QUANTIFYING TRANSITIONAL ROCK MASS DISTURBANCE IN OPEN PIT SLOPES RELATED TO

MINING EXCAVATION

N.D. ROSE, M. SCHOLZ, J. BURDEN, M. KING, C. MAGGS AND M. HAVAEJ

Piteau Associates Engineering, Ltd., North Vancouver, BC, Canada
Key terms: Transitional rock mass disturbance, disturbance decay function, gradational D factor, disturbance rating
system, exponential decay curves, large open pit mines, discrete element numerical modelling.

ABSTRACT
Design of large open pit mine slopes requires consideration of the effects of blasting and stress relief on the strength
of the rock mass and geologic structure. The effects of blasting and excavation can lead to tensile or shear damage
and a reduction or loss of shear strength that diminish progressively with increasing confinement and greater distan-
ce or depth away from an excavation. The 2002 Hoek-Brown strength criterion is widely used in rock mechanics, in
particular the mining industry, to characterize the strength of jointed rock masses, and incorporates a disturbance (D)
factor as an input parameter to quantify the effects of blasting and stress relief on rock mass strength. Depending on
the scale of the mining excavation, stress relief can have a significant effect on the strength degradation of the rock
mass. This is particularly pronounced in open pit slopes characterized by high groundwater levels, weak rock mass
conditions, high in situ or induced stresses, poor blasting controls, and/or unfavourably oriented geological structure.

This paper describes 20 years of experience by the main authors using calibrated discrete element numerical models
to simulate the strain-induced degradation (disturbance) of the rock mass that occurs in open pit slopes as a result
of stress relief and relaxation in response to mining. Transitional disturbance relationships can be estimated by fitting
exponential decay curves to the percent distribution of yielded zones and residual contacts from calibrated discrete
element models, as a function of depth behind the pit wall. Hoek-Brown non-linear strength envelopes can be modified
to incorporate these decay functions to account for a gradually reducing D factor ranging from fully disturbed near sur-
face to undisturbed at a defined depth behind the slope. This approach can provide useful input into limit equilibrium
models that are not capable of evaluating peak and residual strength relationships based on the evolution of stress
and strain conditions in a slope. Selection of an appropriate range of depth or stress defining the disturbance transition
requires consideration of whether slope stability conditions are dominated by geologic structure, rock mass conditions,
groundwater, in situ stresses, slope geometry, poor blasting, or a combination of these factors. Examples are provided
to illustrate the application of transitional disturbance strength relationships in stability analysis models from different
engineering geology environments. The combined results of a series of case examples have been used to develop a
generalized empirical rating system to estimate the effects of rock mass disturbance for consideration in the develop-
ment of transitional rock mass strength envelopes for stability analysis and design.

1. INTRODUCTION
In jointed rock masses, structural geology often plays an important, if not controlling, role in slope stability. Represen-
ting the influence of structural discontinuities in the design of stable bench, interramp and overall slope geometries can
be critical in defining and optimizing slope angles. Where geologic structure is discontinuous and involves interaction
with the rock mass, complex failure modes may occur, such as step path or complex wedge failures that combine
shear or tensile failure through intact rock or rock bridges along the failure path. Limit equilibrium analysis methods are
not able to assess the deformation and strain related changes in shear strength and rock mass conditions that precede
progressive failure development and therefore require estimates of shear strength defined from numerical modelling or
empirical methods. Recognizing and characterizing the potential adverse effects of damage from mining-induced stra-
in is important in defining appropriate design strength parameters, and hence, successful geotechnical slope designs.

This paper describes the use of calibrated discrete element UDEC (Itasca, 2014) modelling from different geological
environments to define transitional rock mass strength relationships based on the percentage of yielded finite diffe-
rence zones (representing the rock mass) and contacts (representing the structure) as a function of depth behind the
slope face. The results of a series of case examples have been compiled into an empirical classification system to aid
in the estimation of transitional strength relationships where calibrated numerical modelling may not be possible or
available.
2. DISCRETE ELEMENT MODELLING OF COMPLEX SLOPE STABILITY AND DEFORMATION

BACKGROUND
Discrete element numerical modelling codes such as UDEC and its threedimensional equivalent 3DEC (Itasca, 2016),
provide the ability to model complex geological structure, rock mass and groundwater conditions, the interaction of
mining activity and related displacement behaviour, and the potential for progressive failure development. Due to
the considerable number of input parameters required in discrete element models, a high level of input data quality
is required. A more detailed description of the UDEC numerical modelling methodology summarized in this paper is
presented in Rose and Scholz (2009) and Rose (2011).

MODEL REPRESENTATION OF PHYSICAL SLOPE CONDITIONS

Structural discontinuity fabric and shear strength

Development of structural fabric in discrete element models requires scaled representation of semi-continuous to con-
tinuous structural features that are important to kinematically possible failure modes or may influence slope deforma-
tion. Nonimportant structural features such as discontinuous joints are generally accounted for in the characterization
of rock mass strength, as represented by finite difference zones. Peak and residual strength conditions should be
incorporated to account for the effects of shear strain on discontinuity shear strength. Figure 1 illustrates the modelling
of discontinuities that exhibit peak-residual behaviour such as joints, as compared to major fault zones that may only
exhibit residual shear strength behaviour.

Figure 1. Illustration of peak and residual Mohr-Coulomb strength relationships for major and minor discontinuities.
Solid lines represent faults and dashed lines represent joints (Rose, 2011).
Rock Mass Strength Conditions and Yield Softening Criteria

As illustrated in Figure 2, rock mass behaviour in model finite difference zones is governed by the Hoek-Brown elas-
tic-plastic constitutive model. Strain softening of the rock mass is simulated using FISH (a scripting language in UDEC)
routines to change the rock mass strength conditions of yielded finite difference zones after each excavation from un-
disturbed to disturbed, defined by Hoek-Brown D factors of 0 and 1, respectively. Softening of rock mass modulus (Em)
from undisturbed to disturbed values is carried out following each excavation stage for each finite difference zone that
is indicated to be in a current state of yield or has yielded in the past. Rock mass dilation angle is generally approxi-
mated as one-quarter to one-eighth of the rock mass friction angle, except for fault zones or low quality rock masses
where the dilation angle is zero. Poisson’s ratio is estimated using laboratory testing results or empirical estimates.

This overall methodology was first used 20 years ago by the main authors in the investigation of slope stability condi-
tions at the Palabora mine in South Africa (Stewart et. al, 2000) and the Goldstrike mine in Nevada, USA (Sharon et.
al, 2005). At that time, the Hoek-Brown (1997) criterion did not account for the application of disturbed rock conditions
in the development of rock mass strength, as compared to the previous Hoek-Brown (1988) criterion that included
disturbance. To accommodate disturbance in the numerical models, the equations for the Hoek-Brown (1997) criterion
were adapted to incorporate a D of 1 as defined by Hoek-Brown (1988). Disturbed moduli were estimated at 45% of the
undisturbed moduli. These adjustments were discussed with Dr. E. Hoek (Rose-Hoek, personal communication, 2000)
prior to development of the Hoek-Brown (2002) strength criterion which has subsequently been used since that time.

As illustrated on the stress plot in Figure 2, the transition between disturbed and undisturbed conditions (blue dashed
line) in an excavated slope occurs as a function of the tensile or shear damage (i.e., disturbance) that develops from
stress relief and slope relaxation during mining. This transition can occur over significant depths and is sensitive to the
structural, rock mass, in situ stress, groundwater, and blasting conditions in the slope.

Figure 2. Illustration of transitional rock mass strength conditions represented in finite difference zones with Hoek-
Brown (2002) strength criteria to define undisturbed and disturbed conditions (solid lines) (after Rose, 2011).

UDEC Model Calibration

Rock mass disturbance resulting from stress relief is estimated from UDEC modelling results using a bench-by-bench
excavation sequence to simulate the stress changes and deformations in response to mining. A methodology descri-
bing the detailed calibration of UDEC models based on slope monitoring displacement data is presented in Rose and
Scholz (2009) and Rose (2011) and illustrated on Figures 3 and 4. The associated tensile or shear damage (strain
softening) that develops from mininginduced stress relief is related to “disturbance” of the rock mass based on peakre-
sidual strength criteria (Figure 2). Pre-mining rock mass strength conditions are represented by peak (undisturbed,
D = 0) rock mass strengths. After each model excavation, model elements (finite difference zones) that have yielded
(i.e., the material strengths are exceeded causing element failure) are assigned residual (disturbed, D = 1) rock mass
strength using a FISH routine. A transition between the fully disturbed limit (FDL) and the undisturbed limit (UDL) can
be defined from the model as a function of depth (stress) to estimate the amount of tensile or shear damage occurring
due to stress relief and slope relaxation during mining (dashed blue line on the inset graph in Figure 2).
 Figure 3: Illustration of bench-by-bench modelling approach to calibrate model displacements
with slope monitoring data (Rose, 2011).

Figure 4 is an example of a calibrated UDEC model for a 425 m high slope on the southeast wall of the Highland Va-
lley Copper (HVC) Lornex Pit showing calibrated prism displacements, contours of total horizontal displacement, and
plasticity indicators representing the distribution of rock mass yielding behind the slope.

The rock mass on the southeast wall occurs predominantly in Skeena Quartz Diorite (SQD) with an approximately 200
m wide Quartz Porphyry Dyke (QPD) in the lower slope. The rock masses are defined by a Rock Quality Designation
(RQD, Deere et al., 1967) block model with five ranges of RQD in 20% intervals and associated average Rock Mass
Rating (RMR, Bieniawski, 1976) and unconfined compressive strength (UCS) parameters. Each of the SQD and QPD
rock masses are characterized by RQD ranges of 0-20, 20-40 and 4060% RQD defining RMRs of 28 to 45, and UCSs
of 33 to 53 MPa in SQD; and RMRs of 31 to 45, and UCSs of 33 to 46 MPa in QPD. Major continuous faults dip at 75°
to the east and west (into the wall and towards the pit) at spacings of 20 and 30 m, respectively. A discontinuous joint
set dips west at 45° at an average spacing of 15 m.

Calibration of the model response to historic slope movements is achieved by refining the structural continuity and
spacing of the main discontinuity sets until a good match is achieved for multiple monitoring locations on the slope and
at locations of subsurface monitoring, if it is available. Multiple prism monitoring installations occur at each monitoring
elevation and therefore calibration requires matching the pattern of modelled displacements within the range of moni-
tored displacements. The selected calibration of monitoring points reflect the range of deformation conditions on the
slope. As seen on Figure 4, over 60 m of slope deformation occurred during mining on the southeast wall up to 2008.
The slope deformation did not result in catastrophic failure, but resulted in significant ravelling and deterioration of the
pit wall, with few benches remaining intact in the mid to upper slopes.
 Figure 4: Example of calibrated UDEC model from the southeast wall of the HVC Lornex Pit showing a)
actual prism monitoring data (grey) versus UDEC displacements (blue); b) contours of total horizontal
displacement; and c) model plasticity indicators.

Characterizing the Distribution of Yielded Elements to Estimate Rock Mass Disturbance

To quantify the amount of yielding and/or slip that has occurred as a function of depth behind the pit wall, the number
of yielded zones and contacts are sampled at equal depth intervals and cumulated as a percentage of all the zones
and contacts within each depth interval. Figures 5a and 5b show an exponential decay relationship fit to the distribu-
tion of yielded finite difference zones and joint elements in UDEC models for the southeast wall of the HVC Lornex
Pit (Figure 4) and the northeast wall of the HVC Valley Pit (Figure 6). Both slopes occur in intrusive rock masses with
similar structural orientations and slope heights, but with different major structural spacing, groundwater levels and
rock mass strengths. In the case of the Lornex southeast wall, yielding is dominated by the rock mass (purple) as a
result of deepseated toppling instability associated with closely spaced faults, whereas on the northeast wall of the
Valley Pit, yielding is dominated by a combination of the rock mass and structure (blue).

Figure 6 shows the distribution of yielded rock mass zones in the HVC Valley Pit northeast wall UDEC model. In Figure
5b, the distribution of yielded zones in the Bethsaida Granodiorite (BGD) rock mass is presented as a function of depth
normal to the pit wall. Rock mass strength parameters for the BGD are also characterized by a geotechnical block
model based on RQD. On the northeast wall, block model RQD ranges between 60-80 and 80-100% defining average
RMRs of 55 to 73, and UCSs of 72 to 81 MPa. Major faults dip to the east (into the wall) at an average dip of 63° and
spacings of 40 to 60 m, just below the threshold for deep-seated toppling. Two sets of joints dip to the west (towards
the pit) at average dips of 75 and 48° and spacings of 20 to 30 m.
 Figure 5: Disturbance decay functions fit to: a) rock mass yield versus depth on the southeast wall of the HVC
Lornex Pit; and b) rock mass/structure yield on the northeast wall of the HVC Valley Pit. Disturbance limits (FDL and
UDL) are labelled.

Figure 6: Plot of plasticity indicators (coloured symbols) in UDEC model of the HVC Valley Pit northeast wall
illustrating relative distribution of yielding in finite difference zones (grey). The target depressurization water table for
the ultimate pit is shown in blue.
 José Miguel Galera Fernández
Profesor de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Departamento de Ingeniería Geológica y minera
As seen on Figures 5b and 6, the percentage of yielded zones in the northeast UDEC model decrease with depth from
the FDL near the slope
Antonio face to the UDL at a depth approximately equal to the slope height.
As seen on Jesús
FiguresGarcía
5b and 6,Guerrero
the percentage of yielded zones in the northeast UDEC model decrease with depth from
Decano-Presidente
the FDL near the slopedel
faceilustre
to the Colegio
UDL at a Oficial de Geólogos
depth approximately de to
equal Andalucía
the slope height.
Development of Transitional Non-Linear Strength Relationships
Development
José Antonio of Transitional Non-Linear Strength Relationships
García strength
Mendoza
Development of non-linear curves that incorporate transitional HoekBrown (2002) D factor for limit equilibrium
Decano-Presidente
analysis can incorporate del Colegio
a transitionalOficial de Ingenieros
disturbance de Minas
decay function baseddel Noreste
on the decay curve that relates the depth of
Development of non-linear strength curves that incorporate transitional HoekBrown (2002) D factor for limit equilibrium
disturbance (i.e., yielding), in a direction normal to the pit wall, as a function of the overall slope height (H) as follows:
analysis can incorporate a transitional disturbance decay function based on the decay curve that relates the depth of
Juan Ramón
disturbance (i.e., García
yielding),Secades
in a direction normal to the pit wall, as a function of the overall slope height (H) as follows:
Consejero Delegado de SEDES S.A

José Francisco González Fernández

Secretario del Consejo Superior de Colegios de Ingenieros de Minas
José Luís Leandro
Decano del Consejo de Colegios de Ingenieros Técnicos de Minas

Juan Antonio López Geta

Presidente Grupo Especializado del Agua de ANIM

Juan Manuel Manrubia Conesa

Decano-Presidente del Colegio Oficial de Ingenieros de Minas de Levante

Rafael Monsalve Romero

Decano-Presidente del Colegio Oficial de Ingenieros de Minas del Centro

Richard Oldcorn
Managing Director and Corporate Consultant. SRK Consulting

José
For
For Luís Parra
calculation
calculation of y Alfaro (2002)
of Hoek-Brown
Hoek-Brown (2002) rock
rock mass
mass shear
shear strengths,
strengths, the
the following
following relationships
relationships can
can be
be assumed
assumed for
for input
input
into
into limit equilibrium
limit
Director equilibrium stability
stability
de la Escuela analyses
analyses
Técnica in the
in the absence
Superior absence of a
of a numerical
numerical
de Ingenieros model,
model,
de Minas assumingde
assuming
y Energía original
original
Madrid ground
ground surface
surface existed
(UPM) existed
at or
at or near
near the
the upper
upper elevation
elevation of
of the
the pit
pit slope:
slope:

Jesús Portillo García-Pintos

Minor principal
Minor stress (σ3́ ) = γH
principal stress [3]
Vicedecano Colegio Oficial de Ingenieros de Minas del Sur
Where:
Javier Targhetta Roza
■ γ=unit weight
■
Consejero Delegado de Atlantic Copper
■
■ H=overall slope height
Joséconditions
Slope
Slope Luís Tejera
conditions on Oliver
on the
the northeast wall
northeast wall of
of the
the HVC
HVC Valley
Valley PitPit defi
define ne a a unique
unique set set of
of conditions,
conditions, as as the
the overburden
overburden units units
inProfesor
in the upperDoctor
the upper 225 m
225 m Ingeniero
of the
of slopede
the slope defiMinas
defi ne a
ne y Energía
a shallow
shallow overall slope
overall slope angle
angle andand their
their unit
unit weights
weights areare 25% lower than
25% lower than the be-
the be-
drock units (i.e., 19.5
drock units (i.e., 19.5 kN/m 3 versus
3 versus 26
26 kN/m3).
kN/m3). Stress
Stress conditions
conditions on
on the
the northeast
northeast wall
wall were
were derived
derived from
from UDEC
UDEC and
and were
were estimated
estimated using
using the
the following
following relationships
relationships

for limit
limit equilibrium
equilibrium analyses:
analyses:
Verónica Rona
for

Minor principal
Minor stress (σ3́)=
principal stress ⅓ γ H cos α [4]

Where:
■
■ γ=unit weight
■
■ H=overall slope height
■ α=overall slope angle

www.congresomineriasevilla2018.org
 ■ α=overall slope angle
Non-linear shear strengths incorporating a transition function for disturbance can be developed using a shear-normal
function defined by a series of points representing a range of minor principal stresses defined at incremental slope
heights based on the equations for shear and normal stresses defined in the Hoek-Brown (2002) strength criterion
and Equations 1, 2 and 3. This approach is illustrated by the selection of 100 points defining a shear-normal function
on Figure 7 for input into limit equilibrium models. Nominally, five to ten points are used to define the tensile to UCS
range, and the increments between normal stresses are progressively increased to provide a greater density of points
in the lower stress ranges.

Figure 7: Example of a shear-normal function defined by 100 points for input into limit equilibrium models.

VERIFICATION OF SHEAR STRENGTH RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON BACK ANALYSIS

Verification of rock mass strengths using a D-factor decay function was achieved using a cross-validation approach
for analyses in Slide version 6 (Rocscience, 2015). Figure 8a is a Slide model developed from UDEC modelling re-
sults where rock mass strengths in Slide are represented by either D=1 or D=0 conditions, based on the distribution
of UDEC yielded and non-yielded elements, respectively. Figure 8b illustrates a zoned D-factor modelling approach
defined with constant D values of 1.0, 0.85 and 0.7 for depth intervals of 0-50; 50-125 and >125 m, respectively. Figure
8c illustrates analysis results using a D-factor decay function approach based on a FDL of 25 m and a UDL of 420 m
equal to the slope height.
 Figure 8: Slide anisotropic stability analyses from the northeast wall of the HVC Valley Pit incorporating: a) yield
distribution from UDEC; b) zoned D-factor according to depth intervals; and c) a D-factor decay function.
As shown on Figure 8b, the FoS results from the zoned D-factor model are within 9 to 3% of the UDEC equivalent Slide
results. In comparison, the D-factor decay function results are within -2 to +1% of the UDEC equivalent Slide results
providing closer agreement using this approach (Figure 8c). These results indicate that with appropriate cross-vali-
dation or back analysis to confirm strength conditions, a decay function approach provides a better representation of
strength conditions as a function of depth behind a pit slope than using set depth intervals of D factor.

3. ASSESSMENT OF FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO ROCK MASS DISTURBANCE

Figure 9 shows examples of exponential decay curves from 10 calibrated UDEC models developed over the last 20
years at six open pit mines with different structural, rock mass, and groundwater conditions. Fully disturbed conditions
range from depths of 7 m (1% of slope height) on the north wall of the Palabora mine in South Africa to over 200 m
(45% of slope height) on the southeast wall of the HVC Lornex Pit (Figure 4) in Canada. Curves shown as solid lines
are characterized by depths of disturbance equal to the full height of the slope. Curves shown as dashed lines are
characterized by disturbance depths that extend to half the slope height. These latter cases are from metasedimen-
tary-hosted gold mines in Nevada in the southwest USA under fully drained (dry) slope conditions. These mines are
situated in an extensional stress environment in the Basin and Range Structural Province and may represent a unique
set of conditions as compared to the other mine sites.

Figure 9. Percentage of zone and contact yield versus a) depth; and b) normalized depth/height (%) for 10 open pit
mine slopes in varying geological environments.

EMPIRICAL RATING SYSTEM TO ESTIMATE LIMITS OF ROCK MASS DISTURBANCE

To investigate whether different geological, structural, hydrogeological, and blasting conditions can be evaluated to de-
termine the level of expected disturbance for geotechnical design, an empirical disturbance rating system was develo-
ped to quantify the limit of fully disturbed conditions as a percentage of the overall excavation slope height. Parameters
that were evaluated included rock mass quality, UCS, structural geology (discontinuity shear strength, continuity, and
spacing), groundwater levels, blasting, stress confinement related to slope curvature, and in situ stress. Each set of
conditions was given a range of point ratings that are cumulated to a maximum rating of 100. The Disturbance Rating
(DR) divided by 100 is used to estimate the percentage depth of the overall slope height that defines the FDL (i.e., DR
= FDL/H; or decay = ln(DR) in Equation 2). The overall rating system is summarized in Table I and the parameters are
described in the following sections.

Rock Mass Quality

RMR according to Bieniawski (1976) or Geological Strength Index (GSI) (Hoek et al., 2013) are assessed using a
six-category scale defining minimum and maximum ratings of 0 and 15 for conditions ranging from extremely good to
very poor, respectively.
UCS
The UCS is evaluated based on six categories with minimum and maximum ratings of 0 and 15 for UCS ranging from
>250 MPa to between 0 and 5 MPa, representing extremely strong to very weak conditions, respectively.

Structural geology
Structural conditions were assessed based on continuity, shear strength and structural orientation according to the
following three categories:

• Fore-dipping structure that strikes subparallel to the pit wall and dips towards the pit defines potential for shear
stress development along the major principal stress direction (i.e., ±30° to slope angle). Ratings range from 0
for random, discontinuous, non-daylighting structure to 10 for continuous faults that daylight on the slope face.
It is assumed that kinematic analyses have been conducted to define stable slope configurations that do not
result in daylight of large-scale planar or wedge failures.
• Back-dipping structure that strikes subparallel to the pit wall and dips steeply (i.e., > 65°) into the slope defines
potential for deep-seated toppling and development of obsequent scarps. Ratings range from 0 for random or
discontinuous structure to 10 for closely spaced continuous faults with low shear strength and low modulus.
• Release structures that strike sub-perpendicular (60 to 90° oblique) to the pit wall provide a greater degree of
freedom for displacements to develop towards the pit. Ratings range from 0 for random discontinuous structure
to 10 for closely spaced continuous faults.

Groundwater Pressure
Groundwater conditions are assessed based on minimum and maximum ratings ranging from 0 to 20, representing dry
to saturated (high pressure) conditions, respectively. Consideration needs to be given as to whether pore pressures
are important relative to the strength of the rock mass. For example, nearsaturated conditions may not have a signifi-
cant impact on slope stability and disturbance if the rock mass strength is sufficiently high.

Controlled Blasting
The effects of blasting are rated on a scale of -15 to 10, ranging from mechanical excavation to production blasting
with no controlled blasting measures, respectively. Judgement is required to assess the potential impacts of blasting
on slope performance based on review of slope conditions and displacement monitoring.

Estimates of the influence of blast damage can be assessed by relationships proposed by Hoek and Karzulovic (2000)
that relate the effects of blasting as a function of the bench excavation height, the blasting method, and the depth
behind the slope face. The range of depth behind the slope face for the blast damage zone is estimated to range from
0.3 to 2.5 times the height of the blasted bench, but can extend to as deep as 100 m behind the slope face.

Slope Curvature (Confinement)

The effects of slope confinement are evaluated on a scale ranging from -15 to 10, representing perfectly circular pit
walls to convex slopes that define noses or convexities that result in loss of confinement, respectively. If significant
concave or convex curvature is present, 3D numerical modelling is recommended.

In situ Stress Ratio Factor and Total Ratings

The summation of all the category ratings is multiplied by the in situ horizontal to vertical stress ratio (ko) to determine
the final Disturbance Rating (DR).

MINE CASE EXAMPLES

Examples of the empirical parameters defining the maximum fully disturbed depth as a percentage of overall slope
height are summarized in Table II. Slope conditions range from strong at the Palabora mine to weak and prone to
deep-seated toppling at the HVC Lornex Pit. Disturbance Rating values from these operations range from a minimum
of 1% to a maximum of 45%, respectively. Over the course of the mine lives, displacements in these pit walls have
ranged from about 0.5 m to in excess of 60 m, respectively. The mine case examples in Table II and on Figure 9 have
been grouped into five categories and are summarized in the following sections. The range of rock mass strength con-
ditions presented in the following categories are summarized from the centre of the deposits to the surrounding host
rocks (e.g., RMR 80 (centre) to 70 (host rock)).
Category 1: Strong Rock Mass, Favourable Structure, Moderate Groundwater

Category 1 is represented by very favourable slope conditions at the Palabora mine in South Africa. Rock mass con-
ditions are strong throughout the orebody and host rocks. Confinement effects were present in the lower interramp
slopes, but were not considered to limit the UDEC models based on 3D modelling results. Slope conditions included:

• RMR/GSI 80 to 70 (very good to good), UCS 127 to 86 MPa (very strong to strong) with favourable structure
and moderately high groundwater conditions. Drainage of the lower slopes is provided by underground mining.
• Steep (58°) to shallow (37° in the upper benches near the pit crest) interramp slope angles (IRAs) defining
overall slope angles (OSAs) of 46 to 50°.
• Pre-split controlled blasting measures with 30 m benches.
• UDLs of 720 to 825 m equal to 100% of slope height.
• DRs of 1 to 3 (1 to 3% of H) defining FDLs of 7 to 25 m.

Category 2: Strong/Moderate Rock Mass, Favourable Structure, Moderate Groundwater

Category 2 is represented by favourable to moderate slope conditions at the Porgera mine in Papua New Guinea.
Rock mass strength conditions are strong in the core of the orebody, but reduce progressively into the surrounding
host rocks. Slope conditions included:

• RMR/GSI 84 to 75 (very good to good), UCS 116 to 26 MPa (very strong to moderately strong) with favourable
structure and moderately high groundwater conditions. Drainage of the lower slopes is provided by under-
ground mining.
• Intermediate (49°) to shallow (38° in the upper slopes) IRAs controlled by bench designs in the lower slope and
structural/rock mass conditions in the upper slopes comprising an OSA of 42°.
• Pre-split controlled blasting measures with 30 m benches.
• UDL of 580 m equal to 100% of slope height.
• Average DR of 10 (10% of H) defining an FDL of 56 m.
Table I: Parameters Defining Rock Mass Disturbance Rating (DR)
Category 3: Moderate Rock Mass, Moderate Structure, Fully Drained

Category 3 is represented by favourable to moderate slope conditions at the Goldstrike and Cortez mines in Nevada,
USA. Rock mass conditions are stronger in the deeper metasedimentary and intrusive units and are progressively
weaker higher in the stratigraphy. Slight curvature effects in the lower slopes were accommodated by varying structu-
ral spacing during model calibration. Slope conditions included:

• RMR/GSI 63 to 31 (good to poor), UCS 60 to 24 MPa (strong to weak) with moderate structure. Drainage of
the slopes is provided by underground mining and deep well drilling defining fully drained (dry) groundwater
conditions.
• Intermediate (44°) to shallow (35°) IRAs controlled by bench designs and structural/ rock mass conditions with
OSAs of 34 to 39°.
• Trim blasting measures with 12 to 15 m benches.
• UDLs of 210 to 325 m equal to 50% of slope height.
• DRs of 8 to 11 (8 to 11% of H) defining FDLs of 34 to 50 m.

Category 4: Strong/Moderate Rock Mass, Deep-Seated Toppling Potential, Enhanced Depressurization

Category 4 is represented by favourable to moderate slope conditions at the HVC Valley Pit, BC, Canada. Rock mass
conditions are generally stronger with depth in the centre of the deposit and are weaker at higher elevations. Slope
conditions included:

• RMR/GSI 73 to 46 (good to fair), UCS 81 to 65 MPa (strong) with structure defining potential for deep-seated
toppling and enhanced depressurization where deep-seated toppling potential exists.
• Intermediate (48°) to shallow (39°) IRAs controlled by bench designs and potential for deep-seated toppling in
some pit sectors defining OSAs of 37 to 41°.
• A transition from trim to pre-split blasting measures occurred in 2015 with 15 m single benches.
• UDLs of 420 to 810 m equal to 100% of slope height.
• DRs of 6 to 11 (6 to 11% of H) defining FDLs of 25 to 89 m.

Category 5: Weak Rock Mass, Deep-Seated Toppling Potential, Enhanced Depressurization

Category 5 is represented by moderate to poor slope conditions at the Lornex Pit, BC, Canada. Rock mass conditions
are generally weak in the centre of the deposit from alteration and along major fault zones and dykes. Slight curvature
effects are present on the lower south wall and were accommodated by varying the model structural spacing in the
lower slope during model calibration. Slope conditions included:

• RMR/GSI 28 to 45 (poor to fair), UCS 33 to 53 MPa (moderately strong) with structure defining potential for
deep-seated toppling and significant enhanced depressurization to control deep-seated toppling.
• Shallow to intermediate (35 to 40°) IRAs controlled by deep-seated toppling with OSAs of 31 to 35°.
• Trim blasting measures with 15 m benches.
• UDLs of 450 to 470 m equal to 100% of slope height.
• DRs of 24 to 45 (24 to 45% of H) defining FDLs of 113 to 203 m.
Table II: Parameters Defining Disturbance Ratings for Ten Open Pit Mine Slopes
4. CONCLUSI ONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Disturbance of rock masses related to stress relief and slope relaxation involves the complex interaction of the rock
mass, geologic structure, groundwater levels, confinement, in situ and induced stresses, and blasting. Carefully cons-
tructed and calibrated numerical models provide the ability to simulate evolution of stresses, strains and displace-
ments in a slope, thereby allowing the distribution of disturbed and undisturbed conditions to be effectively evaluated.
Limitations of limit equilibrium analyses prevent the ability to define appropriate levels of disturbance for design and
often require arbitrary selection of single D factor values based on assumptions. Representation of discrete zones of
disturbance based on defined depth intervals provides a pseudo-representation of decreasing disturbance with depth,
but introduces artificial strength-contrast boundaries.

UDEC numerical modelling can be used to simulate the effects of rock mass disturbance, and D factor transition func-
tions can be developed by fitting decay function curves to the distribution of yielded zones and contacts as a function
of depth behind the slope face. This approach has been cross-validated with limit equilibrium analyses in Slide to
simulate the zones of disturbance from UDEC output which supports the use of decay functions to characterize rock
mass strengths.

An empirical rock mass disturbance rating system is proposed to assist with initial scoping of the potential fully dis-
turbed limit or depth behind the slope face. Assumptions for the depth of the disturbance transition are required, but the
depth of the undisturbed limit can be assumed to equal the overall slope height in the absence of numerical modelling
results. The empirical rock mass disturbance rating system presented in this paper is in the early stages of develop-
ment and will require refinement as it is developed further. However, it provides a simple evaluation of the potential
range of disturbance conditions that could be encountered in a slope if numerical modelling results are not available
or are impractical to develop due to limitations in the level of geotechnical, geological and hydrogeological information
that is available. Application of this system is not recommended for slopes that are unstable. Ultimately, numerical mo-
dels, calibrated to surface and subsurface displacements, provide the best approach to investigate and characterize
rock mass disturbance for geotechnical design purposes.

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors of this paper thank Teck Highland Valley Copper Partnership, Barrick Gold Corporation and Barrick Niu-
gini Limited for the permission to publish the enclosed content relating to the Valley, Lornex, Goldstrike, Cortez and
Porgera open pits. Information pertaining to the Palabora mine was previously described in Stewart et al. (2000).

6. REFERENCES

• Bieniawski, Z.T., 1976. Rock Mass Classification in Rock Engineering. Proceedings Symposium on Exploration for
Rock Engineering. Z.T. Bieniawski (ed.). Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 97-106.
• Deere, D.U., Hendron, A.J., Patton, F.D., and Cording, E.J., 1967. Design of Surface and Near Surface Construction
in Rock. Proceedings. 8th U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics, AIME, New York, pp. 237-302.
• Hoek, E. and Brown E.T. 1988. The Hoek-Brown failure criterion - a 1988 update. Proceedings 15th Canadian Rock
Mechanics Symposium. J.H. Curran (ed.). University of Toronto. pp. 31-38.
• Hoek, E. and Brown, E.T. 1997. Practical estimates or rock mass strength. International Journal of Rock Mechanics,
Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1165-1186.
• Hoek, E. and Karzulovic, A. 2000. Rock-Mass properties for surface mines. Slope Stability in Surface Mining. W. A.
Hustralid, M.K. McCarter and D.J.A. van Zyl (eds.). Littleton, CO: Society for Mining, Metallurgical and Exploration
(SME), pp. 59-70.
• Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C.T., and Corkum, B., 2002. Hoek-Brown Failure Criterion – 2002 Edition. Proceedings
North American Rock Mechanics Society Meeting, Toronto, July.
• Hoek, E., Carter, T.G., Diederichs, M.S., 2013. Quantification of the Geological Strength Index Chart. Proceedings
of the 47th US Rock Mechanics / Geomechanics Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA, June 23-26.
• Itasca, 2014. Universal Distinct Element Code (UDEC) User’s Guide, Version 6.0. Itasca Consulting Group, Inc.,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
• Itasca, 2016. 3 Dimensional Distinct Element Code (3DEC) User’s Guide, Version 5.2. Itasca Consulting Group,
Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota.
• Rocscience, 2016. Slide – 2D Slope Stability Analysis for Soil and Rock Slopes – version 6 User’s Guide. Rocs-
cience Inc., Toronto, Ontario.
• Rose, N.D., and Scholz, M.F., 2009. Analysis of Complex Deformation Behaviour in Large Open Pit Mine Slopes
Using the Universal Distinct Element Code (UDEC). Proceedings of the Slope Stability 2009 Conference, Santiago,
November, 11p.
• Rose, N.D., 2011. Keynote Paper: Investigating the Effects of Mining Induced Strains in Open Pit Slopes, 2011.
Proceedings of the Slope Stability 2011 Conference, Vancouver, September, 16p.
• Rose-Hoek, E. 2000. North Vancouver, BC, Canada. Personal communication.
• Sharon, R., Rose, N. and Rantapaa, M., 2005. Design and Development of the Northeast Layback of the Betze-Post
Open Pit. Proceedings, SME Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah, Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration,
Inc., Pre-print 05-09, 10p.
• Stewart, A., Wessels, F. and Bird, S, 2000. Design, Implementation, and Assessment of Open-Pit Slopes at Palabo-
ra of the Last 20 Years. Slope Stability in Surface Mining. W. A. Hustralid, M.K. McCarter and D.J.A. van Zyl (eds.).
Littleton, CO: Society for Mining, Metallurgical and Exploration (SME), pp. 177-181.