Sensitivity analysis of rock mass parameters estimate influence on decline support design using NATM

  • Slavko Torbica University of Belgrade – Faculty of Mining and Geology
  • Veljko Lapčević University of Belgrade - Faculty of Mining and Geology https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2338-1718
  • Wang Gang Rakita Exploration d.o.o. Bor, Suvaja Street 185A, 19210 Bor, Serbia
  • Nemanja Đokić University of Belgrade – Faculty of Mining and Geology
  • Miodrag Duranović University of Belgrade – Faculty of Mining and Geology
Keywords: Rock mass; Tunneling; NATM; GSI; Stress; Cukaru Peki; Bor;

Abstract

Capital mine development is often faced with limited geotechnical databases and designers are faced with more or less accurate estimates of missing parameters. GSI classification if often used with numerical modelling and its rounding unit is ±5 as suggested by its creators. In situ stresses are usually estimated in such manner that vertical component is equal to the weight of the rocks above, while horizontal components may vary in wide range, starting with ratio to vertical component of 0.3 and even be several times higher than vertical component.

Influence of estimate error of GSI and horizontal stress is analyzed for the Cukaru Peki location near Bor in Serbia. Zone in the rock mass valued with GSI of 40 at depth 160m is analyzed for the change of GSI value of ±5 and horizontal stress ratio between 0.5-1.5. Change of the unsupported length of decline and shotcrete layer thickness is tracked for different values of input parameters. Finally, best case and worst case scenarios are analyzed with results showing that shotcrete layer thickness could vary in range between 4-33cm, and unsupported lengths between 0.6-2m.

References

BARTON, N. et al. (1974) Engineering classification of rock masses for the design of tunnel support. Rock mechanics, 6(4), pp.189-236.

BIENIAWSKI, Z.T. (1993) Classification of rock masses for engineering: the RMR system and future trends. In: Rock Testing and Site Characterization, Pergamon, pp. 553- 573.

HEIDBACH O. et al. (2008) The 2008 release of the World Stress Map. [Online] Available from: http://www.world-stress-map.org. [Accessed 5/5/2019]

HOEK, E. (1994) Strength of rock and rock masses. ISRM News Journal, pp. 4-16.

HOEK, E. (2007) Practical Rock Engineering. Rocscience Inc.

HOEK, E and DIEDERICHS, M. (2006) Empirical estimates of rock mass modulus. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 43, pp. 203–215

ROCSCIENCE INC. (2019) Phase2 Version 9.0 - Finite Element Analysis for Excavations and Slopes. Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

TERAGHI, K. and RICHART, F.E. (1952) Stresses in Rock About Cavities. Géotechnique, 3 (2), pp. 57-90.

TORBICA, S. and LAPČEVIĆ, V. (2016) Model for estimation of stress field in the Earth's crust. Podzemni Radovi, (28), pp. 9-17.

VLACHOPOULOS, N. and DIEDERICHS, M.S. (2009) Improved Longitudinal Displacement Profiles for Convergence Confinement Analysis of Deep Tunnels. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 42(2), pp. 131-146.

ZANG, A. et al. (2012) World stress map database as a resource for rock mechanics and rock engineering. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 30(3), pp.625-646.

Published
2019-06-30
How to Cite
Torbica, S., Lapčević, V., Gang, W., Đokić, N., & Duranović, M. (2019). Sensitivity analysis of rock mass parameters estimate influence on decline support design using NATM. Podzemni Radovi, (34), 27-41. https://doi.org/10.5937/PodRad1934027T
Section
Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)