Implications of groundwater behaviour on the geomechanics

of rock slope stability

J Price SRK Consulting, Australia

Abstract
Groundwater interaction is recognised as one of the key variables influencing slope design and management
and is particularly significant in weaker rock masses. Understanding groundwater and pore pressure
behaviour in rock masses is generally based on accepted theory related to flow through porous granular
media. The presence of discontinuous geological structures within rock masses distorts the accepted
hydraulic behaviour and the profile and aperture variability presents the designer with a complex challenge.
The paper adopts a geotechnical perspective and provides a review of our understanding of the interaction of
groundwater with rock masses including the accepted mechanics of water flow through granular and
fractured media. The discussion considers how this behaviour can be expected to be locally modified and
what implications this may have for slope stability. The discussion references observations as well as
laboratory testing and physical measurements with consideration of the role tortuous laminar flow and
capillarity.

1 Introduction
The focus of this paper is on taking some of the theoretical and conceptualised geotechnical and
hydrogeological aspects of soil and rock relating them to actual geological conditions where non-linear
anisotropic and discontinuous characteristics are commonly encountered. The discussion is especially
focussed on the geotechnical considerations of water flow and pore pressure gradients.
The characteristics of the rock mass dictate whether:
 Interconnected discontinuities are present,
 The rock mass is massive, homogenous and isotropic, or
 The rock mass is a combination of a relatively porous massive media with a superimposed
fracture network.
The above-mentioned geomechanical environments require different conceptualisation to analyse flow. The
former can be represented as impermeable discontinuous rock blocks bounded by a fracture network; the
latter can be hydraulically represented as a combination of a porous continuum with a fracture network. The
dual porosity concept is applicable where the rock block conductivity is of a similar order to that of the
bounding fractures. As the rock matrix conductivity decreases relative to the fractures, a single porosity
model attributed only to secondary permeability becomes increasingly applicable.
Rock slopes comprise a typically discontinuous mass of intersecting fractures and granular media. Porous
media approaches ignore the effects of rock mass defects, and consider flow through intergranular void
spaces, i.e. mainly concerned with primary or effective primary permeability. Discontinuous media
approaches apply known locations and defect dimensions (i.e. secondary permeability) to analyse fluid flow,
and can include or neglect intergranular flow depending upon the relative magnitudes of each permeability
component. Each approach represents the ends of a spectrum of geological conditions to which either model
is applicable to a degree.
The geological complexity of pit slope environments complicates the evaluation of the conditions. In granular
and fractured media, the relationship between flow rate and hydraulic gradient has been shown to be linear

1
during laminar flow, in accordance with Darcy’s law. However, with the increase of frictional losses from the
onset of turbulent flow or flow separation from surface roughness and inertial effects occurring from
aperture variation, non-linear flow laws, e.g. Missbach or Forcheimer need to be considered (Elsworth and
Doe 1986; Indraratna et al. 1994).
Gale (1990) demonstrated that accurate measurement of aperture, particularly residual aperture, is critical
to the reasonable calculation of conductivity and fluid velocity. Despite demonstrating close agreement
between computed and measured inflow rates, he identified that the mean fluid velocity contradicted tracer
testing results, suggesting that at the local or small scale, non-linear behaviour was present.
The following discussion explores some of the key aspects of the mechanical and hydraulic behaviour of rock
masses as well as providing some insight in to the challenges.

2 Groundwater management in open pits

The importance of effective management of water in open pit mining has become increasingly well
recognised as pit slope designs have deepened below the groundwater table and maximum rates of vertical
advance have sought by mine planners, as documented by Stacey and Read (2009) and Beale et al. (2014).
Particular areas of careful evaluation are needed in (meta) sedimentary bulk commodities e.g. iron and coal,
or styles of mineralisation which have led to significant alteration of the rock mass especially in wet tropical
environments e.g. copper porphyries. The significant influences of groundwater in the geotechnical process
are summarised in Table 1 and Table 2. The work flow and evolution over the life of the study clearly shows
the important interaction of groundwater in geotechnical design and management.

Table 1 The slope design process with significant groundwater influences (after Beale et al. 2014,
Chapter 1) – bold text highlights specific relevance to groundwater

Slope design stage Main component Key elements and inputs

Model Geotechnical model informed by Geology – substance and
data collection structure
Rock mass
Hydrogeology
Domain Geotechnical domains Geotechnical model
Common geotechnical behaviour
Potential failure modes
Design Slope geometry – bench, inter Geotechnical domains
ramp and overall slope Regulatory regime
Equipment specification
Mine planning and schedule
Analyses Preliminary analysis – slope Strength
geometry inputs Structure
Groundwater pressure
Final design - optimisation In situ stress
Risk assessment
Implementation Design implementation and Blasting
refinement Dewatering
Depressurisation
Slope monitoring

2
Table 2 Levels of effort by project stage – concept to feasibility (adapted from Stacey and Read 2009
and Beale 2014 (Chapter 1)

Project Status Conceptual Pre-feasibility Feasibility

Stage Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Geological model Regional literature; advanced Mine scale outcrop and core Infill drilling and mapping,
exploration mapping and core logging, enhancement of further enhancement of the
logging; database established; geological database; initial 3D geological database and 3D
initial country rock model geological model model
Structural model Aerial photographs and initial Mine scale outcrop mapping; Trench mapping; infill
(major features) ground proofing targeted oriented drilling; oriented drilling; 3D
initial structural model structural model
Structural model Regional outcrop mapping Mine scale outcrop mapping; Infill trench mapping and
(fabric) targeted oriented drilling; oriented drilling;
database established; initial enhancement of the
stereographic assessment of database; advanced
fabric data; initial structural stereographic assessment of
domains established the fabric data;
confirmation of the
structural domains
Hydrogeological Regional groundwater survey Mine scale airlift, pumping Targeted pumping and airlift
model and packer testing to testing; piezometer
establish initial installation; enhancement
hydrogeological parameters; of the hydrogeological
initial hydrogeological database and 3D model;
database and model initial assessment of
established depressurisation and
dewatering requirements
Intact rock Literature values Index and laboratory testing Targeted drilling and
strength supplemented by index tests on samples selected from detailed sampling and
on core from geological targeted mine scale drilling laboratory testing;
drilling database established; initial enhancement of database;
assessment of lithological detailed assessment of the
domains establishment of
geotechnical units for 3D
geotechnical model
Strength of Literature values Laboratory direct shear Targeted sampling and
defects supplemented by index tests strength from targeted mine laboratory testing;
on core from geological scale drill holes and outcrops; enhancement of database;
drilling database established; detailed assessment and
assessment of defect strength establishment of defect
with initial structural domains strengths within structural
domains
Geotechnical Pertinent regional Assessment and compilation Ongoing assessment and
characterisation information; geotechnical of initial mine scale compilation of new mine
assessment of advanced geotechnical data; scale geotechnical data;
exploration data preparation of initial enhancement of
geotechnical database and 3D geotechnical database and
model 3D model

The importance of groundwater in slope management frequently requires that analysis and decision making
is made by multi-disciplinary teams, which dictates that a common understanding of the rock mass behaviour
from each party is needed, which takes account of frequently different approaches to data collection and

3
analysis but which can present opportunities for short and long term cost saving when conducted to take
advantage of the synergies. The tables demonstrate the recommended work process as well as the level of
development that is suggested to be established during the study phase of the project (and sustained through
detailed design and operations). The residual risk in the slope design reflects the understanding of the mining
environment and level of effort committed to the study. Engagement with stakeholders and the acceptability
of the risk profile is a key element to communicating the intended performance of the slope design.

2 Critical mechanical behaviour

Critical aspects of mechanical behaviour include the following:

2.1 Coupling and effective stress

The theory of hydromechanical coupling in soil and rock is well addressed by authors, represented by Sullivan
(2007) and including Neuzil (2003) and Rutqvist and Stephansson (2003). The phenomena recognises the
influence of change in boundary conditions which result in changes in the physical conditions or properties.
Four different coupling modes have been proposed by Wang (2000) and Rutqvist and Stephansson (2003) in
Table 3.

Table 3 Hydromechanical coupling for soil and rock slopes (Sullivan 2007)

Coupling mode Type Description

1 Direct Solid to fluid – a change in mechanical stress results in a change in fluid
pressure.
2 Direct Fluid to solid – a change in fluid pressure results in a change of rock mass
volume.
3 Indirect Solid to fluid – a change in stress creates a change in hydraulic properties.
4 Indirect Fluid to solid – a change in pore pressure causes a change in the
mechanical properties.

In geotechnical engineering, especially considering pit slope stability, we most often consider incremental,
large-scale deformation which is irrecoverable and results in a changes in the material properties which are
mostly part of the Type 3 and 4 coupling modes.
The theory of effective stress (Equation 1 - Terzaghi, 1923) is the fundamental step in understanding the
engineering behaviour of soil and rock masses.
𝜎 =𝜎 −𝑢 (1)
Effective stress (’) is equivalent to the total normal stress (n) at a point less the pore pressure (u) with 
and u a function of the relevant density and applied load. Weaker materials, such as most soils and some
weathered or altered rocks are generally most influenced by large pore pressures.

2.2 Strength and material constitutive model

For geotechnical materials, strength is often presented using the Mohr-Coulomb failure law which can be
written in terms of effective stress for a point along a failure surface, where  is the shear strength at the
point of interest,  is the angle of internal friction and c the cohesion
𝜏 = (𝜎 − 𝑢) tan 𝜙 + 𝑐 (2)
The strength parameters can be considered in either drained or undrained conditions, dependent upon the
mode of failure being considered: drained strength parameters are considered where pore pressure

4
dissipation is considered possible; undrained parameters considered for example, in soils where rapid loading
occurs which prevents the chance for pore fluid to drain away from the point of application.
The applicable constitutive model when considering material behaviour is decided based upon the expected
post failure response. For weaker materials, the post failure strength changes and the rate of deformation
is usually greater so that steady state or strain softening behaviour is most likely (Sullivan 1993).

2.3 Compressibility

2.3.1 Matrix stiffness

The change in volume of the soil or rock matrix can be considered in terms of elastic and plastic behaviour.
Consolidation theory is particularly applicable to soils, and includes stages of initial elastic followed by
inelastic behaviour (consolidation settlement and creep). In rocks, geological processes have often led to
lithification following exposure to extremes of pressure and temperature creating a corresponding reduction
in the primary porosity and therefore the ability to transmit fluid. The presence of joints and other geological
structures has the tendency to form higher, secondary porosity pathways which can provide alternate alebit
anisotropic transmission pathways.
Deformation of normally consolidated soils or weaker materials is usually modelled in stages of elastic
settlement, consolidation and creep. Consolidation considers the change in volume by the dissipation of
excess pore pressure gradients by flow in granular media, by relating the coefficient of consolidation (cV) to
the Specific Storage (SS) and hydraulic conductivity (K), or the transmissivity (T) and the Storage Coefficient
(S).
𝑐 = = (3)

Transmissivity can be defined as K multiplied by the aquifer thickness b, the Storage Coefficient is the product
of SS and b, and the Specific Storage represents the water released per unit volume per unit drop in head
𝑆 = 𝜌𝑔(𝛼 + 𝑛𝛽) (4)
where, n is defined as the porosity,  is the density of water, g is the acceleration due to gravity with the
compressibility of the rock mass and water defined by  and  respectively.
The influence of previous loading processes, including lithification creates an over-consolidation which leads
to materials appearing stiffer than would otherwise be expected from younger deposits. This influence needs
to be considered especially with weak rocks when considering foundation and pore pressure dissipation.

2.3.2 Fracture stiffness

Fracture stiffness parameters are crucial for controlling the coupled stress:flow behaviour of a fracture and
is often significantly less than the matrix. Several authors have studied the relationship between stress and
conductivity, including Carlsson et al. (1990) and Indraratna et al. (1999a,b).
Carlsson et al. (1990) tested sandstone and coal samples and found that there is a marked reduction of
conductivity for rocks with a lower initial permeability value. Carlsson et al. (1990) did not compare rock type
Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) or Young’s modulus with initial conductivity, or conductivity rate of
change. The elastic properties of the different rock types have a fundamental impact on the rate of change
of conductivity. Aperture closure was directly related to the elastic properties of the rock substance and the
fractures. Brace (1980) considered fracture orientation, and concluded that fractures parallel to the
maximum principal stress would tend to dilate, whereas perpendicular fractures tended to close as loads
increased.
Fracture deformation occurs from shear or normal deformation of the fracture walls. Shear test results
reported by Makurat et al. (1990) indicated that conductivity increases of up to two orders of magnitude
could occur, but as deformation increased, conductivity should decrease because of the formation of gouge

5
material blocking the flow paths. Beyond an upper threshold normal stress, the aperture does not reduce
any further, i.e. after achieving the residual aperture (Indraratna et al. 1999a; Cook et al., 1990). Residual
aperture depends on initial aperture as well as rock type and roughness profile.
Fracture deformation behaviour is related to aperture through elastic theory using their normal and shear
stiffness (Kn, Ks) as explained by Brady & Brown (1994) and presented in Equation 5 and Equation 6. The
contact force (normal or shear) is related to the corresponding displacement by a linear relationship:
𝐹 =𝐾 𝛿 (5)
𝐹 =𝐾𝛿 (6)
where F represents the force,  is the displacement, and the subscripts s or n represent shear or normal
orientations.
Chen et al. (1989) considered idealised fractures when assessing the impact of contact area on flow
behaviour. They studied flow through an element of propped parallel plate used a boundary element with a
smooth parallel plate model including several irregular contact areas of known area. They compared
computed results with those recorded in laboratory experiments as well as the predicted impact using the
Walsh-Maxwell approach. If the contact area was included with irregular asperities, as would be expected
for naturally rough surfaces, then the Walsh-Maxwell approach under predicted the fracture flow by as much
as 30%. The equivalent aspect ratio of the contact area had to be included to make the analytical results
agree with laboratory testing. This makes the correlation of joint behaviour with flow much for difficult in
situ than in the laboratory.
The mechanical change in fracture (normal) aperture can be related to normal fracture stiffness (Kn) and
change in applied normal stress (n). This should be written in terms of effective stress since the mechanical
reaction of a water filled fracture will be mitigated by the fluid mixture with a pore pressure p, particularly
where p ≈ n (Equation 7):
∆ ′ ∆
𝛿 = = [7]

3 Typical hydraulic factors influencing behaviour

3.1 Permeability
Rock mass conductivity often appears in discussions on groundwater flow and is of fundamental importance
in rock mechanics problems (Equation 8). Intrinsic permeability (k) defines the resistance to flow under a
hydraulic gradient. The permeability is more correctly known as the ‘intrinsic permeability’ and is
independent of the properties of the fluid, having units of (m2). Hydraulic conductivity (K) relates the intrinsic
permeability to fluid dynamic viscosity () and is a function of both permeant properties (i.e. water) and pore
geometry:

𝐾= = (8)

Water flow occurs in rocks through a combination of intergranular pores, fissures and interconnected
fractures. Conductivity is recognised to often be represented by a range of values often spread across several
orders of magnitude (Table 4). Rock mass conductivity (Km) is therefore the sum of the matrix or primary
conductivity (K) and the fracture or secondary conductivity (Kf) – Equation 9. Both flow mechanisms occur in
most rocks but it is commonly accepted that due to the low primary porosity of many rocks, fracture flow is
often the dominant mechanism:
𝐾 = 𝐾+𝐾 (9)
Primary permeability is directly related to the material porosity which varies depending upon factors such as
rock type, geological history, and in-situ stress conditions. Porosity can vary between <1% for shales and

6
Table 4 Typical values of primary and secondary hydraulic conductivity from laboratory and field tests
(after Isherwood 1979)

Material type Hydraulic conductivity (m/s)

10-1 10-2 10-3 10-4 10-5 10-6 10-7 10-8 10-9 10-10 10-11
V high High Moderate Low V Low
Soil Gravel Sands Fine sands, silts, glacial till Homogenous clays
Shale
Sandstone
Limestone
and dolomite
Basalt
Volcanics
Metamorphics
Intrusives

granites to up to 50% for some clays and sandstones. Secondary permeability is a function of the fracture
aperture geometry and connectivity.
A variation in hydraulic conductivity for different rock types of several orders of magnitude is common. This
variation is a function of the size of the sample in relation to the scale of the variability of the rock.
Consideration of Equation 6 indicates that in cases where the primary permeability is about two orders of
magnitude less than the secondary permeability, the primary permeability is insignificant for most practical
engineering purposes.
The head driving water flow is calculated from Bernoulli’s equation. In seepage problems where the seepage
velocity is slow, the effect of kinematic head can often be ignored (i.e. assumed that V2/2g  0). Thus, total
head is defined as the sum of pressure head and elevation head above a datum (Equation 10):
ℎ= +𝑧 (10)

where h is total head (m), up = pore pressure (kPa), f = unit weight of fluid (kN/m3) and z is elevation above
datum (m).

3.2 Intergranular flow

Under conditions commonly encountered in engineering projects intergranular, laminar flow of water can be
analysed using Darcy’s Law (Equation 11):

𝑄 = 𝐾𝐴 (11)

where, Q = flow rate (m3s-1), K = hydraulic conductivity (ms-1), A = cross sectional area of flow (m2) and h =
change in head measured over a horizontal distance L.
Darcy’s Law should be recognised as a fundamental tool for the analysis of steady state, laminar flow,
although it should be remembered that it provides an average or equivalent seepage linear velocity or flow
rate since it does not consider that actual percolation path length. As such the estimated values can be scale-
dependent and accommodate local non-linear characteristics.

7
3.3 Fracture flow
Lee & Farmer (1993) describe the evolution of fracture flow study and the application of Darcy’s law from
initial work by Romm (1966) and Lomize (1951). The former used two parallel glass plates with apertures as
small as 0.2 mm, with Romm (1966) concluding the formula was applicable to apertures as fine as 0.2 m.
The law is unsuitable for tight rough defects and for rough defects under high normal stress (Lee et al, 1993;
Witherspoon et al. 1980). Lomize (1951) used marble and quartzite samples to demonstrate the cubic law
validity for open fractures at low stresses, but with a departure at small apertures. Brown (1987) observed
that the accuracy of cubic law predictions diminished when fracture surfaces became close, with flows about
50% of that predicted by cubic law theory. Louis (1968) and Brown (1987) found the Reynolds equation
applicable in calculating flow, a fact confirmed theoretically by Zimmerman & Bodvarsson (1996). Iwai (1976)
and Witherspoon et al. (1980) considered the law valid for natural rough uneven and open discontinuities as
narrow as 4 m. Witherspoon even developed Darcy’s Law to include a term related to the fracture aperture
discussed. It is clear that fracture surface roughness can significantly effect the linearity of flow, but
nonetheless, laminar and viscous flow is often approximated to flow between smooth parallel plates. In such
cases, the conductivity of a single fracture is given by the ‘cubic law’ (Equation 12):

𝐾 = (12)
where Kf = fracture conductivity (ms-1), e = hydraulic aperture (m), g = acceleration due to gravity (ms-2), v =
kinematic viscosity (m2s-1) – 1.01 x 10-6 for pure water at 20C – and b is the spacing between fractures (m).
Equation 9 can then be re-written for an idealised case where regular spaced fractures intersect a rock mass.
If the representative fracture aperture has a mean spacing is b then Equation 13 can be proposed.
𝐾 =𝐾+ 𝐾 (13)
The calculation of an equivalent rock mass conductivity representing the effect of primary and secondary
porosity is a crucial but complex problem. The use of the cubic law is valid for most engineering calculations
except where fractures are significantly rough or pressure gradients are large (Figure 1). In these
circumstances laminar flow behaviour can be replaced by transitional or turbulent flows. Early investigations
applied concepts of pipe hydraulics to fracture flow applying the pressure drop coefficient and the Reynolds
number (Louis, 1968).

8
 10-3

10-4
Aperture, e (m)

10-5

‘Cubic law’ prediction

Experimental results
10-6
10-14 10-13 10-12 10-11 10-10 10-09 10-08 10-07

Flow rate per unit pressure gradient (m4/ Pa s)

Figure 1 Sample plot showing the range of validity of the ‘cubic law’ as presented by Long (1996) after
work by Cook et al. (1990)

The classical assumptions explain the expected behaviour under idealised conditions and at a particular scale,
but frequently we have to consider the situation where local departures from expected behaviour need to
be understood and incorporated in to our designs e.g. joint set characteristics, unsaturated flow and capillary
effects.

4 Small scale characteristics

For hydrogeological interpretation over the medium or large scale, it should be remembered that there
remains the potential for variability and departures from the typical hydraulic assumptions. An
understanding of these characteristics help understand behaviour that could otherwise be considered as
anomalous. The intersection of structures and their potential to conduct water is complicated by the
variability in aperture. The capacity of a fracture to carry significant volumes of water means nonetheless
that the characteristics need to be carefully considered from a perspective of project risk.

4.1 Persistence and spacing

The spatial representation of rock fabric can be measured after the fact using accepted manual or digital
techniques. This data can be analysed statistically and used to provide inputs for the generation of synthetic
fracture models. Prior to excavation, the sampling methods available to practitioners do not allow objective
characterisation of joint properties, except at the small scale.
It has been shown joint persistence can be modelled statistically using different distributions e.g. negative
exponential or log-normal (Priest and Hudson, 1981). The shape of the fracture is also unknown but often
approximated to a circle or at least an ellipse. The true spacing between joints within a set can also typically
be modelled using a negative exponential for log normal distribution. Joint intensity is the number of joints
per unit length or volume.

9
4.2 Aperture
Indraratna et al. (1999b) and Zimmerman & Bodvarsson (1996) stress the role of aperture variation in flow
behaviour, where in reality the aperture is rarely uniform, contrary to an assumption of the parallel plate
law. They have shown it is possible to account for variation in mechanical aperture by using the log-normal
mean hydraulic aperture in calculations based upon parallel plate theory. This is in keeping with the
definitions described by Tsang (1984) in relation to the ‘cubic law’ and in testing by Price (2005) – Figure 2.
200 1
100 1

160 0.8 80 0.8

JP05 sample data: JP08 sample data:
Datapoints: 1333 Datapoints: 1371
Log normal average = 0.262mm Log normal average = 1.748mm
Std dev = 0.220 (86% of mean) Std dev = 0.638 (37 % of mean)
Min = 0.0006mm

Cumulative Frequency

Cumulative Frequency
Min = < 0.577 mm
120 Max = 2.1872mm 0.6 60 Max = 5.887 mm 0.6
Aperture (mm) Aperture (mm)
Frequency

Frequency
Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Frequency

80 0.4 40 0.4

40 0.2 20 0.2

0 0 0 0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4 4.4 4.8 5.2 5.6 6
Aperture (mm)
Aperture (mm)

Figure 2 Aperture scan summaries for rock fractures in terms of aperture frequency and cumulative
frequency

Variable aperture models have been developed by Neuzil & Tracy (1981) and Tsang (1984), among others
that consider flow through small consecutive parallel plate elements. In these cases the element apertures
are related by an aperture function. Where changes in aperture from element to element are small,
Zimmerman & Bodvarrson (1996) indicate that the ‘cubic law’ generally provides an acceptable solution.
Detailed aperture topology provides a means of checking the validity of this approach.
Aperture distributions have been predicted from several laboratory studies and mathematical models, and
aperture distribution is well predicted if a log normal distribution is used (Hakami et al. 1990; Zimmerman &
Bodvarson 1996). More recently, aperture and surface characterisation were conducted by the author (Price
2005) using a computer controlled laser scanner. Instrument optimisation enabled scans to be automatically
recorded at 0.1 mm intervals in the x-y plane (i.e. parallel to the fracture plane) to a vertical (z plane) precision
of ~0.008 mm.

4.3 Roughness

4.3.1 Measurement
In geomechanics, roughness is referenced to standard 100 mm long profiles (ISRM, 1978) by the Joint
Roughness Coefficient (JRC). In this study, rock samples were selected to be 100 mm long so that the ‘scale
effect’ did not complicate the interpretation. Longer wavelength roughness (relative to fracture length)
impacts upon water flow (Barton, Bandis & Bakhtar 1985). Fracture roughness tends to have a corresponding
smaller impact on less viscous fluids e.g. air (Di Biagio 1973).

10
Measurements of surface roughness can capture the variation in asperity amplitude and can be used to
estimate JRC of a profile (Figure 3, Indraratna et al. 2002b, Price 2005). The variable nature of roughness
means that roughness is not a unique value but can be defined by a single or multi-modal range, which has
the controlling influence on behaviour. The direction of measurement and the potential for anisotropy need
to be considered in case there is a connection to geotechnical performance e.g. shear strength.

50 1

JP08 roughness
Cumulative frequency

40 0.8

Cumulative frequency
30 0.6
Frequency

20 0.4

10 0.2

0 0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
JRC
Figure 3 Illustration of JRC assessment for a fracture surface measured with 10 equally spaced profiles of
varying individual roughness

As an example, a comparison of the scanning data for different profiles and using different roughness
evaluation methods often can indicate a range of interpreted average JRC values of 9 to 12 (Table 5).

Table 5 Comparison of JRC estimation methods

Method JRC average

Regression - Milne 12
Chord Angle - Seidel and Haberfield 9
Fourier fit – Price 9
Barton - simplified 11

This conclusion should not be a surprise if actual fracture topology is considered (Figure 4). Furthermore, to
surfaces of varying roughness amplitude will generate an elemental distribution of variable fracture aperture
at a particular scale, contrary to the simplified assumption of fracture smoothness, as illustrated by the upper
plot of Figure 4.

11
 8

0.5

0.25

0.1875

0.125

0.0625

0.03125

Figure 4 Sample JP08 wireframe and aperture contour plot

4.3.2 Strength
Literature review indicates that waviness (i.e. large scale roughness) can be predominantly attributed to
dilation and the observed increase in shear strength above the laboratory residual friction angle. Attempts
have been to define the large-scale wavelength e.g. equal to at least 2% of the observed failure surface
(McMahon 1985), to assist us in measuring the expected shear strength.
The shear strength of a surface is related to the applied normal stress, the friction angle of the material and
the roughness angle as originally suggested by Patton (1966) in Equation 14 where shear is purely frictional:
 = n tan(ult + i) (14)
where, i = roughness angle i.e. the angle between mean dip angle of the discontinuity and the flattest dipping
section of the required wavelength, n = normal stress acting on the discontinuity, and ult = ultimate or
residual friction angle. Using the empirical approach from Barton and Choubey (1977) the shear strength can
be estimated using the estimated JRC and the joint wall compressive strength (JCS):

𝜏 = 𝜎 𝑡𝑎𝑛 𝐽𝑅𝐶 𝑙𝑜𝑔 +𝜙 (15)

The Barton and Choubey (1977) relationship shows for clean strong joints, the potential for an increase in
available shear resistance under low confining stresses, as well as a greater shear strength for surfaces with
a higher JRC. For infilled joints, the relevance of roughness depends on the thickness and the infill strength.

4.3.3 Linear Flow

It has already been mentioned how the cubic law can lose validity at large pressure gradients or over very
rough surfaces (i.e. non laminar flow), or where fractures are particularly tight (capillarity). In 2-D, increases
in roughness reduce the assumption of plate parallel-ism. In the third dimension, this results in further
increases flow path tortuosity in the fracture plane. Laboratory experiments (Witherspoon et al. 1980; Cook
et al. 1990) showed that the back-calculated hydraulic aperture is less than the actual mechanical aperture
under saturated conditions along a rough surface or in small aperture fractures. This discrepancy increases
with increasing roughness under laminar flow conditions. Barton, Bandis & Bakhtar (1985) developed an

12
empirical relationship (Equation 16) relating the hydraulic aperture eh, mechanical aperture e and the JRC for
the condition em  eh, apertures are measured in m:

𝑒 = . (16)

This equation is based upon laboratory data and accounts empirically for non-parallel flow across a rough
surface. The relationship of JRC to fracture roughness as described by the standard profiles proposed by
ISRM (1978) providing a useful link hydraulic and geotechnical behaviour. The hydraulic impact of roughness
on flow can be considered using the Poiseuille’s and Darcy’s laws as described below in Equation 17:

𝑄= (17)

Fracture roughness promotes frictional losses and reduces the flow rate of groundwater seepage. By
combining the parallel plate equation for intrinsic permeability and the Barton, Bandis & Bakhtar (1985)
expression, the following equation can be developed in terms of mechanical aperture and JRC:

𝑘= (18)
100

80
Hydraulic aperture, eh (m)

60

40 em eh for low JRC

eh
emfor higher JRC
20

0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Joint roughness coefficient (JRC)
Figure 5 Relationship between hydraulic aperture (eh) and joint roughness coefficient (JRC) for
hypothetical fracture with mechanical aperture (em) of 100m

As illustrated in Figure 5, surface roughness increasingly impacts upon the continuity and thickness of the
fluid boundary layer at the fracture wall, leading to increased flow path tortuosity and the development of
localised turbulence. This behaviour causes the discrepancy between the actual or ‘mechanical’ aperture of
a fracture and the hydraulic aperture that would be back-calculated from Poiseuille’s law, when the hydraulic
gradient and the flow rate are known. This characteristic is demonstrated by the relationship between
hydraulic aperture (eh), mechanical aperture (em) and JRC as proposed by Barton, Bandis & Bakhtar (1985).
The relationship in Equation 18 is empirical and aperture measurements are in microns and is valid for eh 
em. In practice, smooth fracture JRC (i.e. low roughness) can often be approximated by eh = em.

13
Figure 6 Graph showing relationship between mechanical aperture ( em) and intrinsic permeability (k) for
different fracture roughness (JRC)

Figure 6 also illustrates the effect of increased roughness by the reduction in intrinsic permeability (k). The
permeability (parallel plate model) calculated using the mechanical aperture (em) for the condition em = eh is
compared with the permeability calculated using the corresponding eh from Equation 18. The graph shows
roughness impacts more severely on k for small aperture defects by more than 4 orders of magnitude.

4.3.4 Scalability
The scalability of fracture roughness is recognised, and correlations have been developed to the 100 mm
reference length. Scale was studied by Barton & Bandis (1980) leading to an expression (Equation 19) that
related the original 100 mm JRC0 profile to that of a profile length L.
.
= (19)

The relationship shows that the effective roughness of a surface reduces as the profile length increases, until
the surface is effectively smooth once the joint exceeds 25 m. This relationship occurs because as profile
length extends it is the larger scale waviness that has a predominant effect on the dilatant behaviour of the
material (often coupled with an increase in the normal stress applied to the surface). The mechanical
significance of this is that higher persistence structures can be identified discretely within analyses.
Hydraulically this means however, that the hydraulic aperture needs to be carefully considered at the scale
at which measurement was made. The smallest pore or pore throat along a flow path will continue to control
the flow that can be achieved, and would not be altered despite the relative roughness decreasing to JRCL.

14
4.4 Non-linear flow
The fracture hydraulic response to changes in pressure gradient has been well documented (Louis 1969;
Elsworth & Doe 1986; Lee & Farmer 1993). The test shows a clear reduction in calculated aperture or flow
with increased pressure gradient as well as increasing confining stress.
0.1

0.08
Hydraulic aperture eh (mm)

0.06

0.04 Fracture normal stress

0.5 MPa
2.0 MPa
3.0 MPa
4.0 MPa
0.02
5.0 MPa
6.0 MPa

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Water pressure drop pW (kPa)
Figure 7 Single-phase flow test results over a range of confining conditions showing a plot of (back-
calculated) hydraulic aperture and water phase pressure drop (Price 2005)

The expected laminar to turbulent flow behaviour can be clearly demonstrated in test results (Price, 2005).
The single-phase tests record linear and non-linear flow conditions (Figure 7 and Figure 8). For a specific
confining stress, back-calculation of fracture aperture using these results shows a near constant aperture
occurring over the range of linear flow conditions that decreases with the onset of turbulence. When the
maximum aperture is plotted for a suite of tests over a range of confining stresses, a gradual reduction in the
back-calculated aperture is observed.
This study of fracture normal stress versus flow behaviour confirms established characteristics (Indraratna &
Ranjith 1999b; Price, 2005). A plot of flow rate versus confining water inlet pressure (Figure 8) shows a
gradual reduction in flow as fracture normal stress (i.e. confining stress) increases. With increased stress,
the proportion of fracture contact area between the surfaces rises until the residual aperture is attained.
This is signalled by a near non-reducible flow rate as shown in Figure 8 beyond a confining stress of 3 MPa to
4 MPa.
When flow conditions are not linear, an alternative law is needed to perform engineering analyses. There
are two particular approaches to calculate the flow behaviour under these conditions. The transition
between linear and fully non-linear flow was well described by the Forcheimer’s Law (Indraratna, Rambanda
& Singh 1994 – Equation 20):
∇ϕ = 𝑎 𝑈 + 𝑏 𝑈 (20)
where  is the hydraulic gradient, U is the average velocity and aF and bF are linear and non-linear constants.
The Missbach Equation (Equation 21) is an alternative mathematical relationship for non-linear flow that has
been more widely used in the analysis of pumping test data (Elsworth & Doe 1986; Louis & Maini 1972):
𝑈 = −𝐾∇𝜙 (21)

15
where, K is hydraulic conductivity and n is 0.5 for turbulent and 1 for laminar flow.

160

n 0.5 MPa
n 2.0 MPa
n 3.0 MPa
120 n 4.0 MPa
n 5.0 MPa
Water flow rate (QW) m3s-1

n 6.0 MPa
Residual
aperture
80 onset

40

0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Water inlet pressure (pW) kPa
Figure 8 Impact of fracture normal stress and pressure drop on single-phase flow behaviour for test
sample. Note the onset of residual aperture when normal stress exceeds 3 to 4MPa

4.5 Capillarity
In unsaturated, low-flow or low pressure environments, where capillary flow is the dominant mechanism,
water percolates between the fracture surfaces, driven in the form of dendritic fingers by the interaction of
gravitational and capillary pressures (Nichol & Glass 1994). Water percolates between fracture surfaces,
driven in fingers by gravity, surface tension and capillary pressures, where capillary flow dominates. This
mechanism is different to the laminar viscous flow concept discussed earlier. Capillarity is increasingly
significant for smaller aperture fractures, given the established inverse relationship shown in Equation 22.
Capillary pressure (pC) results in a curved ‘interface’ related to surface tension (TS) and the meniscus
curvature at the air-water interface, following Pruess & Tsang (1990).

𝑝 = (𝑇 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃) − (22)

Assuming conservatively, that the water is pure and temperature constant, surface tension remains
unchanged (72.75 mN/m at 20C, Fredlund & Rahardjo 1993). The terms r1 and r2 are the radii of curvature
of the meniscus, measured perpendicular and parallel to the fracture plane, respectively. Assuming the
contact angle  to be zero, r1 = e/2 and r2 is very large, the above equation simplifies further:
𝑝 = (2𝑇 )/𝑒 (23)
Equation 23 shows that capillary pressure is increasingly important for narrow fractures, especially where
pressures drops are relatively small. The capillary pressure defines the entry pressure above which imbibition
of a phase can occur in an unsaturated medium. If three fluid phases are present, the lower TS value
determines the displacement preference in a situation where phase pressure gradients are increasing. The
potential for influence of capillarity on flow through voids and fractures is illustrated in Table 6.

16
The results demonstrate some interesting outcomes (Table 6): they confirm that capillary effects are more
significant for fine grained and particularly clayey soils; for a sub-micron opening, pore accessibility requires
a pressure drop of more than 15 m head.

Table 6 Comparsion of threshold capillary pressure controlling void access

Material Mechanical Particle size Capillary access

aperture (m) (mm) pressure (kPa)
Fracture 0.01 14,550
0.1 1,455
1 146
10 15
100 2
1000 <1
Clay < 0.002 73
Silt 0.02 7
Fine sand 0.2 1
Coarse sand 2 <1
Gravel >2 <1

It is interesting to remember that particularly for intergranular flow, the pore throat is the smallest opening
through which fluid is required to pass and will, dependent upon grain packing, be much less than the size of
the particle resulting in high capillary pressures that need to be overcome. When looking at small scale flow
in rough fractures or at fractures edges, the same mechanism will play a role which will tend to restrict flow
and develop non-linear (i.e. tortuous) flow. This behaviour, of course exerts a strong influence when voids
are being re-wetted by water or a more viscous fluid.
Where a fluid is percolating in an inclined fracture (), access to the adjacent fracture element can occur if
the weight of the saturated fluid column in the fracture (h) exceeds threshold capillary pressure of that
fracture element, hence,
𝛾ℎ 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛽 = 2𝑇 /𝑒 (24)
When capillarity is significant, flow would be by gradual percolation and pore invasion depending upon the
interaction of gravitational and capillary forces.

5 Field scale conditions

Fracture connectivity relationships indicate that often there are a relatively small number of fractures of high
persistence or continuity within most rock masses but, instead a larger number of shorter length fractures
tends to connect to form a network. Connectivity within a field-scale network is a function of fracture
aperture, fracture connectivity and fracture spacing or intensity.

5.1 Aperture
The sensitivity of fracture conductivity to aperture and fracture frequency is well illustrated in Figure 9,
confirming that:

17
  One order of magnitude change in aperture size is equivalent to three orders of magnitude in
hydraulic conductivity, and
 One order of magnitude of change in joint spacing is theoretically equivalent to a change of one
order of magnitude of hydraulic conductivity.
Joint aperture e (m)
0.00001 0.0001 0.001
1.E-01

1.E-02
Fracture hydraulic conductivity K f (m/s)

1.E-03

1.E-04

1.E-05

1.E-06

1.E-07
1 joint per m

10 joints per m
1.E-08
100 joints per m
1.E-09

1.E-10

Figure 9 Influence of joint aperture (e ) and joint spacing on hydraulic conductivity (Kf ) in the direction
of a set of smooth joints (after Hoek and Bray 1981)

5.2 Fracture Continuity

Fracture continuity or persistence is something that can only be effectively measured in outcrop (rather than
in boreholes) and requires observation of a significant number of fractures to provide confidence that the
upper limit of distribution which is truncated in the outcrop can be estimated. Continuity is often assumed
by authors to have a log normal or exponential distribution. The geological mode of formation or genus of
the fracture often gives an indication of the expected continuity (Figure 10).

Figure 10 Fracture continuity classified by common geological structures (Palmstrom 2001)

18
In general terms, the most continuous structures are typically faults, with shears forming an intermediate
grouping, and cracks or microcracks typically forming a less continuous set. Joints, bedding planes and
foliation can occur within a range of intermediate to most continuous.

5.3 Fracture spacing and intensity

The quality of discontinuity spacing measurement data depends strongly on the rock mass conditions and
sample line or plane orientation: ideal conditions for spacing are in blocky rock masses with moderate relief,
with structure dominated by a few approximately orthogonal discontinuity sets.
In massive rock mass with few fractures, or in conditions where fracturing is non-systematic or joint sets are
unfavourably oriented with respect to bench face window maps, then spacing data may be difficult to collect,
or highly randomized and dependent on sampling location (Figure 11). Measurements made in outcrops and
boreholes are always subject to sources of bias and uncertainty that should be at least qualitatively
accounted for.

Figure 11 Randomness in spacing measurement (Reproduced from Priest, 1993)

Fracture intensity is a measure of fracture frequency used in the generation and validation of statistical
discrete fracture network models (Dershowitz and Herda 1992) (Table 7).
Table 7 Pij system of fracture frequency measurement for fracture network investigations

Dimension of feature
0 1 2 3
0
P00 Length
Point
0
measure
Number of
fractures
-1 0
P10 Length P11 Length Linear
Number of measure
Dimension of sampling region

1 fractures per Length of (borehole

unit length fracture traces or
( linear intensity ) per unit length scanline)
-2 -1 0
P20 Length P21 Length P22 Length
Number of trace Length of Areal
centres per unit fracture trace Area of fractures measure
2
area ( areal per unit area of per unit area of (Window
density ) sampling plane sampling plane map)
( areal intensity )
-3 -1 0
P30 Length P32 Length P33 Length
Number of Area of fractures
fracture centres per unit volume Volume of Volumetric
3
per unit volume ( volumetric fractures per measure
( volumetric intensity ) unit volume
density )
Density Intensity Porosity

19
Figure 12 shows histograms of linear intensity P10 derived from the in-window scanline mapping, along with
a calculated overall discontinuity spacing derived from taking the inverse of the P10 data for each digital
window. The data compares well to log normal and exponential distributions as we often see.

Figure 12 Overall distribution of scanline spacing measurements and calculated horizontal scanlines (P 10)

This figure reinforces the importance of defect spacing on potential hydraulic behaviour of rock masses
although it is the interconnected-ness of conducting fractures that is important from a perspective of
groundwater control. The available porosity (intergranular or fracture controlled), P33, is the factor that is of
greatest significance when considering groundwater and pore pressure control.

6. Pore pressure management

The foregoing discussion has highlighted the sensitivity of flow to the driving hydraulic gradient in order to
overcome the resisting capillary pressure which enable voids to be recharged and for seepage to occur.
Aggressive mine schedules can endanger satisfactory slope performance if the vertical advance rate exceeds
the capacity of the rock mass to drain or depressurise naturally. In these cases, slope depressurisation can
often be created by the installation of lateral or (sub-) horizontal drains. These conditions are often most
prevalent in weak, weathered or altered rocks, or where there are water bearing structures.
The need for, or effectiveness, of these measures is a function of the hydraulic conductivity of the rock mass,
the strength of the rock mass and the location of the piezometric surface which is often is not clear when
mining commences. Drain holes often present a flexible and efficient method to maintain a slope behaviour
in accordance with the design criteria.

6.1 Depressurisation sensitivity model

For the next part of the paper, the 3D rock mass response to depressurization is studied in terms of the effect
of transient seepage on slope stability. The aim of the analysis is to demonstrate how simple repeatable
forms of analysis can be used to allow rapid assessment of any slope stability implications related to the
degree of depressurization. The results can then be used to calibrate field trials or evaluate slope

20
rehabilitation options. For this exercise, a 3D FEFLOW (WASY, 2009) model has been used to provide pore
pressure output that has been analysed using accepted 2D limit equilibrium analyses (Rocscience 2002).
The analyses considered a 150 m high, 50° slope and evaluated the transient pore pressure in a simple 3D
model 200 m wide and made of a rock mass comprising a single hydraulic conductivity. The seepage model
was created with a uniform and homogenous hydraulic conductivity, selected to represent the bulk
conductivity of a weathered or altered rock mass i.e. the effect of geological structure model implicitly as a
continuum. The model was run for 3 conductivity cases to represent the common range of moderate to low
permeability rock mass conditions: values of 1 x 10-5, 1 x 10-7 and 1 x 10-9 ms-1. The model is shown in
Figure 13.

Figure 13 Conceptual depressurisation model in plan and section showing cross section planes and with
drain collar configuration in oblique view

Horizontal drains modelled as 100 mm diameter and 100 m long were positioned with the centres gridded
at 25 m, 50 m and 100 m spacing, with rows either orthogonal or offset. The following are the spacing
combinations used (vertical to lateral): 100 m by 100 m; 50 m by 50 m; 25 m by 25 m; 50 m by 25 m; and 25
m by 50 m. The pore pressures developed at critical time steps were extracted as vertical slices and analysed
using limit equilibrium stability models for an assumed set of material properties. The results gave a factor
of safety (FoS) for a slice at a particular time for a rock mass of a particular conductivity.

6.2 Results
The pore pressure distribution within vertical planes through the model varies with the relative location of
horizontal drains. The profiles for 3 such locations are shown in Figure 14: plots (a) to (c) show the change
in FoS with time for K = 1 x 10-7 m/s due to different drain spacing, with lateral offsets of 50 m, 37.5 m and
25 m from the drain; plots (d) to (f) show the influence of permeability on depressurisation pattern at 365
days.
The FoS results for 1 x 10-7 ms-1 (the mid-zone of the cases analysed) have been picked since they are typical
of the conditions encountered in many weathered rocks or Saprolite – Figure 14 (a) to (c). The analyses show
that where material strength is low, stable conditions (FoS > 1) can take an impractically long time if indeed
it can occur at all, unless assisted by depressurisation measures. The depressurisation effect has a
disproportionate impact on stability over time – very high initial rate of change followed by a tailing off.
For low to moderate permeability rocks and soils, the progressive reduction in the hydraulic gradient and the
capillarity of the voids are the reasons for this observation. The fact that drainage, or partial; drainage has
been achieved is important, since to re-wet the rock mass high hydraulic gradients will need to be reimposed,
which may not be possible if site surface water management measures are not well designed.

21
Figure 14 Change in FoS with time for offset slices (5, 7, 9) at (a) 50 m, (b) 37.5 m, (c) 25 m from the drain
axis; and change in FoS with offset from drain measured at 365 days for K of (d) 1x10 -5,
(e ) 1 x 10-7 and (f) 1 x 10-9 ms-1

The depressurisation effect is also enhanced by increasing the intensity of drain spacing, although the results
show that the positive impact of increasing intensity is more sensitive to reductions in the vertical spacing
than laterally.
The lateral influence of depressurisation induced by drain holes is also interesting to observe: he maximum
influence is achieved under the maximum hydraulic gradient – corresponding to the highest elevation of the

22
piezometric surface (before drains were installed) and lowest head, typically atmospheric pressure at the
interface of the drain and the rock mass.
Considering the zone of influence that is expected to develop around a well, for a horizontal drain we see the
same problem but with the hydraulic gradient applied orthogonally i.e. perpendicular to the axial plane of
the drain rather than perpendicular to the well head. For granular media the assumed zone of influence of
a well is 3-D parabolic surface. For a horizontal drain this form becomes vertically compressed initially with
a limited zone of desaturation forming above the drain, as the seepage is concentrated through the zone of
highest hydraulic gradient; in time, the gradient will reduce as a function of time and material permeability
until an equilibrium is reached between the gradient and the capillary constraints of the rockmass.
When the influence of permeability is considered for the same time step, further interesting behaviour is
indicated (Figure 14 c, d and e). In these figures the graphs show effectively a horizontal slice through the
model in the plane of the drains. For each plot, a different conductivity value is considered – representing a
transition of hydraulic performance from moderately well-draining to very poor-draining. Each data point
represents the FoS for that conductivity model at a 365 day time step measured laterally at an offset from
the drain.
The critical points are:
 At high to moderately high conductivity values (1 x 10-5 ms-1), more effective improvement in slice
FoS can be achieved with relatively coarse drain spacing, with the model showing that typical
bench scale FoS design criteria have been achieved with little intervention.
 At low conductivity values (1 x 10-7 ms-1) only limited zones of the slope would achieve the same
bench scale criteria and it would be expected that extensive slumping would occur. This poor
behaviour could be mitigated by decreasing the drainhole spacing, although sensitivity to lateral
and vertical spacing would provide an opportunity to optimise the time and cost of the program.
 At very low conductivity values (1 x 10-9 ms-1), the model simply shows that significant time
periods could be required to achieve the range of likely acceptable FoS, although in this case the
nature of the geological conditions compared to the model assumptions need to be carefully
checked e.g. an extremely low primary permeability shale could contain secondary permeability
controlled by foliation which upon exposure to stress relief in a pit wall could result in a
significantly more permeable material than initially assumed; as well as anisotropy, compositional
variability can also lead to preferential flow paths developing in materials which have responded
differently to alteration or weathering; the rock mass strength may be strong enough that this
failure mode is not a controlling factor.

7. Conclusion
The key focus of this paper has been to review the large scale and accepted rules that govern the performance
of rock masses containing water. Amongst the established theory, it is important to understand the role of
small scale characteristics on the larger scale behaviour – local variability should be anticipated and will not
necessarily be aligned with expected large scale or conventional assumptions. Geological media contains
anisotropies in terms of composition and joint fabrics which will potentially alter the way that slopes behave.
Geotechnical problems usually impact in areas where the worst conditions or properties are encountered
rather than at average or upper quartile intervals. For this reason, it is important to take steps to increase
confidence in geotechnical data so that the geotechnical model can be optimised. This includes taking
opportunities for ongoing data collection and testing design assumptions against actual field behaviour so
that likelihood, variability and area of influence can be best anticipated or managed.
The analyses show that rate of change of FoS with time and depressurisation measures confirm that timely
intervention results in the most effective control of problem behaviour where groundwater is concerned.
Pore pressure gradients developed around drain holes are essential to effective depressurisation and the

23
degree that can be achieved is related to the permeability of the rock mass and the corresponding capillarity.
Once depressurised or drained, good water management can make it very difficult to remobilise the materials
under the same moisture conditions.
8 Acknowledgements
The author wishes to note the support and input of others across stages of the presented work. The
fundamental work is based upon research collaboration with Professor Buddhima Indraratna (University of
Wollongong, Wollongong NSW) and Dr Winton Gale (Strata Control Technology), and especially Professor
Ranjith P Gammage (University of Monash, Melbourne VIC). The theoretical work has been more recently
assisted by Dr Jaya Mylvaganam and Zack Tuckey (SRK, Australia) as well as other colleagues with SRK in
Australia and overseas, with opportunities for client feedback especially from Isaac Baidoo and Musah
Abdulai (originally GoldFields Ghana).

9 References
Barton N. & S. Bandis (1980). ‘Some effects of scale on the shear strength of rock joints’. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech.
Abstr., vol. 17, pp. 69-73.

Barton N. & V. Choubey (1977). ‘The shear strength of rock joints in theory and practice’. Rock Mechanics, 10, pp. 1-54.

Barton N., Bandis S., Bakhtar K. (1985). ‘Strength deformation and conductivity coupling of rock joints’. Int. Journ. Rock Mechs.
Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abs. vol. 22, no. 3 pp. 121-140.

Beale G. and Read J. (2014). Guidelines for evaluating Water in Pit Slope Stability. Pub. CRC Press Balkema, EH Leiden pp.615

Brace W. F. (1980). Permeability of crystalline and argillaceous rocks. Int. Journ. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. and Geomech. Abs. vol. 17,
pp. 241-251.

Brady B. & Brown E.T. (1994). Rock Mechanics for Underground Mining, 2nd Edition, pub. Chapman-Hall, London pp.571.Brown
S.R. (1987). ‘Fluid flow through rock joints: the effect of surface roughness’. Journ. Geophys. Research, Vol. 92, No. B2
pp. 1337-1347.Carlsson A. Gustafson G., Lindblom U. & Olsson T. (1990). ‘Scale effects in the determination of hydraulic
properties of rock masses’. In: Scale effects in rock masses, ed. Pinto da Cunha, pub. Balkema Rotterdam, pp. 103-117.

Chen D. W., Zimmerman R. W. & Cook N. G. W. (1989). ‘The effect of contact area on the permeability of fractures’. Rock
mechanics as a guide for efficient utilisation of natural resources, ed. Khair, pub. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 81-88.

Cook A. M., Myer L. R., Cook N. G. W. and Doyle F. M. (1990). ‘The effect of tortuosity on flow through a natural fracture. Rock
Mechanics Contributions and Challenges’, Proc 31st US Symp Rock Mechs, pub. Balkema, pp. 371-378.

Dershowitz, WS & Herda, HH 1992. ‘Interpretation of Fracture Spacing and Intensity’, Proceedings of the 33rd U.S. Rock Mechanics
Symposium, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Di Biagio E. (1973). Leakage of gas from underground storage facilities in rock. NGI Report No.97, pp. 15-30.

Elsworth D. & Doe T.W. (1986). ‘Application of non-linear flow laws in determining rock fissure geometry from single borehole
pumping tests’. Int. J. Rock Mechs. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr., 23, pp. 245-54.

Fredlund D. G. & Rahardjo H. (1993). ‘Soil mechanics for unsaturated soils’. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, p. 517.

Gale J. (1990). ‘Hydraulic behaviour of rock joints’. Rock Joints eds. Barton N. & Stephansson O., pub. Balkema, Rotterdam. pp. 351-
373.

Hakami E., Barton N. (1990). ‘Aperture measurements and flow experiments using transport replicas’. Rock Joints, eds. Barton N.
& Stephansson O. pub. Balkema, Rotterdam pp. 383-390.

Hoek E. & Bray J.W. (1981) Rock Slope Engineering Revised 3rd Edition, pub. IMM London, pp. 358.

Indraratna B. & Ranjith P. (2001). ‘Hydromechanical Aspects and Unsaturated Flow in Jointed Rock’. A. A. Balkema, Lisse, p. 286.

24
Indraratna B., Price J. & Gale W. (2002b). ‘Fourier Description of Fracture Roughness’. NARMS-TAC 2002, Mining & Tunnelling
Innovation & Opportunity, Toronto, pub. Uni of Toronto, Canada, 7 – 10 July, pp. 35-44.

Indraratna B., Rambanda P. & Singh R. N. (1994). ‘Numerical analysis of water inflows to underground excavations - current status
and future trends’. 5th Int Mine Water Congress, Nottingham UK. pp. 339-354.

Indraratna B., Ranjith P. G. & Gale W. (1999a). ‘Single phase water flow through rock fractures’. Geotechnical and Geological
Engineering, vol. 17, pp. 211-240.

Indraratna B., Ranjith P. G. & Gale W. (1999b). ‘Deformation and permeability characteristics with interconnected fractures’. 9th
ISRM Int Congress on Rock Mechs, Paris, France, 01-Jan-99 pp. 755-760.

Indraratna B., Ranjith P., Price J. and Gale W. (2003b). ‘Two-phase flow of air and water through rock joints – Analytical approach
and experimental verification’. ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and Geo-Environmental Engineering, Oct 2003, 129(10): pp.
918-929.

Indraratna, B.I., Haque, A. & Gale, W., (1999c). Evaluation of jointed rock permeability using a high pressure triaxial apparatus.
Mechanics of Jointed and Faulted Rock. Rossmanith (ed), Rotterdam: Balkema, pp. 561-566.

Isherwood D. (1979). Geoscience Data Base Handbook for Modelling Nuclear Waste Repository, vol 1 NUREG/CR-0912 VL, UCRL-
52719, V1.

ISRM (1978). ‘Suggested Methods for the Quantitative Description of Discontinuities in Rock Masses’, Part 1, Site Characterisation,
Rock Characterisation Testing and Monitoring, ISRM Suggested Methods. Ed. E.T. Brown, Commission on Testing
Methods, Int. Soc. Rock Mechs., Pergamon Press.

Iwai, K (1976). ‘Fundamental studies of fluid flow through a single fracture’. PhD Thesis, University of Berkeley, California - (WRL
532.519)Keller A. A., Blunt M. J., Roberts P. V. (2000). Behaviour of non-aqueous phase liquids in fractured porous media
under two-phase flow conditions. Transport in Porous Media, no. 38, pp.189-203.

Lee C-H. & I. Farmer (1993). ‘Fluid Flow in Discontinuous Rocks’, Chapman Hall, p. 169.

Lomize G. M. (1951). Water flow through jointed rock. Gosenergoizdat, Moscow. In Russian, cited in Cook (1992).

Long J. C. S. (1996). Rock Fractures and Fluid Flow: Contemporary understanding and applications. US National Research Council,
Committee on Fracture Characterisation and Fluid Flow, pub National Academic Press, Washington, pp. 550.

Louis C. (1968). ‘Etudes des écoulements d’eau dans les roches fissures et des leurs influences sure la stabilité des massifs rocheux.
Bull’. De la Direction des Etud. Et Rech. EDF, sér. A, 3, T2-F.

Louis C. (1969). ‘A study of groundwater flow in jointed rock and its influence on the stability of rock masses’, Rock Mechanics
Research Report No. 10, Imperial College, London.

Louis C. & Maini Y.N. (1970). Determination of in situ hydraulic parameters in jointed rock. Proc 2nd Congress ISRM, pp.1-32.

McMahon B.K. (1985). ‘Some practical considerations for the estimation of shear strength of joints and other discontinuities’.
Proceedings International Symposium on Fundamentals of Rock Joints, Björkliden, Sweden, 15-20 September, ed. O.
Stephansson, 475-485, Luleå, Centek.

Makurat, A., Barton, N., Rad, N. S. and Bandis, S. (1990). “Joint conductivity variation due to normal and shear deformation.“ in
Barton, N. And Stephansson, O. Eds., Proc. Int. Symp. on rock joints, Loen, Norway. Rotterdam: Balkema, 535-540.

Neuzil C.E. & Tracy J. V. (1981). Flow through fractures. Water Resources Research, 17, 191-199.

Neuzil, C.E. (2003) Hydromechanical Coupling in Geologic Processes. Hydrogeology Journal 11, pp. 41-83.

Neuzil C.E. & Tracy J. V. (1981). ‘Flow through fractures’. Water Resources Research, 17, pp. 191-199.Nichol M. J., Glass R. J.
(1994). ‘Wetting phase permeability in a partially saturated horizontal fracture’. Proc 5th Annual International High Level
Radioactive Waste Management Conference, La Grange Park, Ill: American Nuclear Society, pp. 2007-2019.

25
Patton, FD 1966. ‘Multiple modes of shear failure in rock’, Proceedings of the 1st Congress o fthe International Society of Rock
Mechanics, Lisbon, vol.1: pp. 509-513.

Palmström, A 2001. ‘Measurement and Characterization of Rock Mass Jointing’, In-Situ characterization of rocks, Balkema
Publishers, Oslo, pp. 49-97.

Priest, S. D. (1993). ‘Discontinuity analysis for rock engineering’. Chapman Hall, London UK, 473p.

Price J. R. (2005). ‘Coupled analysis of two-phase flow in rough rock fractures’. PhD Thesis. Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW Australia.

Pruess K. & Tsang Y. W. (1990). On two-phase relative permeability and capillary pressure of rough walled rock fractures. Water
Resources Research. Vol 26, No 9, pp. 1915-1926.

Rocscience (2002). SLIDE© Version 5.0 Users Manual. Rocscience Inc., Toronto.

Romm E.S. (1966). ‘Flow Characteristics in Fractured Rock’ (in Russian), Nedra, Moscow. (cited in Ziegler T.W. (1976).
Determination of Rock Mass Permeability, Tech Report S-76-2, US Army Corps Engineers, Waterway Experiment Station,
Vicksburg MS.)

Rutqvist, J. and Stephansson, O. (2003) The Role of Hydromechanical Coupling in Fractured Rock Engineering. Hydrogeology
Journal, 11, pp. 7-40.

Stacey and Read (2009). Guidelines for Open Pit Slope Design. (Ed: Read, J and Stacey, P) CSIRO Publishing, Australia
496pp.Sullivan, T.D. (1993) Understanding Pit Slope Movements. Geotechnical Instrumentation and Monitoring in Open
Pit and Underground Mining, T. Szwedzicki (ed). Balkema, Rotterdam, ISBN 90 5410 321 3.

Sullivan T D (2007). Hydromechanical Coupling and Pit Slope Movements. Slope Stability 2007 — Y. Potvin (ed) Australian Centre
for Geomechanics, Perth.

Terzaghi, K. (1923) Die Berechnung der Durchlässigkeitziffer des Tones aus dem Verlauf der hydrodynamischen
Spannungserscheinungen. Akad. Wissensch. Wien Sitzungsber. Mathnaturwissensch Klasse IIa 142 (3/4), pp. 125-138.

Tsang Y. W. (1984). ‘The effect of tortuosity on fluid flow through a single fracture’. Water Resources Research, 20, pp. 1209-1215.

Wang, H.F. (2000) Theory of Linear Poroelasticity. Princeton University Press, p. 287.

WASY (2009). FEFLOW® Finite Element Subsurface Flow and Transport Simulation System - Users Manual. WASY GmbH, Berlin.

Witherspoon P. A., J.S.Y. Wang, K. Iwai, & J. Gale (1980). ‘Validity of cubic law for fluid flow in a deformable rock fracture’. Water
Resour. Res., Vol. 16, No. 6 pp. 1016-1024.

Zimmerman R. W., & Bodvarsson G. S. (1996). ‘Hydraulic conductivity of rock fractures’. Transport in Porous Media, 23: pp 1-30.

26