geotechnical parameters of sydney sandstone and shale · sydney sandstone and shale bertuzzi &...
TRANSCRIPT
SYDNEY SANDSTONE AND SHALE BERTUZZI & PELLS
Australian Geomechanics Vol 37 No 5 December 2002 41
GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS OF SYDNEY SANDSTONE AND SHALERobert Bertuzzi & Philip J.N. Pells
Pells Sullivan Meynink Pty Ltd, Sydney
1 INTRODUCTIONThe classification system for Sydney sandstone and shales, through the Australian Geomechanics Society (Pells et al,1978; Pells, Mostyn and Walker, 1998) was intended to assist in the design of foundations on rock in the Sydney area.The five class system has proved to be a good tool for communicating rock mass quality for other geotechnical projectssuch as tunnels and deep basement excavations. However, the classification system is not a design tool for works otherthan foundations on rock. Tunnels, slopes, deep basements and retaining walls should be designed using normalmethods of applied mechanics. However, such methods, whether hand stability calculations or complex analyses usingprograms such as UDEC, require engineering parameters covering strength and deformation characteristics. In someinstances, such as rock substance strength and modulus, the parameters may be measured by laboratory testing.However, when it comes to rock mass parameters use has to be made of parameters back figured from monitoring ofactual excavations and retaining structures; published correlations from other geological environments, such as massmodulus versus RMR; or semi-theoretical approaches such as Hoek’s approach of estimating mass modulus from Hoek-Brown parameters. Unfortunately, when one scratches the surface many of these correlations and guidelines are basedon scant data and they must be used with great caution.
This paper summarises the deformation and strength parameters the authors currently use for rock mechanicscomputations in the Sydney shales and sandstones. It is not intended to provide a detailed lithological or petrographicdescription of Sydney rocks. The reader is directed elsewhere for that information, for example Packham (1969),Chestnut (1983), Pells (1985), Pells (1993), Pells et al (1998), McNally & McQueen (2000), McNally & Franklin(2000), etc. Rather, the purpose of this paper is to improve the communication between engineering geologists,geotechnical engineers and the construction industry, in particular the tunnelling fraternity, when referring to Sydneyrocks.
The paper is divided into four parts.
i) The first is a recapitulation of the appropriate process of classification using the Sydney ClassificationSystem.
ii) The second presents typical insitu engineering parameters, which may be appropriate for engineeringdesign once the rock mass has been classified. The tables should not be used to back-figure the rock massclass.
iii) The third presents typical Q and RMR values for sandstone and shale, as the authors have found that thesemay help in communicating conditions to practitioners unfamiliar with the Sydney Classification System.However, please note that the authors do not recommend using either the Q or RMR system, or the SydneyClassification System, for the design of tunnel support within these rocks. Several publications highlight thedifficulties in using the Q and/or RMR system in Sydney, eg Asche & Cooper (2002), Pells (1997).
iv) The fourth presents six colour sheets describing the typical engineering geology of Class I/II, Class III andClass IV/V sandstone and then of Class I/II, Class III and Class IV/V shale. Photographs of example rockexposures are included on the sheets to further assist communication. The authors note that there are severallocations around Sydney to observe these exposures, including:
a. West Pymble Bicentennial Park - Class II to V sandstone;b. M2 tunnel and the Tarpian Cliff at the Opera House - Class I and II sandstone;c. Eastwood Brick Pit – Class V to II shale;d. M2 motorway – Class V and IV shale.
The authors hope that practitioners will find this paper useful in their work in Sydney.
1 USING THE SYDNEY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMThe classification system as described in Pells et al (1978 and 1998) is reasonably unambiguous in its application tofoundations. The original 1978 guidelines state that the rock mass to be classified is for:
Pad footings within a zone of influence of 1.5 times the least footing dimension, and
SYDNEY SANDSTONE AND SHALE BERTUZZI & PELLS
42 Australian Geomechanics Vol 37 No 5 December 2002
Socketed footings, within a zone equal to the length of the socket plus a further depth equal to the width of thefooting.
The 1998 publication acknowledged that the classification system was being used for other works such as tunnels andexcavations and recommend that the zone of rock being classified be “over a length of core of similar characteristics”.In writing those words it was the senior author’s intent that the classification system be applied to portions or units ofthe rock mass having similar UCS, defect spacing and seam characteristics. However, from reading several projectspecific reports produced by professionals applying the system to cuttings, tunnels and retaining structures it is apparentthat the classification system is sometimes applied inappropriately.
In particular the system is being applied to small elements of a geological profile, such as individual seams and thinbeds. Figure 1 is a cartoon intended to clarify the correct method of applying the classification system to a general rockprofile. This may be a mapped face or a borehole. The main points to note from Figure 1 are that it is incorrect toapply the system to small components of the rock mass and the UCS for a unit should be a cautious estimate of themean, ie it is reasonable to discard outliers. It should also be noted that there could be a change to the classification iffooting of particular dimensions were to be located within the profile. For example a 2m wide footing at level AA inFigure 1 would classify as being on Class II material even though in the general classification it is in Class III material.This is because of the controlling influence of seam thickness percentage in the footing’s zone of influence, ie 1.5 times2m.
2 SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR ENGINEERING PARAMETERSTable 1 presents the substance and mass parameters for the various classes, which the authors have used in severaldesign projects. Table 2 presents the friction angle and stiffness of discontinuities.
There is substantial information on the sandstone and shale substance parameters from numerous site investigations forspecific projects. Publications giving summaries of substance parameters include Pells (1985, 1993), McNally &McQueen (2000), Won (1985) and Ghafoori et al (1993), etc.
Rock mass modulus values for mainly Class II and Class III sandstone have been backfigured from lateralmeasurements in deep basements (Pells, 1990), from tunnel convergence measurements (Hole, 2000) and fromsettlement monitoring of pad and socket footings (Rowe & Pells, 1980). These field measurements provide a gooddatabase and therefore there is reasonably high level of confidence in regard to the sandstone mass modulus values.Mass modulus values for the shales are largely taken from the estimates made by members of the AustralianGeomechanics Society obtained in preparing the 1978 paper by Pells, Douglas, Rodway, Thomas and McMahon.
Figure 1: The wrong and right way to classify
SYDNEY SANDSTONE AND SHALE BERTUZZI & PELLS
Australian Geomechanics Vol 37 No 5 December 2002 43
The authors use extension failure (Stacey, 1981) as one of the criteria in assessing potential failure zones aroundunderground excavation. The strain values at which sympathetic tensile failure starts is shown in Table 1 and arederived from laboratory testing of large blocks of sandstone undertaken by Pells. Note that extension is dependent onthe Young’s Modulus of the substance, ie intact rock.
Permeability values have been obtained from site investigations for numerous tunnelling projects including the OceanOutfalls, Sydney Harbour Tunnel, Eastern Distributor, M5 East, Cross City, cables tunnels and Parramatta Rail Link.Overall the permeability database represents approximately 5km of tested borehole.
There is very little direct data for defect normal and shear stiffness. These are very difficult parameters to measure inthe laboratory for real defects. Normal stiffness can be estimated using the relationship between the defect’s normalstiffness (kn) and the modulus of its infill material (E), so that, kn = Load ÷ closure of defect = E ÷ thickness of defect.The elastic relationship between shear (ks) and normal (kn) stiffness is ks = kn÷2(1+ν), which suggests that ks shouldbe 0.33 to 0.5 times kn. However, the authors note that the ratio ks/ kn is actually dependent on the normal stress.Kulhawy (1975) showed limited experimental data with ks/ kn = 0.04 to 1.20. Bandis et al (1983) carried out furthertesting which suggested that for normal stresses greater than about 1MPa, a ratio of about 0.10 could be used. This isthe ratio the authors currently use in the absence of specific data.
3 REFERENCESAsche HR & Cooper DN (2002), Estimation of tunnel support requirements for TBM driven rock tunnels. 28th
International Tunnelling ConferenceBandis SC, Lumsden AC & Barton NR (1983), Fundamentals of rock joint deformation. Int. J Rock Mech Min Sci &
Geomech Abstr. Vol 20, No 6 Chestnut WS (1983),Engineering Geology Geology of the Sydney 1:100,000 Sheet ed. Herbert, Geol. Survey of NSWEngineering geology of the Sydney region (1985). ed. Pells Balkema Ghafoori M, Carter JP & Airey DW (1993) Anisotropic behaviour of Ashfield shale in the direct shear test Geotechnical
Engineering of Hard Soils – Soft Rocks, ed Anagnostopoulos, BalkemaHoek E, Kaiser PK & Bawden WF (1995),Support of underground excavations in hard rock, Balkema Hole J (2000), Determination of field stress ratio and Young’s modulus using the under excavation technique. 4th ANZ
Young geotechnical professionals conferenceKulhawy FH (1975), Stress deformation properties of rock and rock discontinuities. Engineering Geology, Vol 9McNally GH & McQueen LB (2000),The Engineering Properties of Sandstone and What they Mean. Sandstone City
eds McNally & Franklin, Geological Society of AustraliaPells PJN, Douglas DJ, Rodway B, Thorne C & McMahon BK (1978). Design loadings for foundations on Shale and
Sandstone in the Sydney Region AGS JournalPells PJN (1990), Stresses and displacements around deep basements in the Sydney Sandstone. 7th Australian
Tunnelling ConferencePells PJN (1994), Rock Mechanics and Engineering Geology in the design of underground works.The 1993 EH Davis
Memorial Lecture, Austraian Geomechanics No.25.Pells PJN (1997), Classification systems – good for communication but not always for design. Tunnelling under
difficult ground, ITC Conference, BaselPells PJN, Mostyn G & Walker BF (1998), Foundations on Sandstone and Shale in the Sydney Region. Australian
Geomechanics Vol 33 No 3Rowe RK & Pells PJN (1980), A theoretical study of pile-rock socket behaviour. Int. Conf. on Structural Foundations
on Rock.Sandstone City (2000),Geological Society of Australia, eds McNally & Franklin Stacey TR (1981), A simple extension strain criterion for fracture of brittle rock.Int. J Rock Mech Min Sci & Geomech
Abstr. Vol 18The geology of New South Wales (1969).Geological Society of Australia,ed. PackhamVarious papers in Structural Foundations on Rock, (1980) ed. Pells, Balkema Won G (1985),Engineering properties of Wianamatta Group rocks from laboratory and insitu testing, Engineering
geology of the Sydney region, ed. Pells Balkema.
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
44Au
stra
lian
Geo
mec
hani
cs V
ol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
IN S
ITU
EN
GIN
EE
RIN
G P
AR
AM
ET
ER
ST
AB
LE
1 -
RO
CK
MA
SSSU
BSTA
NC
EM
ASS
STREN
GTH
ELA
STIC
ITY
STREN
GTH
PERM
EABIL
ITY
(uL
)
CLA
SS
UC
S(M
Pa)
σt(M
Pa)
mε (c)
E(G
Pa)
UC
S(M
Pa)
c'(k
Pa)
φ’ (°)
UN
ITW
EIG
HT
(kN
/m3)
MO
DU
LUS
(MPa
)LO
GM
EAN
RA
NG
E
GSI(b
)
San
dsto
neI /
II12-5
02-6
2-9
8-1
415-2
5(a
)(a
)24
900-2
500
0.2
< 0
.01 t
o2
65-7
5
San
dsto
neIII
7-2
50.5
-34-1
06-1
05-2
0(a
)(a
)24
350-1
200
10.1
to
50
45-6
5
San
dsto
neIV
/ V
1-7
0.1
-0.5
<1-4
(a)
(a)
24
50-7
00
5-1
01 t
o 100
30-4
5
San
dsto
neRes
idua
l Soi
l<
10
<1
528
20
40
N/A
Sha
leI /
II7-4
01-4
2-1
07-1
5(d
)10-2
0(a
)(a
)24
700-2
500
0.2
< 0
.01 t
o25
64-7
3
Sha
leIII
2-1
50.1
-22-1
05-1
0(d
)1-7
(a)
(a)
24
200-1
200
10.1
to
50
40-6
4
Sha
leIV
/ V
1-2
<0.2
<1
(a)
(a)
24
50-5
00
1<
1 t
o25
30-4
0
Sha
leRes
idua
l Soi
l<
10
<1
526
18
30
N/A
TA
BL
E 2
- D
ISC
ON
TIN
UIT
IES
STIF
FNES
S (G
PA/M
)D
ESC
RIP
TIO
NTH
ICK
NES
S(E)
(MM
)FR
ICTI
ON
AN
GLE
(°)
NO
RM
AL
(KN
)SH
EAR
(KS)
MA
JOR
BED
DIN
GPL
AN
ETI
GH
T1-
55-
10
35-4
530
-35
20-2
5
4000
200
10
400
20 1ER
OSI
ON
AL
PLA
NE
5-30
20-3
55
0.5
CR
OSS
BED
PA
RTI
NG
STI
GH
T1-
325
-35
20-2
840
0015
0040
015
0JO
INT
TIG
HT
35-4
040
0040
01
22-2
815
0015
03
18-2
250
050
a Th
e va
lue
of G
SI w
hich
is in
clud
ed in
the
tabl
e ca
n be
use
d to
obt
ain
c’ a
nd φ
’ whi
ch a
re d
epen
dent
on
the
insi
tu st
ress
.b G
eolo
gica
l Stre
ngth
Inde
x de
fined
by
Hoe
k et
al (
1995
).c M
illis
train
at w
hich
sym
path
etic
tens
ile fa
ilure
com
men
ces t
o be
use
d in
ext
ensi
on fa
ilure
crit
erio
n St
acey
(198
1).
Stra
ins i
ncre
ase
with
nor
mal
stre
ss.
d Sub
stan
ce m
odul
us fo
r sha
le is
dep
ende
nt o
n m
oist
ure
cont
ent (
m%
). F
or d
esig
n us
e th
e re
latio
nshi
p ba
sed
on W
on (1
985)
, ie
E =
3.6e
-0.4
15m G
Pae Th
e in
fill i
s typ
ical
ly a
sand
y cl
ay w
hen
pres
ent i
n sa
ndst
one,
and
a c
lay
whe
n pr
esen
t in
shal
e.
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
Aust
ralia
n G
eom
echa
nics
Vol
37
No
5 D
ecem
ber 2
002
45
TA
BL
E 3
Q –
SA
ND
STO
NE
PAR
AM
ET
ER
CL
ASS
IC
LA
SS II
CL
ASS
III
CL
ASS
IVC
LA
SS V
1.
Roc
k Q
ualit
yD
esig
natio
n (R
QD
)
2.
Join
t Set
Num
ber
(Jn)
90 -1
00
2-4
505.
22−
=JnRQ
D
75–1
00
4
2575.
18−
=JnRQ
D
40 –
70
4 –
6
25 –
40
4 –
6
102.4
−=
JnRQD
0-25
1
6-12
17.483.0
−=
JnRQD
3.
Join
t Rou
ghne
ssN
umbe
r (J r)
4.
Join
t Alte
ratio
nN
umbe
r (J a
)
1-3 1
31
−=
JaJr
1–3
1–2
35.0
−=
JaJr
1 –
2
2 –
3
133.0
−=
JaJr
1 –
2
3 –
4
67.025.0
−=
JaJr
1 3-6
33.017.0
−=
JaJr
5.
Join
t Wat
erR
educ
tion
Fact
or(J
w)
6.
Stre
ss R
educ
tion
Fact
or (S
RF)
2
1 1
1=
SRFJw
1 1–2
15.0
−=
SRF
Jw
1
1 –
2.5
14.0−
=SR
FJw
0.66
–1
1 –
5
113.0
−=
SRF
Jw
0.66
-1
1-5
113.0
−=
SRF
Jw
SRF
Jwx
JaJnx
JnRQD
Q=
22.5
to 1
50G
ood
to E
xtre
mel
y G
ood
4.7
to 7
5Fa
ir to
Ver
y go
od0.
9 to
17.
5Po
or to
Goo
d0.
14 to
6.7
Ver
y po
or to
Fai
r0.
02 to
1.4
Extre
mel
y po
or to
poo
r
1 Whe
re R
QD
≤ 1
0 (in
clud
ing
0) a
nom
inal
val
ue o
f 10
is u
sed
to e
valu
ate
Q.
2 App
licab
le fo
r tun
nels
at d
epth
s to
50 m
, say
.
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
46Au
stra
lian
Geo
mec
hani
cs V
ol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
TA
BL
E 4
Q –
SH
AL
E
PARA
MET
ERC
LA
SS I
CL
ASS
IIC
LA
SS II
IC
LA
SS IV
CL
ASS
V
1.
Roc
k Q
ualit
yD
esig
natio
n (R
QD
)
2.
Join
t Set
Num
ber (
J n)
90-1
00
2-4
505.
22−
=JnRQ
D
70-9
0
4
5.22
5.17
−=
JnRQD
40-6
0
4 –
6
157.6
−=
JnRQD
25 -
40
4 –
6
102.4
−=
JnRQD
0-25
2
6-12
3.
Join
t Rou
ghne
ssN
umbe
r (J r)
4.
Join
t Alte
ratio
nN
umbe
r (J a
)
1-3 1
31
−=
JaJr
1-2
1- 4
225.0
−=
JaJr
1– 2
2 –
6
117.0
−=
JaJr
0.5-
1.5
6-12
25.004.0
−=
JaJr
1 3-6
33.017.0
−=
JaJr
5.
Join
t Wat
er R
educ
tion
Fact
or (J
w)
7.
Stre
ss R
educ
tion
Fact
or(S
RF)
2
1 1
1=
SRFJw
1
1 –
2
15.0
−=
SRF
Jw
1
1 –
5
12.0
−=
SRF
Jw
0.66
-1
2.5-
10
4.006
6.0
−=
SRF
Jw
0.66
-1
5-10
2.006
6.0
−=
SRF
Jw
SRF
Jwx
JaJnx
JnRQD
Q=
22.5
to 1
50G
ood
to E
xtre
mel
y G
ood
2.2
to 4
5Po
or to
Ver
y go
od0.
2 to
15
Ver
y Po
or to
Goo
d0.
011
to 1
Extre
mel
y Po
or to
V
ery
Poor
0.00
9 to
0.2
7Ex
cept
iona
lly P
oor t
oV
ery
Poor
1 Whe
re R
QD
≤ 1
0 (in
clud
ing
0) a
nom
inal
val
ue o
f 10
is u
sed
to e
valu
ate
Q.
App
licab
le fo
r tun
nels
at d
epth
s to
50 m
, say
.
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
Aust
ralia
n G
eom
echa
nics
Vol
37
No
5 D
ecem
ber 2
002
47
TA
BL
E 5
RM
R –
SA
ND
STO
NE
PAR
AM
ET
ER
CL
ASS
IC
LA
SS II
CL
ASS
III
CL
ASS
IVC
LA
SS V
Inta
ct S
treng
th
Roc
k Q
ualit
yD
esig
natio
n (R
QD
)
2 20
2
18-2
0
2
11-1
6
1
5-11
0 0-5
Dis
cont
inui
ty S
paci
ng
Dis
cont
inui
ty C
ondi
tion
15-2
5
20-2
5
15-2
0
20-2
2
8-12
15-2
0
6-10
8-12
5-8
5-12
Gro
undw
ater
Adj
ustm
ent f
orO
rient
atio
n
8-10 -5
7-10 -5
7-10 -5
7-10 -5
7-10 -5
RM
R60
to 7
7G
ood
rock
57 to
69
Fair
to g
ood
rock
38 to
55
Poor
to fa
ir ro
ck22
to 3
9Po
or ro
ck12
to 3
0V
ery
poor
to p
oor r
ock
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
48Au
stra
lian
Geo
mec
hani
cs V
ol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
TA
BL
E 6
RM
R –
SH
AL
E
PAR
AM
ET
ER
CL
ASS
IC
LA
SS II
CL
ASS
III
CL
ASS
IVC
LA
SS V
Inta
ct S
treng
th
Roc
k Q
ualit
yD
esig
natio
n (R
QD
)
2
18-2
0
2
18-2
0
1
11-1
6
0
5-11
0 0-5
Dis
cont
inui
ty S
paci
ng
Dis
cont
inui
ty C
ondi
tion
15-2
0
18-2
5
8-15
18-2
2
6-12
15-2
0
3-8
6-10
1-3
0-6
Gro
undw
ater
Adj
ustm
ent f
orO
rient
atio
n
8-10
-7 to
-5
7-10
-7 to
–5
7-10
-7 to
-5
7-10
-7 to
-5
7-10
-7 to
-5
RM
R54
to 7
2Fa
ir to
goo
d ro
ck46
to 6
4Fa
ir to
goo
d ro
ck33
to 5
4Po
or to
fair
rock
14 to
34
Ver
y po
or to
poo
r roc
k1
to 1
9V
ery
poor
rock
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
Aust
ralia
n G
eom
echa
nics
Vol
37
No
5 D
ecem
ber 2
002
49
CL
ASS
I/II
SA
ND
STO
NE
DIS
CO
NTI
NU
ITY
SET
S
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Bed
ding
Join
tJo
int
Cro
ss B
edPa
rting
sO
rient
atio
n (T
rue
Nor
th) D
ip/D
ipD
irSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
0-5°
160-
200°
90 ±
20°
100-
140°
90 ±
20°
350-
020°
15-3
0°
0-45
°
Effe
ctiv
e Le
ngth
(m)
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
up to
100
’s
H >
10m
V 3
0% >
10m
4
0% 5
-10m
3
0% <
5m
H >
10m
V 3
0% >
10m
4
0% 5
-10m
3
0% <
5m
<4
Effe
ctiv
e Sp
acin
g (m
)Se
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
1 to
52
to 1
0m
ay o
ccur
insw
arm
s
2 to
20
0.2
Con
ditio
nSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
Und
ulat
ing,
roug
h,oc
casi
onal
lysa
ndy
clay
infil
l10
mm
Plan
ar, r
ough
,lim
onite
stai
ning
Plan
ar, r
ough
,lim
onite
stai
ning
Cur
ved,
roug
h
Not
esEx
pect
var
iatio
n in
def
ect o
rient
atio
ns w
ith c
hang
e in
larg
e sc
ale
geol
ogic
al fe
atur
es, e
g la
rge
scal
e fo
ldin
gC
ross
bed
ding
var
ies l
ocal
ly
GEO
LOG
ICA
L D
ESC
RIP
TIO
N
Sand
ston
e.
Fine
to m
ediu
m g
rain
ed, p
ale
grey
to p
ale
yello
w, p
oorly
to
wel
l de
velo
ped
bedd
ing,
th
inly
la
min
ated
to
m
assi
ve,
quar
tzsa
ndst
one
(av.
70%
con
tent
) w
ithin
kao
linite
cla
y (u
p to
20%
) m
atrix
and
som
e si
derit
e. MA
JOR
GEO
LOG
ICA
L FE
ATU
RES
Mas
sive
and
cro
ss-b
edde
d sa
ndst
one
beds
. Su
b-ho
rizon
tal u
ndul
atin
gbe
ddin
g pl
anes
with
occ
asio
nal u
p to
10m
m th
ick
of c
laye
y si
lty s
and.
Indi
vidu
al b
eds
are
typi
cally
2m
thi
ck,
rang
ing
1 to
5m
. T
wo
sub-
verti
cal
join
t se
ts o
ccur
and
are
typ
ical
ly t
ight
. O
ne s
et s
pace
d at
appr
oxim
atel
y 3m
, the
oth
er a
t 5 to
10m
.
RO
CK
MA
SS C
ON
DIT
ION
Wea
ther
ing:
Fres
h to
Slig
htly
wea
ther
ed
Inta
ct R
ock
Stre
ngth
:12
to
50 M
Pa(ty
pica
lly 2
0 to
30
MPa
)
RQ
D:
75-1
00%
Perm
eabi
lity:
< 0.
01 to
25
Luge
on(lo
g m
ean
0.0
2uL)
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
chan
ics
Vol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
CL
ASS
III S
AN
DST
ON
E
DIS
CO
NTI
NU
ITY
SET
S
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Bed
ding
Join
tJo
int
Cro
ss B
edPa
rting
sO
rient
atio
n (T
rue
Nor
th) D
ip/D
ipD
irSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
0-5°
160-
200°
90 ±
20°
100-
140°
90 ±
20°
350-
020°
15-3
0°
0-45
°
Effe
ctiv
e Le
ngth
(m)
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
up to
100
’s
H >
10m
V 3
0% >
10m
4
0% 5
-10m
3
0% <
5m
H >
10m
V 3
0% >
10m
4
0% 5
-10m
3
0% <
5m
<4
Effe
ctiv
e Sp
acin
g (m
)Se
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
GEO
LOG
ICA
L D
ESC
RIP
TIO
N
Sand
ston
e.
Fine
to m
ediu
m g
rain
ed, p
ale
grey
to y
ello
w, p
oorly
to w
ell
deve
lope
d be
ddin
g, t
hinl
y la
min
ated
to
mas
sive
, qu
artz
sand
ston
e (a
v. 7
0% c
onte
nt)
with
in k
aolin
ite c
lay
(up
to 2
0%)
mat
rix a
nd so
me
side
rite.
MA
JOR
GEO
LOG
ICA
L FE
ATU
RES
Mas
sive
and
cro
ss-b
edde
d sa
ndst
one
beds
, wea
ther
ing
deve
lope
dal
ong
disc
ontin
uitie
s. S
ub-h
oriz
onta
l un
dula
ting
bedd
ing
plan
esw
ith o
ccas
iona
l up
to 2
0mm
thic
k of
cla
yey
silty
san
d. I
ndiv
idua
lbe
ds a
re t
ypic
ally
2m
thi
ck, r
angi
ng 1
to
5m.
Two
sub-
verti
cal
join
t se
ts o
ccur
and
are
typ
ical
ly t
ight
. O
ne s
et s
pace
d at
appr
oxim
atel
y 3m
, the
oth
er a
t 5 to
10m
.
RO
CK
MA
SS C
ON
DIT
ION
Wea
ther
ing:
Slig
htly
to M
oder
atel
y
50Au
stra
lian
Geo
me
1 to
51
to 5
may
occ
ur in
swar
ms
2 to
20
0.2
Con
ditio
nSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
Und
ulat
ing,
roug
h, sa
ndy
clay
infil
l to
20m
m
Plan
ar, s
light
lyro
ugh,
lim
onite
stai
ning
Plan
ar, s
light
lyro
ugh,
lim
onite
stai
ning
Cur
ved,
slig
htly
roug
h,oc
casi
onal
cla
yin
fill u
p to
3m
m
Not
esEx
pect
var
iatio
n in
def
ect o
rient
atio
ns w
ith c
hang
e in
larg
e sc
ale
geol
ogic
al fe
atur
es, e
g la
rge
scal
e fo
ldin
gC
ross
bed
ding
var
ies l
ocal
ly
wea
ther
ed
Inta
ct R
ock
Stre
ngth
:7
to 2
5 M
Pa
RQ
D:
40-7
0%
Perm
eabi
lity:
0.1
to 5
0 Lu
geon
(log
mea
n 1u
L)
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
51
CL
ASS
IV/V
SA
ND
STO
NE
GEO
LOG
ICA
L D
ESC
RIP
TIO
N
Sand
ston
e.
Fine
to
med
ium
gra
ined
, yel
low
to
oran
ge t
o re
d-br
own,
poor
ly to
wel
l dev
elop
ed b
eddi
ng, t
hinl
y la
min
ated
to m
assi
ve, q
uartz
sand
ston
e (a
v. 7
0% c
onte
nt)
with
in k
aolin
ite/il
lite
clay
(up
to
30%
)m
atrix
and
som
e si
derit
e.
MA
JOR
GEO
LOG
ICA
L FE
ATU
RES
Mas
sive
an
d cr
oss-
bedd
ed
sand
ston
e be
ds,
wea
ther
ing
very
w
ell
deve
lope
d al
ong
disc
ontin
uitie
s. S
ub-h
oriz
onta
l un
dula
ting
bedd
ing
plan
es w
ith u
p to
50m
m th
ick
of c
laye
y si
lty s
and.
Ind
ivid
ual b
eds
are
DIS
CO
NTI
NU
ITY
SET
S
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Bed
ding
Join
tJo
int
Cro
ss B
edPa
rting
sO
rient
atio
n (T
rue
Nor
th) D
ip/D
ipD
irSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
0-5°
160-
200°
90 ±
20°
100-
140°
90 ±
20°
350-
020°
15-3
0°
0-45
°
Effe
ctiv
e Le
ngth
(m)
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Aust
ralia
n G
eom
echa
nics
Vol
37
No
5 D
ecem
ber 2
002
typi
cally
2m
thic
k, ra
ngin
g 1
to 5
m.
Two
sub-
verti
cal j
oint
set
s oc
cur
and
are
typi
cally
tigh
t. O
ne s
et s
pace
d at
app
roxi
mat
ely
3m, t
he o
ther
at 5
to 1
0m.
RO
CK
MA
SS C
ON
DIT
ION
Wea
ther
ing:
Hig
hly
to E
xtre
mel
y w
eath
ered
Inta
ct R
ock
Stre
ngth
:1
to 7
MPa
RQ
D:
<40%
Perm
eabi
lity:
1 to
100
Lug
eon
(log
mea
n 5
to 1
0uL)
up to
100
’s
H >
10m
V 3
0% >
10m
4
0% 5
-10m
3
0% <
5m
H >
10m
V 3
0% >
10m
4
0% 5
-10m
3
0% <
5m
<4
Effe
ctiv
e Sp
acin
g (m
)Se
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
1 to
51
to 5
may
occ
ur in
swar
ms
2 to
20
0.2
Con
ditio
nSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
Und
ulat
ing,
roug
h, sa
ndy
clay
infil
l to
50m
m
Plan
ar, s
light
lyro
ugh,
sand
ycl
ay in
fill t
o>3
mm
Plan
ar, s
light
lyro
ugh,
sand
ycl
ay in
fill t
o>3
mm
Cur
ved,
slig
htly
roug
h,cl
ay in
fill u
p to
3mm
Not
esEx
pect
var
iatio
n in
def
ect o
rient
atio
ns w
ith c
hang
e in
larg
e sc
ale
geol
ogic
al fe
atur
es, e
g la
rge
scal
e fo
ldin
g
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
stra
lian
Geo
mec
hani
cs V
ol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
52Au
CL
ASS
I/II
SH
AL
E
GEO
LOG
ICA
L D
ESC
RIP
TIO
N
Shal
e.
Ver
y fin
e to
fin
e gr
aine
d, d
ark
grey
to
blac
k, w
ell
deve
lope
d be
ddin
g, th
inly
lam
inat
ed, s
iltst
one
and
clay
ston
e w
ithm
inor
car
bona
ceou
s con
tent
.
MA
JOR
GEO
LOG
ICA
L FE
ATU
RES
Sub-
horiz
onta
l un
dula
ting
bedd
ing
plan
es.
Ind
ivid
ual
beds
are
typi
cally
1 t
o 3m
. T
wo
sub-
verti
cal
join
t se
ts o
ccur
and
are
typi
cally
tigh
t. O
ne s
et s
pace
d at
app
roxi
mat
ely
3m, t
he o
ther
at
5 to
10m
.
RO
CK
MA
SS C
ON
DIT
ION
Wea
ther
ing:
Fres
h to
Slig
htly
wea
ther
ed
Inta
ct R
ock
Stre
ngth
:7
to 4
0 M
Pa
RQ
D:
70-1
00%
Perm
eabi
lity:
< 0.
01 to
25
Luge
on
(log
mea
n 0
.02u
L)
DIS
CO
NTI
NU
ITY
SET
S
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Bed
ding
Join
tJo
int
Join
t(r
ando
m)
Orie
ntat
ion
(Tru
e N
orth
) Dip
/Dip
Dir
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
0-10
°
sout
h
90 ±
20°
070-
110°
90 ±
15°
340-
040°
30-6
0°
SW o
r NE
Effe
ctiv
e Le
ngth
(m)
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
up to
100
’s
typi
cally
with
inin
divi
dual
bed
sty
pica
lly w
ithin
indi
vidu
al b
eds
Ver
y m
inor
Effe
ctiv
e Sp
acin
g (m
)Se
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
1 to
30.
5 to
50.
5 to
10
Ver
y m
inor
Con
ditio
nSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
Und
ulat
ing,
smoo
thPl
anar
, slig
htly
roug
hPl
anar
, slig
htly
roug
hPl
anar
,sl
ight
ly ro
ugh
Not
esEx
pect
var
iatio
n in
def
ect o
rient
atio
ns w
ith c
hang
e in
larg
e sc
ale
geol
ogic
al fe
atur
es, e
g la
rge
scal
e fo
ldin
g
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LEB
ERTU
ZZI &
PEL
LS
53
Austra
lian
Geo
mec
hani
cs V
ol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
CL
ASS
III S
HA
LE
GEO
LOG
ICA
L D
ESC
RIP
TIO
N
Shal
e. V
ery
fine
to fi
ne g
rain
ed, d
ark
grey
to b
lack
, wel
l dev
elop
edbe
ddin
g,
thin
ly
lam
inat
ed,
silts
tone
an
d cl
ayst
one
with
m
inor
carb
onac
eous
con
tent
.
MA
JOR
GEO
LOG
ICA
L FE
ATU
RES
Wea
ther
ing
deve
lope
d al
ong
disc
ontin
uitie
s.
Sub-
horiz
onta
lun
dula
ting
bedd
ing
plan
es.
Indi
vidu
al b
eds
are
typi
cally
1 t
o 3m
.Tw
o su
b-ve
rtica
l jo
int
sets
occ
ur a
nd a
re t
ypic
ally
tig
ht.
One
set
spac
ed a
t app
roxi
mat
ely
3m, t
he o
ther
at 5
to 1
0m.
RO
CK
MA
SS C
ON
DIT
ION
Wea
ther
ing:
Mod
erat
ely
wea
ther
ed
Inta
ct R
ock
Stre
ngth
:2
to 1
5 M
Pa
RQ
D:
40-6
0%
Perm
eabi
lity:
0.1
to 5
0 Lu
geon
(lo
g m
ean
1uL)
DIS
CO
NTI
NU
ITY
SET
S
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Bed
ding
Join
tJo
int
Join
t(r
ando
m)
Orie
ntat
ion
(Tru
e N
orth
) Dip
/Dip
Dir
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
0-10
°
sout
h
90 ±
20°
070-
110°
90 ±
15°
340-
040°
30-6
0°
SW o
r NE
Effe
ctiv
e Le
ngth
(m)
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
up to
100
’s
typi
cally
with
inin
divi
dual
bed
sty
pica
lly w
ithin
indi
vidu
al b
eds
1 to
2
Effe
ctiv
e Sp
acin
g (m
)Se
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
1 to
30.
5 to
50.
5 to
10
<1
Con
ditio
nSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
Und
ulat
ing,
smoo
th, c
lay
infil
l up
to 1
0mm
Plan
ar, s
moo
th,
clay
coa
ting
Plan
ar, s
moo
th,
clay
coa
ting
Plan
ar,
smoo
th,
clay
coat
ing
Not
esEx
pect
var
iatio
n in
def
ect o
rient
atio
ns w
ith c
hang
e in
larg
e sc
ale
geol
ogic
al fe
atur
es, e
g la
rge
scal
e fo
ldin
g
BER
TUZZ
I & P
ELLS
lian
Geo
mec
hani
cs V
ol 3
7 N
o 5
Dec
embe
r 200
2
SYD
NEY
SA
ND
STO
NE
AN
D S
HA
LE
CL
ASS
IV/V
SH
AL
E
DIS
CO
NTI
NU
ITY
SET
S
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
Bed
ding
Join
tJo
int
Join
t(r
ando
m)
Orie
ntat
ion
(Tru
e N
orth
) Dip
/Dip
Dir
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
0-10
°
sout
h
90 ±
20°
070-
110°
90 ±
15°
340-
040°
30-6
0°
SW o
r NE
GEO
LOG
ICA
L D
ESC
RIP
TIO
N
Shal
e.
Ver
y fin
e to
fin
e gr
aine
d, d
ark
grey
to
blac
k, w
ell
deve
lope
d be
ddin
g, th
inly
lam
inat
ed, s
iltst
one
and
clay
ston
e w
ithm
inor
car
bona
ceou
s con
tent
.
MA
JOR
GEO
LOG
ICA
L FE
ATU
RES
Wea
ther
ing
ubiq
uito
us
alon
g di
scon
tinui
ties.
Su
b-ho
rizon
tal
undu
latin
g be
ddin
g pl
anes
. In
divi
dual
bed
s ar
e ty
pica
lly 1
to 3
m.
54Au
stra
Effe
ctiv
e Le
ngth
(m)
Set 1
Set 2
Set 3
Set 4
up to
100
’s
typi
cally
with
inin
divi
dual
beds
typi
cally
with
inin
divi
dual
beds
1 to
2
Effe
ctiv
e Sp
acin
g (m
)Se
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
1 to
30.
5 to
50.
5 to
10
<1
Con
ditio
nSe
t 1Se
t 2Se
t 3Se
t 4
Und
ulat
ing,
smoo
th, c
lay
infil
l up
to30
mm
Plan
ar,
smoo
th, c
lay
infil
l to
30m
m
Plan
ar,
smoo
th, c
lay
infil
l to
30m
m
Plan
ar,
smoo
th, c
lay
infil
l to
30m
m
Not
esEx
pect
var
iatio
n in
def
ect o
rient
atio
ns w
ithch
ange
in la
rge
scal
e ge
olog
ical
feat
ures
, eg
larg
esc
ale
fold
ing
Two
sub-
verti
cal j
oint
set
s oc
cur a
nd a
re ty
pica
lly ti
ght.
One
set
spac
ed a
t app
roxi
mat
ely
3m, t
he o
ther
at 5
to 1
0m.
RO
CK
MA
SS C
ON
DIT
ION
Wea
ther
ing:
Hig
hly
to e
xtre
mel
y w
eath
ered
Inta
ct R
ock
Stre
ngth
:1
to 2
MPa
RQ
D:
<40%
Perm
eabi
lity:
<1 to
25
Luge
on(lo
g m
ean
1uL)