Rock Mechanics

Rock mechanics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Rock mechanics is the theoretical and applied science of the mechanical behaviour of rock
and rock masses; compared to geology, it is that branch of mechanics concerned with the
response of rock and rock masses to the force fields of their physical environment.
Rock mechanics forms part of the broader subject of geomechanics, which is concerned with
the mechanical responses of all geological materials, including soils. Rock mechanics, as
applied in engineering geology, mining, petroleum, and civil engineering practice, is
concerned with the application of the principles of engineering mechanics to the design of the
rock structures generated by mining, drilling, reservoir production, or civil construction
activity, e.g. tunnels, mining shafts, underground excavations, open pit mines, oil and gas
wells, road cuts, waste repositories, and other structures built in or of rock. It also includes
the design of reinforcement systems, such as rock bolting patterns.
See also[edit]
 Engineering geology
 Geotechnical engineering
 Rock mass classification
 Slope stability analysis
 Rock mass plasticity
References[edit]
Engineering geology
Engineering geology is the application of the geologic sciences to engineering practice for
the purpose of assuring that the geologic factors affecting the location, design, construction,
operation and maintenance of engineering works are recognized and adequately provided for.
Engineering geologists investigate and provide geologic and geotechnical recommendations,
analysis, and design associated with human development. The realm of the engineering
geologist is essentially in the area of earth-structure interactions, or investigation of how the
earth or earth processes impact human made structures and human activities.
Engineering geologic studies may be performed during the planning, environmental impact
analysis, civil or structural engineering design, value engineering and construction phases of
public and private works projects, and during post-construction and forensic phases of
projects. Works completed by engineering geologists include; geologic hazards, geotechnical,
material properties, landslide and slope stability, erosion, flooding, dewatering, and seismic
investigations, etc. Engineering geologic studies are performed by a geologist or engineering
geologist that is educated, trained and has obtained experience related to the recognition and
interpretation of natural processes, the understanding of how these processes impact man-
made structures (and vice versa), and knowledge of methods by which to mitigate for hazards
resulting from adverse natural or man-made conditions. The principal objective of the
engineering geologist is the protection of life and property against damage caused by
geologic conditions.
Engineering geologic practice is also closely related to the practice of geological engineering,
geotechnical engineering, soils engineering, environmental geology and economic geology. If
there is a difference in the content of the disciplines described, it mainly lies in the training or
experience of the practitioner.
Contents
[hide]
 1 History
 2 The Practice
 3 Scope of Studies
 4 Geohazards and adverse geo-conditions
 5 Soil and Rock Mechanics
 6 Methods and reporting
 7 See also
 8 References
o 8.1 Engineering geology
o 8.2 Geological modelling
History[edit]
Although the study of geology has been around since the 18th century, at least in its modern
form, the science and practice of engineering geology didn't begin as a recognized discipline
until the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The first book titled Engineering Geology was
published in 1880 by William Penning. In the early 20th century Charles Berkey, an
American trained geologist who was considered the first American engineering geologist,
worked on a number of water supply projects for New York City, then later worked on the
Hoover dam and a multitude of other engineering projects. The first American engineering
geology text book was written in 1914 by Ries and Watson. In 1925, Karl Terzaghi, an
Austrian trained engineer and geologist, published the first text in Soil Mechanics (in
German). Terzaghi is known as the father of soil mechanics, but also had great interest in
geology; Terzaghi considered soil mechanics to be a sub-discipline of engineering geology.
In 1929, Terzaghi, along with Redlich and Kampe, published their own Engineering Geology
text (also in German).
The need for geologist on engineering works gained world wide attention in 1928 with the
failure of the St. Francis dam in California and the loss of 426 lives. More engineering
failures which occurred the following years also prompted the requirement for engineering
geologists to work on large engineering projects.
In 1951, one of the earliest definitions of the "Engineering geologist" or "Professional
Engineering Geologist" was provided by the Executive Committee of the Division on
Engineering Geology of the Geological Society of America.
The Practice[edit]
One of the most important roles as an engineering geologist is the interpretation to forms of
land and earth processes to identify potential geologic and related man-made hazards that
may have a great impact on civil structures and human development.The background in
geology provides the engineering geologist with an understanding of how the earth works,
which is crucial minimizing earth related hazards. Most engineering geologists also have
graduate degrees where they have gained specialized education and training in soil
mechanics, rock mechanics, geotechnics, groundwater, hydrology, and civil design. These
two aspects of the engineering geologists' education provides them with a unique ability to
understand and mitigate for hazards associated with earth-structure interactions.
Scope of Studies[edit]
Engineering geologic studies may be performed:
 for residential, commercial and industrial developments;

 for governmental and military installations;
 for public works such as a power plant, wind turbine, transmission line, sewage treatment
plant, water treatment plant, pipeline (aqueduct, sewer, outfall), tunnel, trenchless
construction, canal, dam, reservoir, building, railroad, transit, highway, bridge, seismic
retrofit, airport and park;
 for mine and quarry excavations, mine tailing dam, mine reclamation and mine tunneling;
 for wetland and habitat restoration programs;
 for coastal engineering, sand replenishment, bluff or sea cliff stability, harbor, pier and
waterfront development;
 for offshore outfall, drilling platform and sub-sea pipeline, sub-sea cable; and
 for other types of facilities.
Geohazards and adverse geo-conditions[edit]

Typical geologic hazards or other adverse conditions evaluated and mitigated by an
engineering geologist include:
 fault rupture on seismically active faults ;

 seismic and earthquake hazards (ground shaking, liquefaction, lurching, lateral spreading,
tsunami and seiche events);
 landslide, mudflow, rockfall, debris flow, and avalanche hazards ;
 unstable slopes and slope stability;
 erosion;
 slaking and heave of geologic formations, such as frost heaving;
 ground subsidence (such as due to ground water withdrawal, sinkhole collapse, cave
collapse, decomposition of organic soils, and tectonic movement);
 volcanic hazards (volcanic eruptions, hot springs, pyroclastic flows, debris flow, debris
avalanche, gas emissions, volcanic earthquakes);
 non-rippable or marginally rippable rock requiring heavy ripping or blasting;
 weak and collapsible soils, foundation bearing failures;
 shallow ground water/seepage; and
 other types of geologic constraints.
An engineering geologist or geophysicist may be called upon to evaluate the excavatability

(i.e. rippability) of earth (rock) materials to assess the need for pre-blasting during earthwork
construction, as well as associated impacts due to vibration during blasting on projects.
Soil and Rock Mechanics[edit]

Main articles: Soil mechanics and Rock mechanics
Soil mechanics is a discipline that applies principles of engineering mechanics, e.g.

kinematics, dynamics, fluid mechanics, and mechanics of material, to predict the mechanical
behavior of soils. Rock mechanics is the theoretical and applied science of the mechanical
behaviour of rock and rock masses; it is that branch of mechanics concerned with the
response of rock and rock masses to the force fields of their physical environment. The
fundamental processes are all related to the behaviour of porous media. Together, soil and
rock mechanics are the basis for solving many engineering geologic problems.
Methods and reporting[edit]

The methods used by engineering geologists in their studies include
 geologic field mapping of geologic structures, geologic formations, soil units and hazards;
 the review of geologic literature, geologic maps, geotechnical reports, engineering plans,
environmental reports, stereoscopic aerial photographs, remote sensing data, Global
Positioning System (GPS) data, topographic maps and satellite imagery;
 the excavation, sampling and logging of earth/rock materials in drilled borings, backhoe test
pits and trenches, fault trenching, and bulldozer pits;
 geophysical surveys (such as seismic refraction traverses, resistivity surveys, ground
penetrating radar (GPR) surveys, magnetometer surveys, electromagnetic surveys, high-
resolution sub-bottom profiling, and other geophysical methods);
 deformation monitoring as the systematic measurement and tracking of the alteration in the
shape or dimensions of an object as a result of the application of stress to it manually or
with an automatic deformation monitoring system; and
 other methods.
The field work is typically culminated in analysis of the data and the preparation of an
engineering geologic report, geotechnical report, fault hazard or seismic hazard report,
geophysical report, ground water resource report or hydrogeologic report. The engineering
geologic report is often prepared in conjunction with a geotechnical report, but commonly
provide geotechnical analysis and design recommendations independent of a geotechnical
report. An engineering geologic report describes the objectives, methodology, references
cited, tests performed, findings and recommendations for development. Engineering
geologists also provide geologic data on topograpic maps, aerial photographs, geologic maps,
Geographic Information System (GIS) maps, or other map bases.
See also[edit]
 Earthquake engineering
 Geoprofessions
 Geotechnics
 Geotechnical investigation
 Important publications in engineering geology
 Mining engineering
 Petroleum engineering
 Hydrogeology
References[edit]
Engineering geology[edit]
 Bates and Jackson, 1980, Glossary of Geology: American Geological Institute.

 Kiersh, 1991, The Heritage of Engineering Geology: The First Hundred Years: Geological
Society of America; Centennial Special Volume 3
 Legget, Robert F., editor, 1982, Geology under cities: Geological Society of America; Reviews
in Engineering Geology, volume V, 131 pages; contains nine articles by separate authors for
these cities: Washington, DC; Boston; Chicago; Edmonton; Kansas City; New Orleans; New
York City; Toronto; and Twin Cities, Minnesota.
 Legget, Robert F., and Karrow, Paul F., 1983, Handbook of geology in civil engineering:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1,340 pages, 50 chapters, five appendices, 771 illustrations.
ISBN 0-07-037061-3
 Price, David George, Engineering Geology: Principles and Practice, Springer, 2008 ISBN 3-
540-29249-7
 Prof. D. Venkat Reddy, NIT-Karnataka, Engineering Geology, Vikas Publishers, 2010 ISBN
978-81259-19032
 Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment
Geological modelling[edit]
 Wang H. F., Theory of Linear Poroelasticity with Applications to Geomechanics and

Hydrogeology, Princeton Press, (2000).
 Waltham T., Foundations of Engineering Geology, 2nd Edition, Taylor & Francis, (2001).
Geotechnical engineering
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by
adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
(August 2010)
Boston's Big Dig presented geotechnical challenges in an urban environment.
Geotechnical engineering is the branch of civil engineering concerned with the engineering
behavior of earth materials. Geotechnical engineering is important in civil engineering, but is
also used by military, mining, petroleum, or any other engineering concerned with
construction on or in the ground. Geotechnical engineering usually uses principles of soil
mechanics and rock mechanics to investigate subsurface conditions and materials; determine
the relevant physical/mechanical and chemical properties of these materials; evaluate stability
of natural slopes and man-made soil deposits; assess risks posed by site conditions; design
earthworks and structure foundations; and monitor site conditions, earthwork and foundation
construction.[1][2]
A typical geotechnical engineering project begins with a review of project needs to define the
required material properties. Then follows a site investigation of soil, rock, fault distribution
and bedrock properties on and below an area of interest to determine their engineering
properties including how they will interact with, on or in a proposed construction. Site
investigations are needed to gain an understanding of the area in or on which the engineering
will take place. Investigations can include the assessment of the risk to humans, property and
the environment from natural hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, sinkholes, soil
liquefaction, debris flows and rockfalls.
Ground Improvement refers to a technique that improves the engineering properties of the
soil mass treated. Usually, the properties that are modified are shear strength, stiffness and
permeability. Ground improvement has developed into a sophisticated tool to support
foundations for a wide variety of structures. Properly applied, i.e. after giving due
consideration to the nature of the ground being improved and the type and sensitivity of the
structures being built, ground improvement often reduces direct costs and saves time.[3]
A geotechnical engineer then determines and designs the type of foundations, earthworks,
and/or pavement subgrades required for the intended man-made structures to be built.
Foundations are designed and constructed for structures of various sizes such as high-rise
buildings, bridges, medium to large commercial buildings, and smaller structures where the
soil conditions do not allow code-based design.
Foundations built for above-ground structures include shallow and deep foundations.
Retaining structures include earth-filled dams and retaining walls. Earthworks include
embankments, tunnels, dikes and levees, channels, reservoirs, deposition of hazardous waste
and sanitary landfills.
Geotechnical engineering is also related to coastal and ocean engineering. Coastal

engineering can involve the design and construction of wharves, marinas, and jetties. Ocean
engineering can involve foundation and anchor systems for offshore structures such as oil
platforms.
The fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology are closely related, and have
large areas of overlap. However, the field of geotechnical engineering is a specialty of
engineering, where the field of engineering geology is a specialty of geology.
Contents
[hide]
 1 History
 2 Practicing engineers
 3 Soil mechanics
o 3.1 Soil properties
 4 Geotechnical investigation
 5 Foundations
o 5.1 Shallow foundations
 5.1.1 Footings
 5.1.2 Slab foundations
o 5.2 Deep foundations
 6 Lateral earth support structures
o 6.1 Gravity Walls
o 6.2 Cantilever walls
o 6.3 Excavation shoring
 7 Earth structures
o 7.1 Compaction
 8 Slope stability
 9 Offshore geotechnical engineering
 10 Geosynthetics
 11 See also
 12 Notes
 13 References
History[edit]
Humans have historically used soil as a material for flood control, irrigation purposes, burial
sites, building foundations, and as construction material for buildings. First activities were
linked to irrigation and flood control, as demonstrated by traces of dykes, dams, and canals
dating back to at least 2000 BCE that were found in ancient Egypt, ancient Mesopotamia and
the Fertile Crescent, as well as around the early settlements of Mohenjo Daro and Harappa in
the Indus valley. As the cities expanded, structures were erected supported by formalized
foundations; Ancient Greeks notably constructed pad footings and strip-and-raft foundations.
Until the 18th century, however, no theoretical basis for soil design had been developed and
the discipline was more of an art than a science, relying on past experience.[4]
Several foundation-related engineering problems, such as the Leaning Tower of Pisa,

prompted scientists to begin taking a more scientific-based approach to examining the
subsurface. The earliest advances occurred in the development of earth pressure theories for
the construction of retaining walls. Henri Gautier, a French Royal Engineer, recognized the
"natural slope" of different soils in 1717, an idea later known as the soil's angle of repose. A
rudimentary soil classification system was also developed based on a material's unit weight,
which is no longer considered a good indication of soil type.[4][5]
The application of the principles of mechanics to soils was documented as early as 1773
when Charles Coulomb (a physicist, engineer, and army Captain) developed improved
methods to determine the earth pressures against military ramparts. Coulomb observed that,
at failure, a distinct slip plane would form behind a sliding retaining wall and he suggested
that the maximum shear stress on the slip plane, for design purposes, was the sum of the soil
cohesion, , and friction , where is the normal stress on the slip plane and is the
friction angle of the soil. By combining Coulomb's theory with Christian Otto Mohr's 2D
stress state, the theory became known as Mohr-Coulomb theory. Although it is now
recognized that precise determination of cohesion is impossible because is not a
fundamental soil property,[6] the Mohr-Coulomb theory is still used in practice today.
In the 19th century Henry Darcy developed what is now known as Darcy's Law describing
the flow of fluids in porous media. Joseph Boussinesq (a mathematician and physicist)
developed theories of stress distribution in elastic solids that proved useful for estimating
stresses at depth in the ground; William Rankine, an engineer and physicist, developed an
alternative to Coulomb's earth pressure theory. Albert Atterberg developed the clay
consistency indices that are still used today for soil classification.[4][5] Osborne Reynolds
recognized in 1885 that shearing causes volumetric dilation of dense and contraction of loose
granular materials.
Modern geotechnical engineering is said to have begun in 1925 with the publication of
Erdbaumechanik by Karl Terzaghi (a mechanical engineer and geologist). Considered by
many to be the father of modern soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, Terzaghi
developed the principle of effective stress, and demonstrated that the shear strength of soil is
controlled by effective stress. Terzaghi also developed the framework for theories of bearing
capacity of foundations, and the theory for prediction of the rate of settlement of clay layers
due to consolidation.[4][6][7] In his 1948 book, Donald Taylor recognized that interlocking and
dilation of densely packed particles contributed to the peak strength of a soil. The
interrelationships between volume change behavior (dilation, contraction, and consolidation)
and shearing behavior were all connected via the theory of plasticity using critical state soil
mechanics by Roscoe, Schofield, and Wroth with the publication of "On the Yielding of
Soils" in 1958. Critical state soil mechanics is the basis for many contemporary advanced
constitutive models describing the behavior of soil.[8]
Geotechnical centrifuge modeling is a method of testing physical scale models of

geotechnical problems. The use of a centrifuge enhances the similarity of the scale model
tests involving soil because the strength and stiffness of soil is very sensitive to the confining
pressure. The centrifugal acceleration allows a researcher to obtain large (prototype-scale)
stresses in small physical models.
Practicing engineers[edit]
Geotechnical engineers are typically graduates of a four-year civil engineering program and
often hold a masters degree. In the USA, geotechnical engineers are typically licensed and
regulated as Professional Engineers (PEs) in most states; currently only California and
Oregon have licensed geotechnical engineering specialties. State governments will typically
license engineers who have graduated from an ABET accredited school, passed the
Fundamentals of Engineering examination, completed several years of work experience
under the supervision of a licensed Professional Engineer, and passed the Professional
Engineering examination.[9]
Soil mechanics[edit]
A phase diagram of soil indicating the weights and volumes of air, soil, water, and voids.
Main articles: Soil mechanics and Rock mechanics
In geotechnical engineering, soils are considered a three-phase material composed of: rock or
mineral particles, water and air. The voids of a soil, the spaces in between mineral particles,
contain the water and air.
The engineering properties of soils are affected by four main factors: the predominant size of
the mineral particles, the type of mineral particles, the grain size distribution, and the relative
quantities of mineral, water and air present in the soil matrix. Fine particles (fines) are
defined as particles less than 0.075 mm in diameter.
Soil properties[edit]
Main article: Soil mechanics
Some of the important properties of soils that are used by geotechnical engineers to analyze
site conditions and design earthworks, retaining structures, and foundations are:[2]
Unit Weight
Total unit weight: Cumulative weight of the solid particles, water and air in the material per
unit volume. Note that the air phase is often assumed to be weightless.
Porosity
Ratio of the volume of voids (containing air, water, or other fluids) in a soil to the total
volume of the soil. A porosity of 0 implies that there are no voids in the soil.
Void ratio
is the ratio of the volume of voids to the volume of solid particles in a soil. Void ratio is
mathematically related to the porosity.
Permeability
A measure of the ability of water to flow through the soil, expressed in units of velocity.
Compressibility
The rate of change of volume with effective stress. If the pores are filled with water, then
the water must be squeezed out of the pores to allow volumetric compression of the soil;
this process is called consolidation.
Shear strength
The shear stress that will cause shear failure.
Atterberg Limits
Liquid limit, plastic limit, and shrinkage limit. These indices are used for estimation of other
engineering properties and for soil classification.
Geotechnical investigation[edit]
This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by
(September 2010)
Main article: Geotechnical investigation
Geotechnical engineers perform geotechnical investigations to obtain information on the

physical properties of soil and rock underlying (and sometimes adjacent to) a site to design
earthworks and foundations for proposed structures, and for repair of distress to earthworks
and structures caused by subsurface conditions. A geotechnical investigation will include
surface exploration and subsurface exploration of a site. Sometimes, geophysical methods are
used to obtain data about sites. Subsurface exploration usually involves in-situ testing (two
common examples of in-situ tests are the standard penetration test and cone penetration test).
In addition site investigation will often include subsurface sampling and laboratory testing of
the soil samples retrieved. The digging of test pits and trenching (particularly for locating
faults and slide planes) may also be used to learn about soil conditions at depth. Large
diameter borings are rarely used due to safety concerns and expense, but are sometimes used
to allow a geologist or engineer to be lowered into the borehole for direct visual and manual
examination of the soil and rock stratigraphy.
A variety of soil samplers exist to meet the needs of different engineering projects. The
standard penetration test (SPT), which uses a thick-walled split spoon sampler, is the most
common way to collect disturbed samples. Piston samplers, employing a thin-walled tube, are
most commonly used for the collection of less disturbed samples. More advanced methods,
such as ground freezing and the Sherbrooke block sampler, are superior, but even more
expensive.
Atterberg limits tests, water content measurements, and grain size analysis, for example, may
be performed on disturbed samples obtained from thick walled soil samplers. Properties such
as shear strength, stiffness hydraulic conductivity, and coefficient of consolidation may be
significantly altered by sample disturbance. To measure these properties in the laboratory,
high quality sampling is required. Common tests to measure the strength and stiffness include
the triaxial shear and unconfined compression test.
Surface exploration can include geologic mapping, geophysical methods, and

photogrammetry; or it can be as simple as an engineer walking around to observe the physical
conditions at the site. Geologic mapping and interpretation of geomorphology is typically
completed in consultation with a geologist or engineering geologist.
Geophysical exploration is also sometimes used. Geophysical techniques used for subsurface
exploration include measurement of seismic waves (pressure, shear, and Rayleigh waves),
surface-wave methods and/or downhole methods, and electromagnetic surveys
(magnetometer, resistivity, and ground-penetrating radar).
Foundations[edit]
(September 2010)
Main article: Foundation (engineering)
A building's foundation transmits loads from buildings and other structures to the earth.
Geotechnical engineers design foundations based on the load characteristics of the structure
and the properties of the soils and/or bedrock at the site. In general, geotechnical engineers:
1. Estimate the magnitude and location of the loads to be supported;

2. Develop an investigation plan to explore the subsurface;
3. Determine necessary soil parameters through field and lab testing (e.g., consolidation test,
triaxial shear test, vane shear test, standard penetration test);
4. Design the foundation in the safest and most economical manner.
The primary considerations for foundation support are bearing capacity, settlement, and
ground movement beneath the foundations. Bearing capacity is the ability of the site soils to
support the loads imposed by buildings or structures. Settlement occurs under all foundations
in all soil conditions, though lightly loaded structures or rock sites may experience negligible
settlements. For heavier structures or softer sites, both overall settlement relative to unbuilt
areas or neighboring buildings, and differential settlement under a single structure, can be
concerns. Of particular concern is settlement which occurs over time, as immediate
settlement can usually be compensated for during construction. Ground movement beneath a
structure's foundations can occur due to shrinkage or swell of expansive soils due to climatic
changes, frost expansion of soil, melting of permafrost, slope instability, or other
causes.[citation needed] All these factors must be considered during design of foundations.
Many building codes specify basic foundation design parameters for simple conditions,
frequently varying by jurisdiction, but such design techniques are normally limited to certain
types of construction and certain types of sites, and are frequently very conservative.[citation
needed]
In areas of shallow bedrock, most foundations may bear directly on bedrock; in other areas,
the soil may provide sufficient strength for the support of structures. In areas of deeper
bedrock with soft overlying soils, deep foundations are used to support structures directly on
the bedrock; in areas where bedrock is not economically available, stiff "bearing layers" are
used to support deep foundations instead.
Shallow foundations[edit]
(September 2010)
Main article: Shallow foundation
Example of a slab-on-grade foundation.
Shallow foundations are a type of foundation that transfers building load to the very near the
surface, rather than to a subsurface layer. Shallow foundations typically have a depth to width
ratio of less than 1.
Footings[edit]
Footings (often called "spread footings" because they spread the load) are structural elements
which transfer structure loads to the ground by direct areal contact. Footings can be isolated
footings for point or column loads, or strip footings for wall or other long (line) loads.
Footings are normally constructed from reinforced concrete cast directly onto the soil, and are
typically embedded into the ground to penetrate through the zone of frost movement and/or to
obtain additional bearing capacity.
Slab foundations[edit]
A variant on spread footings is to have the entire structure bear on a single slab of concrete
underlying the entire area of the structure. Slabs must be thick enough to provide sufficient
rigidity to spread the bearing loads somewhat uniformly, and to minimize differential
settlement across the foundation. In some cases, flexure is allowed and the building is
constructed to tolerate small movements of the foundation instead. For small structures, like
single-family houses, the slab may be less than 300 mm thick; for larger structures, the
foundation slab may be several meters thick.
Slab foundations can be either slab-on-grade foundations or embedded foundations, typically

in buildings with basements. Slab-on-grade foundations must be designed to allow for
potential ground movement due to changing soil conditions.
Deep foundations[edit]
(September 2010)
Piledriving for a bridge in Napa, California.
Main article: Deep foundations
Deep foundations are used for structures or heavy loads when shallow foundations cannot
provide adequate capacity, due to size and structural limitations. They may also be used to
transfer building loads past weak or compressible soil layers. While shallow foundations rely
solely on the bearing capacity of the soil beneath them, deep foundations can rely on end
bearing resistance, frictional resistance along their length, or both in developing the required
capacity. Geotechnical engineers use specialized tools, such as the cone penetration test, to
estimate the amount of skin and end bearing resistance available in the subsurface.
There are many types of deep foundations including piles, drilled shafts, caissons, piers, and
earth stabilized columns. Large buildings such as skyscrapers typically require deep
foundations. For example, the Jin Mao Tower in China uses tubular steel piles about 1m
(3.3 feet) driven to a depth of 83.5m (274 feet) to support its weight.
In buildings that are constructed and found to undergo settlement, underpinning piles can be
used to stabilise the existing building.[citation needed]
There are three ways to place piles for a deep foundation. They can be driven, drilled, or
installed by use of an auger. Driven piles are extended to their necessary depths with the
application of external energy in the same way a nail is hammered. There are four typical
hammers used to drive such piles: drop hammers, diesel hammers, hydraulic hammers, and
air hammers. Drop hammers simply drop a heavy weight onto the pile to drive it, while diesel
hammers use a single cylinder diesel engine to force piles through the Earth. Similarly,
hydraulic and air hammers supply energy to piles through hydraulic and air forces, as air and
water are both incompressible fluids. Energy imparted from a hammer head varies with type
of hammer chosen, and can be as high as a million foot pounds for large scale diesel
hammers, a very common hammer head used in practice. Piles are made of a variety of
material including steel, timber, and concrete. Drilled piles are created by first drilling a hole
to the appropriate depth, and filling it with concrete. Drilled piles can typically carry more
load than driven piles, simply due to a larger diameter pile. The auger method of pile
installation is similar to drilled pile installation, but concrete is pumped into the hole as the
auger is being removed.[10]
Lateral earth support structures[edit]

(September 2010)
Main article: Retaining wall
A retaining wall is a structure that holds back earth. Retaining walls stabilize soil and rock
from downslope movement or erosion and provide support for vertical or near-vertical grade
changes. Cofferdams and bulkheads, structures to hold back water, are sometimes also
considered retaining walls.
The primary geotechnical concern in design and installation of retaining walls is that the
retained material is attempting to move forward and downslope due to gravity. This creates
soil pressure behind the wall, which can be analysed based on the angle of internal friction
(φ) and the cohesive strength (c) of the material and the amount of allowable movement of
the wall. This pressure is smallest at the top and increases toward the bottom in a manner
similar to hydraulic pressure, and tends to push the wall forward and overturn it.
Groundwater behind the wall that is not dissipated by a drainage system causes an additional
horizontal hydraulic pressure on the wall.
Gravity Walls[edit]
Gravity walls depend on the size and weight of the wall mass to resist pressures from behind.
Gravity walls will often have a slight setback, or batter, to improve wall stability. For short,
landscaping walls, gravity walls made from dry-stacked (mortarless) stone or segmental
concrete units (masonry units) are commonly used.
Earlier in the 20th century, taller retaining walls were often gravity walls made from large
masses of concrete or stone. Today, taller retaining walls are increasingly built as composite
gravity walls such as: geosynthetic or steel-reinforced backfill soil with precast facing;
gabions (stacked steel wire baskets filled with rocks), crib walls (cells built up log cabin style
from precast concrete or timber and filled with soil or free draining gravel) or soil-nailed
walls (soil reinforced in place with steel and concrete rods).
For reinforced-soil gravity walls, the soil reinforcement is placed in horizontal layers
throughout the height of the wall. Commonly, the soil reinforcement is geogrid, a high-
strength polymer mesh, that provide tensile strength to hold soil together. The wall face is
often of precast, segmental concrete units that can tolerate some differential movement. The
reinforced soil's mass, along with the facing, becomes the gravity wall. The reinforced mass
must be built large enough to retain the pressures from the soil behind it. Gravity walls
usually must be a minimum of 30 to 40 percent as deep (thick) as the height of the wall, and
may have to be larger if there is a slope or surcharge on the wall.
Cantilever walls[edit]
Prior to the introduction of modern reinforced-soil gravity walls, cantilevered walls were the
most common type of taller retaining wall. Cantilevered walls are made from a relatively thin
stem of steel-reinforced, cast-in-place concrete or mortared masonry (often in the shape of an
inverted T). These walls cantilever loads (like a beam) to a large, structural footing;
converting horizontal pressures from behind the wall to vertical pressures on the ground
below. Sometimes cantilevered walls are buttressed on the front, or include a counterfort on
the back, to improve their stability against high loads. Buttresses are short wing walls at right
angles to the main trend of the wall. These walls require rigid concrete footings below
seasonal frost depth. This type of wall uses much less material than a traditional gravity wall.
Cantilever walls resist lateral pressures by friction at the base of the wall and/or passive
earth pressure, the tendency of the soil to resist lateral movement.
Basements are a form of cantilever walls, but the forces on the basement walls are greater
than on conventional walls because the basement wall is not free to move.
Excavation shoring[edit]
(September 2010)
Shoring of temporary excavations frequently requires a wall design which does not extend
laterally beyond the wall, so shoring extends below the planned base of the excavation.
Common methods of shoring are the use of sheet piles or soldier beams and lagging. Sheet
piles are a form of driven piling using thin interlocking sheets of steel to obtain a continuous
barrier in the ground, and are driven prior to excavation. Soldier beams are constructed of
wide flange steel H sections spaced about 2–3 m apart, driven prior to excavation. As the
excavation proceeds, horizontal timber or steel sheeting (lagging) is inserted behind the H
pile flanges.
In some cases, the lateral support which can be provided by the shoring wall alone is
insufficient to resist the planned lateral loads; in this case additional support is provided by
walers or tie-backs. Walers are structural elements which connect across the excavation so
that the loads from the soil on either side of the excavation are used to resist each other, or
which transfer horizontal loads from the shoring wall to the base of the excavation. Tie-backs
are steel tendons drilled into the face of the wall which extend beyond the soil which is
applying pressure to the wall, to provide additional lateral resistance to the wall.
Earth structures[edit]
A compactor/roller operated by U.S. Navy Seabees
See also: Earthworks (engineering)
Compaction[edit]
Compaction is the process by which the strength and stiffness of soil may be increased and
permeability may be decreased. Fill placement work often has specifications requiring a
specific degree of compaction, or alternatively, specific properties of the compacted soil. In-
situ soils can be compacted either by excavation and recompaction, or by methods such as
deep dynamic compaction, vibrocompaction, or compaction grouting.
Slope stability[edit]
(September 2010)
Simple slope slip section.
Main articles: Slope stability and Slope stability analysis
Slope stability is the analysis of soil covered slopes and its potential to undergo movement.
Stability is determined by the balance of shear stress and shear strength. A previously stable
slope may be initially affected by preparatory factors, making the slope conditionally
unstable. Triggering factors of a slope failure can be climatic events can then make a slope
actively unstable, leading to mass movements. Mass movements can be caused by increases
in shear stress, such as loading, lateral pressure, and transient forces. Alternatively, shear
strength may be decreased by weathering, changes in pore water pressure, and organic
material.
Several modes of failure for earth slopes include falls, topples, slides, and flows. In slopes
with coarse grained soil or rocks, falls typically occur as the rapid descent of rocks and other
loose slope material. A slope topples when a large column of soil tilts over its vertical axis at
failure. Typical slope stability analysis considers sliding failures, categorized mainly as
rotational slides or translational slides. As implied by the name, rotational slides fail along a
generally curved surface, while translational slides fail along a more planar surface. A slope
failing as a flow would resemble a fluid flowing downhill. Analysis: Geotechnical engineers
consider two types of slopes when analyzing stability, finite and infinite slopes. Most slopes
are analyzed in the 20th and 21st century using principles pertaining to the limit equilibrium
concept. This method analyzes a finite or infinite slope as if it were about to fail along its
sliding failure surface. Equilibrium stresses are calculated along the failure plane, and
compared to the soils shear strength as determined by Terzaghi’s shear strength equation.
Stability is ultimately decided by a factor of safety equal to the ratio of shear strength to the
equilibrium stresses along the failure surface. A factor of safety greater than one generally
implies a stable slope, failure of which should not occur assuming the slope is undisturbed. A
factor of safety of 1.5 is acceptably safe in practice.
The analysis of an infinite slope is made possible by several engineering assumptions: The
failure surface is planar and infinitely long, it is parallel to the above ground slope, and the
soil composing the medium in question is homogenous and isotropic, meaning the same
throughout. The assumption of an isotropic soil medium includes that the groundwater table,
if present, is parallel to the failure surface, and thus the ground surface above. Swedish Slip
Circle Method of Analysis: The Swedish Slip Circle method is used in slope analysis under
the assumption that the friction angle of the soil is equal to zero. This simplifies the factor of
safety calculation in the way it affects the soil’s shear strength parameter. Terzaghi concludes
that shear strength is equal to the soil cohesion value added to the product of the effective
stress and the tangent of the soils friction angle. When friction angle is considered to be zero,
the effective stress term goes to zero, thus equating the shear strength to the cohesion
parameter of the given soil. The Swedish slip circle method assumes literally a circular
failure plane, and analyzes stress and strength parameters using circular geometry and statics.
The moment caused by the internal driving forces of a slope is compared to the moment
cause by forces resisting slope failure. If resisting forces are greater than driving forces, the
slope is assumed stable. Ordinary Method of Slices: The method of slices is another analysis
method for determination of slope stability. The Swedish slip circle method only accounts for
soil with a friction angle equal to zero; therefore, the method of slices is needed for soils
having a friction angle greater than zero. The ordinary method of slices, commonly referred
to as OMS, neglects the equal and opposite forces on any given soil slice. This allows for a
simple static equilibrium calculation, considering only soil weight, along with shear and
normal stresses along the failure plane. Modified Bishop’s Method of Analysis: The
Modified Bishop’s method for analyzing slope stability is slightly different than the ordinary
method of slices in its assumptions regarding side forces on each slice considered. Instead of
assuming equal and opposite side forces, the Modified Bishop’s Method considers these
forces equal to zero. Such an assumption improves accuracy in factor of safety calculations.
Spencer’s Method: Spencer’s Method of analysis requires a computer program capable of
cyclic algorithms, but makes slope stability analysis easier. It is not as accurate as the
Modified Bishop’s method, but is acceptably accurate in engineering practices.[10]
Offshore geotechnical engineering[edit]

Main article: Offshore geotechnical engineering
Platforms offshore Mexico.
Offshore (or marine) geotechnical engineering is concerned with foundation design for
human-made structures in the sea, away from the coastline (in opposition to onshore or
nearshore).[11] Oil platforms, artificial islands and submarine pipelines are examples of such
structures. There are number of significant differences between onshore and offshore
geotechnical engineering.[11][12] Notably, ground improvement (on the seabed) and site
investigation are more expensive, the offshore structures are exposed to a wider range of
geohazards, and the environmental and financial consequences are higher in case of failure.
Offshore structures are exposed to various environmental loads, notably wind, waves and
currents. These phenomena may affect the integrity or the serviceability of the structure and
its foundation during its operational lifespan – they need to be taken into account in offshore
design.
In subsea geotechnical engineering, seabed materials are considered a two-phase material
composed of 1) rock or mineral particles and 2) water.[13][14] Structures may be fixed in place
in the seabed—as is the case for piers, jettys and fixed-bottom wind turbines—or may be a
floating structure that remain roughly fixed relative to its geotechnical anchor point.
Undersea mooring of human-engineered floating structures include a large number of
offshore oil and gas platforms and, since 2008, a few floating wind turbines. Two common
types of engineered design for anchoring floating structures include tension-leg and catenary
loose mooring systems. "Tension leg mooring systems have vertical tethers under tension
providing large restoring moments in pitch and roll. Catenary mooring systems provide
station keeping for an offshore structure yet provide little stiffness at low tensions."[15]
Geosynthetics[edit]
(September 2010)
A collage of geosynthetic products.
Main article: Geosynthetics
Geosynthetics are a type of plastic polymer products used in geotechnical engineering that
improve engineering performance while reducing costs. This includes geotextiles, geogrids,
geomembranes, geocells, and geocomposites. The synthetic nature of the products make them
suitable for use in the ground where high levels of durability are required; their main
functions include: drainage, filtration, reinforcement, separation and containment.
Geosynthetics are available in a wide range of forms and materials, each to suit a slightly
different end use, although they are frequently used together. These products have a wide
range of applications and are currently used in many civil and geotechnical engineering
applications including: roads, airfields, railroads, embankments, piled embankments,
retaining structures, reservoirs, canals, dams, landfills, bank protection and coastal
engineering.[16]
See also[edit]
Engineering portal
 Civil engineering
 Deep Foundations Institute
 Effective stress
 Geology
o Engineering geology
o Rock mass classifications
o Seismology
 Geoprofessions
 International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering
 Karl von Terzaghi
 Land reclamation
 Landfill
 List of publications in geotechnical engineering
 Mechanically stabilized earth
 Observational method (geotechnics)
 Offshore geotechnical engineering
 Sediment control
 Soil mechanics
 Soil physics
 Soil science
Notes[edit]
1. Jump up ^ Terzaghi, K., Peck, R.B. and Mesri, G. (1996), Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice 3rd Ed.,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 0-471-08658-4
2. ^ Jump up to: a b Holtz, R. and Kovacs, W. (1981), An Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering,
Prentice-Hall, Inc. ISBN 0-13-484394-0
3. Jump up ^ RAJU, V. R. (2010). Ground Improvement Technologies and Case Histories. Singapore:
Research Publishing Services. p. 809. ISBN 978-981-08-3124-0.
4. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Das, Braja (2006). Principles of Geotechnical Engineering. Thomson Learning.
5. ^ Jump up to: a b Budhu, Muni (2007). Soil Mechanics and Foundations. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
ISBN 978-0-471-43117-6.
6. ^ Jump up to: a b Disturbed soil properties and geotechnical design, Schofield, Andrew N.,Thomas
Telford, 2006. ISBN 0-7277-2982-9
7. Jump up ^ Soil Mechanics, Lambe,T.William and Whitman,Robert V., Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, John Wiley & Sons., 1969. ISBN 0-471-51192-7
8. Jump up ^ Soil Behavior and Critical State Soil Mechanics, Wood, David Muir,Cambridge University
Press, 1990. ISBN 0-521-33782-8
9. Jump up ^ "Licensure for Engineers". Retrieved 2006-12-11.
10. ^ Jump up to: a b Coduto, et al, Donald (2011). Geotechnical Engineering Principles and Practices. New
Jersey: Pearson Higher Education. ISBN 9780132368681.
11. ^ Jump up to: a b Dean, E.T.R. (2010). Offshore Geotechnical Engineering - Principles and Practice.
Thomas Telford, Reston, VA, U.S.A., 520 p.
12. Jump up ^ Randolph, M. and Gourvenec, S., 2011. Offshore geotechnical engineering. Spon Press,
N.Y., 550 p.
13. Jump up ^ Das, B.M., 2010. Principles of geotechnical engineering. Cengage Learning, Stamfort,
U.S.A., 666 p.
14. Jump up ^ Atkinson, J., 2007. The mechanics of soils and foundations. Taylor & Francis, N.Y., 442 p.
15. Jump up ^ Floating Offshore Wind Turbines: Responses in a Seastate -- Pareto Optimal Designs and
Economic Assessment, P. Sclavounos et al, October 2007.
16. Jump up ^ Koerner, R. M. (2012) Designing with geosynthetics, 6th Edition, Xlibris Corporation, USA
References[edit]
 Holtz, R. and Kovacs, W. (1981), An  Fang, H.-Y. and Daniels, J. (2005) Introductory
Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Geotechnical Engineering : an environmental
Prentice-Hall, Inc. ISBN 0-13-484394-0 perspective, Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0-415-
 Bowles, J. (1988), Foundation Analysis and 30402-4
Design, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.  NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering
ISBN 0-07-006776-7 Command) (1986) Design Manual 7.01, Soil
 Cedergren, Harry R. (1977), Seepage, Mechanics, US Government Printing Office
Drainage, and Flow Nets, Wiley. ISBN 0-471-  NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering
14179-8 Command) (1986) Design Manual 7.02,
 Kramer, Steven L. (1996), Geotechnical Foundations and Earth Structures, US
Earthquake Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Government Printing Office
ISBN 0-13-374943-6  NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering
 Freeze, R.A. & Cherry, J.A., (1979), Command) (1983) Design Manual 7.03, Soil
Groundwater, Prentice-Hall. ISBN 0-13- Dynamics, Deep Stabilization and Special
365312-9 Geotechnical Construction, US Government
 Lunne, T. & Long, M.,(2006), Review of long Printing Office
seabed samplers and criteria for new sampler  Terzaghi, K., Peck, R.B. and Mesri, G. (1996),
design, Marine Geology, Vol 226, p. 145-165 Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice 3rd Ed.,
 Mitchell, James K. & Soga, K. (2005), John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 0-471-08658-4
Fundamentals of Soil Behavior 3rd ed., John  Santamarina, J.C., Klein, K.A., & Fam, M.A.
Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-0-471-46302-3 (2001), "Soils and Waves: Particulate
 Rajapakse, Ruwan., (2005), "Pile Design ans Materials Behavior, Characterization and
Construction", 2005. ISBN 0-9728657-1-3 Process Monitoring", Wiley, ISBN 978-0-471-
49058-6
 Firuziaan, M. and Estorff, O., (2002),
"Simulation of the Dynamic Behavior of
Bedding-Foundation-Soil in the Time Domain",
Springer Verlag.
[show]
 v
 t
 e
Topics in geotechnical engineering
Rock mass classification


Rock mass classification systems are used for various engineering design and stability
analysis. These are based on empirical relations between rock mass parameters and
engineering applications, such as tunnels, slopes, foundations, and excavatability. The first
rock mass classification system in geotechnical engineering was proposed in 1946 for tunnels
with steel set support.
Contents
[hide]
 1 Design methods
 2 Objectives
o 2.1 Benefits
 3 Rock mass classification systems
o 3.1 Systems for tunneling: Quantitative
o 3.2 Other systems: Qualitative
o 3.3 Systems for slope engineering
o 3.4 Earlier systems
 4 Further reading
 5 See also
Design methods[edit]
In engineering in rock, three design strategies can be distinguished: analytical, empirical, and
numerical. Empirical, i.e. rock mass classification, methods are extensively used for
feasibility and pre-design studies, and often also for the final design.
Objectives[edit]
The objectives of rock mass classifications are (after Bieniawski 1989):
1. Identify the most significant parameters influencing the behaviour of a rock mass.
2. Divide a particular rock mass formulation into groups of similar behaviour – rock mass
classes of varying quality.
3. Provide a basis of understanding the characteristics of each rock mass class
4. Relate the experience of rock conditions at one site to the conditions and experience
encountered at others
5. Derive quantitative data and guidelines for engineering design
6. Provide common basis for communication between engineers and geologists
Benefits[edit]
The main benefits of rock mass classifications:
1. Improving the quality of site investigations by calling for the minimum input data as
classification parameters.
2. Providing quantitative information for design purposes.
3. Enabling better engineering judgement and more effective communication on a project.
Rock mass classification systems[edit]
Systems for tunneling: Quantitative[edit]
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)

 Q-system
 Mining rock mass rating (MRMR)
Other systems: Qualitative[edit]
 New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM)

 Size Strength classification
Systems for slope engineering[edit]
 Slope Mass Rating (SMR)

 Rock mass classification system for rock slopes doi:10.1007/s10064-009-0241-y [1]
 Slope Stability Probability Classification (SSPC)[2]
Earlier systems[edit]
 Rock load classification method
The Rock load classification method is one of the first methodologies for rock mass
classification for engineering. Karl von Terzaghi developed the methodology for tunnels
supported by steel sets in the 1940s. By many regarded as obsolete as ideas about rock and
rock mass mechanical behavior have since further developed and the methodology is not
suitable for modern tunneling methods using shotcrete and rock bolts.
Reference: Terzaghi, K. (1946). "Rock defects and loads on tunnel supports". In Proctor, R.V.;
White, T. Rock Tunnelling with Steel Supports. Youngstown, Ohio: Commercial Shearing and
Stamping Co. pp. 15–99. also in Soil Mechanics Series 25, publication 418. Harvard
University, Graduate School of Engineering.
 Stand-up time classification
The Stand-up time classification by Lauffer is often regarded as the origin of the New
Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM). The original system as developed by Lauffer is
nowadays by many regarded as obsolete but his ideas are incorporated in modern rock
mechanics science, such as the relation between the span of a tunnel and the stand-up time,
and notably in the New Austrian Tunnelling Method.
Reference: Lauffer, H. (1958). "Gebirgsklassifizierung für den Stollenbau". Geology Bauwesen
74 (1): 46–51.
 Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
The Rock Quality Designation index was developed by Deere in the 1960s to classify the
quality of a rock core based on the integrety of borehole cores. Nowadays the classification
system itself is not very often used, but the determination of the RQD as index for rock core
quality is standard practice in any geotechnical rock drilling, and is used in many, more
recent, rock mass classification systems, such as RMR and Q-system (see above).
 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)
The Rock Structure Rating system is a quantitative method for describing quality of a rock
mass and appropriate ground support, in particular, for steel-rib support, developed by
Wickham, Tiedemann and Skinner in the 1970s.
Further reading[edit]
 Bieniawski, Z.T. (1989). Engineering Rock Mass Classifications. Wiley-Interscience. p. 272.
ISBN 978-0-471-60172-2.
 Hack, H.R.G.K. (25–28 November 2002). "An evaluation of slope stability classification.
Keynote Lecture.". In Dinis da Gama, C.; Ribeira e Sousa, L. Proc. ISRM EUROCK’2002.
Funchal, Madeira, Portugal: Sociedade Portuguesa de Geotecnia, Lisboa, Portugal. pp. 3–32.
ISBN 972-98781-2-9.
 Palmstrom, A.; Broch, E. (2006). "Use and misuse of rock mass classification systems with
particular reference to the Q-system". Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 21 (6):
575–593. doi:10.1016/j.tust.2005.10.005.
 Pantelidis, L. (2009). "Rock slope stability assessment through rock mass classification
systems". International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences 46 (2): 315–325.
doi:10.1016/j.ijrmms.2008.06.003.
 Singh, B.; Goel, R.K. (1999). Rock Mass Classification: A Practical Approach in Civil
Engineering. Elsevier Science. p. 282. ISBN 978-0-08-043013-3.
 Singh, B.; Goel, R.K. (2006). Tunnelling in Weak Rocks. Geo-Engineering 5. Elsevier Science.
p. 512. ISBN 978-0-08-044987-6.
Slope stability analysis

This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. Please help improve this
article to make it understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical details.
The talk page may contain suggestions. (December 2012)
Figure 1: Rotational failure of slope on circular slip surface
Slope stability analysis is performed to assess the safe design of a human-made or natural
slopes (e.g. embankments, road cuts, open-pit mining, excavations, landfills etc.) and the
equilibrium conditions.[1][2] The term slope stability may be defined as the resistance of
inclined surface to failure by sliding or collapsing.[3] The main objectives of slope stability
analysis are finding endangered areas, investigation of potential failure mechanisms,
determination of the slope sensitivity to different triggering mechanisms, designing of
optimal slopes with regard to safety, reliability and economics, designing possible remedial
measures, e.g. barriers and stabilization.[1][2]
Successful design of the slope requires geological information and site characteristics, e.g.
properties of soil/rock mass, slope geometry, groundwater conditions, alternation of materials
by faulting, joint or discontinuity systems, movements and tension in joints, earthquake
activity etc.[4][5] Choice of correct analysis technique depends on both site conditions and the
potential mode of failure, with careful consideration being given to the varying strengths,
weaknesses and limitations inherent in each methodology.[6]
Before the computer age stability analysis was performed graphically or using hand-held
calculator. Today engineers have a lot of possibilities to use analysis software, ranges from
simple limit equilibrium techniques through computational limit analysis approaches (e.g.
Finite element limit analysis, Discontinuity layout optimization) to complex and sophisticated
numerical solutions (finite-/distinct-element codes).[1] The engineer must fully understand
limitations of each technique. For example, limit equilibrium is most commonly used and
simple solution method, but it can become inadequate if the slope fails by complex
mechanisms (e.g. internal deformation and brittle fracture, progressive creep, liquefaction of
weaker soil layers, etc.). In these cases more sophisticated numerical modelling techniques
should be utilised. In addition, the use of the risk assessment concept is increasing today.
Risk assessment is concerned with both the consequence of slope failure and the probability
of failure (both require an understanding of the failure mechanism).[7]
Within the last decade (2003) Slope Stability Radar has been developed to remotely scan a
rock slope to monitor the spatial deformation of the face. Small movements of a rough wall
can be detected with sub-millimeter accuracy by using interferometry techniques.
Contents
[hide]
 1 Conventional methods of analysis

o 1.1 Limit equilibrium analysis
o 1.2 Stereographic and kinematic analysis
o 1.3 Rockfall simulators
 2 Rock mass classification
 3 Numerical methods of analysis
o 3.1 Continuum modelling
o 3.2 Discontinuum modelling
o 3.3 Hybrid/coupled modelling
 4 See also
 5 References
 6 Bibliography
 7 External links
Conventional methods of analysis[edit]

Most of the slope stability analysis computer programs are based on the limit equilibrium
concept for a two- or three-dimensional model.[8][9] In rock slope stability analysis
conventional methods can be divided into three groups: kinematic analysis, limit equilibrium
and rock fall simulators.[7]
Limit equilibrium analysis[edit]

See also: Slope stability
The conventional limit equilibrium methods investigate the equilibrium of the soil mass
tending to slide down under the influence of gravity. Transitional or rotational movement is
considered on assumed or known potential slip surface below soil or rock mass.[10] In rock
slope engineering, methods may be highly significant to simple block failure along distinct
discontinuities.[7] All methods are based on comparison of forces (moments or stresses)
resisting instability of the mass and those that causing instability (disturbing forces). Two-
dimensional sections are analyzed assuming plain strain conditions. These methods assume
that the shear strengths of the materials along the potential failure surface are governed by
linear (Mohr-Coulomb) or non-linear relationships between shear strength and the normal
stress on the failure surface.[10] analysis provides a factor of safety, defined as a ratio of
available shear resistance (capacity) to that required for equilibrium. If the value of factor of
safety is less than 1.0, slope is unstable. The most common limit equilibrium techniques are
methods of slices where soil mass is discretized into vertical slices (Fig. 2).[9][11] Results
(factor of safety) of particular methods can vary because methods differs in assumptions and
satisfied equilibrium conditions.[10][12]
Figure 2: Method of slices
Functional slope design considers calculation with the critical slip surface where is the lowest
value of factor of safety. Locating failure surface can be made with the help of computer
programs using search optimization techniques.[13] Wide variety of slope stability software
using limit equilibrium concept is available including search of critical slip surface. The
program analyses the stability of generally layered soil slopes, mainly embankments, earth
cuts and anchored sheeting structures. Fast optimization of circular and polygonal slip
surfaces provides the lowest factor of safety. Earthquake effects, external loading,
groundwater conditions, stabilization forces (i.e. anchors, georeinforcements etc.) can be also
included. The software uses solution according to various methods of slices (Fig. 2), such as
Bishop simplified, Ordinary method of slices (Swedish circle method/Petterson/Fellenius),
Spencer, Sarma etc.
Sarma and Spencer are called as rigorous methods because they satisfy all three conditions of
equilibrium: force equilibrium in horizontal and vertical direction and moment equilibrium
condition. Rigorous methods can provide more accurate results than non-rigorous methods.
Bishop simplified or Fellenius are non-rigorous methods satisfying only some of the
equilibrium conditions and making some simplifying assumptions.[11][12]
Another limit equilibrium program SLIDE[14] provides 2D stability calculations in rocks or

soils using these rigorous analysis methods: Spencer, Morgenstern-Price/General limit
equilibrium; and non-rigorous methods: Bishop simplified, Corps of Engineers, Janbu
simplified/corrected, Lowe-Karafiath and Ordinary/Fellenius. Searching of the critical slip
surface is realized with the help of a grid or as a slope search in user-defined area. Program
includes also probabilistic analysis using Monte Carlo or Latin Hypercube simulation
techniques where any input parameter can be defined as a random variable. Probabilistic
analysis determine the probability of failure and reliability index, which gives better
representation of the level of safety. Back analysis serves for calculation of a reinforcement
load with a given required factor of safety. Program enables finite element groundwater
seepage analysis.[14]
Program SLOPE/W[15] is formulated in terms of moment and force equilibrium factor of

safety equations. Limit equilibrium methods include Morgenstern-Price, General limit
equilibrium, Spencer, Bishop, Ordinary, Janbu etc. This program allows integration with
other applications. For example finite element computed stresses from SIGMA/W[16] or
QUAKE/W[17] can be used to calculate a stability factor by computing total shear resistance
and mobilized shear stress along the entire slip surface. Then a local stability factor for each
slice is obtained. Using a Monte Carlo approach, program computes the probability of failure
in addition to the conventional factor of safety.[15]
STABL WV[18] is a limit equilibrium-based, Windows software based on the stabl family of
algorithms. It allows analysis using Bishop's, Spencer's and Janbu's method. Regular slopes
as well as slopes with various types of inclusions may be analyzed.
SVSlope[19] is formulated in terms of moment and force equilibrium factor of safety

equations. Limit equilibrium methods include Morgenstern-Price, General limit equilibrium,
Spencer, Bishop, Ordinary, Kulhawy and others This program allows integration with other
applications in the geotechnical software suite. For example finite element computed stresses
from SVSolid[20] or pore-water pressures from SVFlux[21] can be used to calculate the factor
of safety by computing total shear resistance and mobilized shear stress along the entire slip
surface. The software also utilizes Monte Carlo, Latin Hypercube, and the APEM
probabilistic approaches. Spatial variability through random fields computations may also be
included in the analysis.
Some other programs based on limit equilibrium concept:
 GALENA[22] - includes stability analysis, back analysis, and probability analysis, using the
Bishop, Spencer-Wright and Sarma methods.[22]
 GSLOPE[23] - provides limit equilibrium slope stability analysis of existing natural slopes,
unreinforced man-made slopes, or slopes with soil reinforcement, using Bishop’s Modified
method and Janbu’s Simplified method applied to circular, composite or non-circular
surfaces.[23]
 CLARA-W[24] - three-dimensional slope stability program includes calculation with the help of
these methods: Bishop simplified, Janbu simplified, Spencer and Morgenstern-Price. Problem
configurations can involve rotational or non-rotational sliding surfaces, ellipsoids, wedges,
compound surfaces, fully specified surfaces and searches.[24]
 TSLOPE3[25] - two- or three-dimensional analyses of soil and rock slopes using Spencer
method.[25]
Rock slope stability analysis based on limit equilibrium techniques may consider following
modes of failure:
 Planar failure -> case of rock mass sliding on a single surface (special case of general wedge
type of failure); two-dimensional analysis may be used according to the concept of a block
resisting on an inclined plane at limit equilibrium[26][27]
 Polygonal failure -> sliding of a nature rock usually takes place on polygonally-shaped
surfaces; calculation is based on a certain assumptions (e.g. sliding on a polygonal surface
which is composed from N parts is kinematically possible only in case of development at
least (N - 1) internal shear surfaces; rock mass is divided into blocks by internal shear
surfaces; blocks are considered to be rigid; no tensile strength is permitted etc.)[27]
 Wedge failure -> three-dimensional analysis enables modelling of the wedge sliding on two
planes in a direction along the line of intersection[27][28]
 Toppling failure -> long thin rock columns formed by the steeply dipping discontinuities may
rotate about a pivot point located at the lowest corner of the block; the sum of the
moments causing toppling of a block (i.e. horizontal weight component of the block and the
sum of the driving forces from adjacent blocks behind the block under consideration) is
compared to the sum of the moments resisting toppling (i.e. vertical weight component of
the block and the sum of the resisting forces from adjacent blocks in front of the block under
consideration); toppling occur if driving moments exceed resisting moments[29][30]
Stereographic and kinematic analysis[edit]

See also: Stereonet#Geology
Kinematic analysis examines which modes of failure can possibly occur in the rock mass.
Analysis requires the detailed evaluation of rock mass structure and the geometry of existing
discontinuities contributing to block instability.[31][32] Stereographic representation
(stereonets) of the planes and lines is used.[33] Stereonets are useful for analyzing
discontinuous rock blocks.[34] Program DIPS[35] allows for visualization structural data using
stereonets, determination of the kinematic feasibility of rock mass and statistical analysis of
the discontinuity properties.[31][35]
Rockfall simulators[edit]
Rock slope stability analysis may design protective measures near or around structures
endangered by the falling blocks. Rockfall simulators determine travel paths and trajectories
of unstable blocks separated from a rock slope face. Analytical solution method described by
Hungr & Evans[36] assumes rock block as a point with mass and velocity moving on a
ballistic trajectory with regard to potential contact with slope surface. Calculation requires
two restitution coefficients that depend on fragment shape, slope surface roughness,
momentum and deformational properties and on the chance of certain conditions in a given
impact.[37]
Program ROCFALL[38] provides a statistical analysis of trajectory of falling blocks. Method

rely on velocity changes as a rock blocks roll, slide or bounce on various materials. Energy,
velocity, bounce height and location of rock endpoints are determined and may be analyzed
statistically. The program can assist in determining remedial measures by computing kinetic
energy and location of impact on a barrier. This can help determine the capacity, size and
location of barriers.[38]
Rock mass classification[edit]

Various rock mass classification systems exist for the design of slopes and to assess the
stability of slopes. The systems are based on empirical relations between rock mass
parameters and various slope parameters such as height and slope dip.
Numerical methods of analysis[edit]

Numerical modelling techniques provide an approximate solution to problems which
otherwise cannot be solved by conventional methods, e.g. complex geometry, material
anisotropy, non-linear behaviour, in situ stresses. Numerical analysis allows for material
deformation and failure, modelling of pore pressures, creep deformation, dynamic loading,
assessing effects of parameter variations etc. However, numerical modelling is restricted by
some limitations. For example, input parameters are not usually measured and availability of
these data is generally poor. Analysis must be executed by well trained user with good
modelling practise. User also should be aware of boundary effects, meshing errors, hardware
memory and time restrictions. Numerical methods used for slope stability analysis can be
divided into three main groups: continuum, discontinuum and hybrid modelling.[39]
Continuum modelling[edit]
See also: Finite element method and Finite difference method
Figure 3: Finite element mesh
Modelling of the continuum is suitable for the analysis of soil slopes, massive intact rock or
heavily jointed rock masses. This approach includes the finite-difference and finite element
methods that discretize the whole mass to finite number of elements with the help of
generated mesh (Fig. 3). In finite-difference method (FDM) differential equilibrium equations
(i.e. strain-displacement and stress-strain relations) are solved. finite element method (FEM)
uses the approximations to the connectivity of elements, continuity of displacements and
stresses between elements. Most of numerical codes allows modelling of discrete fractures,
e.g. bedding planes, faults. Several constitutive models are usually available, e.g. elasticity,
elasto-plasticity, strain-softening, elasto-viscoplasticity etc.[39]
Discontinuum modelling[edit]
See also: Discrete element method and Discontinuous Deformation Analysis
Discontinuum approach is useful for rock slopes controlled by discontinuity behaviour. Rock
mass is considered as an aggregation of distinct, interacting blocks subjected to external loads
and assumed to undergo motion with time. This methodology is collectively called the
discrete-element method (DEM). Discontinuum modelling allows for sliding between the
blocks or particles. The DEM is based on solution of dynamic equation of equilibrium for
each block repeatedly until the boundary conditions and laws of contact and motion are
satisfied. Discontinuum modelling belongs to the most commonly applied numerical
approach to rock slope analysis and following variations of the DEM exist:[39]
 distinct-element method
 discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA)
 particle flow codes
The distinct-element approach describes mechanical behaviour of both, the discontinuities

and the solid material. This methodology is based on a force-displacement law (specifying
the interaction between the deformable rock blocks) and a law of motion (determining
displacements caused in the blocks by out-of-balance forces). Joints are treated as [boundary
conditions. Deformable blocks are discretized into internal constant-strain elements.[39]
Discontinuum program UDEC[40] (Universal distinct element code) is suitable for high
jointed rock slopes subjected to static or dynamic loading. Two-dimensional analysis of
translational failure mechanism allows for simulating large displacements, modelling
deformation or material yielding.[40] Three-dimensional discontinuum code 3DEC[41] contains
modelling of multiple intersecting discontinuities and therefore it is suitable for analysis of
wedge instabilities or influence of rock support (e.g. rockbolts, cables).[39]
In discontinuous deformation analysis (DDA) displacements are unknowns and equilibrium

equations are then solved analogous to finite element method. Each unit of finite element type
mesh represents an isolated block bounded by discontinuities. Advantage of this methodology
is possibility to model large deformations, rigid body movements, coupling or failure states
between rock blocks.[39]
Discontinuous rock mass can be modelled with the help of distinct-element methodology in
the form of particle flow code, e.g. program PFC2D/3D.[42][43] Spherical particles interact
through frictional sliding contacts. Simulation of joint bounded blocks may be realized
through specified bond strengths. Law of motion is repeatedly applied to each particle and
force-displacement law to each contact. Particle flow methodology enables modelling of
granular flow, fracture of intact rock, transitional block movements, dynamic response to
blasting or seismicity, deformation between particles caused by shear or tensile forces. These
codes also allow to model subsequent failure processes of rock slope, e.g. simulation of
rock[39]
Hybrid/coupled modelling[edit]
Hybrid codes involve the coupling of various methodologies to maximize their key
advantages, e.g. limit equilibrium analysis combined with finite element groundwater flow
and stress analysis adopted in the SVOFFICE[44] or GEO-STUDIO[45] suites of software;
coupled particle flow and finite-difference analyses used in PF3D[43] and FLAC3D.[46]
Hybrid techniques allows investigation of piping slope failures and the influence of high
groundwater pressures on the failure of weak rock slope. Coupled finite-/distinct-element
codes, e.g. ELFEN,[47] provide for the modelling of both intact rock behaviour and the
development and behaviour of fractures.[39]
See also[edit]
 Discontinuous Deformation Analysis
 Discontinuity layout optimization
 Discrete element method
 Finite difference method
 Finite element limit analysis
 Finite element method
 Rock mass classification
 Slope stability
 Stereonet
References[edit]
1. ^ Jump up to: a b c Eberhardt 2003, p. 4
2. ^ Jump up to: a b Abramson 2002, p. 2
3. Jump up ^ Kliche 1999, p. 2
4. Jump up ^ USArmyCorps 2003, pp. 1–2
5. Jump up ^ Abramson 2002, p. 1
6. Jump up ^ Stead 2001, p. 615
7. ^ Jump up to: a b c Eberhardt 2003, p. 6
8. Jump up ^ Abramson 2002, p. 329
9. ^ Jump up to: a b Abramson 2002, p. 363
10. ^ Jump up to: a b c USArmyCorps 2003, p. 2
11. ^ Jump up to: a b Zhu 2003, pp. 377–395
12. ^ Jump up to: a b Abramson 2002, pp. 363–367
13. Jump up ^ USArmyCorps 2003, p. 5
14. ^ Jump up to: a b "SLIDE – 2D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis", http://www.rocscience.com
(Toronto, Canada: Rocscience), retrieved 20 July 2009
15. ^ Jump up to: a b "SLOPE/W – Slope Stability Analysis", http://www.geo-slope.com (Calgary, Canada:
Geo-Slope International), retrieved 20 July 2009
16. Jump up ^ "SIGMA/W – Stress-deformation Analysis", http://www.geo-slope.com (Calgary, Canada:
17. Jump up ^ "QUAKE/W – Dynamic Earthquake Analysis", http://www.geo-slope.com (Calgary, Canada:
18. Jump up ^ "STABL WV – Slope Stability Analysis Software", http://www.geotechnicalsoftware.biz
(Miami, FL: TerraWiz, LLC)
19. Jump up ^"SVSlope – Slope Stability Analysis", http://www.soilvision.com (Saskatoon, Canada:
SoilVision Systems Ltd.), retrieved 20 July 2010
20. Jump up ^"SVSolid – Stress-deformation Analysis", http://www.svsolid.com (Saskatoon, Canada:
21. Jump up ^"SVFlux – Groundwater Seepage Analysis", http://www.soilvision.com (Saskatoon, Canada:
22. ^ Jump up to: ab"GALENA – Slope Software System", http://www.scisoftware.com (Utah, USA:
Scientific Software Group), retrieved 20 July 2009
23. ^ Jump up to: ab"GSLOPE – Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis for Reinforced Slopes",
http://www.mitresoftware.com (Edmonton, Canada: Mitre Software Corporation), retrieved 20 July
2009
24. ^ Jump up to: ab"CLARA-W – 2D and 3D Slope Stability Analysis", http://www.clara-w.com/ (West
Vancouver, Canada: O. Hungr Geotechnical Research), retrieved 21 July 2009
25. ^ Jump up to: ab"TSLOPE3 – 2D and 3D Analyses of Soil and Rock Slopes", http://www.tagasoft.com
(California, USA: TAGA Engineering Software), retrieved 21 July 2009
26. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, pp. 125–137
27. ^ Jump up to: abcKovari 1978, pp. 103–124
28. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, pp. 153–169
29. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, p. 15
30. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, pp. 139–152
31. ^ Jump up to: abEberhardt 2003, p. 7
32. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, p. 111
33. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, pp. 111–123
34. Jump up ^Kliche 1999, pp. 43–65
35. ^ Jump up to: ab"DIPS – Graphical and Statistical Analysis of Orientation Data",
http://www.rocscience.com (Toronto, Canada: Rocscience), retrieved 21 July 2009
36. Jump up ^Hungr 1988, pp. 685–690
37. Jump up ^Eberhardt 2003, pp. 15–17
38. ^ Jump up to: ab"ROCFALL – Statistical Analysis of Rockfalls", http://www.rocscience.com (Toronto,
Canada: Rocscience), retrieved 21 July 2009
39. ^ Jump up to: abcdefghEberhardt 2003, pp. 17–38
40. ^ Jump up to: ab"UDEC - Universal Distinct Element Code", http://www.itascacg.com (Minneapolis,
USA: Itasca), retrieved 27 July 2009
41. Jump up ^"3DEC - Three Dimensional Distinct Element Code", http://www.itascacg.com (Minneapolis,
42. Jump up ^"PFC2D - Particle Flow Code in Two Dimensions", http://www.itascacg.com (Minneapolis,
Rock mass plasticity

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has
insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise
citations. (November 2013)
Boudinaged quartz vein(with strain fringe) showing sinistral shear sense, Starlight Pit, Fortnum Gold
Mine, Western Australia
Plasticity theory for rocks is concerned with the response of rocks to loads beyond the elastic
limit. Historically, conventional wisdom has it that rock is brittle and fails by fracture while
plasticity is identified with ductile materials. In field scale rock masses, structural
discontinuities exist in the rock indicating that failure has taken place. Since the rock has not
fallen apart, contrary to expectation of brittle behavior, clearly elasticity theory is not the last
work.[1]
Theoretically, the concept of rock plasticity is based on soil plasticity which is different from
metal plasticity. In metal plasticity, for example in steel, the size of a dislocation is sub-grain
size while for soil it is the relative movement of microscopic grains. The theory of soil
plasticity was developed in the 1960s at Rice University to provide for inelastic effects not
observed in metals. Typical behaviors observed in rocks include strain softening, perfect
plasticity, and work hardening.
Application of continuum theory is possible in jointed rocks because of the continuity of

tractions across joints even through displacements may be discontinuous. The difference
between an aggregate with joints and a continuous solid is in the type of constitutive law and
the values of constitutive parameters.
Contents
[hide]
 1 Experimental evidence
 2 Governing equations
o 2.1 Constitutive relations
o 2.2 Yield surfaces for rocks
 3 Plasticity theory
o 3.1 Three-dimensional plasticity
o 3.2 Flow rule
o 3.3 Consistency condition
 4 Notes
 5 References
Experimental evidence[edit]
Experiments are usually carried out with the intention of characterizing the mechanical
behavior of rock in terms of rock strength. The strength is the limit to elastic behavior and
delineates the regions where plasticity theory is applicable. Laboratory tests for
characterizing rock plasticity fall into four overlapping categories: confining pressure tests,
pore pressure or effective stress tests, temperature-dependent tests, and strain rate-dependent
tests. Plastic behavior has been observed in rocks using all these techniques since the early
1900s.[2]
The Boudinage experiments [3] show that localized plasticity is observed in certain rock
specimens that have failed in shear. Other examples of rock displaying plasticity can be seen
in the work of Cheatham and Gnirk.[4] Test using compression and tension show necking of
rock specimens while tests using wedge penetration show lip formation. The tests carried out
by Robertson [5] show plasticity occurring at high confining pressures. Similar results are
observable in the experimental work carried out by Handin and Hager,[6] Paterson,[7] and
Mogi.[8] From these results it appears that the transition from elastic to plastic behavior may
also indicate the transition from softening to hardening. More evidence is presented by
Robinson [9] and Schwartz.[10] It is observed that the higher the confining pressure, the greater
the ductility observed. However, the strain to rupture remains roughly the same at around 1.
The effect of temperature on rock plasticity has been explored by several teams of
researchers.[11] It is observed that the peak stress decreases with temperature. Extension tests
(with confining pressure greater than the compressive stress) show that the intermediate
principal stress as well as the strain rate has an effect on the strength. The experiments on the
effect of strain rate by Serdengecti and Boozer [12] show that increasing the strain rate makes
rock stronger but also makes it appear more brittle. Thus dynamic loading may actually cause
the strength of the rock to increase substantially. Increase in temperature appears to increase
the rate effect in the plastic behavior of rocks.
After these early explorations in the plastic behavior of rocks, a significant amount of
research has been carried out on the subject, primarily by the petroleum industry. From the
accumulated evidence, it is clear that rock does exhibit remarkable plasticity under certain
conditions and the application of a plasticity theory to rock is appropriate.
Governing equations[edit]
The equations that govern the deformation of jointed rocks are the same as those used to
describe the motion of a continuum:[13]
where is the mass density, is the material time derivative of ,

is the particle velocity, is the particle displacement, is the material time derivative of ,
is the Cauchy stress tensor, is the body force density, is the internal
energy per unit mass, is the material time derivative of , is the heat flux vector,
is an energy source per unit mass, is the location of the point in the deformed
configuration, and t is the time.
In addition to the balance equations, initial conditions, boundary conditions, and constitutive
models are needed for a problem to be well-posed. For bodies with internal discontinuities
such as jointed rock, the balance of linear momentum is more conveniently expressed in the
integral form, also called the principle of virtual work:
where represents the volume of the body and is its surface (including any internal
discontinuities), is an admissible variation that satisfies the displacement (or velocity)
boundary conditions, the divergence theorem has been used to eliminate derivatives of the
stress tensor, and are surface tractions on the surfaces . The jump conditions across
stationary internal stress discontinuities require that the tractions across these surfaces be
continuous, i.e.,
where are the stresses in the sub-bodies , and is the normal to the surface
of discontinuity.
Constitutive relations[edit]
Stress-strain curve showing typical plastic behavior of rocks in uniaxial compression. The strain can
be decomposed into a recoverable elastic strain ( ) and an inelastic strain ( ). The stress at initial
yield is . For strain hardening rocks (as shown in the figure) the yield stress increases with
increasing plastic deformation to a value of .
For small strains, the kinematic quantity that is used to describe rock mechanics is the small
strain tensor If temperature effects are ignored, four types of
constitutive relations are typically used to describe small strain deformations of rocks. These
relations encompass elastic, plastic, viscoelastic, and viscoplastic behavior and have the
following forms:
1. Elastic material: or . For an isotropic, linear elastic, material

this relation takes the form or .
The quantities are the Lamé parameters.
2. Viscous fluid: For isotropic materials, or
where is the shear viscosity and is the bulk
viscosity.
3. Nonlinear material: Isotropic nonlinear material relations take the form
or .
This type of relation is typically used to fit experimental data and may include inelastic
behavior.
4. Quasi-linear materials: Constitutive relations for these materials are typically expressed in
rate form, e.g., or .
A failure criterion or yield surface for the rock may then be expressed in the general form
Typical constitutive relations for rocks assume that the deformation process is isothermal, the
material is isotropic, quasi-linear, and homogenous and material properties do not depend
upon position at the start of the deformation process, that there is no viscous effect and
therefore no intrinsic time scale, that the failure criterion is rate-independent, and that there is
no size effect. However, these assumptions are made only to simplify analysis and should be
abandoned if necessary for a particular problem.
Yield surfaces for rocks[edit]
View of Mohr–Coulomb failure surface in 3D space of principal stresses for
Design of mining and civil structures in rock typically involves a failure criterion that is
cohesive-frictional. The failure criterion is used to determine whether a state of stress in the
rock will lead to inelastic behavior, including brittle failure. For rocks under high hydrostatic
stresses, brittle failure is preceded by plastic deformation and the failure criterion is used to
determine the onset of plastic deformation. Typically, perfect plasticity is assumed beyond
the yield point. However strain hardening and softening relations with nonlocal inelasticity
and damage have also been used. Failure criteria and yield surfaces are also often augmented
with a cap to avoid unphysical situations where extreme hydrostatic stress states do not lead
to failure or plastic deformation.
View of Drucker–Prager yield surface in 3D space of principal stresses for
Two widely used yield surfaces/failure criteria for rocks are the Mohr-Coulomb model and
the Drucker-Prager model. The Hoek–Brown failure criterion is also used, notwithstanding
the serious consistency problem with the model. The defining feature of these models is that
tensile failure is predicted at low stresses. On the other hand, as the stress state becomes
increasingly compressive, failure and yield requires higher and higher values of stress.
Plasticity theory[edit]
The governing equations, constitutive models, and yield surfaces discussed above are not
sufficient if we are to compute the stresses and displacements in a rock body that is
undergoing plastic deformation. A additional kinematic assumption is needed, i.e., that the
strain in the body can be decomposed additively (or multiplicatively in some cases) into an
elastic part and a plastic part. The elastic part of the strain can be computed from a linear
elastic constitutive model. However, determination of the plastic part of the strain requires a
flow rule and a hardening model.
Typical flow plasticity theories (for small deformation perfect plasticity or hardening
plasticity) are developed on the basis on the following requirements:
1. The rock has a linear elastic range.

2. The rock has an elastic limit defined as the stress at which plastic deformation first takes
place, i.e., .
3. Beyond the elastic limit the stress state always remains on the yield surface, i.e., .
4. Loading is defined as the situation under which increments of stress are greater than zero,
i.e., . If loading takes the stress state to the plastic domain then the increment of
plastic strain is always greater than zero, i.e., .
5. Unloading is defined as the situation under which increments of stress are less than zero,
i.e., . The material is elastic during unloading and no additional plastic strain is
accumulated.
6. The total strain is a linear combination of the elastic and plastic parts, i.e.,
. The plastic part cannot be recovered while the elastic part is fully
recoverable.
7. The work done of a loading-unloading cycle is positive or zero, i.e.,
. This is also called the Drucker stability postulate and
eliminates the possibility of strain softening behavior.
Three-dimensional plasticity[edit]
The above requirements can be expressed in three dimensions as follows.
 Elasticity (Hooke's law). In the linear elastic regime the stresses and strains in the rock are
related by
where the stiffness matrix is constant.
 Elastic limit (Yield surface). The elastic limit is defined by a yield surface that does not
depend on the plastic strain and has the form
 Beyond the elastic limit. For strain hardening rocks, the yield surface evolves with increasing
plastic strain and the elastic limit changes. The evolving yield surface has the form
 Loading. It is not straightforward to translate the condition to three dimensions,

particularly for rock plasticity which is dependent not only on the deviatoric stress but also
on the mean stress. However, during loading and it is assumed that the direction of
plastic strain is identical to the normal to the yield surface ( ) and that
, i.e.,
The above equation, when it is equal to zero, indicates a state of neutral loading where the
stress state moves along the yield surface without changing the plastic strain.
 Unloading: A similar argument is made for unloading for which situation , the
material is in the elastic domain, and
 Strain decomposition: The additive decomposition of the strain into elastic and plastic parts
can be written as
 Stability postulate: The stability postulate is expressed as
Flow rule[edit]
In metal plasticity, the assumption that the plastic strain increment and deviatoric stress
tensor have the same principal directions is encapsulated in a relation called the flow rule.
Rock plasticity theories also use a similar concept except that the requirement of pressure-
dependence of the yield surface requires a relaxation of the above assumption. Instead, it is
typically assumed that the plastic strain increment and the normal to the pressure-dependent
yield surface have the same direction, i.e.,
where is a hardening parameter. This form of the flow rule is called an associated
flow rule and the assumption of co-directionality is called the normality condition. The
function is also called a plastic potential.
The above flow rule is easily justified for perfectly plastic deformations for which
when , i.e., the yield surface remains constant under increasing plastic deformation.
This implies that the increment of elastic strain is also zero, , because of Hooke's
law. Therefore,
Hence, both the normal to the yield surface and the plastic strain tensor are perpendicular to
the stress tensor and must have the same direction.
For a work hardening material, the yield surface can expand with increasing stress. We
assume Drucker's second stability postulate which states that for an infinitesimal stress cycle
this plastic work is positive, i.e,
The above quantity is equal to zero for purely elastic cycles. Examination of the work done
over a cycle of plastic loading-unloading can be used to justify the validity of the associated
flow rule.[14]
Consistency condition[edit]
The Prager consistency condition is needed to close the set of constitutive equations and to
eliminate the unknown parameter from the system of equations. The consistency
condition states that at yield because , and hence
Notes[edit]
1. Jump up ^ Pariseau (1988).
2. Jump up ^ Adams and Coker (1910).
3. Jump up ^ Rast (1956).
4. Jump up ^ Cheatham and Gnirk (1966).
5. Jump up ^ Robertson (1955).
6. Jump up ^ Handin and Hager (1957,1958,1963.)
7. Jump up ^ Paterson (1958).
8. Jump up ^ Mogi (1966).
9. Jump up ^ Robinson (1959).
10. Jump up ^ Schwartz (1964).
11. Jump up ^ Griggs, Turner, Heard (1960)
12. Jump up ^ Serdengecti and Boozer (1961)
13. Jump up ^ The operators in the governing equations are defined as:
where is a vector field, is a symmetric second-order tensor field, and are the components of
an orthonormal basis in the current configuration. The inner product is defined as
14. Jump up ^ Anandarajah (2010).
References[edit]
 Pariseau, W. G. (1988), "On the concept of rock mass plasticity", In The 29th US Symposium
on Rock Mechanics (USRMS) (Balkema)
 Adams, F. D.; Coker, E. G. (1910), "An experimental investigation into the flow of rocks; the
flow of marble", American Journal of Science 174: 465–487
 Rast, Nicholas (1956), "The origin and significance of boudinage.", Geol. Mag 93: 401–408
 Cheatham Jr, J. B.; Gnirk, P. F. (1966), "The mechanics of rock failure associated with drilling
at depth", In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Fairhurst C, editor,
University of Minnesota: 410–439
 Robertson, Eugene C. (1955), "Experimental study of the strength of rocks", Geological
Society of America Bulletin 66 (10): 1275–1314
 Handin, John; Hager Jr., Rex V. (1957), "Experimental deformation of sedimentary rocks
under confining pressure: Tests at room temperature on dry samples", AAPG Bulletin 41 (1):
1–50
 Handin, John; Hager Jr., Rex V. (1958), "Experimental deformation of sedimentary rocks
under confining pressure: Tests at high temperature", AAPG Bulletin 42 (12): 2892–2934
 Handin, John; Hager Jr, Rex V.; Friedman, Melvin; Feather, James N. (1963), "Experimental
deformation of sedimentary rocks under confining pressure: pore pressure tests", AAPG
Bulletin 47 (5): 717–755
 Paterson, M. S. (1958), "Experimental deformation and faulting in Wombeyan marble",
Geological Society of America Bulletin 69 (4): 465–476
 Mogi, Kiyoo (1966), "Pressure Dependence of Rock Strength and Transition from Brittle
Fracture to Ductile Flow", Bulletin of the earthquake research institute 44: 215–232
 Robinson, L. H. (1959), "The effect of pore and confining pressure on the failure process in
sedimentary rock", In The 3rd US Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS)
 Schwartz, Arnold E (1964), "Failure of rock in the triaxial shear test", In The 6th US
Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS)
 Griggs, D. T.; Turner, F. J.; Heard, H. C. (1960), "Deformation of rocks at 500 to 800 C",
Griggs, DT, and Handin, J.(eds.), Rock deformation: Geological Society of America Memoir 79
39: 104
 Serdengecti, S.; Boozer, G. D. (1961), "The effects of strain rate and temperature on the
behavior of rocks subjected to triaxial compression", In Proceedings of the Fourth
Symposium on Rock Mechanics: 83–97
 Anandarajah, A. (2010), Computational methods in elasticity and plasticity: solids and porous
media, Springer
<img src="//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralAutoLogin/start&type=1x1"
alt="" title="" width="1" height="1" style="border: none; position: absolute;" />
Retrieved from
"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rock_mass_plasticity&oldid=581272740"
Categories:
 Continuum mechanics
 Plasticity
 Rock Mechanics
Category:Continuum mechanics
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Continuum mechanics.
Continuum mechanics is a branch of classical mechanics that deals with solids and fluids.
The main article for this category
Category:Plasticity
This category deals with plasticity in solid mechanics.
Pages in category "Plasticity"

The following 33 pages are in this category, out of 33 total. This list may not reflect recent
changes (learn more).
B M S
 Bresler Pister yield  Mechanical threshold  Specified Minimum Yield

criterion stress plasticity model Strength
 Microplasticity  Steinberg-Guinan
C  Mohr–Coulomb theory plasticity model
 Monocular deprivation  Stress (mechanics)
 Christensen failure
criterion P T
D  Perzyna viscoplasticity  Tsai–Wu failure criterion

model
 Drucker–Prager yield  Plastic bending V
criterion  Plasticity (physics)
 Duvaut-Lions  Preston-Tonks-Wallace  Viscoplasticity
viscoplasticity model plasticity model  Von Mises yield criterion
F R W
 Material failure theory  R-value (plasticity)  Willam-Warnke yield

 Forging temperature  Reinforced solid criterion
 Fracture  Rock mass plasticity
Y
H
 Yield (engineering)
 Hill yield criterion  Yield strength anomaly
 Hosford yield criterion  Yield surface
J Z
 Johnson-Cook plasticity  Zerilli-Armstrong

model plasticity model
 Lankford coefficient
Category:Rock Mechanics
The main article for this category is Rock mechanics.
Pages in category "Rock Mechanics"

The following 3 pages are in this category, out of 3 total. This list may not reflect recent
changes (learn more).
 Discontinuity (geotechnical engineering)
 International Society for Rock Mechanics
 Rock mass plasticity
Retrieved from
"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Rock_Mechanics&oldid=547743368"
Categories:
 Mechanics
Discontinuity (geotechnical engineering)

A discontinuity in geotechnical engineering (in geotechnical literature often denoted by

joint) is a plane or surface that marks a change in physical or chemical characteristics in a
soil or rock mass. A discontinuity can be, for example, a bedding, schistosity, foliation, joint,
cleavage, fracture, fissure, crack, or fault plane. A division is made between mechanical and
integral discontinuities. Discontinuities may occur multiple times with broadly the same
mechanical characteristics in a discontinuity set, or may be a single discontinuity. A
discontinuity makes a soil or rock mass anisotropic.[1][2][3][4][5]
Contents
[hide]
 1 Mechanical discontinuity
 2 Integral discontinuity
 3 Discontinuity set or family
 4 Single discontinuity
 5 Discontinuity characterization
 6 See also
 7 References
 8 Further reading
Mechanical discontinuity[edit]
A mechanical discontinuity is a plane of physical weakness where the tensile strength
perpendicular to the discontinuity or the shear strength along the discontinuity is lower than
that of the surrounding soil or rock material.
Integral discontinuity[edit]
An integral discontinuity is a discontinuity that is as strong as the surrounding soil or rock
material. Integral discontinuities can change into mechanical discontinuities due to physical
or chemical processes (e.g. weathering) that change the mechanical characteristics of the
discontinuity.
Discontinuity set or family[edit]

Various geological processes create discontinuities at a broadly regular spacing. For example,
bedding planes are the result of a repeated sedimentation cycle with a change of
sedimentation material or change in structure and texture of the sediment at regular intervals,
folding creates joints at regular separations to allow for shrinkage or expansion of the rock
material, etc. Normally discontinuities with the same origin have broadly the same
characteristics in terms of shear strength,[6][7] spacing between discontinuities,[8] roughness,
infill, etc. The orientations of discontinuities with the same origin are related to the process
that has created them and to the geological history of the rock mass. A discontinuity set or
family denotes a series of discontinuities for which the geological origin (history, etc.), the
orientation, spacing, and the mechanical characteristics (shear strength, roughness, infill
material, etc.) are broadly the same.
Single discontinuity[edit]
A discontinuity may exist as a single feature (e.g. fault, isolated joint or fracture) and in some
circumstances, a discontinuity is treated as a single discontinuity although it belongs to a
discontinuity set, in particular if the spacing is very wide compared to the size of the
engineering application or to the size of the geotechnical unit.
Discontinuity characterization[edit]
Various international standards exist to describe and characterize discontinuities in
geomechanical terms, such as ISO 14689-1:2003[9] and ISRM.[1]
See also[edit]
Asperity (Geotechnical engineering)
Persistence (Discontinuity)
Rock mass classification
Rock mechanics
Shear strength (Discontinuity)
Sliding criterion (Geotechnical engineering)
International Society for Rock Mechanics

The International Society for Rock Mechanics - ISRM was founded in Salzburg in 1962 as
a result of the enlargement of the "Salzburger Kreis". Its foundation is mainly owed to Prof.
Leopold Müller who acted as President of the Society till September 1966. The ISRM is a
non-profit scientific association supported by the fees of the members and grants that do not
impair its free action. In 2012 the Society has 6,800 members and 49 National Groups.
The field of Rock Mechanics is taken to include all studies relative to the physical and
mechanical behaviour of rocks and rock masses and the applications of this knowledge for
the better understanding of geological processes and in the fields of Engineering.
The main objectives and purposes of the Society are:
 to encourage international collaboration and exchange of ideas and information between

Rock Mechanics practitioners;
 to encourage teaching, research, and advancement of knowledge in Rock Mechanics;
 to promote high standards of professional practice among rock engineers so that civil,
mining and petroleum engineering works might be safer, more economic and less disruptive
to the environment.
The main activities carried out by the Society in order to achieve its objectives are:
 to hold International Congresses at intervals of four years;

 to sponsor International and Regional Symposia, organised by the National Groups the
Society;
 to publish a News Journal to provide information about technology related to Rock
Mechanics and up-to-date news on activities being carried out in the Rock Mechanics
community;
 to operate Commissions for studying scientific and technical matters of concern to the
Society;
 to award the Rocha medal for an outstanding doctoral thesis, every year, and the Müller
award in recognition of distinguished contributions to the profession of Rock Mechanics and
Rock Engineering, once every four years;
 to cooperate with other international scientific associations.
The Society is ruled by a Council, consisting of representatives of the National Groups, the
Board and the Past Presidents. The current President is Prof. Xia-Ting Feng, from China.
The ISRM Secretariat has been headquartered in Lisbon, Portugal, at the Laboratório
Nacional de Engenharia Civil - LNEC since 1966, date of the first ISRM Congress, when
Prof. Manuel Rocha was elected as President of the Society.
Details of the Society can be obtained from its website at www.isrm.net
Retrieved from
"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Society_for_Rock_Mechanics&oldid=5439
79790"
Categories:
 International nongovernmental organizations

 Rock Mechanics
Navigation menu
Personal tools
 Create account
 Log in
Namespaces
 Article
 Talk
Variants
Views
 Read
 Edit
 View history
Actions
Search
Special:Search
Navigation
 Main page
 Contents
 Featured content
 Current events
 Random article
 Donate to Wikipedia
Interaction
 Help
 About Wikipedia
 Community portal
 Recent changes
 Contact page
Tools
 What links here

 Related changes
 Upload file
 Special pages
 Permanent link
 Page information
 Data item
 Cite this page
Print/export
 Create a book
 Download as PDF
 Printable version
Languages
 Português
 Edit links
 This page was last modified on 14 March 2013 at 02:25.

Rock Mechanics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rock Mechanics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rock Mechanics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rock mechanics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

 for residential, commercial and industrial developments;

Geohazards and adverse geo-conditions[edit]

 fault rupture on seismically active faults ;

An engineering geologist or geophysicist may be called upon to evaluate the excavatability

Soil and Rock Mechanics[edit]

Soil mechanics is a discipline that applies principles of engineering mechanics, e.g.

Methods and reporting[edit]

 Bates and Jackson, 1980, Glossary of Geology: American Geological Institute.

 Wang H. F., Theory of Linear Poroelasticity with Applications to Geomechanics and

Jump to: navigation, search

Geotechnical engineering is also related to coastal and ocean engineering. Coastal

Several foundation-related engineering problems, such as the Leaning Tower of Pisa,

Geotechnical centrifuge modeling is a method of testing physical scale models of

Main articles: Soil mechanics and Rock mechanics

The shear stress that will cause shear failure.

Main article: Geotechnical investigation

Geotechnical engineers perform geotechnical investigations to obtain information on the

Surface exploration can include geologic mapping, geophysical methods, and

Main article: Foundation (engineering)

1. Estimate the magnitude and location of the loads to be supported;

Main article: Shallow foundation

Example of a slab-on-grade foundation.

Slab foundations can be either slab-on-grade foundations or embedded foundations, typically

Piledriving for a bridge in Napa, California.

Main article: Deep foundations

Lateral earth support structures[edit]

Main article: Retaining wall

A compactor/roller operated by U.S. Navy Seabees

See also: Earthworks (engineering)

Main articles: Slope stability and Slope stability analysis

Offshore geotechnical engineering[edit]

Platforms offshore Mexico.

A collage of geosynthetic products.

Main article: Geosynthetics

Topics in geotechnical engineering

Rock mass classification

Jump to: navigation, search

The main benefits of rock mass classifications:

 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)

Other systems: Qualitative[edit]

 New Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM)

Systems for slope engineering[edit]

 Slope Mass Rating (SMR)

 Rock load classification method

 Stand-up time classification

 Rock Quality Designation (RQD)

 Rock Structure Rating (RSR)

Slope stability analysis

Jump to: navigation, search

 1 Conventional methods of analysis

Conventional methods of analysis[edit]

Limit equilibrium analysis[edit]

Another limit equilibrium program SLIDE[14] provides 2D stability calculations in rocks or

Program SLOPE/W[15] is formulated in terms of moment and force equilibrium factor of

SVSlope[19] is formulated in terms of moment and force equilibrium factor of safety

Some other programs based on limit equilibrium concept: