Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123 www.elsevier.

nl/locate/enggeo

New approaches to the characterization of clay-bearing, densely jointed and weak rock masses
Candan Gokceoglu *, Husnu Aksoy
Hacettepe University, Geological Engineering Department, Applied Geology Division, 06532 Beytepe, Ankara, Turkey Received 6 July 1999; accepted for publication 31 March 2000

Abstract Various classication systems for rock masses have been used in engineering applications. However, these systems are not sucient to classify clay-bearing, densely jointed and weak rock masses. Among the factors that cause this deciency are the damaging eect of water on rocks, which has not suciently been described in the existing classication systems. This factor was allowed for by the inclusion of new parameters in the modied rock mass classication (M-RMR) system developed in recent years. The aim of this study is to make contributions to the M-RMR classication system and to overcome the diculties encountered in the classication procedure. For this purpose, data were collected for rock mass classication from 13 clay-bearing, densely jointed and weak rock masses in four regions ( Yatagan, Soma, Baskoyak and Guvenc) located in the western and middle parts of Turkey. The discontinuity data were collected by the line-survey technique and evaluated by statistical methods. In addition to the uniaxial compressive strength test for the determination of the rating for intact rock strength, the block punch index test was also considered as an alternative parameter, and the slake durability index test and X-ray diraction analyses were performed on 104 samples collected from the studied rock masses. Further, the weathering coecient (W ) c determined by Schmidt hammer was considered as an alternative parameter for the determination of the rating for joint weathering. As a result of statistical evaluation of data obtained from the eld and laboratory studies, it has been concluded that the block punch index (BPI ) could be used as an alternative parameter for the determination of the rating for intact rock strength in the M-RMR classication system. It was also found that the slake durability index (I ) determined at the fourth cycle would be a more eective approach than the second-cycle index that has d previously been used to express the unfavourable eect of water on the rock mass. The propositions made in the present work to contribute to the M-RMR system were tested in back analyses of three previously failed slopes, and the performance of the system with the newly introduced improvements appeared to be satisfactory. 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Block punch index; Rock mass classication; Schmidt hardness; Slake durability index

1. Introduction In engineering applications, various classication systems such as rock load ( Terzaghi, 1946),
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: cgokce@hacettepe.edu.tr (C. Gokceoglu)

the New Austrian tunnelling method (NATM ) (Pacher et al., 1974), rock structure rating (RSR) ( Wickham et al., 1972), size-strength (Franklin, 1970, 1986), rock mass rating (RMR) (Bieniawski, 1973), tunneling quality index (Q) (Barton et al., 1974), modied rock mass rating (MRMR) (Laubscher and Taylor, 1976), rock mass strength

0013-7952/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S0 0 1 3 -7 9 5 2 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 03 2 - 6

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

(RMS) (Stille et al., 1982), surface rock mass classication (SRC ) (DeVallejo, 1983), slope mass rating (SMR) (Romana, 1986), geomechanical classication (R) ( Venkateswarlu et al., 1989), weakening coecient system ( WCS ) (Singh, 1986), broken rock zone (BROZ ) (Dong et al., 1988), modied-rock mass rating (M-RMR) ( Unal and Ozkan, 1990), rock durability classication (RDC ) (Olivier, 1979), unied rock mass classication system ( URCS ) ( Williamson, 1984), rock trenchability system (RTC ) (Inyang, 1991), geomechanical classication (GC ) (Mendes et al., 1993), and rock mass index (RMi) (Palmstrom, 1996) are used today to characterize a rock mass. These systems were developed or modied when certain parameters used in the classication were found to be inadequate or the ratings for certain parameters needed to be changed as the number of cases and practice increased. In most classication systems, the character of the rock mass is assessed on the basis of the rock strength and characteristics of the discontinuities. However, the mineralogical composition of the rock material is not suciently taken into consideration. In presently used classication systems, the slaking eect of water on rock strength in particular is not highlighted when applied to clayey or clay-bearing rock masses. Further, the strength of the intact rock may be very dicult to determine when the rock mass consists of thinly laminated or very densely jointed rock, as it becomes almost impossible to obtain suitable samples for uniaxial compressive strength or point load index tests. In recent years, Unal and Ozkan (1990) and Unal (1996) introduced the slake durability index in their classications (M-RMR) as a modication for the Geomechanical Classication (RMR) system of Bieniawski (1979, 1989). Yet, this improvement did not always satisfactorily account for the damaging eect of water on clayey rocks in all cases. However, parameters such as intact rock strength, rock quality designation (RQD) and spacing of discontinuities are closely related to the intensity of the joint sets in the rock mass. Therefore, the weathering process is accelerated as the number of discontinuity surfaces that are open to weathering agents increases, and a rock mass consisting of rock materials that are more suscepti-

ble to weathering should be better characterized. According to Laubscher (1990), the intact rock strength, RQD and the condition of the discontinuities are directly aected by weathering processes. The work carried out by Unal et al. (1992) showed that there was a close relationship between the slake durability index and the above-cited parameters. The M-RMR classication system proposed by Unal and Ozkan (1990) was applied to various studies by Unal et al. (1992), Ozkan (1995) and Ulusay et al. (1995b), and satisfactory results were obtained. While the M-RMR was applied, the point load index test was proposed as an intact rock strength parameter where suitable core samples could not be obtained to carry out a uniaxial compressive strength test. However, the point-load index test is not particularly suitable for laminated rocks. In addition to this, the weathering coecient ( Unal, 1996) obtained from two cycle slake durability index tests is not suciently functional. As mentioned by Ulusay (1993), an improvement for a better denition of the weathering degree of joint surfaces is not included in the M-RMR or in any other rock mass classication system. Finally, the joint condition index depending on intact core recovery and RQD is conservative for weak rock masses. The above points deserve to be investigated in detail. However, the M-RMR is more suitable than other rock mass classication systems for claybearing, highly jointed and weak rock masses ( Unal, 1996) owing to: 1. exibility in determining the input parameters from eld survey and/or core boxes; 2. inclusion of new parameters to the system, namely the point load strength index (I ), PL weathering coecient (F ) and intact core recovc ery index; 3. further description of the adjustment factors, reecting the eects of blasting damage (A ) b and major planes of weakness (A ); w 4. allocation of new joint lling conditions that can describe what is physically seen in core boxes; 5. adjustment of the interval limits of the strength and joint parameters by sub-dividing them mostly basing on descriptions, as suggested by ISRM (1981); 6. allocation of importance ratings to new conditions and intervals.

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Considering the characteristics summarized above, the M-RMR system provides important improvements for rock mass classications. However, the M-RMR system has some diculties in the assessment of weathering coecient and discontinuity condition, along with determination of intact rock strength in the case of laminated rocks when a classication procedure is applied, as mentioned above. The present study aims to improve the M-RMR classication system, overcoming the diculties encountered during the classication procedure.

compact marls overlie these units. A typical view from compact marls is given in Fig. 2b. 2.3. Baskoyak region The Baskoyak open pit barite mine is located about 6 km east of Beysehir Lake ( Fig. 1d ). The rock units in the area generally consist of schists, grouped into two types on the basis of degree of weathering. The lower schist is a rather fresh unit, whereas the upper schist is considerably aected by weathering. 2.4. Ankara Guvenc region

2. General characteristics of the study areas The study was carried out on clay-bearing, laminated or densely jointed, and weak rock masses situated in Yatagan, Soma and Beysehir Baskoyak open pit mines, and on natural outcrops at Guvenc near Ankara city ( Fig. 1a). 2.1. Yatagan region The Yatagan region has three open-pit lignite mines, namely the Eskihisar, Bagyaka and Tinaz pits ( Fig. 1b). The Eskihisar coal basin comprises Neogene deposits overlying a metamorphic basement ( Ulusay, 1991). In the stratigraphical sequence, Turgut Formation forms the lower units of the Neogene, with various clays, silts and negrained gravel alternations. The coal seam, with a thickness of about 20 m, occurs at the base of this Neogene sequence, which consists of compact marls at its lower levels, and an alternation of laminated marls, limestones and claystones at upper levels. Fig. 2a shows the general character of the laminated marls at the Eskihisar open pit mine. The main units at Bagyaka and Tinaz, however, consist of compact marls. 2.2. Soma region There are three operating lignite pits located about 3 km south of Soma. These are Isiklar, Kisrakdere and Sarikaya mines (Fig. 1c). The lithological units of the Soma basin consist of Neogene formations, starting at the bottom with basal conglomerates, transitioning upwards to silty and clayey layers and the main coal layer (Nebert, 1978). Thick-bedded

The locations studied in the Guvenc region are situated about 20 km northwest of Ankara ( Fig. 1e). The Paleozoic basement rocks consisting of metamorphic rocks are unconformably covered by ophiolitic melange, limestone blocks, alternations of marl and claystone of Upper Cretaceous age. These units are overlain in turn by conglomerates, sandstones and siltstones (Sagular, 1986). The upper units in the area are the laminated, alternating limestones and marls, studied for classication in the present work.

3. Field studies During eld studies, line surveys, sampling and Schmidt rebound hammer tests were performed in addition to drill core evaluations and observations on slope instabilities developed in densely jointed rock masses. About 1750 m of line survey have been carried out in accordance with the method described by ISRM (1981) in order to determine such discontinuity characteristics as spacing, persistence, aperture, type and thickness of the inll material, and roughness and weathering particularities of the discontinuity surfaces. As planar and clean as possible, slope faces were selected for the line surveys; and generally, information on more than 100 discontinuities was recorded at each location, as suggested by Priest (1993). 3.1. Spacing of discontinuities Mean spacings of discontinuities were calculated from data on 13 dierent rock masses belong-

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Fig. 1. Location maps of the study areas.

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Fig. 2. Close view from laminated marls in Eskihisar ( Yatagan) Open Pit (a) and compact marls in Sarikaya (Soma) Open Pit (b).

ing to the four main regions. Table 1 shows the distribution of the mean spacing of discontinuities for the rock masses concerned, with related statis-

tics. Chi-square tests and cross-correlations carried out for normal, log-normal, gamma and exponential distributions on relevant data have shown that

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Table 1 Discontinuity parameters of the studied rock masses Rock mass ( location) Total line survey length (m) 322.25 366.02 57.99 45.75 184.46 243.25 220.15 150.31 45.20 45.29 44.65 16.14 9.57 Number of measured discontinuities 1285 1138 179 264 501 629 527 405 125 130 134 411 213 Mean spacing of discontinuities (m) 0.251 0.322 0.324 0.173 0.370 0.390 0.420 0.370 0.362 0.348 0.333 0.040 0.045 Discontinuity frequency (m1) 3.98 3.11 3.09 5.77 2.72 2.59 2.39 2.69 2.77 2.87 3.00 25.50 22.30 Standard deviation RQD (%)

Laminated marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Bagyaka, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Tinaz, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere East, Soma) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere West,Soma) Compact marl (Isiklar, Soma) Compact marl (Sarikaya, Soma) Compact marl (Guvenc, Ankara) Mudstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Sandstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Schist upper zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Schist lower zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir)

0.19 0.23 0.23 0.14 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.19 0.22 0.25 0.23 2.86 3.20

84 88 88 71 94 93 92 92 92 90 89 0 4

all of the exponential distributions and some of the log-normal and gamma distributions yielded signicant chi-square values, while none of the normal distributions showed signicant values. The discontinuity spacingRQD relationship suggested by Bieniawski (1989) was used to obtain RQD values for the rock masses (see Table 1). 3.2. Aperture and inlling The aperture of the discontinuities and the inll material were recorded in the eld in accordance

with ISRM (1981) standards. These values are presented in Table 2. 3.3. Roughness and waviness of discontinuity surfaces In the present work, no instrumental techniques could be applied to determine the surface roughness of the discontinuities; qualitative descriptions suggested by ISRM (1981) were used. Discontinuity characteristics for marls of

Table 2 Distribution of aperture values and type of inll materials of the studied rock masses Rock mass ( location) Distribution of aperture (%) 620 mm Laminated and compact marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Bagyaka, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Tinaz, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere East, Soma) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere West, Soma) Compact marl (Isiklar, Soma) Compact marl (Sarikaya, Soma) Compact marl (Guvenc, Ankara) Mudstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Sandstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Schist upper zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Schist lower zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) 2 0 3 8 9 9 20 1 0 24 0 0 26 mm 6 2 12 65 70 66 57 11 8 28 0 0 <2 mm 80 70 68 27 19 22 21 81 11 47 49 38 Close 12 28 17 0 2 3 2 7 81 1 51 62 Clay-silt grain size, soft inll material Clay-silt grain size, soft inll material Generally no inll material, occasionally soft inll material Clay-silt grain size, soft inll material Generally no inll material, occasionally soft inll material Generally soft clay inll material No inll material Generally soft clay inll material Generally soft clay inll material Generally hard inll material (calcite) No inll material No inll material Type of inll material

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Eskihisar, Bagyaka, Tinaz, Kisrakdere East and West, Isiklar, Sarikaya and Guvenc were found to be generally smooth-planar surfaces for bedding planes, and slightly rough-planar surfaces for joint sets. The bedding planes and joint surfaces were determined to be planar-rough for Guvenc sandstones, while the discontinuity surfaces were recorded as planar-smooth for both joints and schistosity planes in Baskoyak pit.

3.6. Strike and dip of discontinuities In order to investigate the applicability of the HoekBrown failure criterion (Hoek and Brown, 1988; Hoek, 1990) proposed for jointed rock masses, strikes and dips of the discontinuities belonging to the 13 dierent rock masses in the four regions were evaluated by the stereographical projection technique. The distribution of the orientations of the discontinuities on the stereographic net showed that there were at least three joint sets for each rock mass, as required by the Hoek Brown (Hoek and Brown, 1988; Hoek, 1990) criterion. 3.7. Drill-hole studies Cores from three drill holes with a total length of 250 m in the Eskihisar pit were studied and evaluated for rock mass classication. Total core recovery, RQD and discontinuity spacing values were determined, along with discontinuity parameters and groundwater observations. Core samples were also taken for laboratory testing. 3.8. Sampling In addition to the core samples taken from drill holes in the Eskihisar pit, 123 block samples were collected from dierent locations within the four regions studied. All samples were covered with paran and taken to the laboratory in an intact condition.

3.4. Groundwater conditions Among the sites, Yatagan, Soma and some parts of the Guvenc area have similar groundwater characteristics. Surface conditions were found to be dry at these locations, while rock discontinuities were determined to be moist when scraped back 510 cm. Local ows were identied in the sandstones of Guvenc region, whereas the schists of Baskoyak pit were totally dry.

3.5. Persistence and weathering The majority of the joints and the bedding planes were observed to have a very high persistence (ISRM, 1981) in all the pits studied except at Guvenc, where the joint sets exhibited a high persistence, and the bedding planes showed a very high persistence. Criteria described in ISRM (1981) were used to dene the weathering characteristics of the discontinuity surfaces. Most of the discontinuity surfaces observed at Soma open pits were generally unweathered or slightly weathered, while a very small number of upper bench surfaces were recorded as moderately weathered. Similarly, the majority of the discontinuity surfaces in the marls of Eskihisar, Bagyaka and Tinaz pits were unweathered or slightly weathered. The discontinuities in the rocks of the Guvenc region were mostly observed to be slightly to moderately weathered, whereas the lower schists of the Baskoyak pit had unweathered or slightly weathered surfaces. However, the joints of the upper schist zone contained moderate to highly weathered joints.

4. Laboratory work The following laboratory tests were performed in order to determine the required parameters for the present study. All tests were carried out in accordance with ISRM (1981): $ uniaxial compressive strength tests, to be used in rock mass classication, and also to be used as an input parameter for the HoekBrown failure criterion (Hoek and Brown, 1988; Hoek, 1990). Uniaxial compressive strength tests were also performed to investigate the relationship

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Table 3 Uniaxial compressive strength values and their statistics Rock type ( location) s (MPa) c Minimum Laminated marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Bagyaka, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Tinaz, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere East, Soma) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere West, Soma) Compact marl (Isiklar, Soma) Compact marl (Sarikaya, Soma) Compact marl (Guvenc, Ankara) Mudstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Sandstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Schist upper zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Schist lower zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) 2.2 3.1 2.7 2.1 35.4 50.2 47.0 51.2 55.2 31.9 23.1 Maximum 7.4 7.5 7.3 6.4 44.3 65.3 67.3 62.7 75.2 67.2 59.3 Average 4.1 4.9 4.6 4.0 40.2 57.8 55.6 56.5 65.4 43.9 39.5 5.2 7.5 S.D. 1.42 1.42 1.48 1.39 2.95 6.07 6.98 4.75 8.11 9.70 15.43

with the BPI to be considered for laminated rocks ( Table 3), block punch index tests ( Table 4), to determine in an indirect way the uniaxial compressive strength when it was dicult to prepare suitable samples, particularly from laminated and schistose rocks. Another major purpose of carrying out these tests was to determine reliable relationships between the uniaxial compressive strength and the block punch index (BPI ) of such rocks and thus to introduce the BPI as an alternative index parameter for classication.

Although no international standard exists for this test, a further evaluation of the method will be given in later paragraphs as it provides an approach to the intact rock strength in rock mass classication, slake durability index tests, to determine the weathering characteristics of clay-bearing rocks in the study area, and to study the damaging eect of water on clayey rocks. As the two cycle tests suggested by Franklin and Chandra (1972) did not prove to be satisfactory, Martin (1986) and Ulusay et al. (1995a) proposed a higher

Table 4 Summary of the BPI test results Rock type Location Number of test set BPI (MPa) Minimum Laminated marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Mudstone Sandstone Schist Eskihisar, Yatagan Eskihisar, Yatagan Bagyaka, Yatagan Tinaz, Yatagan Kisrakdere East, Soma Kisrakdere West, Soma Isiklar, Soma Sarikaya, Soma Guvenc, Ankara Guvenc, Ankara Guvenc, Ankara Baskoyak, Beysehir 22 21 13 9 10 5 10 5 8 12 12 3 0.57 0.67 0.55 0.50 5.00 10.80 8.42 8.95 10.00 5.32 2.93 1.05 Maximum 2.84 2.70 1.41 1.52 11.50 12.80 14.9 11.6 14.10 8.79 10.35 2.57 Average 1.19 1.41 0.93 0.92 8.46 11.70 10.83 10.65 12.15 6.63 6.61 1.81 S.D. 0.62 0.55 0.27 0.32 1.86 0.77 2.22 1.00 1.37 0.96 2.34 0.76

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

number of cycles. In the present study, six cycles were applied. As they provide useful data for rock mass classication, further evaluation of slake durability tests will be given in the following paragraphs. The results and a general evaluation of the slake durability tests are given in Table 5, X-ray diraction analyses, to determine the mineral contents of the rock samples of the study area semi-quantitatively. For this purpose, 146 XRD analyses were carried out, of which 104 were whole-rock analyses, and 42 were clay analyses. The results indicated that all of the rock samples analysed contained clay minerals in dierent amounts varying between 9 and 44%, with clay minerals belonging to the kaolinite, illite and smectite groups. Results of the X-ray analyses are given in Table 6. These results were used in the assessment of relationships between the mineral contents and slake durability index values for each cycle.

5. Block punch index as a classication parameter In most rock classication systems, the uniaxial compressive strength ( UCS ) of intact rock is an important parameter. However, determination of this parameter requires tests conforming with international standards and high-quality core samples. It may be dicult, even impossible, to determine the uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock in the case of weak rocks or when the core recovery is too low to obtain core samples with a length/diameter ratio of approximately 2. Thus, tests such as the point load index test, requiring relatively less sample preparation and having less demanding test standards, have been developed and extensively used in practice. However, in the case of laminated or highly schistose rocks, even the point load index test may become impractical as the rock becomes extremely anisotropic. For this reason, there appears to be a need to develop index tests to obtain reliable results, using the smallest possible samples, to overcome the above diculties. A simple testing device, suggested by Mazanti and Sowers (1965) and by Stacey (1980), to determine the direct shear

strength of thin disc-shaped samples of rock was later introduced as the block punch index (BPI ) test apparatus by Van der Schrier (1988). Van der Schrier (1988) indicated that there was a good correlation between the uniaxial compressive strength, tensile strength and the block punch index, and stated that the BPI could be as valuable as other index values used when only small samples were available. Van der Schrier tested a thickness of 10 mm with a diameter of 40 mm. In the present work, the aim was to investigate the applicability of the BPI test as an alternative strength parameter for the M-RMR system, determining the relationship between the uniaxial compressive strength and the BPI for clay-bearing, stratied or laminated rocks, especially taking into account the eects of sample diameter and thickness on BPI. For this purpose, 797 block punch index tests were performed on rock samples of dierent diameters with varying thicknesses, taken from four regions. Statistical evaluation of the failure pattern has shown that most of the 510 mm thick samples failed in a regular manner, while those with thicknesses exceeding 10 mm generally failed in an irregular pattern. However, for samples with a very low strength and a thickness of less than 10 mm, it was often very dicult to record the load on failure. These results dictated that a thickness of 10 mm and a diameter of 50 mm be taken as a reference value. Therefore, a correction was needed for samples with a thickness other than 10 mm and a diameter other than 50 mm. BPI tests were carried out on 797 samples of dierent thicknesses and diameters, to obtain correction factors for sample thickness and diameter. Statistical evaluations of the data were performed by Gokceoglu (1997) and Aksoy et al. (1997) for stratied and clay-bearing rocks, and the following empirical relationships were obtained: Correction for thickness: K =14.6t 1.157 (r=0.87). t Correction for diameter: K =211.5d1.3687 (r=0.88). d Uncorrected BPI: BPI=F/A. (1)

(2)

(3)

10

Table 5 Slake durability test results with their statistics

Id1 (%) Id2 (%) Id3 (%)

Rock type ( location)

Minimum Maximum Average S.D. S.E. Minimum Maximum Average S.D. S.E. Minimum Maximum Average S.D. S.E. 91.8 95.6 96.2 94.8 97.1 98.1 98.5 98.2 99.7 98.5 96.3 98.5 98.8 Id4 (%) Id5 (%) Id6 (%) 99.5 99.8 99.4 97.7 99.0 99.6 99.7 99.8 99.9 99.3 98.7 99.5 99.2 96.9 98.4 97.5 95.7 98.3 99.1 99.3 99.3 99.8 98.9 97.2 98.9 99.0 2.3 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.03 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 86.2 90.5 92.6 90.8 94.9 97.4 98.3 97.8 99.5 97.4 95.3 98.3 98.4 99.4 99.6 97.6 96.1 98.2 99.4 99.6 99.5 99.8 99.0 97.9 98.5 99.0 94.4 97.1 94.5 93.2 97.2 98.5 99.1 99.0 99.6 98.2 96.1 98.4 98.6 3.6 2.3 1.5 2.1 1.2 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.05 0.3 0.5 0.05 0.2 81.4 89.4 90.6 80.1 93.7 96.7 98.0 97.4 99.2 97.1 94.6 91.6 95.0 99.1 99.1 95.8 92.6 97.9 99.0 99.4 99.4 99.4 98.8 97.4 93.8 98.6 90.9 95.5 92.9 85.6 96.6 98.1 98.9 98.8 99.3 97.9 95.4 92.4 97.2 5.4 2.6 1.5 5.7 1.5 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.6 1.1 1.2 1.9 1.1 0.6 0.5 2.3 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.03 0.3 0.5 0.7 1.1

Laminated marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Bagyaka, Yatagan) Compact marl (Tinaz, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere East, Soma) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere West, Soma) Compact marl (Isiklar, Soma) Compact marl (Sarikaya, Soma) Compact marl (Guvenc, Ankara) Mudstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Sandstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Schist upper zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Schist lower zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir)

Rock type ( location)

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Minimum Maximum Average S.D. S.E. Minimum Maximum Average S.D. S.E. Minimum Maximum Average S.D. S.E. 73.4 87.6 89.1 73.8 92.2 95.8 97.9 97.1 98.3 93.3 93.4 83.4 83.6 98.5 98.8 92.8 89.9 97.5 98.5 99.3 99.3 98.9 98.0 96.2 86.1 91.3 88.4 93.9 91.5 79.7 96.0 97.6 98.8 98.5 98.7 96.1 94.6 85.2 87.8 7.3 3.4 1.4 5.9 1.9 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.2 1.8 1.1 1.6 3.9 1.5 0.7 0.5 2.4 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.5 0.9 2.3 67.3 84.8 88.3 71.4 91.7 95.4 97.8 96.9 98.2 92.3 88.4 78.0 81.3 98.4 98.4 92.3 88.2 97.3 98.2 99.2 99.1 98.8 97.3 93.6 85.4 90.7 85.7 92.9 90.4 77.4 95.6 97.3 98.7 98.2 98.6 95.4 92.1 81.4 86.4 9.2 4.0 1.5 6.4 2.0 1.0 0.4 0.8 0.2 2.0 2.1 3.7 4.7 1.9 0.9 0.5 2.6 0.8 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.9 2.2 2.7 61.2 80.1 87.9 67.8 90.7 94.6 96.8 96.5 97.9 91.9 87.8 74.6 69.7 97.0 98.0 91.2 76.0 97.0 98.0 99.0 98.5 98.5 97.0 91.9 84.2 89.2 83.4 91.1 89.5 71.3 95.2 96.9 98.4 98.0 98.3 95.1 90.8 80.4 81.3 11.1 5.5 1.2 3.4 2.3 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.2 2.0 1.7 5.1 10.3 2.3 1.2 0.4 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.8 2.9 5.9

Laminated marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Bagyaka, Yatagan) Compact marl (Tinaz, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere East, Soma) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere West, Soma) Compact marl (Isiklar, Soma) Compact marl (Sarikaya, Soma) Compact marl (Guvenc, Ankara) Mudstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Sandstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Schist upper zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Schist lower zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir)

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123 Table 6 X-ray diraction analysis results Rock type ( location) Laminated marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Eskihisar, Yatagan) Compact marl (Bagyaka, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Tynaz, Yatagan) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere East, Soma) Compact marl ( Kisrakdere West, Soma) Compact marl (Isiklar, Soma) Compact marl (Sarikaya, Soma) Compact marl (Guvenc, Ankara) Mudstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Sandstone (Guvenc, Ankara) Schist upper zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Schist lower zone (Baskoyak, Beysehir) Aragonite (%) 52.5 58.6 48.0 45.0 Dolomite (%) 8.2 8.7 6.2 7.1 2.6 2.4 1.9 2.4 4.8 21.3 Calcite (%) 9.1 5.8 23.4 20.5 62.5 68.3 79.7 79.7 62.8 7.6 15.0 Clay (%) 23.7 18.3 22.3 27.3 22.6 10.1 9.3 13.2 4.8 21.3 28.0 44.0 30.0 Another minerals

11

Feldspar, quartz, mica Feldspar, quartz, mica Feldspar, quartz, mica Feldspar, quartz, mica Mica, quartz Mica, quartz Mica, quartz Mica, quartz Feldspar, mica, pyroxene Feldspar, mica, pyroxene Quartz, feldspar Mica, feldspar, quartz Mica, feldspar, quartz

The failure area for BPI is calculated as follows: A=4t(r295.1)0.5 (mm)2 (4)

for r=(d/2)=25 mm and t=10 mm. A is obtained as 920.8 mm2. Therefore, the corrected BPI=K K (F/A), or t d Corrected BPI=(14.6t 1.157)(211.5d1.3687) (F/920.8). (5)

In a recent study on BPI, carried out by Ulusay and Gokceoglu (1997), the conversion factor between uniaxial compressive strength and BPI was found to be 5.5. However, the equation suggested by Ulusay and Gokceoglu (1997) includes a wide range of rock types. In the present study, the developed equation refers to only clay-bearing and stratied rock types.

Carrying out simplications and making necessary conversions, the following empirical equation for the corrected BPI was obtained as: Corrected BPI (MPa)=3353d1.3687t 1.157F (6) where t is the thickness (mm), d is the diameter in (mm), and F is the failure load (kN ). Regression analyses between UCS and corrected BPI were performed on a total of 127 data pairs using the statistical program Statgraph (STSC, 1991), and the results are shown in Fig. 3. According to these results, the linear relationship between UCS and corrected BPI (Fig. 3) is found to be more signicant than the exponential, power and logarithmic functions. Using this relationship, the BPI was adopted in the M-RMR system for determination of the rating of intact rock strength.

Fig. 3. Relationship between uniaxial compressive strength and block punch index.

12

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Table 7 Weathering classes proposed by Singh and Gahrooee (1989) Description Freshslightly weathered Moderately weathered Weathered Weathering coecient (sa/JCSb)<1.2 c 1.2<(s /JCS)<2 c (s /JCS)>2 c

ing characteristics are obtained using an L-type Schmidt hammer. The weathering coecient, W , c is introduced as: W =R /R (7) c f w where R is the rebound number obtained from f fresh rock surface, and R is the rebound number w obtained from the weathered rock surface. A total of 142 Schmidt hammer test sets were applied ( Table 8) to rock surfaces in accordance with the procedure suggested by ISRM (1981). Fig. 4a shows the results of this procedure. W c was obtained for classes of ISRMs weathering classication (ISRM, 1981) ( Fig. 4a and Table 9). A weathering-rating graph was developed, using the rating of Unal (1996) ( Table 9) in order to obtain an objective and continuous assessment ( Fig. 4b). Using this graph, the following equation was suggested to determine the rating of the weathering of joint surfaces ( Fig. 4b). Rating ( joint surface weathering)=10.72.7W (r=0.94). c (8)

a s : uniaxial compressive strength of unweathered rock. c b JCS: joint strength determined by the Schmidt hardness test.

6. Use of the Schmidt hammer test in the classication system Another improvement to the M-RMR system in this work is the utilization of the Schmidt rebound hardness hammer to determine the weathering characteristics of joint surfaces. Singh and Gahrooee (1989) proposed a weathering classication for joint surfaces using UCS and JCS obtained from Schmidt hammer tests ( Table 7). Nevertheless, JCS is estimated, while UCS is determined directly. Because of this, the process may not always be reliable. As shown in Table 7, the classication was divided into three groups, while six dierent weathering classes were dened by ISRM (1981). To overcome these problems, another procedure is suggested in the present study. The principal approach is based on the suggestion by Singh and Gahrooee (1989). However, both parameters used to assess weatherTable 8 Summary of Schmidt hammer test results Rock type Location

According to Fig. 4b and the equation above, when W is equal to 1, the weathering rating will c be 8. When W is equal to 2.96 or more, this c equation should not be used to determine the weathering rating. While the minimum value of weathering rating must be 0, this equation will

Number of test set

Schmidt hardness, N Joint Minimum Maximum 30.9 32.9 28.9 39.9 41.0 45.3 37.3 32.4 35.9 26.1 39.0 Fresh surface Minimum 19.5 17.5 18.2 33.1 38.9 34.1 34.8 32.8 27.1 18.3 40.0 Maximum 37.4 32.6 29.0 40.9 43.1 45.5 38.7 44.6 38.6 33.6 43.7

Laminated and compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Compact marl Mudstone Sandstone Schist

Eskihisar, Yatagan Bagyaka, Yatagan Tinaz, Yatagan Kisrakdere East, Soma Kisrakdere West, Soma Isiklar, Soma Sarikaya, Soma Guvenc, Ankara Guvenc, Ankara Guvenc, Ankara Baskoyak, Beysehir

38 13 9 12 8 16 8 8 12 12 6

15.4 14.5 14.6 18.9 26.4 19.8 28.5 20.4 22.1 11.9 17.2

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123 Table 9 Weathering ratings for the M-RMR system W c Class Description (ISRM, 1981) Fresh Slightly weathered Moderately weathered Highly weathered Completely weathered Residual soil

13

Weathering rating ( Unal, 1996) 8 7 6 4 2 0

<1.1 1.11.5 1.52.0 >2.0

I II III IV V VI

assessment and the test proposed in the present study should be applied when classication is carried out.

7. New approach to the slake durability index In the RMR classication system (Bieniawski, 1989), the damaging eect of water on rock masses such as clay-bearing and weak rock masses was not considered. To overcome this, Unal and Ozkan (1990) used the slake durability index in the M-RMR system. In addition to Unal and Ozkan (1990), other researchers (Duaut, 1981; Newman and Bieniawski, 1986; Unal et al., 1992, 1995a; Ulusay, 1993) emphasized that the slake durability index could be well applied to characterize claybearing and weak rock masses. ISRM (1981) and ASTM (1990) suggested that two cycles be used in the determination of the slake durability index. However, recent researchers (Moon and Beattie, 1995; Ulusay et al., 1995b; Gokceoglu, 1997) applied three or more cycles, and these studies revealed that two cycles for the slake durability index were insucient to describe the wetting and drying inuence on rocks. Although many rock types disintegrate at the end of two cycles, they can have high slake durability index values. In the present work, the slake durability tests were carried out to six cycles, and the index values obtained were correlated with uniaxial compressive strength, RQD, discontinuity spacing, discontinuity condition and clay content. The correlation coecients obtained are given in Table 10. The coecients of correlations increase up to the fourth or fth cycle, and no signicant changes were observed beyond

Fig. 4. (a) Results of analysis of Schmidt hammer test data. (b) Determination of the rating of the joint surface weathering.

yield a negative value if W exceeds 3.96. This c point is the limitation of this approach. To obtain a precise assessment for joint weathering and to carry out a cross-check, both an observational

14

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Table 10 Correlation coecients among the slake durability index, uniaxial compressive strength, RQD, spacing and condition of discontinuities and clay content Parameter Number of cycle First UCS RQD Spacing of discontinuity Condition of discontinuity Clay content 0.66 0.11 0.18 0.15 0.54 Second 0.72 0.15 0.25 0.18 0.55 Third 0.85 0.20 0.48 0.21 0.60 Fourth 0.87 0.59 0.80 0.37 0.72 Fifth 0.85 0.61 0.82 0.43 0.75 Sixth 0.83 0.60 0.81 0.32 0.71

that. For a better characterization of the damaging eect of water on rocks, the four-cycle slake durability index is suggested as an index for the M-RMR classication system.

8. New suggestions for M-RMR and rock mass classication results of studied masses In the present study, new suggestions were made for further improvements to the M-RMR system, and the following suggestions were made. 1. Intact rock strength: in addition to uniaxial compressive strength and point load index, the block punch index is also suggested for determination of the rating of intact rock strength. 2. Description of the joint surface weathering: keeping the observational evaluation of joint surface weathering, a new weathering coecient is added to overcome the subjective evaluations of joint surface weathering as an alternative parameter. 3. Evaluation of aperture and inlling thickness: aperture and inlling thickness are evaluated individually in both the RMR and M-RMR systems. The following results were obtained from line surveys and drilling studies: $ When drilling is performed, if the inlling material is soft, it is practically not possible to dene inlling thickness. However, if inlling is not washed out completely, it is only possible to say that inlling exists. However, if there is hard inlling material, the inlling thickness can be determined in drill cores. $ Based on observations from line surveys per-

formed in the eld, the thickness of the soft inlling material is generally the same as the aperture. Thus, it is usually not practical to determine the thickness of the inll material in the eld. To obtain a more practical classication procedure, the aperture and thickness of the inlling material are evaluated together ( Fig. 5). 4. Calculation of the joint condition index: In the M-RMR system, calculation of the joint condition index depends on intact core recovery and RQD, using parameters of weathering, persistence, aperture, inlling and roughness. In this study, the joint condition index is the sum of the ratings of the above parameters ( Table 11). 5. Slake durability index: instead of the two cycle slake durability index test used in the original M-RMR system ( Unal, 1996), the water eect coecient obtained using a four cycle slake durability index is suggested in the present study. This coecient is multiplied by ratings of intact rock strength, RQD, spacing of discontinuity and joint condition index.

Fig. 5. New approach to evaluate aperture and inlling together.

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123 Table 11 Table for calculation of joint condition indexa
Weathering (Fig. 4b can be used as an alternative) I W Unweathered Slightly Moderately Highly Very Decomposed weathered weathered weathered highly weathered 7 6 4 2 0 Planar Rough 6 Slightly rough 4 Low 3 Smooth 2 Slickensided 1 Medium 2 Inlling None Soft Hard None Soft Hard None Soft Hard None Soft Hard Very rough 4 Rough Slightly Smooth rough 3 2 1 High 1.5 I A-I 10 8 9 8 6 7 4 3 5 0 0 1 Very high 1

15

8 Undulating Very rough 8 Very low 4

Roughness

Slickensided 0

Persistence I P

Aperture and inlling Aperture (mm) 00.01

0.011.0

1.05.0

>5

a Calculation : I =I +I +I +I . JC W R P A-I

8.1. Application of the improved M-RMR system Application of the M-RMR system is similar to that of Bieniawskis RMR system (Bieniawski, 1989). The rock mass is divided into a number of structural regions such that certain features are more or less uniform within each region, in order to apply the geomechanics classication (Bieniawski, 1989). Even though rock masses are discontinuous in nature, they may nevertheless be uniform within regions. Boundaries of structural regions (Bieniawski, 1989; Unal, 1996) will coincide with major geological features such as faults, dykes, shear zones, and so on. After dening the structural zones, the data sheet used in rock mass classication is completed using the parameters obtained from the drilling study, scanline survey and laboratory study. The following parameters are required to apply the improved M-RMR classication system: $ intact rock strength [ UCS, Is or BPI ], (50)

RQD, spacing of discontinuities, $ condition of discontinuities: weathering, persistence, roughness aperture and inlling, $ groundwater condition, $ intact core recovery (ICR), $ slake durability index (I ), d4 $ blasting and weak zone correction factors if necessary. These data are used in the following methodology as shown in the ow chart in Fig. 6: $ Unit mass rating ( UMR): this is the sum of the ratings of intact rock strength, discontinuity spacing, RQD and discontinuity condition ( Table 11). $ Corrected unit mass rating (CUMR): the UMR is multiplied by A determined from the equaw tion shown in Fig. 6, and the result of these processes is added to the rating of groundwater condition:
$ $

CUMR=(A UMR)+I . w GW

(9)

16

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Fig. 6. Flow chart summarizing the M-RMR procedure.

Basic M-RMR (BM-RMR): this is the sum of CUMR and discontinuity orientation rating (DO): BM-RMR=CUMR+I . JO (10)

$ Corrected M-RMR (M-RMR): the factors for blasting eect, weak zones are multiplied by BM-RMR, and the M-RMR is obtained:

M-RMR=(BM-RMR)A A . b wz

(11)

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

17

8.2. Limitations of the improved M-RMR system The M-RMR system, like other classication systems, has several limitations when used for design purposes: $ When the improved M-RMR system is used to obtain the data for the HoekBrown failure criterion (Hoek and Brown, 1988; Hoek, 1990), the rock mass must include at least three discontinuity sets, one of these being inclined. $ The improvements suggested in this study were applied only to slope cases. For this reason, the new suggestions should not be used alone in a tunnel case. $ In developing the improved M-RMR system,
$

three slope cases were tested. More cases need to be studied. It should not be forgotten that rock mass classications systems make up only a part of the design studies.

8.3. Application results of the improved M-RMR system The rock masses in the study areas were classied using the improved M-RMR system. According to the results, the majority of the studied rock masses are moderate quality rock masses (Fig. 7 and Table 12). While use of the

Fig. 7. Results of the rock mass classications.

18

Table 12 Summary of classication parameters and their ratings in the original and improved M-RMR systems
Groundwater Joint Blasting I (%) d2 orientation adjustment adjustment Drywet ICR>%25 Smooth blasting 82.699.4 73.497.6 I (%) d4 Original M-RMR rating Improved M-RMR rating

Rock mass ( location)

Intact rock strength (MPa) 203347

RQD (%) Discontinuity Discontinuity condition spacing (mm)

Laminated marl (Eskihisar-Yatagan)

2.27.4

8092

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Compact marl (Eskihisar-Yatagan)

1.32.4 1.32.4 3.17.5

16.518.6 10.611.7 16.518.6 10.611.7 8694 274411

1510 1510 Drywet

(5)(6) 0.95 (5)(6) 0.95 ICR>%25 Smooth blasting

1.061.13 2556 (47) 0.941.03 2556 (46) 90.099.6 87.696.3

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Compact marl (Bagyaka-Yatagan)

1.52.4 1.52.4 2.77.3

17.619.0 11.212.1 17.619.0 11.212.1 8697 262452

1510 1510 Drywet

5 0.95 5 0.95 ICR>%25 Smooth blasting

1.091.11 3461 (52) 0.991.02 3561 (53) 92.699.7 89.192.8

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Compact marl (Tinaz-Yatagan)

1.42.4 1.42.4 2.16.4

17.619.5 11.112.3 17.619.5 11.112.3 5693 137263

1510 1510 Drywet

5 0.95 5 0.95 ICR>%25 Smooth blasting

1.101.13 4656 (51) 0.991.01 4655 (51) 90.896.1 73.889.9

Original M-RMR 1.32.2 Improved M-RMR 1.32.2 Compact marl 35.444.3 ( Kisrakdere East-Soma)

12.418.8 9.911.1 12.418.8 9.911.1 9095 312394

1510 1510 Drywet

5 0.95 5 0.95 ICR>%25 Fair blasting

1.091.12 4050 (46) 0.941.00 3946 (45) 94.998.2 92.297.3

Original M-RMR 5.46.0 Improved M-RMR 5.46.0 Compact marl 50.265.3 ( Kisrakdere West-Soma)

18.319.1 11.512.0 18.319.1 11.512.0 9096 325416

1510 1510 Drywet

5 0.90 5 0.90 ICR>%25 Fair blasting

1.131.14 3453 (45) 1.011.03 4050 (45) 97.499.4 95.498.2

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR

6.47.4 6.47.4

18.319.3 11.612.1 18.319.3 11.612.1

01 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 014.5 1018 01 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 714.5 1421 00.5 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 11 14 01 mm aperture, no inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 12 15 520 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredmoderately weathered 010 410 220 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 013 1117 1510 1510 5 5 0.90 0.90

1.131.15 4060 (52) 1.021.03 4961 (55)

Compact marl (Isiklar-Soma)

47.067.3

9098

374487

Drywet

ICR>%25 Fair blasting

99.099.6 98.699.0

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Compact marl (Sarikaya-Soma)

6.27.5 6.27.5 51.262.7

18.319.5 11.912.5 18.319.5 11.912.5 9095 328406

1510 1510 Drywet

5 0.90 5 0.90 ICR>%25 Fair blasting 1.131.15 4861 (55) 1.031.04 4564 (55) 97.899.5 96.999.1

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Compact marl (Guvenc-Ankara)

6.57.2 6.57.2 55.275.2

18.319.1 11.612.1 18.319.1 11.612.1 9293 357382

1510 1510 Drywet

5 0.90 5 0.90 ICR>%25 No blasting

1.131.15 5257 (55) 1.031.04 5055 (53) 98.399.5 83.698.3

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Mudstone (Guvenc-Ankara)

6.87.9 6.87.9 31.967.2

18.618.8 11.811.9 18.618.8 11.811.9 9092 314362

1510 1510 Drywet

5 1.0 5 1.0 ICR>%25 No blasting

1.141.15 5668 (62) 0.981.03 5470 (62) 97.499.0 93.398.0

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Sandstone (Guvenc-Ankara)

5.17.5 5.17.5 23.159.3

18.318.6 11.511.8 18.318.6 11.511.8 8891 304356

1510 1510 Drywet

5 1.0 5 1.0 ICR>%25 No blasting

1.131.14 6065 (62) 1.011.03 5763 (61) 95.397.9 93.496.2

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Schist Upper zone (Baskoyak-Beysehir)

4.37.0 4.37.0 5.2

17.918.4 11.411.8 17.918.4 11.411.8 0 3040

1510 1510 Dry

5 5 ICR=%2

1.0 1.0 No blasting

1.121.14 5061 (56) 1.011.02 5161 (56) 98.398.5 83.486.1

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR Schist Lower zone (Baskoyak-Beysehir)

2.0 2.0 7.5

0 0 0

7.48.2 7.48.2 3070

15 15 Dry

12 12 ICR=%2

1.0 1.0 No blasting

1.141.15 (14) 0.980.99 98.499.0 83.691.3

(21)

Original M-RMR Improved M-RMR

2.4 2.4

0 0

7.48.7 7.48.7

520 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 714 1121 620 mm aperture, no inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 910 1011 0.52 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, slightlymoderately weathered 8.514.0 9.519.5 00.5 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarslightly rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 14.0 15.520.5 2-20 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarroughvery rough surfaces, very high persistency, unweatheredslightly weathered 1315 1719 00.5 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarsmooth surfaces, very high persistency, highly weathered 0 9 00.5 mm aperture, soft inlling, planarsmooth surfaces, very high persistency, slightly weathered 10 17 15 15 12 12 1.0 1.0 1.141.15 (25) 0.981.00 (30)

19

20

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

improved M-RMR system did not change the results in moderate and good quality rock masses, they increased the ratings of weak and very weak rock masses. 8.4. Basic approach of back analysis and comparison of results of back analyses and M-RMR classications The back-analysis procedure is suitable for slope instabilities that occurred in jointed rock masses. The method presented by Sonmez et al. (1998) is based on the following assumptions: 1. The geometry of the slope before and after failure, the position of the sliding surface, and the groundwater conditions are known. 2. The mechanism of the movement is known. 3. A condition of the static equilibrium at the point of failure exists at the time of failure. 4. In closely jointed rock media, it seems appropriate to assume that material is approximately homogenous. 5. What is obtained by back calculation is a weighted mean value of rock mass rating and corresponding m and s values (HoekBrown criterion constants) along the failure surfaces at the time of failure. 6. A set of relations between the RMR and the constants given in following equations given by the updated HoekBrown failure criterion (Hoek, 1990): For disturbed rock mass: (m/m )=exp{(RMR100)/14} i s=exp{(RMR100)/6}. For undisturbed rock mass: (m/m )=exp{(RMR100)/28} i s=exp{(RMR100)/9}.

that performs back calculations for three unknown parameters can be carried out using the following algorithm (Sonmez et al., 1998): Step 1. One variable, RMR, out of three unknown geomechanical parameters (RMR, m, s) is selected and the second unknown, the constant s, is calculated by the utilization of equations given above for s, depending on the condition of disturbance of the rock mass. The rock mass rating value selected to calculate the parameter s is denoted by RMR . s Step 2. By utilizing the position of the sliding surface, normal stress acting on each slice is calculated. Keeping the previously chosen RMR value and the corresponding RMR s (RMR ), which lead to a value of safety factor m of unity, are calculated by a trial-and-error technique in conjunction with the equations given by the updated HoekBrown failure criterion (Hoek, 1990). Step 3. Trials are made for dierent values of RMR (s) to obtain various possible combinations s of RMR and RMR satisfying the limit equilibs m rium conditions. Back analysis results are best presented in a RMR RMR function forms (Fig. 8). The s m closely jointed rock mass is an approximately homogeneous material, it is logical to consider that the rock mass must have a unique rock mass rating value. If a straight line passing from the

(12)

(13)

7. Uniaxial compressive strength and the material constant, m , are the input parameters. i The back analysis starts with the fact that the constants, m and s, of a given rock mass depend upon a rock mass rating value, and therefore, various possible combinations of (m, s) pairs at the time of failure (F=1) can be derived from dierent rock mass rating values. The procedure

Fig. 8. Basic concept of the back analysis technique proposed by Sonmez et al. (1998).

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123

21

origin of the RMR RMR graph with an inclinas m tion of 45 is drawn, it intersects the RMR RMR curve at a certain point, which s m indicates a common rock mass rating value, RMR (the actual rock mass rating value for the RM rock mass), for both constants at the time of failure and utilization of this back analyzed rock mass rating value will yield the right combination of two constants, m and s, of the rock mass (Sonmez et al., 1998). The procedure outlined above has been applied by Sonmez et al. (1998) to failed slopes in three open pit mines, Eskihisar ( Yatagan region), Kisrakdere East (Soma region) and Baskoyak (Beysehir region). In this study, the back-analysis results were used to understand the performance of the original and improved M-RMR systems. Using the results obtained from back analyses and application of the M-RMR systems, failure envelopes for these rock masses were drawn (Fig. 9). As summarized in Fig. 9, both the original and improved M-RMR systems satised the backanalysis results for the Eskihisar and Kisrakdere East cases. However, the original M-RMR system did not satisfy the back analysis for the Baskoyak case. The improved M-RMR system satised the back-analysis results. Even though the improved M-RMR system conforms with all the back-analysis results, it should be applied to more cases before it is used for rock slope design purposes.

9. Results and conclusions The results and conclusions obtained from this study can be summarized as follows: 1. In order to determine the rating of intact rock strength for weak and/or stratiedlaminated rocks, the block punch index test was proposed in the M-RMR system as an alternative parameter. 2. To provide an objective assessment of joint surface weathering characterictics, the weathering coecient determined using the Schmidt hardness hammer was suggested as a new parameter in addition to observational assessment. The weathering coecient is valid for

Fig. 9. Failure envelopes of three rock masses: (a) compact marls of Eskihisar ( Yatagan) Open Pit, (b) compact marls of Kisrakdere East (Soma) Open Pit, and (c) upper zone schists of Baskoyak (Beysehir) (modied after Sonmez et al., 1998).

ISRM (1981) weathering classes IIV in particular. 3. The discontinuity aperture and inlling material are evaluated separately both in the RMR system (Bieniawski, 1989) and in the M-RMR

22

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123 Duaut, P., 1981. Structural weakness in rocks and rock masses-tentative classication and behaviour. In: Proc. Int. Symp. Weak Rock, Tokyo Vol. 1. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 9397. Franklin, J.A., 1970. Observations and tests for enginnering description and mapping or rocks. In: Proc. 2nd Cong. ISRM, Belgrade Vol. 1., 36. Franklin, J.A., 1986. Sizestrength system for rock characterization. Proc. Int. Symp. Application of Rock Characterization Techniques in Mine Design, March 1986, New Orleans. Franklin, J.A., Chandra, R., 1972. The slake durability test. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 9, 325341. Gokceoglu, C., 1997, The approaches to overcome the diculties encountered in the engineering classication of claybearing, densely jointed and weak rock masses. Ph.D. thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara, 214 pp. (unpublished, in Turkish). Hoek, E., Brown, T., 1988. The HoekBrown failure criterion a 1988 update. In: Proc. 15th Canadian Rock Mech. Symp., University of Toronto, 3138. Hoek, E., 1990. Estimating MohrCoulomb friction and cohesion values from HoekBrown failure criterion. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 27 (2), 227229. Inyang, H.I., 1991. Development of a preliminary rock mass classication scheme for near surface excavation. Int. J. Surf. Min. Reclam. 5, 6574. ISRM, 1981. . In: Brown, E.T. (Ed.), Rock Characterization Testing and Monitoring ISRM Suggested Methods. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 211 pp. Laubscher, D.H., Taylor, H.W., 1976. The importance of geomechanics of jointed rock masses in mining operations. Symp. Exploration for Rock Engineering, 15 November 1976, Johannesburg. Laubscher, D.H., 1990. A geomechanics classication system for the rating of rock mass in mine design. J. South Afr. Inst. Min. Metal. 90, 257273. Martin, R.P., 1986. Use of index tests for engineering assessment of weathered rocks. In: Proc. 5th Int. Cong. of IAEG, Buenos Aires, 433460. Mazanti, B.B., Sowers, G.F., 1965. Laboratory testing of rock strength. In: Proc. Symp. Testing Techniques for Rock Mechanics, Seattle, Washington, 207227. Mendes, F.M., Gama, C.D., Santos, M.C., Arrais, C.M., Gaspar, A.F., Silva, P.B., 1993. In: Geomechanics and Mine Support Investigation in the Germunde Coal Mine, EUROCK93, Portugal, 637642. Moon, V.G., Beattie, A.G., 1995. Textural and microstructural inuences on the durability of Waikato coal measures mudrocks. Q. J. Eng. Geol. 28, 303312. Nebert, K., 1978. Lignite bearing Soma Neogene region Western Anatolia (in Turkish). J. M.T.A., Ankara, Say 90, s20s69. Newman, D.A., Bieniawski, Z.T., 1986. A modied version of the geomechanics classication for entry design in underground coal mines. Trans. Soc. Min. Eng. AIME 280, 21342138.

system ( Unal, 1996). However, these parameters were combined in this study. 4. Two-cycle slake durability index testing was suggested for the M-RMR system by Unal (1996) to overcome the deciency of the RMR system for the damaging eect of water on claybearing and weak rock masses. In the present study, a four-cycle slake durability index was suggested for a better characterization of claybearing and weak rock masses. The maximum value of the reduction factor depending on slake durability index was 1.04, and the minimum value was 0.7. 5. The improvements to the M-RMR system suggested in this study were applied to three failed slope cases, and the improved M-RMR system gave more satisfactory results than the original M-RMR system for these. 6. The improved M-RMR system is not proposed at present for cases such as tunnels or foundations.

References
Aksoy, H., Ulusay, R., Kasapoglu, K.E., Gokceoglu, C., Sonmez, H., Kumtepe, P., 1997. Development of rock mass classication system to obtain optimum slope design parameters of open pit mines in weak rock masses. Research Report for TUBITAK Scientic and Technical Research Center of Turkey. 122 pp., in Turkish, unpublished ASTM, 1990. Standard test method for slake durability of shales and similar weak rocks (D4644). In: Annual Book of ASTM Standards Vol. 4.08. ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 863865. Barton, N.R., Lien, R., Lunde, J., 1974. Engineering classication of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock Mech. 6, 189239. Bieniawski, Z.T., 1973. Engineering classication of jointed rock masses. Trans. S. Afr. Inst. Civ. Eng. 15, 335344. Bieniawski, Z.T., 1979. The geomechanics classication in rock engineering applications. In: Proc. 4th Int. Cong. Rock Mech. ISRM, Montreux Vol. 2., 4148. Bieniawski, Z.T., 1989. Engineering Rock Mass Classication. McGraw Hill, New York. 237 pp. DeVallejo, L.I.G., 1983. A new rock classication system system for underground assessment using surface data. In: Int. Symp. Eng. Geol., Lisbon Vol. 1., I85I94. Dong, F., Song, H., Gou, Z., 1988. The broken rock zone around tunnels and its support theory. In: 7th Int. Conf. Ground Control in Mining, West Virginia University, Morgantown, 35 August, 336343.

C. Gokceoglu, H. Aksoy / Engineering Geology 58 (2000) 123 Olivier, H.J., 1979. A new engineering geological rock durability classication. Eng. Geol. 14, 255279. Ozkan, I., 1995. Modied rock mass rating (M-RMR) system and roof behaviour model. Ph.D. thesis, METU, Ankara, 370 pp. (unpublished). Pacher, F., Rabcewicz, L., Golser, J., 1974. In: Zum der seitigen Stand der Gebirgsklassizierung in Stollen und Tunnelbau, Proc. XXII Geomech. Colloq., Salzburg, 5158. Palmstrom, A., 1996. Characterizing rock masses by the RMi for use in practical rock engineering (Part 1: The development of the Rock Mass Index (RMi)). Tunell. Underground Space Technol. 11 (2), 175188. Priest, S.D., 1993. Discontinuity Analysis for Rock Engineering. Chapman & Hall, London. 473 pp. Romana, M., 1986. Practice of SMR classication for slope appraisal. In: Bonnard, C. (Ed.), Proc. 5th Int. Symp. Landslide Vol. 2., 12271231. Sagular, E.K., 1986, Investigation of Cretaceous biostratigraphy of Orhaniye (NW Ankara) region. M.Sc. thesis, Ankara University, 70 pp. (unpublished, in Turkish). Singh, T.N., 1986. Application of equivalent material models in mines and tunnels. In: Proc. Workshop on Rock Mech. Problems of Tunnels and Mine Roadways Srinagar Sec. 4.2, 111. Singh, R.N., Gahrooee, D.R., 1989. Application of rock mass weakening coecient for stability assessment of slopes in heavily jointed rock masses. Int. J. Surf. Min. Reclam. Environ. 3, 207219. Sonmez, H., Ulusay, R., Gokceoglu, C., 1998. A practical procedure for the back analysis of slope failures in closely jointed rock masses. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 35 (2), 219233. Stacey, T.R., 1980. A simple device for the direct shear strength testing of intact rock. J. S. Afr. Inst. Min. Metal. 80, 129130. Stille, H., Groth, T., Frederikson, A., 1982. FEM analysis of rock mechanics problems by JOBFEM. Swed. Rock Eng. Res. Found. Publ. 307, 18. STSC, 1991. Statgraphics: Statistical Procedures Reference Manual V5.0. 1750 pp. Terzaghi, K., 1946. Rock defects and loads on tunnel support. In: Proctor, R.V., White, T.L. ( Eds.), Rock Tunneling with Steel Supports. Commerical Shearing, Youngstown, OH, pp. 1599.

23

Ulusay, R., 1991. Geotechnical evaluations and deterministic design considerations for pitwall slopes at Eskihisar ( Yatagan-Mula) strip coal mine. Ph.D. thesis, METU, Ankara, 340 pp. (unpublished ). Ulusay, R., 1993. Classication Schemes for Weak Rock Mass, A Report of Technical Visit to GEODATA, Torino. 9 pp., unpublished. Ulusay, R., Arykan, F., Yoleri, M.F., Caglan, D., 1995a. Engi neering geological characterization of coal mine waste material and an evaluation in the context of back-analysis of spoil pile instabilities in a strip mine, SW Turkey. Eng. Geol. 40, 77101. Ulusay, R., Ozkan, I., Unal, E., 1995b. Characterization of weak stratied and clay-bearing rock masses for engineering applications. In: Myer, L.R., Cook, N.G.W., Goodman, R.E., Tsan, C.F. ( Eds.), Fractured and Jointed Rock Masses Conference, 35 June California. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 229235. Ulusay, R., Gokceoglu, C., 1997. The modied block punch index test. Can. Geotech. J. 34, 9911001. Unal, E., Ozkan, I., 1990. Determination of classication patameters for clay-bearing and stratied rock masses. In: Peng, S.S. ( Ed.), 9th Int. Conf. Ground Control in Mining, West Virginia University, 46 June, 250259. Unal, E., Ozkan, I., Ulusay, R., 1992. Characterization of weak stratied and clay bearing rock masses. In: Hudson, J.A. ( Ed.), ISRM Symposium: Eurock92 Rock Characterization, Chester, UK, 1417 September 1992. British Geotechnical Society, London, pp. 330335. Unal, E., 1996. In: Modied Rock Mass Classication: M-RMR System, Milestones in Rock Engineering, The Bieniawskis Jubilee Collection. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 203223. Van der Schrier, J.S., 1988. The block punch index test. Bull. Int. Assoc. Eng. Geol. 38, 121126. Venkateswarlu, W., Ghose, A.K., Raju, N.M., 1989. Rock mass classication for design of roof supports. A statistical evaluation of parameters. Min. Sci. Tech. 8, 97107. Wickham, G.E., Tiedemann, H.R., Skinner, E.H., 1972. Support determinations based on geologic predictions. In: Proc. 1st North American Rapid Excavation and Tunneling Conf. AIME, New York Vol. 1., 4364. Williamson, D.A., 1984. Unied rock mass classication system. Bull. Assoc. Eng. Geol. 2 (3), 345354.