a numerical procedure to deduce the
injection pressure P = p(a) - p(b) from Eqs. (61) and
(62) when the volumetric flow rate and the spread are
known. Their procedure has to be encapsulated in an
extended one to solve the inverse problem, which is
obtaining the flow rate when the injection pressure and
spread are known. The inverse problem is necessary in
calculating the time–spread when injecting at a constant
pressure or energy.
It is shown hereafter that despite the fact that Eqs.( 48) and
(62) seem completely different, they give equal flow rates. This
implies that their predicted time–spreads will be identical.
Since Q is independent of the radial coordinate, inte-
grating Eq. (62) between a and b leads to
Zb
3gQ b ð1  bÞ2 ð2 þ bÞ
ln ¼ dr ð63Þ
2pH 2 c a b
a
Cauchy’s mean integral theorem states that there is a par-
ticular value bc between b(a) and b(b) for which the
integral on the right-hand side of Eq. (63) is
Zb
ð1  bÞ2 ð2 þ bÞ ð1  bc Þ2 ð2 þ bc Þ
dr ¼ ðb  aÞ ð64Þ
b bc
a
Inserting Eqs. (64) in Eq. (63) leads to
2pH 2 c b  a ð1  bc Þ2 ð2 þ bc Þ
Q¼ ð65Þ
3g ln ba bc
Comparing Eqs. (65) and (48), it is deduced that they are
equal if and only if the following condition is satisfied
bc ¼ n ð66Þ
The similarity between Eqs. (47) and (66) explains the
remark of Rafi and Stille on the closeness of the time predic-
tions of the two formulations. Their similarity is more relevant
than the observed closeness. If, at a given time they coincide,
they will coincide subsequently. It is conjectured that the flow
rates that are obtained from both formulations are equal. An
informal reason is that Eq. (47) is necessary to satisfy the energy
balance, according to which the dissipation rate is equal to the
power expended by the injection mechanism (El Tani 2012).
Hence, it is no longer necessary to use a numerical procedure to
calculate the flow rate in the formulation of Dai and Bird, since
it can be obtained using Eq. (48). Consequently, the time-
spread at a constant pressure or energy can also be obtained
from Eqs. (49) and (51), respectively.
6 Considerations Regarding Practical Works
The considerations are divided into three parts: one, gen-
eral aspects based on the injection of a fracture obtained
from analytical solutions; two, simultaneous grouting of
many fractures; three, suitable stop criteria.
6.2 General Aspects
Mathematical solutions of the spread of grout mix were
obtained for simple driving relations. There are two basic
123
 Author's personal copy
conditions. One, the grout mix is far from the transition
time and has not entered the solidification phase, due to
polymerization or other hardening processes. Two, the
fracture aperture is constant with rigid boundaries that
cannot deform, which excludes jacking or uplift. But, it
does not exclude evaluating the risk of jacking or uplift.
The spread of the Newtonian fluid will continue as long
as there is a pressure gradient. Bingham material may resist
a pressure gradient, leading to a finite spread under a
constant injection pressure or a constant energy. However,
the maximum spread will be obtained after an infinite time.
The governing equations and their solutions show that
refusal cannot be obtained during finite time for the dis-
cussed driving relations. No refusal pressure or energy
exists for a Newtonian fluid or a Bingham material.
Grouting with a constant pressure or constant energy will
lead to a decreasing flow rate in time. In the very beginning,
the flow rate will be very high and limited by the pumping
capacity of equipment. However, this will last for a short time
and have a negligible influence on the spread and the grouting
period. If during grouting, for any reason, the pressure or
energy is increased, there will be an increase in the flow rate.
Grouting with a constant flow rate will lead to an
increased pressure with time. High pressure exposes the
fractures to jacking and the rock mass to uplift.
The uplift and jacking risks have to be evaluated, con-
sidering the injection pressure and grout spread conforming
to mechanical principles (Cambefort 1961; Brantberger
et al. 2000; Rafi and Stille 2015). The actual grout spread
can be evaluated with the presented equations.
The above details show that exploring the governing
equations is necessary for an evaluation of empirical
statements and a prerequisite for adequate design of
grouting works.
6.3 Simultaneous Grouting of Rock Fractures
Grouting of rock fractures is carried out through boreholes
crossing the fractures. The length of the borehole used for
each grouting operation can vary from some metres to tens
of metres. Normally several fractures will intersect the
borehole and will be grouted simultaneously. The grouting
pressure will be the same for each crossing fracture. The
fractures may be regarded as independent conductors in
rock mass with few fractures. In a more fractured rock
mass, the grouting course in one fracture will have an
effect on the flow in the others.
Grouting of several fractures simultaneously through the
borehole will have an effect on the grout course. In order to
demonstrate the effect, the problem is simplified by
grouting N identical fractures at the same time.
Grouting with constant flow rate implies that the flow
into each fracture is 1/N of the total flow. The pressure will
123
M. El Tani, H. Stille
be proportional to 1/N2 and thus much smaller compared to
one fracture. To get the same spread, the grouting period
will take N times longer.
Grouting with constant pressure will change the total
flow. This will be N times higher than a single fracture. The
grouting period and spread will be independent of the
number of fractures.
Grouting with constant energy G implies an equal
division of the energy G/N in each fracture. The reach will
be 1/N1/2 times smaller than for a single fracture.
The above considerations stress the importance to know
the number of fractures intersecting the injection borehole,
in order to estimate the current flow rate and spread for
practical design purposes.
6.4 Stop Criteria
The fact that no refusal will be obtained in finite time implies
that new stop criteria have to be defined. These criteria have
to be related to the goal of the grouting works. Generally, the
goal is to reduce the water-bearing capacity of the rock mass
to a certain value in a zone with a predefined thickness. This
value is deduced from the project and engineering specifi-
cations and is the target of the spread to be obtained. Direct
measurement of the spread is not always practically feasible.
There are many indirect methods that allow verifying the
required achievement. The first method is to relate the spread
to time. The parametric solutions can be used to evaluate the
time evolution of the spread, pressure, volume and flow rate.
These predictions are used to decide the moment when the
target is attained and thus can be used to formulate relevant
and practical stop criteria. This criterion may be subject to
unexpected deviations from regularity when encountering an
unforeseen cavity. The necessary time to fill the cavity has to
be evaluated in order to reconsider the time–spread relation
afterwards. The second method is to deduce the spread from
the flow rate and pressure. This criterion may not be practi-
cal, particularly when the flow rate is low and decreases very
slowly in time. Its value may be flawed by a significant rel-
ative error. However, it does not suffer from a deviation
encountering an unforeseen cavity, because it is time inde-
pendent and depends only on the spread ratio and pressure.
There is a variant of this criterion to avoid very small flow
rate, which is to define a margin with a flow-rate-limit
beyond which grouting is stopped. An example is the mod-
ified minimal flow criterion, MFC, for which the flow-rate-
limit has been parameterized for fractures that are injected at
a constant pressure (El Tani 2012, 2013). There is another
example which is the modified minimal penetrability crite-
rion, MPC, for which the ratio of the flow rate to the pressure
has been parameterized for a fracture or multiple fractures of
various thicknesses that are injected simultaneously at a
constant energy (El Tani et al. 2014).
 Author's personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures
Stop criteria will always depend on an estimation of the
number of fractures and fracture geometry, which never
can be investigated in detail in any preinvestigation. These
must be verified during the grouting operation in order to
validate the stop criterion and ascertain that the target has
been attained. This implies an inverse use of the presented
equations. The type of flow (channel or disc flow), the
fracture geometry and the number of fractures have to be
evaluated based on measured grout flow, grout volume and
applied grout pressure. The obtained spread can then be
verified. This has been called the real-time grouting control
method, RTGC, see Stille et al. (2009).
6.5 Practical Application
An example of time integration is set up following the
grouting process in Fig. 1. The fracture is 10 m wide and
Fig. 4 Time–spread of mixes
of equal viscosities along the
same grouting process
Fig. 5 Time–injection pressure
of mixes of equal viscosities
along the same grouting process
its opening 0.3 mm. The injection starts at a constant flow
rate 19.7 l/min. The pressure increases and when it attains
0.6 MPa it is maintained at this value up to the moment the
product PV attains 9 kJ. The product PV is then maintained
at this value. The calculations are carried out for a Bing-
ham material and Newtonian one with the same viscosity.
The viscosity is 0.02 Pas. The yield stress of the Bingham
material is 5 Pa. The time dependence of the spread is
shown in Fig. 4. During the first 60 s, the difference
between the spread of the two grout materials is not sig-
nificant. Then the spread of the Newtonian fluid will go
faster. The spread of the Bingham material will attain the
reach equivalent to 9.5 m after an infinite long time. Fig-
ure 5 shows the time dependence of the injection pressure.
The pressure growth is much faster when injecting at a
constant flow rate than its decay at a constant energy.
Figure 6 shows the time dependence of the flow rate. The
123
 Author's personal copy
M. El Tani, H. Stille

Fig. 6 Time–flow rate of mixes

of equal viscosities along the
same grouting process

flow rate starts decreasing when the pressure is maintained
constant and continues likewise at a constant energy. The
flow rates of a Bingham material and a Newtonian one with
the same viscosity decay differently. This observation has a
practical consequence concerning the applied Lugeon
theory or ALT (see Bruce 2011, 2013). The apparent
Lugeon is the hydraulic conductivity that is obtained from
a pressure test, using a fluid other than water. The effective
Lugeon is the hydraulic conductivity that is obtained from
these tests. According to ALT, the decrease of both flow
rates in Fig. 6 should be identical, since they have the same
viscosity (e.g. Naudts 2004; Ladiges et al. 2013). There-
fore, ALT does not predict the correct hydraulic conduc-
tivity when the testing material is a Bingham one. It may
work only when the testing fluid is similar to water, with
the same rheological characteristics.
7 Conclusions
argument that the risk of jacking does not prevail. The risk
of jacking shall be sought in the applied forces, initial
stresses and stiffness of the rock mass. When a predefined
energy envelope is combined with a zero flow rate as is the
case in the GIN model, it can be interpreted as the enthalpy
or the energy that is necessary to reactivate the grout from
a rest state.
The complex behaviour of a Bingham material has to be
simplified in order to solve the flow in 2D structures like
discs. Two approaches are found in the literature. It has
been shown that these two approaches give equal flow rate
and time–spread.
Appendix 1: Time–Spread Closed Form
The integration of the right-hand side of Eq. (50) leads to
na  2 1 þ na
F¼ ðFa þ Fb Þ þ Fc ð67Þ
9 3

In this paper, the theories of flow of both Newtonian fluids with,

 
and Bingham material in 1D structures like channels and 2þn j2  na j
2D discs are presented for different driving processes like Fa ¼ Sp þ ln lnð2 þ nÞ ð68Þ
2  na na
constant flow, constant pressure and constant energy.  
Based on the presented equations, the design of grouting 1n 1 þ na
Fb ¼ Sp  ln lnð1  nÞ ð69Þ
operations can be carried out both for grouting rock frac- 1 þ na na
tures with chemical grout or cement-based grout. 1 n þ na 1 n þ na
An example of a sequential combination of driving pro- Fc ¼ ln  ln ð70Þ
1n na 1 þ na 1  n
cesses was applied to a Bingham material and a Newtonian
fluid with the same viscosity. They behave differently than in which Sp is Spence’s function. Spence’s function is
expected, which has major consequences on the interpreta- Zz
lnj1  xj
tion of the spread and the set-up of any stop criteria. SpðzÞ ¼  dx ð71Þ
Energy considerations have shown that it is always x
0
possible to select a grouting process that will exceed any
predefined energy. Predefined energy cannot be used as an Spence’s function has different appellations since it has
many discoverers or re-discoverers (Zagier 2006).

123
 Author's personal copy
Grout Spread and Injection Period of Silica Solution and Cement Mix in Rock Fractures

Spence’s function can be calculated using the dilogarithm Bruce DA (2013) Refusal and closure in rock grouting: let’s get it
function that is defined in the interval (-1, 1) as right! Geotech News 31(2):24–25
Bruce DA, de Porcellinis P (1990) Structural repair of major concrete
X1 n
z dams through epoxy resin bonding. Concrete Repair Bull 22:4–5
Li2 ðzÞ ¼ 2
ð72Þ Cambefort H (1961) L’injection et ses problèmes. Bull Tech Suisse
n¼1
n
Roman 87(19):329–341
Carino LJ, Lew HS (2001) The maturity method: from theory to
Their relations are application. In: Proceedings of the 2001 structures congress and
exposition, pp 1–19, ASCE, Washington, DC
SpðzÞ ¼ Li2 ðzÞ  1z1 ð73Þ
Dai G, Bird R (1981) Radial flow of a Bingham fluid between two
p2 1 2 fixed circular disks. J Non-Newton Fluid Mech 8:349–355
SpðzÞ ¼  ln ðzÞ  Li2 ð1=zÞ z1 ð74Þ El Tani M (2009) Grout-time to break through the SL dispute.
3 2 Geotech News 27(3):41–48
p2 1 2 El Tani M (2012) Grouting rock fractures with cement grout. Rock
SpðzÞ ¼   ln jzj  Li2 ð1=zÞ z   1 ð75Þ Mech Rock Eng 45:547–561
6 2 El Tani M (2013) Grouting emancipation. Geotech News 31(3):38–42
El Tani M, Bremen R, Katterbach M (2014) Stop criterion for GIN.
In: 8th Asian rock mechanics symposium, Sapporo, ISRM/One
Petro, pp 447–456
Appendix 2: Time–Spread First-Order Frigaard IA, Paso KG, de Souza Medes KG (2017) Bingham’s model
Approximation in the oil and gas industry. Rheol Acta 56(3):259–282
Funehag J, Axelsson M (2003) Hydrogeological characterisation and
sealing of narrow fractures in hard rock. Mater Geoenviron
The first-order approximations of Eq. (50) in the interval 60:121–124
(0, n) is Funehag J, Gustafsson G (2008) Design of grouting with silica sol in
hard rock. Part I. TUST 23:1–8
Zn Gustafson G, Claesson J (2005) Steering parameters for rock
ð1Þ x
F ðnÞ ¼ ðf ðnÞ þ ðx  nÞf 0 ðnÞÞ dx grouting. Unpublished paper submitted to the international
ð1  xÞ2 ð2 þ xÞ journal of rock mechanics and mining sciences (IJRMMS), pp 19
0
Gustafson G, Stille H (2005) Stop criteria for cement grouting.
ð76Þ Felsbau 25(3):62–68
Håkansson U (1993) Rheology of fresh cement-based grouts. Thesis
in which KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, p 154
    Hässler L (1991) Grouting of rock—simulation and classification.
n x
f ðxÞ ¼ 1 þ a ln 1 þ ð77Þ PhD thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, p 159
x na Hatem M, Pusch M, Knutsson S (2015) Study of cement-grout
penetration into fractures under static and oscillatory conditions.
The integration is straightforward and leads to TUST 45:10–19
F(1) = F(0) ? DF with Houlsby AC (1990) Construction and design of cement grouting.
     Wiley, New York, p 442
1 n n n 2 2ð1  nÞ Karol RH (2003) Chemical grouting and soil stabilization, 3rd edn.
F ð0Þ ¼ 1 þ a ln 1 þ þ ln
3 n na 1  n 3 2þn Dekker
Ladiges S, Willey J, Norbert M, Barclay A (2013) Case studies of
ð78Þ foundation grouting using the GIN method at the enlarged Cotter
   Dam, 18p, ANCOLD conference 2013
1 na n
DF ¼ 1  ln 1 þ Lombardi G, Deere D (1993) Grouting design and control using the
n n na GIN principle. Water Power Dam Constr 45(6):15–22
  ð79Þ
4 þ 2n 2 þ n 2n  5 1 n Naudts A (2004) Contemporary issues in rock grouting and formu-
ln þ ln þ lation of engineered cement based suspension grouts, 14 p,
9 2 9 1n 3 Montreal
Rafi JY, Stille H (2015) Applicability of using GIN method, by
F(0) is the zero-order approximation. considering theoretical approach of grouting design. Geotech
Geol Eng 33(6):1431–1448
Stille H (2015) Rock grouting theories and application, pp 140. Befo
Stockholm. ISBN: 978-91-88257-46-8
References Stille B, Stille H, Gustafson G, Kobayashi S (2009) Experience with
the real time grouting control method. Geomech Tunn 2:447
Teyssandier F, Ivankovic M, Love BJ (2010) Modeling the effect of
Andersson HMK, Borchardt PJ, Bruce DA (2001) The use of
the curing conversion on the dynamic viscosity of epoxy resins
polyurethane resins in tunnel grouting. In: Rapid excavation and
cured by an anhydride curing agent. J Appl Polym Sci
tunneling conference, San Diego, CA, June 11–13, 18 pp
115:1671–1674
Brantberger M, Stille H, Eriksson M (2000) Controlling grout
Wallner M (1976) Propagation of sedimentation stable cement pastes
spreading in tunnel grouting—analyses and developments of the
in jointed rock. Rock Mech Waterw Constr 2:449–461
GIN-method. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 15(4):343–352
Walz AH, Wilson DB, Bruce DA, Hamby JA (2003) Grouted seepage
Bruce DA (2011) Rock grouting for dams and the need to fight
cutoffs in karstic limestone. In: 3rd international conference on
regressive thinking. Geotech News 29(2):23–30

123
 Author's personal copy
M. El Tani, H. Stille

grouting and ground treatment, New Orleans, ASCE, vol 120, Zagier D (2006) The dilogarithm function. In: Frontiers in number
pp 967–978 theory physics and geometry, vol II, pp 3–65, Springer, Berlin.
Weaver K, Bruce D (2007) Dam foundation grouting, revised and doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30308-4
expanded. ASCE, press, New York

123