Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920

© Scholarlink Research Institute Journals, 2011 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

jeteas.scholarlinkresearch.org
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Kinematic Analyses of Different Types of Rock Slope Failures in a

Typical Limestone Quarry in Nigeria
1
Olaleye, B.M and 2Ajibade Z.F
1
Department of Mining Engineering,
The Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria.
2
Department of Petroleum Engineering,
Petroleum Training Institute, Effurun, Warri, Nigeria
Corresponding Author: Olaleye, B.M
___________________________________________________________________________
Abstract
Kinematic analyses of planar discontinuity sets in a limestone deposit in Western Nigeria were carried out to
ascertain the degree of slope stability. Discontinuity orientations in the rock mass were mapped using compass
clinometers. Kinematic analyses of the discontinuities were carried out using DIPS software. The results of the
investigation revealed evidence of potential slope failures from the two joint sets identified in the study area.
From the result of the analyses, face 1 of the limestone quarry is susceptible to both plane and wedge failures as
all the geometrical conditions associated with the occurrence of such failures were noticeable. However there
was no indication of any toppling failure from the analyses. Face 2 of the limestone quarry is not susceptible to
wedge failure, but some part of it (40%), faces the risk of plane failure while up to 50% of it faces the risk of
toppling failure. It can be concluded that analyses of discontinuity orientation in relation to cut face direction in
rock excavation is essential for mine planning to forestall mine accidents.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Keywords: Discontinuity, orientation, limestone, slope failure
__________________________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION made to the strength parameters of the rock for the
With the usage of rock materials being significant in principal considerations are the orientations of the
the various engineering applications and the need for planar weaknesses in relation to the orientation of the
increased production, a more effective approach is excavation..
needed to solve its exploitation problems. The safe
condition of working environment for both mine In the determination of mean orientation of planar
workers and the equipment of any mining industry discontinuities, each structural domain is
should be a paramount concern of all the stakeholders characterized by a single stereonet displaying the
of the industry, hence, the need to critically mean orientation of set. During data acquisition, the
investigate from time to time the problems that may orientation of the sampled areas has to be noted,
be associated with the exploitation of the deposit with because contouring procedures can bias the fracture
a view to proffering solutions. Slope stability density sampling. It is possible for data sampled
investigation in mines is critical to the profitability of along a scanline to be biased since the discontinuity
the mines in relation to slope failures. Kinematic frequency is dependent on the angle between the
analysis is one of the analytical methods used for the discontinuity set and the scanline. The density point
investigation. of the stereonet can be corrected using Terzaghi
correction (Terzaghi, 1965; Priest, 1993). Mean
“Kinematics” refers to the motion of bodies without number of traces in a sampling window is usually
reference to the forces that cause them to move difficult to obtain because third dimension of the
(Goodman, 1989). Many rock cuts are stable on steep structure is not easily accessible, hence, surface
slopes even though they contain steeply inclined observations are the only obtainable data. Trace
planes of weakness with exceedingly low strength; lengths may be estimated from a sampling window
that happens when there is no freedom for a block to by dividing the total length of the traces that appear
move along the weak surface because other ledges of in the window by the number of contained traces.
intact rock are in the way. Should the blockage be Discontinuity spacing is the perpendicular distance
removed by erosion, excavation, or growth of cracks, between adjacent discontinuities and is usually
the slope would fail immediately. This deals with an expressed as the mean spacing of a particular set of
approach to slope design making use mainly of the joints. The spacing of discontinuities determines the
directionality of the discontinuous rock mass to sizes of the blocks making up the rock mass. The
insure that there is always rock “in the way” of mechanism of deformation and failure can vary with
potentially failure blocks. Only minimal reference the ratio of discontinuity spacing to excavation size.
914
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

Engineering properties such as cavability,
fragmentation characteristics and rock mass
permeability also vary with discontinuity spacing. It
is to be expected that, like all other characteristics of
a given rock mass, discontinuity spacing will not
have uniquely defined values but, rather, will take a
range of values, possibly according to some form of
statistical distribution. Priest and Hudson (1976)
made measurements on a number of sedimentary
rock masses in the United Kingdom and found that,
in each case, the discontinuity spacing histogram
gave a probability density distribution that could be
approximated by the negative exponential
distribution. Thus the frequency, f (x), of a given
discontinuity spacing value, x, is given by the
function:
f (x) = λe− λ x. ............................... Eq. 1
the mean orientation, mean spacing and mean trace
length ( Del`eze et al., 2003).
LOCATION OF STUDY AREA
The study area is the limestone deposit at Obajana in
Kogi State, Nigeria which is within longitude 6020’E
and 6028’E and latitude 7048’ N and 7056’ N. Figure 1
shows the location map of the study area. The rock
type in the study area includes schist, pegmatite,
quartz, limestone, granite and granulites. The
limestone having roughly NE-SW trend and thinning
out in the western direction is of gray to white in
colour, mainly coarse grained in nature with few
mica specks. In some places mica and granulites
intrude the limestone. The limestone is overlaid with
8 metres thick overburden soil as revealed from the
surface.

Methods for Sampling the Geometrical

Characteristics of Discontinuities
Mining condition vary widely from mine to mine,
therefore stability problems must be handled with
care since rock is a discontinuous material, non-
homogeneous and strength parameters of the rock
massif are very variable (Olaleye 2009). The
geometrical characteristics of discontinuities, such as
spacing, trace length, means and distributions can be
determined by several methods yielding more or less
detailed information. A review of the main methods
can be found in Priest (1993). Trace lengths have
been estimated by employing distribution
assumptions (Priest and Hudson, 1976). In these
cases, they can be estimated by counting them on
rectangular (Pahl, 1981) or circular windows
(Mauldon et al., 2001). Other methods using two or
more photographs of an outcrop allow the estimation
of orientation, fracturing density and trace length
(Thomas et al., 1987; Crosta, 1997). Detailed digital
elevation model may be used to characterize
discontinuity sets (Froldi, 2000). A more
sophisticated and time consuming approach employs
the use of software which allows a complete
characterization of discontinuities using numerical
simulations (Baroudi et al., 1990; Starzec and
Andersson, 2002). The present method uses simple
estimates of the mean characteristics of discontinuity
DISCONTINUITY DATA COLLECTION AND
sets. The first step consists in defining homogeneous
INTERPRETATION
structural domains, where geological structures,
According to Olaleye and Jegede (2006), one of the
lithologies and fracturing show constant properties,
most important aspects of rock slope analysis is the
i.e. orientation, spacing, trace length, undulation,
systematic collection and presentation of geological
infilling material and aperture. In other words, this is
data in such a way that it can easily be evaluated and
an area where rock instabilities are driven by an
incorporated into stability analysis. Two faces of the
identical mechanism that could also be controlled by
limestone quarry were mapped and there were two
slope morphology. The second step consists of a field
major joint sets observed at the faces. The third joint
survey of the discontinuities (Hoek and Bray, 1981;
set was random and scanty in term of density, hence
Priest, 1993; Jaboyedoff et al., 1996). This survey
it was neglected. At face 1, the dominant joint set was
can be more or less detailed, depending on the goal of
joint set 1 while in face 2, the dominant joint set was
the study. An estimation of the fracturing density
joint set 2. However during processing using
requires three parameters for each discontinuity set:
directional cosine to calculate mean orientation, the
joints in each face were classified according to their
915
 Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

sets. For instance joint set 1 in face 1 was analysed Table 2: Summary of orientation data for joint set 2
separately, also joint set 2 in face 1 was analysed fracture on quarry face 1
separately to get the correct mean of each joint set. Direction cosine
The same was used for analyses of joint sets in face
2. DIPS software was used to plot the data and also (sin dip (cos dip (sin dip)
dir* cos dip) dir.cos dip)
used for both statistical and kinematical analyses of Sum
the orientation data to determine the stability of the - mi = 0.82116 ni=
slopes under study and results were presented in
Figures 1-6. Tables 1-4 contain the processed 42.7262 13.77561
orientation data of the two bench faces (1 and 2) for Arithmetic Mean -0.94947 --0.01825 0.306125
150 and 100 sub-parallel fractures respectively. =( /N)
Fracture orientation data were collected along a 200m
straight scanline on a rock slope which was tagged, Vector Mean = -0.9515 -0.1829 0.3068
face one (1) and 100m straight scanline tagged, face =( /N/R)
two (2). At Obajana limestone quarry, two joint sets
were identified on each of the faces. Figures 1and 2
Number of joint sets, N = 45 for J2 in face 1
show the fracture normal in lower hemisphere
projection. The fractures are thought to be of
Table 3: Summary of orientation data for joint set 2
approximately the same size, and orientations to
fracture on quarry face 2
follow the Fisher distribution. Orientation of cut faces Direction cosine
1 and 2 are 89/100 and 88/230 respectively. Since all
fractures belong to a well-defined set, the “Terzaghi (sin dip dir* (cos dip (sin dip)
bias” associated with sampling along a straight cos dip) dir.cos dip)
scanline (Priest, 1993) is approximately the same for Sum - mi = 24.36302 ni =
all fractures, and is therefore neglected here. With the 55.182 17.4821
aid of spread sheet, a basic program with Microsoft Arithmetic Mean -0.8759 0.386715 0.277494
excel was written to process the data. However DIPS =( /N)
software has inbuilt program for statistical analyses,
but sometimes it is not always handy hence the basic Vector Mean = -0.87865 0.387927 0.278364
excel program was very useful. =( /N/R)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results Number of joint sets, N = 63 for J2 in face 2
Tables 1-4 contain the processed orientation data of
the two bench faces (1 and 2) for 150 and 100 sub- Table 4 Summary of orientation data for joint set 1
parallel fractures respectively. Figures 2-7 depict the fracture on quarry face 2
Direction cosine
orientation data of the discontinuities in the limestone
deposit.
(sin dip (cos dip (sin dip)
dir* cos dip) dir.cos dip)
Table 1: Summary of orientation data for joint set 1 Sum mi = 30.89509 ni = -
fracture on quarry face 1 20.00703 2.38462
Direction cosine Arithmetic Mean 0.540731 0.835002 -0.06445
=( /N)
(sin dip dir* (cos dip (sin dip)
cos dip) dir.cos dip) Vector Mean = 0.542 0.87 -0.006
Sum mi = ni= =( /N/R)
Number of joint sets, N = 37 for J12 in Face 1.
62.95194 62.95194 5.47133
Arithmetic 0.655749 0.746706 0.056993 DISCUSSION
Mean =( /N) From Figure 2, the pole friction cone of plunge 90
degree and angle 35 degree is roughly estimated to
represent friction angle of limestone. On the
Vector Mean = 0.658778 0.750155 0.057256
stereonet, a daylight envelope is visible. Any pole
=( /N/R)
that fall outside the cone represents a plane which
could slide if kinematically possible. From the
Number of joint sets, N = 96 for J1 in face 1 analyses, there is indication that joint set 2 is
susceptible to plane failure. The red crescent outline
zone outside the pit slope enclosed by the friction
cone represents the zone of wedge (intersection)
sliding. Any plane intersection which falls within this
zone will be unstable. In Figure 3, planes 1 and 2
916
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)
intersect outside the pit slope but enclosed by the
friction cone. Hence, the intersection falls within
critical area which makes wedge failure to be
possible on the face. From Figure 4, any pole that
falls within pole toppling region indicates a toppling
risk. From visual estimation, there is no pole within
this region; hence toppling failure is unlikely. The
crescent formed by failure envelope on friction cone
only in Figure 5 affected roughly 40% of joint set 1
in face 2, therefore, it is not of much concern that
plane failure will be experienced. Intersection of
planes 1 and 2 fall outside the crescent (critical area)
produced by overlapping cut face and friction angle
by a very small margin in Figure 6. This indicates
that wedge failure is not expected and very unlikely
to happen. Face 2 is more stable kinematically than
face 1 as far as wedge failure is concern. Joint set 2 in
face 2 of the quarry is susceptible to toppling if other
factors favour it. 50% of the joint set 2 falls within
pole toppling region as indicated in Figure 7.
CONCLUSION
The importance of discontinuity orientation to
stability of slopes in the study area was considered
and the fracture pattern in the limestone deposit was
studied. Results show that there are two major joint
sets at the limestone quarry with average orientation
of 87/218 for face 1 and 68/95 for face 2. The quarry
face 1 is susceptible to both plane and wedge failures
from kinematic analysis. There is no indication of
any toppling failure from the analyses. Face 2 of the
quarry is not susceptible to wedge failure, but some
part of it (40%) face the risk of plane sliding and up
to 50% of the face also face the risk of toppling. The
parameters that can be varied to avoid slope failures
are orientation of cut face, bench height and drainage
of flooded pits. Fracture orientation is a natural
geologic activity, hence attention should be paid to
the orientation of the cut faces and proper analysis
should be done using the right tools and techniques
so as to avoid turning a profitable mine to a loss.
REFERENCES
Baroudi H., Piguet J. P., Chambon C. and Asof M.
(1990): Utilization of the Block Generator
“Resoblock” to Complex Geologic Conditions in an
Open Pit Mine. International Conference on
Mechanics of Jointed and Faulted Rock, 18–20 April
1990, Vienna Austria, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam,
pp529–536.
Crosta G.: (1997): Evaluating Rock Mass Geometry
from Photographic Images, Rock Mech. Eng., 30,
35–58.
D´el`eze J. Y., Jaboyedoff M., Baillifard F. and
Rouiller J.D. (2003): Mattercliff-Software for the
Analysis of Spatial Distribution of Discontinuities in
Cliffs. EGS-AGU-EUG Joint Assembly, Nice,
France, April 2003, Abstract EAE03-A-03384.
917
Froldi P. (2000): Digital Terrain Model to Assess
Geostructural Features in Near Vertical Cliffs. Bull.
Eng. Geol. Env., Vol.59, pp. 201–206.
Goodman R.E., (1989): Introduction to Rock
Mechanics (2nd edition), Wiley, New York.
562p.
Hoek E. and Bray J.W. (1981): Rock Slope
Engineering (3rd edition): The Institution of Mining
and Metallurgy, London. 358p
Jaboyedoff M., Baillifard F., Philippossian, F. and
Rouiller J.D (2004): Assessing Fracture Occurrence
Using “Weighted Fracturing Density”: A Step
Towards Estimating Rock Instability Hazard. Natural
Hazards and Earth System Sciences. European
Geosciences Union, Vol.4, pp.83–93.
Mauldon M., W. M. Dunne and M. B. Rohrbaugh, Jr.
(2001): “Circular Scanlines and Circular Windows:
New Tools for Characterizing the Geometry of
Fracture Traces”. Journal of Structural Geology,
23(3): pp. 247-258.
Olaleye B.M. (2009): Slope Stability Analysis of
Igbeti Marble Quarry, Nigeria, International Journal
of Pure and Applied Science, Published by Pan-
African Book Company, Ghana, Vol. 2, No 1, 36-42.
Olaleye B.M. and Jegede G. (2006): Investigation of
the Stability of Alaguntan Quarry Face, Southwestern
Nigeria. Mineral Wealth Journal, Greece, No 141, p.
9-14.
Pahl P. J. (1981): Estimating the Mean Length of
Discontinuity Traces. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.
and Geomech. Abstr. 18, pp. 221–228.
Priest, S.D. (1993): Discontinuity Analyses for Rock
Engineering, Chapman and Hall, London, 473 p.
Priest S.D. and Hudson J.A. (1976): Estimation of
Discontinuity Spacing and Trace Length Using
Scanline Surveys. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. and
Geomech. Abstr. Vol 18, pp. 183-197.
Starzec P. and Andersson J. (2002): Probabilistic
Predictions Regarding Key Blocks Using Stochastic
Discrete Fracture Networks - Example From a Rock
Caverne in South-East Sweden, Bull. Eng. Geol.
Env., 61, pp. 363–378.
Terzaghi R. (1965): Sources of Error in Joints
Surveys. Geotechnique, Vol. 15, pp. 287-304.
Thomas A., Pienau A. and Blin-Lacroix J.L. (1987):
Determination of a Spatial Fracture Network.
International Journal of Numerical and Analytical
Methods in Geomechanics, 11, pp. 381–390.
 Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

APPENDIX

N
DAYLIGHT ENVELOPE
PIT SLOPE Number of Poles

PLANAR SLIDING ZONE JOINT SET 1

1 pole
1m
2 to 3 poles
4 to 5 poles
6 to 7 poles
JOINT SET 2
8 to 9 poles
1 10 to 11 poles
W 2m E 12 to 13 poles
1
1m 2m
14 to 15 poles

POLE FRICTION CONE(35 degrees)

Equal Angle
Lower Hemisphere
150 Poles
150 Entries

Figure 2: Stability analyses of quarry face 1 for plane failure using daylight envelope and
friction cone

OBAJANA LIMESTONE QUARRY FACE 1 OF DANGOTE CEMENT

N
Plane 2
Pit Slope Orientations
ID Dip / Direction

Plane 1 1m 1 89 / 100

1 m 87 / 228
1 w 87 / 228
2 m 72 / 096
2 w 72 / 096
1
2m Plane Friction Cone(35 degrees)
W E
1
1m 2m

Wedge Sliding Zone

Equal Angle
Lower Hemisphere
150 Poles
150 Entries

S Point of intersection at Wedge Sliding Zone(49.9degrees)

Figure 3: Stability analyses of quarry face 1 for wedge failure using intersection of planes
.

918
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

ID

1 [1]
1m
10 [1]
100 [1]
101 [1]
102 [1]
1:PIT SLOPE 103 [1]
2m 2:SLIP LIMIT
W E 104 [1]
1:PIT2m
1m SLOPE
2:SLIP LIMIT 105 [1]
POLE TOPPLING REGION 106 [1]
107 [1]
Others [140]

Equal Angle
Lower Hemisphere
150 Poles
150 Entries

Figure 4: Toppling failure analyses of quarry face 1

N
DAYLIGHT ENVELOPE
JOINT TYPE

PLANE FOR JOINT SET 2 1m JOINT SET 1

J1 [37]
1:PIT FACE
J2 [63]
JOINT SET 2 PLANE FOR JOINT SET 2
2m

CRESCENT OF PLANE SLIDING ZONE

W E
1:PIT FACE
1m
2m

Equal Angle
Lower Hemisphere
100 Poles
100 Entries
POLE FRICTION CONE(35degree)
S
Figure 5: Stability analyses of quarry face 2 for plane failure using daylight envelope and
friction cone
N

Orientations
ID Dip / Direction
1m
1 88 / 230
1:PIT FACE
1 m 86 / 220
2m 1 w 86 / 220
2 m 74 / 121
2 w 74 / 121

W E
1:PIT FACE
1m
2m PLANE FRICTION CONE (35degrees)

Equal Angle
Lower Hemisphere
100 Poles
100 Entries

S
WEDGE SLIDING ZONE

Figure 6: Stability analyses of quarry face 2 for wedge failure using intersection of planes

919
Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 2 (6): 914-920 (ISSN: 2141-7016)

OBAJANA LIMESTONE QUARRY FACE 2 OF DANGOTE CEMENT COMPANY

N

JOINT TYPE

1m J1 [37]
1:PIT FACE J2 [63]

2m
2:SLIP LIMIT

W E
1:PIT FACE
1m
2m PLANE FRICTION CONE (35degrees)
2:SLIP LIMIT
POLE TOPPLING ZONE

Equal Angle
Lower Hemisphere
100 Poles
100 Entries

S
WEDGE SLIDING ZONE

Figure 7: Toppling failure analyses of quarry face 2

920