Tunnels in Granite - Tneles en granito

Universitat Politchnica de Catalunya

Barcelona - Spain

Practical Implication of Brittle Failure on

Hard Rock Tunnelling Construction
Peter K. Kaiser

President/CEO Centre for Excellence in Mining Innovation

Chair for Rock Mechanics and Ground Control

Laurentian University

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Practical Implication of Brittle Failure on

Hard Rock Tunnelling Construction
Acknowledgements
Collaborators: Cai, Diederichs, Hajibdolmajid, Martin, McCreath,

Contractors: MATRANS, TAT, Herrenknecht AG, ...

Mining companies: Vale INCO, Goldcorp, Rio Tinto,
Science Council: NSERC
and many more

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Experiences
from major mining and
tunnelling operations

Toronto

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Mining at depth

Lessons learned

under stress rock is less forgiving

must learn from costly mistakes
and learn to design smart !

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Objective
Review lessons learned
Interpret observed rock failure
processes
Explain factors affecting
constructability
to identify opportunities for
improvements
support design
rock excavation techniques
ground control measures

to reduce construction problems

minimize gap between designer and
contractor
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Hoek/Kaiser/Bawden 1995

Primary rock mechanics challenge

when tunnelling in massive to moderately jointed rock

Anticipating the actual rock behaviour

Brittle or spalling failure
spalling often dominates over shear failure

Geo-engineering for constructability

fractured rock is often difficult to control

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Site characterization

Geological Model !

Rock Mass Model !

?

Rock Behaviour Model ?

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Modes of
tunnel
instability
Focus on
massive to
moderately
jointed
rock

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

1st Challenge - anticipate failure mode

Observe
Interpret
Understand

Funka-Bedretto - CH
Trondheim - No
Ltschberg - CH
El Teniente - Chile
URL-Canada

Piora - CH
Mt.Terri - CH

Spalling behaviour
must be anticipated in almost rocks !
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

2nd Challenge - anticipate the extent

Observe
Interpret
Stress field
Depth of Failure

Understand
Extrapolate
Stress Level (

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

(or Depth/UCS)

Appropriate failure criteria to model nearwall behaviour

Spalling
leads to
near-excavation
strength
reduction

(Kaiser et al. 2000)

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Field rock mass strength

X
From field observations: microseismicity to visual observations

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Intact rock too! Revisited data courtesy Hoek (1961)

6.0

Failure criteria to model

intact rock is actually
s-shaped

5.0

brittle

4.0

s 1/ucs

with full or apparent

cohesion mobilization only at
high confinement

3.0

2.0

Apparent
UCS(II)
1.0

ductile

UCS(I)

0.0
0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

s 3 /ucs

0.4

0.5

UCS(I)/10

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

WHY? - Griffith crack simulation

5,15,25,35,45,50,55,65,69,70

Influence of heterogeneity on propagating path of wing crack

in an unconfined sample (simulated with RFPA2D)
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Why?

Heterogeneity causes tensile stresses

s1

400

PFC Samples:
Local tension due to
heterogeneity

300

Yield

s3 = 2.5 MPa
200

Initiation
100

Courtesy
Diederichs 2000

0
-10

10

20

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

30

s3

40

Internal tension causes spalling

Crack
propagation
length

Propagation
Spalling
Griffith, Hoek, and many others

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

% tensile stresses spalling limit

Area in Tension: 10%
400

1%

0.1%

Stress ratio
= 10 to 20

s1

300

Yield

200

Initiation
100
Courtesy
Diederichs 2000

0
0

10

20

30

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

40

s3

50

Appropriate failure criteria to model nearwall behaviour

Spalling
leads to
near-excavation
strength
reduction

(Kaiser et al. 2000)

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Where?
near excavations in low s3 range
Ko = 0.75

Ko = 1

Ko = 1.33

s3 = 12MPa

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

s1 [MPa]

800

Quartzite as an analogue of a rock mass

700
600
500

~a/2

400

300
200
100
0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

s3 [MPa]
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

20

Probability of yield (100 0% failed elements)

and deviatoric stress (s1-s3) contours

CoV =
15% to 45%

x = shear
o = tension
Kaiser 2010 Eurock
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Spalling limit or s1/s3 - ratio

Mean stress ratio
+1sd
-1sd
Normalized crack length

10

6
5
4
3

1
0

0
0

10

15

20

Distance along edge of yield zone [m]

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Normalized crack length

Stress ratio 1/ 3

15

Yield actually means deep spalling

Spalling not
shear yield

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Stress issues even at shallow depth

Summary from detailed measurements

Martin 1999

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

 under stress
- same geology behaves differently Tender documents, tend to
emphasise description of geology, rock
and rock mass, and
underemphasise description of the anticipated
rock behaviour and spalling is not anticipated (?)
When getting rock behaviour wrong
numerical models and design are likely wrong
and construction is often difficulties

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Implications for tunnels

Implications of behaviour misinterpretation

illustrated on case example
Stand-up time issues delays $$

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Implications of getting

rock mass rock mass behaviour wrong

For example
reduction in advance rate [m/d]
Planned
Actual

Raveling rock behind the open TBM split

the advance and support cycle
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Stress-driven rock mass degradation

often dominates
(b)

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

(c)

Stand-up time reduction

Construction
tools

Bieniawski 1987
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

6- 2

4 hr
s

3-9

mo
s

GSI

Progressive failure process produces blocky,

unravelling ground with rock mass bulking

Volume
increase
inside df

blocky ground = unravelling rockmass broken by stress

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Instabilities of highly stresses tunnel face

Anticipating behaviour at depth
Fracture propagation from stress raisers
at corners (e.g. incl. tunnel face)

Massive rock unravels

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Anticipate TBM face behaviour

Observe
Interpret
Understand
Extrapolate
to depth

Face behaviour

now can also anticipated

spalling at tunnel face

Increasing stress or depth

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Spalling at tunnel face

Predictions and
observations

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Unravelling tunnel face

What is seen in roof is to
be expected at face !
Unravelling of face
before wall !

massive

broken

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Rock support of brittle failing ground

with rock mass bulking

Volume
increase
inside df

blocky ground = unravelling rockmass broken by stress

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

12
Challenge anticipate rock mass
11

al. 1996) showing

>30% for unconfined
floors
and 1increase)
to 10% depending on su
bulking
(geometric
volume
Reference source not found..b).

10

15
14
13

100

12

80

Uni-directional

10
9
8

60

7
6
5

40

4
3
2

20

Courtesy
Cai 2006

0
0

0.5

1
Vertical displacement (mm)

(a)

1.5

1
0

10
9

Dilation or Bulking Factor BF [%]

Dilation (%)

Vertical stress (MPa)

11

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

-1 = 40 0.01
2 s3 = 1 MPa

9
8
7

ELFEN model
Light support

BF = 0 to 10%
Yielding support
Strong support

6
0.1

10
9

ulking Factor BF [%]

Dilation (%)

120

Simulation
with ELFEN

10

Confinement [MPa]

(b)measurements
Field

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

6
5

Yield and s3 pattern near tunnel

Circular
tunnel at
2000m
and
Ko=0.5
1.5m

a = 5m
R = 6.5m
R/a = 1.3

Yield

Bulking
Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Radial strain (%) control

12

bulking

Dilation or BF [%]

10

6
4
2

Plastic strain, far from face

Combined

s3<2 MPa BF=0-10%

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Distance from Springline [m]

with dense bolting and retention (shotcrete)

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Lessons learned ...

When dealing with brittle failure in tunnelling ...
observe, interpret, and understand
adjust design and construction
procedures to match ground behaviour

Stressed ground is less forgiving

stress breaks even good ground
good ground becomes poor ground
massive, brittle rock disintegrates
cohesionless ground
Quantum shift in constructability

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

Lessons learned ...

When highly stressed brittle rock fails
by spalling .. not shear
degradation cannot be prevented
conventional failure criteria mislead
designers s-shaped
spalling process affects both tunnel walls
roof and face
select excavation and support techniques
appropriate for broken rock
No ravelling, raining rock and flying
arches!

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010

www.miningexcellence.ca
Practical Implication of Brittle Failure on Hard
Rock Tunnelling Construction

Acknowledgements
Collaborators: Cai, Diederichs, Hajibdolmajid, Martin, McCreath,
Contractors: MATRANS, TAT, Herrenknecht AG, ...
Mining companies: Vale INCO, Goldcorp, Rio Tinto,
Science Council: NSERC

Practical Implications of Brittle Failure in Tunnelling - Kaiser 2010