INTRODUCTION
It is also important, however, to obtain data on discontinuity intensity in addition to discontinuity orientation. In the-case of tunnelling, for example, it is
necessary to examine the ratio between discontinuity
intensity and excavation dimensions [8, 9].
RQD = 100
~ x,/L,
(1)
i=1
136
I
I I.
-',,
,l'}
If-B
Af
IJJll
till(
}/Ill
Ill((
THEORY
/ -.\
,
B
(d)Clustered distribuhon
A_ I lIMIt \1 /I.',
I I~
I ~1(
I B_
Li \
f(x)=ke_X,
notiva e, -iol
I ~ e i n f o ~ ~t~w spocms I
II
I|
~.~ I
Discontinuity spacing values,
(e) Random distribution
f(x) = 2e -a~,
(2)
large compared with that of the evenly spaced distribution, the latter will be largely unaffected and consequently dominate. In all other combinations, the clusters are largely unaffected whilst the even spacings are
broken up by superimposed random discontinuity patterns. It is important to note that the orientation of
discontinuities, relative to that of the scanline, in general controls the number of discontinuities intersected
per unit length and not the overall pattern of the discontinuity spacing distribution.
70
5o
I
/
~ 40
/
IO
i
0
0.1'2) for
2 <~ 10/m.
RQD,* = 100
I:
, Lxf(x) rt' /L
RQD? = 10022
f:
x e -~x dx:
, 7
~
I /
! /
?'
0.1
I
RQD
RQI3P"I~ I-xflxldx/L
0.1
-x,
l
t
\mmolnin(jWtQhspocing~,,OlUe/
,
(3)
I ~.~"~'~'~'~r~om discordir~uty
positions
~CP =lOOe'~(O'l
k+i)7
60
I001
90 ~
8o
.
137.
I""
I
I
0.2
0.:5
Meondiscontinuityspocin~ I/Mrn)
i ^ ~ ~
_u,Im . . . . .
;
0.4
0.,.5
Threshold volue
Fig. 2. Maximum and minimum possible RQD values and RQD vs mean discontinuity spacing for randomly positioned
discontinuities.
138
" o~
90
7O
N 6O
5O
3O
1 6 0 of the sconlineconsists
of intact lengths >~l.Om
20
tO
0
0,1 0.2
Fig. 3. Variation of
03
0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 I.I 1,2 1.3
Mean discontinuity spacing, m
RQD with
1.4 1.5
1,6 1.7
1.8 1.9 2D
RQD threshold
values t.
(4)
I00
80
,~
4o
5m sample length
I00
80
T', \
~ 60
139
60
ROD*=91%
Error bond
95%-84%
.Error band
20
900/.-720
~' ~
'~" ,~
2O
- "~ . . . . . ~ . . . . . . ~ .
I
I
, -- ~ ~ i ~
I0
20
30
40
Obser~<l number of discontinuities
0
0
50
I0
20
30
40
2m sample length
I00
50
;,
t
=o ,o r
o 60
80 I
40
20
0
0
I0
20
30
40
50
I0
20
:30.
40
50
Experimental results
(a) Chinnor tunnel. Detailed assessment of chalk discontinuity characteristics formed an intrinsic part of
the rock cutting experiments in the Lower Chalk carried out during the full scale tunnelling trials at Chinnor, Oxfordshire. A total of seven thousand discontinuity spacing values was processed for a total scanline
length of approximately 750 m taken in the 23 m deep,
3 m dia shaft and in the 5 m dia tunnel.
Figure 5 shows a discontinuity spacing histogram for
all measurements taken in the shaft, and Fig. 6 a spacing histogram of measurements taken at selected faces
during the first 85 m of tunnelling. The distribution of
measured discontinuity spficing values is not strictly
Ol3
.c_
II
Total sconline length 253.81m
Mean discontinuity spacing(~) O . I I 4 m
Standard deviation O.107m
Number of values 2221
~,o
Y9
8
"-- 4
"6
g3
]TITrFrrl-TT ,,
~o
0.01
0.C~
0.10
0.15
020
0.25
0.30
0.35
Discontinuity spacing, m
3m
>o5o .
0.40
0.45
0.50
140
tO
_=
.,3 6 -
~5>.
"~. 4 c
o
"6
~ d F i t t e d negative exponential
3-
o;o,
0.05
0.10
0.15
O.aO
0.25
'i''l-:
0.30
0.35
. . . . . .
0.40
0.45
0.50
Discont"inui'fy spacing, rn
Fig. 6.
Discontinuity spacing histogram. Sum of all scanlines in the first 85 m of tunnel (Lower Chalk, Chinnor. Oxfordshire).
5 ~ i / m
.c
o>
.E
0.9
0.8
~ 0.7
21
._ 0.7
0.6
0.5
~ 0.5
i .
0.5
0.3
e o
ooo
0.2
02
0.1
..i..,.i.,,,
O. I _..~....,....,....,....~....,....,....,....,...o.,o.._
0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Discontinuityspacing, m
I.,.,h.,,I,...I..,,I.,,,I..,,I.,..I.,,
Sample probability density distribution of discontinuity spacing values, plotted on a logarithmic scale. Sum of all scanlines in
the 3 m dia shaft. 2221 Values (Lower Chalk, Chinnor, Oxfordshire).
Fig. 7.
Sample probability density distribution of discontinuity spacing values, plotted on a logarithmic scale. Sum of all scanlines in
lirst 85m of tunnel. 4884 Values (Lower Chalk, Chinnor,
Oxfordshire).
Fig. 8.
141
tO .
~ 9 -
.~ 7
=g6Fitted negative exponential
^
~robability density distribution, X=7.-F;'8/rn
4
3
2
>0.50--.-~I
OOI
0.05
O.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
Discontinuity spocincj, rn
ne
....
0.40
0.35
,,..I
0.45
0.50
Fig. 9. Discontinuity spacing histogram. Rogerley Quarry tunnel. Sum of all scanlines in the sandstone.
In the section dealing with the theoretical approach construction programme provided an additional opporit was stated that a feature of the negative exponential tunity for examining in situ Lower Chalk. Assessment
distribution is that the mean spacing is equal to the of discontinuity characteristics was carried out using
standard deviation. Fig. 11 is a graph plotting the mean the scanline techniques described earlier. Figure 12
discontinuity spacing against the standard deviation of shows a histogram of discontinuity spacing values, for
the spacing for separate survey locations at Chinnor a 0.5 m class interval. The fitted negative exponential
and Rogerley Quarry. The data have been divided into probability density distribution indicates a reasonably
two groups based on the sample size: <200 values and good agreement between actual and theoretical distri> 200 values. The straight line in Fig. 11 indicates the butions considering the small sample size.
idealised relation for which the mean discontinuity
spacing is equal to the standard deviation. It is clear General considerations
from this figure that the experimental results conform
In searches of published data only two papers, Mahwell to the theoretical line, particularly for the larger tab et al. [14] and McGown et al. [15], were found
samples where sampling error is lower. Agreement is giving the results of measurements of discontinuity
within 20~o for samples containing more than 200 spacing in histogram form. Although the class interval
values. It is worth noting that in other distributions, was rather wide the indications are that the distribufor example the normal distribution, the mean and tions tended to follow the negative exponential form.
standard deviation are totally independent.
In view of the tunnel data presented in this section,
(c) Channel tunnelt. Excavation of the machine erec- it is felt that the negative exponential probability dention chamber during Phase II of the Channel tunnel sity distribution provides a good approximation to the
Totalscanline length
Mean discontinuity spacing (~)
Standard deviation
Number of values
60.75m
O.O=,L3rn
O.O~.rn
1828rn
0.22
Number of values
in sample
<200 >200
values values
Lower chalk Chionor
O
0.20
50
~28
0. 18
-G 26
24
O
/
O. 16
2-00
E 0.14
;o
.~ 18
'-
16
~ 1.4
12
O
o O
./.:
e4'
oO
o,0
0.08
IO
~
r ~
Fitted negativeexponential A
obability der
~E
p!!"
0.01
0.0,$
0.05
0.07
0.09
0.11
Discontinuity spacing, m
te: if the
~di~:onti~i~
0.04
=//
0.02
0.13
0.15
r,
0
0
0.02
~ing
0.04
0.06
ODe
0.I0
0.12
0.14
0.16
Standard deviation,
0.18
rn
142
2O
t9
18
DISCUSSION
._~
.-~ I0
:=
]
(Spacing >1.5 m)
5 ~
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0,6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 I.I
Discontinuity spocinq, rn
Fig. 12. Discontinuity spacing histogram. Channel tunnel. Sum of
vertical and horizontal scanlines (Lower Chalk).
Rock formation,
location
Lower Chalk
Chinnor shaft
Lithology
Chalk
RQD ",,
RQD* %
Scanline
configuration
(from
equation 1)
(from
equation 5)
Average
number of
discontinuities
per m,
/.
Horizontal
scanlines
Vertical scanline I
Vertical scanline II
79
67
7(/
81
70
75
7.9
11.0
9.5
91
87
80
83
82
78
78
72
60
66
79
64
71
64
65
63
89
87
81
87
81
81
81
74
64
69
79
65
73
68
69
63
5.6
6.3
7.9
6.4
7.9
8.0
8.0
9.9
12.5
11.3
8.5
12.3
10.1
11.7
11.3
12.8
Vertical plus
horizontal scanlines
83
82
7.8
Vertical plus
horizontal scanlines
100
98
2.0
Chainage =
Lower Chalk
Chinnor tunnel
Chalk
Sandstone
RQD
Horizontal
plus
vertical
scanlines
for
each face
9.9m
ll.5m
12.1m
14.0m
18.1m
20.4m
35.9m
55.4m
57.5m
60.5m
65.2m
70.2m
72.7m
73.9m
79.3m
85.0m
Measured
Theoretical
Carboniferous
Limestone
Rogerley
tunnel
Limestone
Mudstone
Vertical plus
horizontal
scanlines at
selected faces
12
32
14
22
12
31
17
26
37.0
23.8
32.5
26.3
Lower Chalk
Channel tunnel
Chalk
Vertical plus
horizontal scanlines
99
88
99
90
1.2
5.3
143
I00
90
U'l"e,~
80
~"-~
L~
9w ~
" ~
70
Inflection point P
I'lk.
. . . . . .
I.)eVlOTIOn aue to
clustered discontinuities
.~
#RoQerley,limestone]
CarboniferousUmestone
a RogerlElYtmu~mne---J-L--I
J
0 Chores, tunneltLower Chalk
~g 6o
~ /
/ '
c$5o
Theoreficol curve
.-~1
RQ~-IOO. x (O. I X + I )
~ 40
:50
20
I0
0
0
I
2
I
4
I
8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~1
I0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Averoge number of discontinuities per m, X
Fig. 14. R e l a t i o n b e t w e e n
R.MM.S 13 5 a
RQD a n d
I
32
I
34
I
36
I
38
40
144
r~~l
II B
50
100
ROD.
Theorei'icol curve
:....-;,<
Theoreticol curve
RQD*
~
75
50
or~
O
e.
25
25
I
2
t
4
I
6
= I I I I I
8 10 17' 14 16 18 20
T t ~ o r e t i c a l curve
- "~
.-
ROD~
75
d 50
o
e~
50
0
w"
O
n
6 8 I0 12 14 16 18 20
Fig. 15. C o m p a r i s o n
25
2 4
o
I
a NX core
1~3.4~
6 8 I0 12 14 16 18 20
RQD (RQD
et al.,
1967).
145
REFERENCES
1. Fookes P. G. & Denness B. Observational studies on fissure
patterns in Cretaceous sediments of south-east England. Geotech.
19. 493-497 (1969).
2. Trollope D. H. The mechanics of discontinua or elastic
mechanics in rock problems. In Rock Mechanics in Engineering
Practice. (Edited by Stagg K. G. & Zienkiewicz O. C.), Chap.
9. pp. 275-320 (1968).
3. Jaeger J. C. & Cook N. G. W. Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics.
p. 513. Methuen, London (1969).
4. Hock E. & Bray J. W. Rock Slope En~lineeriml. p. 309. Inst. Min.
Mctall. (1974).
5. Piteau D. R. Geological factors significant to the stability of
slopes cut in rock. S. Af Inst. Min. Met., Syrup. Planning Open
Pit Mines, Johannesburg. 33-53 (1970).
6. AtteweU P. B. & Woodman J. P. Stability of discontinuous rock
masses under polyaxial stress systems. In Stability of Rock Slopes.
13th Syrup. Rock Mech. (Edited by Cording E. J.) pp. 665-683.
ASCE, NY. (1971).
7. Hock E., Bray J. W. & Boyd J. M. The stability of a rock slope
containing a wedge resting on two intersecting discontinuities.
Q. J. Engng Geol. 6, 1-55 (1973).
8. Watkins M. D. Terminology for describing the spacing of discontinuities of rock masses. Q. J. Engng Geol. 3, 193-195 (1971).
9. Barton N., Lien R. & Lunde J. Analysis of rock mass quality
and support practice in tunneling, and a guide for estimating
support requirements. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Internal report, 19 June (1974).
10. Skempton A. W., Schuster R. L. & Petley D. J. Joints and fissures
in the London Clay at Wraysbury and Edgware. Geotech. 19,
205-217 (1969).
11. Dcere D. U. Technical description of rock cores for engineering
purposes. Rock Mech. Eng. Geol. 1, 17-22 (1964).
12. Dcere D. U., Hendron A. J., Patton F. D. & Cording E. J. Design
of surface and near surface construction in rock. In Failure and
Breakage of Rock (Edited by Fairhurst C.), pp. 237-302. AIME,
NY. (1967).
13. Terzaghi R. D. Sources of error in joint surveys. Geotech. 15,
287-304 (1965).
14. Mahtab M. A., Boistad D. D. & Kendorski F. S. Analysis of
the Geometry of Fractures in San Manuel Copper Mine, Arizona. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. No.
RI 7715, 24 (1973).
146
APPENDIX A
The Poisson and negative exponential distributions
HHH
HTTH
HT.
(A1)
where P(x)= probability of x occurring, p = probability of a head (or an intact unit), q = 1 - p = probability of a tail (or a unit containing a discontinuity).
The probabilities associated with encountering a certain number of discontinuities in a given length of scanline can be calculated from equation A I given q the
probability of a discontinuity intersecting a unit length
of scanline. The mean and standard deviation of the
binomial distribution are np and x/npq respectively.
However, we are also interested in the distribution
of spacings between successive tails and, by analogy,
the distribution of spacings between discontinuities. In
this case, the probability of each sequence is considered.
Assuming that a tail has just occurred, the sequences
in Table A1 can follow:
147
0.IO~
distribution
Nc~jofi~ e~oon~t~l
O. lO
0.08 I
~0.06
X = O . I/unit length
i, Mean spacing
value= I 0 heads
:~
"~
0.
004
I I
0 1
10
15
o.o~ I-
Meonspecing
value= IOunits
',
O/
0
25
20
0.02 I-
f(x)=Xe-x=
whereh =nunt~ of events/unitlength
Mean spacing=l/X units
\
X
0.08
p= 0.91
~ 0.06
distribution
t
i
5
tO
15
20
Spacing value,x, arbitrary units
25
APPENDIX B
= 1-
accidents follow a Poisson distribution. In the discontinuity context, an apparent clustering of discontinuities
will occur as a natural consequence of the random positions.
(A4)
f(x) = 2e -xx.
(A5)
The parameter 2 in the negative exponential distribution (cf. equation 2) is estimated by counting the
number of discontinuities intersecting a scanline and
then dividing by the scanline length: The estimated
number of discontinuities per metre (2) is given by
n/L,
(B1)
1.0
"""'"""""*20/~r~--"~--
E'~ 0.8
=g
/
~ OA
""'~
~:to%etror bond
-- -- --
x
0
"1
K=I8
I0
15
20
25
30
~20~/Kt =0.42
I
35
-I
40
45
50
Fig. B1. Graph for determining the probability of estimating the discontinuity frequency (2) to within +20% or + 10%
for different sample lengths.
148
e- ;x(~.x)k/k!
(B2)
(B3)
(B4)
GARWOOD [20]
Possible variation of 2L
n
98% confidence
90% confidence
0
1
5
10
15
20
25
30
40
50
0-4.61
0.01-6.64
1.28-13.11
4.13-20.14
7.48-26.74
11.08-33.10
14.85-39.31
18.74-45.40
26.77-57.35
35.03-69.07
0-3
0.05-4.74
1.97-10.51
5.43-16.96
9.25-23.10
13.25-29.06
17.38-34.92
21.59-40.69
30.20-52.07
38.96--63.29
is
k= a2
e-aL(2L)k/k!,
(B5)
k=nt