Engineering Geology

Chapter 1
Introductory Chapter:
Engineering Geology
Essa GeorgesLwisa
1. Introduction
Engineering geology is the application of geology to the engineering study for

the purpose of ensuring that the geological aspects related to the site, scheme,
construction, process and maintenance of engineering works are recognized and
taken in consideration [1].
Engineering geologists provide geological and geotechnical endorsements,
analyzes, and designs related to human development and different kinds of struc-
tures. The field of engineering geology is primarily in the field of Earth-structure
interactions, or the investigation of how Earth or Earth processes affect human
structures and human activities [2].
Topics of Engineering Geology are:
• Rocks and geological structures: rock types, structures, plate tectonic.

Engineering geological maps.
• Geo hazards: boundary hazards, ground subsidence, land slide, slope failure.
• Geological masses: mass fabric, ground mass description, weathering, rocks

discontinuities.
• Field tests and measurements: tests in boreholes and excavations, engineering

geophysics, seismic methods, electrical and magnetic methods.
• Ground improvement: shallow and deep impaction, grout treatment, bentonite

suspension, ground anchor
• Water reservoirs and dams: dam design parameters, geological influences upon
the selection of reservoir sites, dam foundations, dam seismicity.
2. Rocks and geological structures
Geologic structures are usually the result of the powerful tectonic forces that
occur within the earth. These forces fold and break rocks, form deep faults, and
build mountains. Repeated applications of force can create a very complex geologic
picture that is difficult to interpret.
2.1 Rock types
Types of rocks are igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic. Igneous rocks are
formed when molten rocks cools and solidifies. Sedimentary rocks arise when
1
Engineering Geology
particles settle down out of water or air, or by precipitation of minerals from the
water. Pile up in layers. Metamorphic rocks result when existing rocks are altered by
heat, pressure, or reactive fluids, such as hot water rich in minerals [3].
2.2 Rock structures
Most rocks are not uniform all the time. On a scale best measured in millimeters
or centimeters, they are made up of individual mineral grains that differ in size,
shape and composition. The geometric properties of these small rock features and
the relationships between them form rock texture. Rocks also commonly differ on
larger scales, and are best measured in centimeters to meters to kilometers. The dis-
parate and small-sized individual features of the rocks are called “structures”. Our
mission is to find out if there are rock structures that can provide clues to the forma-
tive environment of rocks: whether they are igneous, sedimentary or metamorphic.
There are many rock structures. Geologists usually divide them into “primary”
and “secondary” structures [4].
• Elementary structures that were formed before or at the same time that matter
is in the process of converting to rocks.
• Secondary Structures, imposed on rocks after they have already formed.
2.3 Plate tectonic
Plate tectonics is a scientific theory that describes the large-scale movement of

seven large plates and the movements of many smaller plates from the Earth’s litho-
sphere, since tectonic processes on Earth began between 3.3 and 3.5 billion years
ago. The model is based on the concept of continental drift, an idea that developed
during the early decades of the twentieth century. The theory of plate tectonics was
accepted by the geological scientific community after sea floor propagation was
validated in the late 1950s and early 1960s [5].
The lithosphere, the planet’s rigid outermost layer, is divided into tectonic
plates. The Earth’s lithosphere consists of seven or eight main plates and many
minor plates. When the plates encounter, their relative movement controls the type
of boundary: convergent, divergent, or transformational. Earthquakes, volcanic
activity, mountain building, and oceanic trench formation occur along these plate
boundaries. The relative movement of the plates usually ranges from 0 to 100mm
per year [5].
2.4 Engineering geological maps
The Engineer Geological Mapping is a guide to the principles, concepts, methods,

and practices involved in geological mapping, as well as applications of geology to
engineering [6].
3. Geo hazards
Geographical hazards are geological and environmental conditions and involve

long-term or short-term geological processes. Geographical risks can be relatively
small features, but they can also reach huge proportions (for example, a landslide or
submarine) and affect the local and regional social economy to a large extent (for
example, a tsunami) [7].
2
Introductory Chapter: Engineering Geology
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/ITexLi.95991
3.1 Boundary hazards
There are three different types of converging plate boundaries recognized:

continental, oceanic -oceanic, and continental - continental.
An oceanic ocean border is when two oceanic plates meet. Usually one plate
submerges under the other and in the process a deep trench forms in the ocean and
can also lead to the formation of undersea volcanoes [7].
A continental oceanic boundary is when an oceanic plate meets a continental plate
and the denser oceanic plate descends below the continental plate [7].
The continental boundary is when two continental plates meet and neither of
them subsides below the other because the continental rocks are relatively light and
resist downward movement [7].
3.2 Ground subsidence
Subsidence is the sinking or settling of the Earth’s surface. It can happen through
a number of processes. Land subsidence may result from settling of local low-density
soils, or the cavity of natural or man-made voids underground. Subsidence may
occur gradually over many years as sagging or depressions form on the earth’s sur-
face. In rare cases, a sudden landing such as a dangerous ground hole may swallow
any part of the structure in that location, or leave a dangerous, steep hole [8–10].
3.3 Land slide
A landslide may be defined as the movement of a mass of rock, debris, or land

down a slope. Landslides are a kind of “mass wasting”, which refers to any down-
ward movement of soil and rocks under the straight influence of gravity. The word
“landslide” includes five slope movement patterns: falls, slides, slides, spreads and
flow [8, 11].
Landslides have several causes. Slope movement happens when forces acting
on the lower slope surpass the force of the earth materials that make up the slope.
Causes contain aspects that increase the effects of slope forces and aspects that
contribute to a decrease or increase in strength. Landslides can start on slopes that
are already on the edge of movement due to precipitation, snowmelt, changes in
water level, table erosion, changes in groundwater, earthquakes, volcanic activ-
ity, disturbance caused by human activities, or any combination of these factors.
Earthquake vibration and other aspects can also activate underwater landslides.
These landslides are called undersea landslides. Sub-sea landslides sometimes cause
tsunamis that damage seaside areas [9, 11].
3.4 Slope failure
Slope failure is the phenomenon of suddenly collapsing slope due to poor self-
holding capacity of the earth under the influence of rain or earthquake. Due to the
sudden collapse of the slope, many people fail to escape from it if it occurs near a
residential area, resulting in a high death rate [12].
4. Geological masses
The size of the land that will be affected or will affect the engineering work. All
rocks and many soil masses have discontinuities and their presence in rocks or soil
mass is of prime importance for all engineering work in rocks or soil.
3
Engineering Geology
Mass movement, also called mass wasting, is the movements of soil and rock
debris down slopes in response to gravitational pull, or the rapid or gradual sink-
ing of the Earth’s surface in a mostly vertical direction. Previously, the term mass
wasting referred to a variety of processes by which large masses of cortical material
are transported by gravity from one place to another. More recently, the term mass
movement has been replaced to include processes of mass wasting and inundation
of confined areas of the Earth’s surface. The group movements on the ramps and the
submersible group movements are often assisted by the water and the importance
of both types is the role that each plays in changing the earthly shapes [13, 14].
4.1 Mass fabric
In geology, the texture of rocks defines the spatial and geometric formation of all
the elements that make up it. In sedimentary rocks, the tissue developed depends on
the deposition environment and can offer evidence on current developments at the
time of precipitation. In structural geology, fabrics could deliver evidence on both the
direction and size of strains that have controlled a particular piece of deformed rock.
Fabric types: [15, 16].
• Primary fabric
• Shape fabric
• Crystallographic preferred orientation
• S-fabric
• L-fabric
• Penetrative fabric
• Magnetic fabric.
4.2 Ground mass description
General term from the fine-grained, not discernible part of a rock. In igneous
rocks, this is the part of the rock that is not phenocrysts, and can help in determin-
ing the composition of extrusive rocks. In sedimentary rocks, it typically refers
to the fine-grained components, namely mud. In metamorphic rocks, it is usually
referring to material between porphyroblasts or a low-grade rock with only micro-
scopic mineralization [17].
A matrix or ground mass of rock is the mass of fine-grained substantial into
which grains, crystals, or large holes are incorporated.
The matrix of igneous rocks contains of fine-grained, usually microscopic,
crystals in which bigger crystals are fused. This porphyry tissue is revealing that
magma was cooled in multi stages.
A sedimentary rock matrix is a fine-grained sedimentary material, such as clay
or silt, in which larger grains or lumps are incorporated. It is also used to describe
the rock material in which the fossil is included [7, 17 ].
4.3 Weathering
Weathering is the collapse of rocks on the Earth’s surface by rainwater, tempera-

ture extremes, and biological activity. It does not involve removing rock material.
There are three types of weathering, physical, chemical and biological [18].
4
4.4 Rocks discontinuities
Discontinuity in geotechnical engineering (in the geotechnical literature it is

often referred to as a joint) is a surface or surface that indicates a change in the
physical or chemical properties of a soil or rock mass. The discontinuity can be, for
example, bedding, schistosomiasis, foliation, joint, splitting, fracture, cleft, crack
or failed plane. Mechanical and integral discontinuities are separated. Interruptions
may occur multiple times with the same mechanical properties on a large scale in a
discontinuity group, or they may be a single interruption. The discontinuity causes
the mass of soil or rock to anisotropy [7, 19].
5. Field tests and measurements
Geophysical surveys are primary sources for both qualitative and quantitative
data regarding ground conditions, and they form an essential part of many on-site
investigations. There are several reasons for this, perhaps the most important of
which is that it provides, for design purposes, parameters that represent a more
realistic assessment of geotechnical ground conditions than is usually the case
with laboratory tests. The samples used for laboratory tests, due to their small size,
may not be sufficiently representative of the ground from which they are taken.
In particular, it may not have widespread discontinuities, found in rocks or soil
masses, which greatly affect the engineering properties of the materials in question.
Moreover, the sampling inevitably involves some disturbances in stress conditions
and water content of soil and rocks so that the parameters obtained in the labora-
tory are not fully representative of the conditions at the site [20].
5.1 Tests in boreholes and excavations
Geotechnical investigations are performed by geotechnical engineers or engi-

neering geologists to obtain information about the physical properties of soil works
and proposed soil foundations for the proposed structures and to fix the distress
of earthworks and structures caused by subterranean conditions. This type of
investigation is called site inspection. In addition, geotechnical investigations are
also used to measure the thermal resistance of soil or backfill materials required for
underground transmission lines, oil and gas pipelines, radioactive waste disposal
and solar thermal storage facilities. The geotechnical investigation will include
surface exploration and subsurface exploration of the site. Sometimes, geophysical
methods are used to obtain data about sites. Subsurface exploration usually includes
soil sampling and laboratory testing of recovered soil samples.
Some of the on-site tests are: standard penetration test, dynamic cone penetra-
tion test, cone penetration test [7, 21].
5.2 Engineering geophysics
Engineering geophysics consists of the spatial studies of the Earth’s surface

and subsurface. The geophysical signal is measured, processed and analyzed in
order to discover anomalies in the subsurface and determine the composition
and physical properties of rocks, layers, etc. This information is essential in
engineering planning, calculations and infrastructure project design, energy and
environment [8, 22].
Use of geophysical methods to obtain information for civil engineering. The goal
is usually to describe not only the geometry of the Earth’s interior but also its nature
5
Engineering Geology
(for example, its elastic properties as determined by measurements of seismic

velocities and density). Shallow, gravitational, magnetic, and electrical seismic
reflection and refraction methods and sampling methods are commonly used to
find bedrock depth and sediment strength for foundation purposes, to determine
the rupture (qv) susceptibility of rocks, to measure the degree of rupture, to detect
underground cavities, to detect pockets of gas near the surface, to determine The
dangers of buried pipelines under the sea floor, buried pollutant barrels, and land-
fill safety. In water-covered areas, high-powered sphygmomanometers, sparks, gas
pistols, and other seismic reflection methods employ high frequencies (up to 5kHz)
to obtain reflections from shallow façades so that bedrock and the nature of the fill-
ing material can be diagnosed. Such methods are also used to locate large pipelines
on the sea floor or to bury them on the sea floor by the prominent deflections they
generate. It is usually limited to a shallow breakout of over 1,000feet [22].
5.3 Seismic methods
Seismic tomography is a technique for imaging the Earth’s interior with seismic
waves produced by earthquakes or explosions. P and S waves and surface waves can
be used for tomography models with different resolutions based on seismic wave-
length, wave source distance, and seismometer array coverage [23].
Reflective seismology (or reflection seismic) is a technique of geophysics
exploration that uses principles of seismology to approximation the properties of
the Earth’s interior from reflected seismic waves [24].
Seismic refraction is a geophysical standard governed by Snell’s law of refrac-
tion. The seismic refraction method uses the refraction of seismic waves by rocks or
soil deposits to characterize the subterranean geological conditions and geological
building [24].
Seismic refraction is browbeaten in engineering geology, geotechnical engineer-
ing, and exploration geophysics. Seismic refraction traversal (seismic lines) are
performed using a mixture of seismometers or geophones and a power source [24].
The procedures are based on the fact that seismic waves have different velocities
in different types of soil or rocks. Waves are refracted when they cross boundaries
between different types of soil or rocks. These methods allow the fortitude of gen-
eral soil types and the estimated depth of stratigraphic boundaries or bedrock [24].
5.4 Magnetic and electrical methods
Magnetic techniques, including aeromagnetic surveys to map magnetic anomalies.

An aeromagnetic survey is a common type of geophysical survey that is performed
with a magnetometer on board a plane or pulled behind it. This principle is similar
to the magnetic survey conducted with a handheld magnetometer, but it allows for
much larger areas of the Earth’s surface to be quickly covered for regional reconnais-
sance. Plane typically flies in a grid-like pattern with line spacing and elevation to
determine data accuracy (and cost per unit area of scan) [25].
Electrical techniques, including electrical resistivity tomography and induced
polarization [26].
Stimulated polarization (IP) is a geophysical imaging technique used to determine
the electric chargeability of subsurface materials, such as ores [27, 28].
Konrad Schlumberger originally discovered the effect of polarization when
measuring the resistance of rocks [27, 28].
Induced polarization is a widely used geophysical method in mineral exploration
and mine operations [27, 28].
IP scanning can be performed in both time area and frequency area mode [28].
6
Electromagnetic methods, such as magnetotellurics, ground penetrating radar,

transient/time-domain electromagnetics and SNMR [29, 30].
Magnetotellurics (MT) is an electromagnetic geophysical method for inferring
subsurface electrical conductivity from measurements of natural and geoelectric
magnetic field anisotropy at the Earth’s surface. Search depth ranges from 300
meters underground by recording higher frequencies up to 10km or deeper with
sounding for prolonged periods [29, 30].
Ground penetrating radar (GPR) is a geophysical method that uses radar pulses to
photograph the Earth’s interior. It is a non-intrusive way to survey below the surface
to check underground facilities such as concrete, asphalt, minerals, pipes, cables or
masonry [31, 32].
Transient electromagnetism, is a geophysical exploration method in which electric
and magnetic fields are induced by transient pulses of an electric current and the
subsequent decay response is measured [33, 34].
6. Ground improvement
Ground improvement refers to a technology that improves the engineering

properties of a mass of treated soil. Usually the properties that are modified are
shear strength, stiffness, and permeability. Floor improvement has evolved into a
sophisticated tool to support foundations for a variety of structures [35].
6.1 Shallow and deep impaction
Soil compaction is the process in which pressure is applied to the soil causing
concentration as air is exiled from the pores between the soil grains. The compac-
tion is usually the result of heavy machinery compressing the soil [35, 36].
The available techniques can be classified as: Static, Impact, Vibrating, Gyrating,
Rolling, and Kneading [35, 36].
6.2 Grout treatment
A ground remediation operation performed to accomplish one of two things,

either to reduce water flow or to improve the properties of the ground by drilling
wells in the foundation and injecting material under pressure into the subsurface
foundation [35, 37].
Each hole in the filler project is an extension of previous exploration pits and
the data collected is used to increase the understanding of subsurface conditions.
Injectable materials used for filler range from cementitious plaster materials
(particles) to a variety of chemical slurries [37].
Filling foundations in dams and canals to reduce water flow are among the oldest
applications of fillers, dating back to the early nineteenth century with plaster
curtains in use since the 1890s [37].
6.3 Bentonite suspension
The different kinds of bentonite are called after their main element, like potas-
sium, sodium, calcium, and aluminum. Bentonite is usually made by weathering
volcanic ash, regularly in the presence of water. However, the term bentonite, as
well as a similar clay called Tonstein, has been used to describe clay layers of uncer-
tain origin. For industrial purposes, there are two main classes of bentonite: sodium
and calcium bentonite. In stratigraphy and tephrochronology, fully demixed ash
7
Engineering Geology
layers (weathered igneous glass) are commonly referred to as K-bentonites when

the predominant clays are lit. In addition to montmorillonite and the attachment of
other common clays that are sometimes prevalent are kaolin. Clays dominated by
kaolinite are commonly referred to as tonsteins and are commonly associated with
charcoal [35, 38, 39].
6.4 Ground anchor
Ground anchors are a device designed to support structures, most commonly

used in geotechnical and construction applications.. Ground anchors are used in
temporary and permanent applications [35].
Ground anchors are commonly used in civil engineering and construction
projects, and have a variety of applications, including: [35].
• Retaining walls.
• Structural support of temporary buildings and structures,
• Tethering marine structures.
• Supporting guyed masts.
• Anchoring utility poles.
• Landscape, anchoring trees, often semi-mature transplants.
• General security, as in anchoring small aircraft.
• Sporting activities, such as slacklining or abseiling.
7. Water reservoirs and dams
The reservoir is an non-natural lake in which water is stored. Most reservoirs are
made by building dams across rivers. A reservoir can also be made from a natural
lake whose outlet has been blocked to control the water level. The dam controls the
amount of water that streams from the reservoir [40].
7.1 Dam design parameters
Design criteria for earth dams are: [41].
• Sufficient capacity is provided for the drainage and the float basin so there is
no risk of overflow of the dam.
• The leakage flow across the bridge is controlled so the amount lost does not
interfere with the target of the dam and there is no erosion or erosion of the
soil. In this regard, the leakage line should remain well within the downstream
front of the dam and the part of the weir should be drained on the downstream
side of the impermeable core.
• The uplift pressure caused by the leakage from below is not enough to cause the
pipes.
8
• Bridge slopes are stable under all tank operating conditions, including rapid
drawdown and during continuous leakage under a full tank.
• The stresses imposed by the bridge on the foundation are less than.
• The upstream face is properly protected ((stone throw, riprap, revetment) from
abrasion caused by the movement of waves, and the lower face (anti-arms,
grass) is protected from the impact of rain.
7.2 Geological influences upon the selection of reservoir sites
Topography: In the geological sense, topography is the composition of the

Earth’s surface, and includes the location, size and shape of physical features such
as hills, hills, valleys, streams, and lakes. Topographic maps show these features.
Examination of a topographic map combined with a survey of the land is often
sufficient to determine the overall topographical suitability of the dam and the
location of the proposed reservoir. This is the first and easiest step in determining
the feasibility of a proposed project [25].
Hydrology and Hydrogeology: Hydrology is the science related to the Earth’s water,
its distribution and phenomena. For a dam and reservoir project to be successful,
it must have an adequate and continuous supply of water suitable for the tank’s
intended uses. Hydrological information and investigations will be required to
varying degrees, depending on the size of the project. Annual rainfall, the ratio of
the catchment area to the reservoir area, and the size of the stream flow must be
known in all seasons of the year. It is also necessary to study groundwater science to
determine whether the groundwater will contribute to the reservoir or whether the
reservoir will lose water to the groundwater system. Tank capacity, maximum and
minimum tank yield must also be known so that water commitments do not exceed
the amount of water available [25].
Geology: To properly judge the feasibility of the proposed dam and reservoir
project, it is necessary to know the type, distribution and succession of rocks and
other geological units in the project area, for the stability of the dam and water - the
ability to maintain the reservoir is directly related to them. The aspects of geology
that must be evaluated to determine the suitability of a project site include:
• The directions of the units, whether flat or tilted.
• The depth and extent of weathering.
• The presence and condition of breaks, such as open or closed joints, faults, or
solution channels.
• The presence of layers of sand or silt and old soil areas.
The engineering properties of the geological units are directly related to the type
of rocks or unconsolidated material involved, and thus to the geology [25].
7.3 Dam foundations
A site investigation shall be carried out prior to construction to verify the nature
of the foundation. By knowing the actual foundation condition at the site, the earth
dam can then be designed accordingly. An embankment foundation is said to be
suitable if it is able to provide stable support for the bridge under all conditions of
9
Engineering Geology
saturation and loading and that it provides adequate leakage resistance to avoid
excessive water loss [42, 43].
The foundation of the dam may be broadly classified into three types which are
rock foundations, coarse-grained material foundations and fine-grained material
foundation [43].
These foundations may need to be treated to stabilize any weakness and also to
reduce leakage. On the other hand, rock foundation must be inspected for erosive
leakage and excessive uplift pressure. If such conditions exist, the foundation must
be considered grouting [9, 43].
7.4 Dam seismicity
Induced earthquakes refer to the earthquakes and slight tremors that result from
human activity that alter the stresses and stresses on the Earth’s crust. Most of the
induced earthquakes are of low magnitude [44].
Seismic hazard from induced seismic activity can be assessed using techniques
similar to natural earthquakes, although one account for unstable earthquakes.
Earthquakes vibrating from induced earthquakes appear to be similar to those
observed in natural tectonic earthquakes, although differences in rupture depth
need to be taken into account. This means that ground motion models derived from
natural seismic recordings can be used, which are often more numerous in robust
motion databases compared to induced earthquake data. Then, a risk assessment
can be performed, taking into account earthquake risk and the vulnerability of
vulnerable items (such as local residents and building stock). F inally, risk can, in
theory at least, be mitigated, either through modifications of the risk or reduced
exposure or vulnerability [44].
Acknowledgements
All thanks and gratitude are for my wife, Rasha, and my children, George
Alexander and Tia, for their unconditioned love.
I am also grateful for Prof. Hasan Arman, Prof. Sulaiman Alzuhair, and Prof. Ali
Almarzouqi, from UAE University for their support.
10
References
[1] B. a. Jacson, Glossary of Geology, [13] d. F. M.H., Geological Masses,

AGI, 1981. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009.
[2] Kiersh, “The Heritage of Engineerng [14] T. E. o. E. Britannica, “Mass

Geology: The first 100 years,” Geological movement,” Encyclopaedia Britannica,
Society of America, vol. 3, 1991. 12 12 2020. [Online]. Available:
https://www.britannica.com/science/
[3] A. M. o. N. History, “Exhabitions,” mass-movement.
Amirecan Museum of Natural
History, 6 1 2021. [Online]. [15] M. W. &. W. P. Hobbs BE, An
Available: https://www.amnh.org/ outline of structural geology, John Wiley
exhibitions/permanent/planet-earth/ & sons, 1976.
how-do-we-read-the-rocks/three-types.
[16] T. R. a. M. EM, Structural Geology,
WH Freeman and Co, 2007.
[4] U. S. D. o. Agriculture, National
Engineering Handbook, United States
[17] M. D. A. P. I. C. M. Chris Johnson,
Department of Agriculture, 2012.
an Introduction to Geology, Salt Lake
Community College, 2017.
[5] R. F. Butler, Applications to
paleogeography, IUPAC, 1992. [18] T. G. S. o. London, “Weathering,”
The Geological Society of London, 12
[6] W. Dearman, Engineering Geological 12 2020. [Online]. Available: https://
Mapping, Elsevier Ltd., 1991. www.geolsoc.org.uk/ks3/gsl/education/
resources/rockcycle/page3461.
[7] D. G. Price, Engineering Geology: html#:~:text=Weathering%20is%20
Principles and Practice, Springer, the%20breakdown%20of,%2C%20
2008. physical%2C%20chemical%20and%20
biological.
[8] A. a. farmer, Principles of
Engineering Gelology, University of [19] R. Ulusay and J. Hudson, The
Durham, 1976. Complete ISRM Suggested Methods
for Rock Characterization, Testing and
[9] T. Waltham, Foundations of Monitoring, Ankara: Turkish National
Engineering Geology, CRC Press, 2009. Group, 1974.
[20] d. F. M.H., Field Tests and

[10] C. G. Survey, “Colorado Geological
Survey,” 12 12 2020. [Online]. Measurements, Springer, Berlin, 2009.
[21] ASTM, “Standard Test Method for

[11] “U.S. Geological Survey,” 12 12
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and
2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.
Split-Barrel Sampling of Soils,” ASTM
usgs.gov/faqs/what-a-landslide-and- International.
what-causes-one?qt-news_science_
products=0#qt-news_science_products. [22] T. S. o. E. Geophysicists,
“Engineering geophysics,” 12
[12] I. S. Network, “International 12 2020. [Online]. Available:
SABO Network,” [Online]. Available: https://wiki.seg.org/wiki/
http://www.sabo-int.org/dott/ Dictionary:Engineering_geophysics.
slope.html#:~:text=A%20slope%20
failure%20is%20a,a%20higher%20 [23] A. Malehmir, M. Urosevic, G.
rate%20of%20fatalities. Bellefleur, C. Juhlin and B. Milkereit,
11
Engineering Geology
Seismic methods in mineral exploration [33] M. Nabighian, “Quasi-static

and mine planning — Introduction, The Transient Response of a Conducting
Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Half-Space – an Approximate
2012. Representation,” Geophysics, vol. 44,
no. 10, pp. 1700-1705, 1979.
[24] J. Milsom and A. Eriksen, Field
Geophysics, Environmental and [34] J. D. McNeill, “Applications of
Engineering Geoscience, 2011. Transient Electromagnetic Techniques,”
in Technical Note 7, Geonics Ltd,
[25] S. A. J. C. Burger RH, Introduction Mississauga, Ontario., 1980.
to Applied Geophysics, W. W. Norton,
2006. [35] A. B. Klaus Kirsch, Ground
Improvement, New York: CRC Press,
[26] M. Loke and R. Barker, “Practical 2013.
techniques for 3D resistivity surveys
and data inversion,” in the 57th EAEG [36] X. Jia, W. Hu, P. Polaczyk, H.
Meeting, Glasgow, 1995. Gong and B. Huang, “Comparative
Evaluation of Compacting Process for
[27] D. F. Bleil, “INDUCED Base Materials using Lab Compaction
POLARIZATION: A METHOD OF Methods,” Journal of the Transportation
GEOPHYSICAL PROSPECTING,” Research Board, vol. 2673 , no. 4, p.
GEOPHYSICS, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 636- 558-567, 2019.
661, 1953.
[37] B. M. Peter T. Bobrowsky, “Grout/
[28] J. W. S. U. D. L. C. J. H. C. K. S. Grouting,” Encyclopedia of Engineering
C. R. H. C. L. S. E. P. G. P. G. H. J. D. Geology, pp. 1-15, Living Edition.
K. T. B. M. D. H. D. P. L. F. D. M. M.
H. L. R. D. B. S. C. M. Ken Zonge, [38] I. E. Odom, “Smectite clay Minerals:
“Resistivity, Induced Polarization, and Properties and Uses,” Philosophical
Complex Resistivity,” Investigations in Transactions of the Royal Society A:
Geophysics, pp. 265-300, 2005. Mathematical, Physical and Engineering
Sciences., vol. 311, no. 1517, p. 391-409,
[29] A. Tikhonov, “On determining 1984.
electrical characteristics of the deep
layers of the Earth’s crust,” Doklady., [39] K. Bekkour, “Rheological
vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 295-297, 1950. Characterization of Bentonite
Suspensions and,” Applied Rheology,
[30] L. Cagniard, “Basic theory of the vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 178-188, 2001.
magneto-telluric method of geophysical
prospecting,” Geophysics, vol. 18, no. 3, [40] N. G. Editiors, “Reservoir,”
p. 605-635. , 1953. National Geographic, 12 12 2021.
[Online]. Available: https://www.
[31] D. DJ, “Ground Penetrating nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/
Radar,” Institution of Engineering and reservoir/.
Technology, no. 2, pp. 1-4, 2004.
[41] G. Mishra, “CRITERIA FOR
[32] J.-F. Hofinghoff, “Resistive Loaded DESIGN OF EARTH DAMS,” The
Antenna for Ground Penetrating Constructor - The Construction
Radar Inside a Bottom Hole Assembly,” Encyclopedia, 12 12 2020.
IEEE Transactions on Antennas and [Online]. Available: https://
Propagation, vol. 61, no. 12, p. 6201- theconstructor.org/water-resources/
6205, 2013. criteria-for-design-of-earth-dams/2278/.
12
[42] H. R. H. R. G. P. S. Ö.
Best E., “Development, Danube
river,” in Danube river: Development,
Dordrecht, 1998.
[43] UKEssays, “Design and

Construction Fundamentals
Of Earth Dams Environmental
Sciences Essay.” UKEssays, 12 12
2018. [Online]. Available: https://
www.ukessays.com/essays/
environmental-sciences/design-and-
construction-fundamentals-of-earth-
dams-environmental-sciences-essay.
php#citethis.
[44] R. S. J. C. J. H. E.M. Gosschalk, “An

Engineering Guide to Seismic Risk to
Dams in the United Kingdom, and its
international relevance,” Soil Dynamics
and Earthquake Engineering, vol. 1, no.
3, pp. 163-179, 1994.
13
Chapter 2
Time-Dependent Behavior of
Rock Materials
ChrysothemisParaskevopoulou
Abstract
Understanding the geomechanical behavior of a geological model is still an

on-going challenge for engineers and scientists. More challenges arise when consid-
ering the long-term behavior of rock materials, especially when exposed to
environ-ments that enable time-dependent processes to occur and govern overall
behavior. The latter is essential in underground projects such as nuclear waste
repositories. The lifespan can exceed one million years or other openings where the
project’s lifetime and sustainability are the critical design parameter. In such cases,
progres-sive rock mass deformation that can lead to instabilities, time-dependent
overload-ing of support and delayed failure are considered the product of time-
dependent phenomena. Understanding and predicting the overall impact of such
phenomena aims to achieve design optimization, avoiding dlivery delays and thus
cost overruns. This chapter provides more insight into the time-dependent
behavior of rocks. Simultaneously, the emphasis is given to investigating and
analyzing creep defor-mation and time-dependent stress relaxation phenomenon at
the laboratory scale, and in-depth analyses are presented. This work further
develops the understanding of these phenomena, and practical yet scientific tools
for estimating and predict-ing the long-term strength and the maximum stress
relaxation of rock materials is presented. The work presented in this chapter
advances the scientific understanding of time-dependent rock, and rock mass
behavior increases the awareness of how such phenomena are captured
numerically and lays out a framework for dealing with such deformations when
predicting tunnel deformations.
Keywords: time-dependent behavior, long-term behavior, long-term strength,

creep, stress-relaxation, strength-degradation
. Introduction
Rock engineering and tunneling are considered to be three-dimensional

problem. In practice, the short-term mechanical performance is of primary focus in
design
as design and characterization parameters and data are derived from short-term
testing. Challenges and implications can be formed when performance over time
and long-term behavior is taken into consideration. Current design methodologies
used in underground structures and tunneling projects are commonly solely based
on the static response of the surrounding ground neglecting the long-term time-
dependent behavior that can affect the overall structure’s performance and the
construction process [1, 2]. The latter can cause difficulties when attempting to
understand the governing mechanisms in rock materials where time-dependent
phenomena such as creep and stress relaxation can occur [3, 4]. When these
processes are excluded or

Engineering Geology
neglected during the design process, incorrect results and unsound conclusions are
derived. These can involve support requirements and excavation methods employed,
impacting the construction, the maintenance cost of the tunnel, and in the worst
case, may even cause safety issues [5–8].
Strength-degradation is considered highly important in underground applica-
tions such as low, intermediate and high-level nuclear waste. The time-dependent
strength decrease deteriorates the overall lifetime of the underground opening [9].
This lifetime span can range from 100,000 to 1,000,000years which significantly
exceeds the typical 100-year lifetime of underground projects. It is evident, thus,
the reason why there is a need to investigate from micro to macro-scale further
the long-term behavior of rock materials that could be used as host-rocks for such
applications.
This Chapter aims to provide more insight into rock materials’ time-dependent
behavior by addressing the mechanisms involved and highlighting the associated
implications for both scientific and practical applications. In this work, both experi-
mental laboratory testing and numerical analyses are employed to examine the
time-dependent mechanisms and rocks’ response under different boundary condi-
tions while introducing a different perspective for analyzing and predicting the
intact rock’s time-dependent behavior of the rock mass behavior in underground
environments. A time-dependent response such as creep, squeezing, swelling, stress
relaxation, and strength degradation of the rock mass can occur during both the
construction and the maintenance of underground openings depending on the in
situ conditions that control the mechanical behavior shown in Figure .
It has been observed that an often misconception is the assumption that time-
dependent phenomena only act individually. However, this assumption can yield
unsound estimations and erroneous conclusions. These phenomena may share the
same (or similar) mechanisms given the existing in situ conditions can take place
either in series or even simultaneously. Therefore, the overall observed displace-
ment on the tunnel wall can result from different phenomena acting together. The
selection of an appropriate constitutive model to examine the mechanical behavior
of rock material overtime is required. The ability of such models to capture and
simulate time-dependent behavior is illustrated in Figure .
The time-effect can cause different behavioral patterns depending on the
underground construction project’s site-specific conditions; the selection of the
Figure 1.
Examples of time-dependent phenomena, the behavioral response with time and a description of the
phenomena encountered in rock tunneling.

Time-Dependent Behavior of Rock Materials
Figure 2.
Examples of reported failures and mechanisms associated with time-dependent behavior; where t refers to time
and ur(t) to the radial displacements observed in the tunnel walls over time.
appropriate model to simulate the desired mechanical response is crucial. For

instance, stress relaxation usually occurs near the newly exposed walls after the
tunnel face excavation. The visco-elasticity (or anelasticity) can cause implica-
tions during rapid excavation (i.e., TBM). The indefinite deformation usually
observed in more ductile materials can result from the deterioration of the
support system. In this case, different support measures (i.e., yielding support
systems) should be undertaken where the on-going deformation will be allowed
to take place. Visco-plasticity or delayed fracturing can permanently damage
the rock mass after initial construction, requiring redesigning the initial tunnel
design. These examples show the importance of using the appropriate model to
simulate the real conditions as closely as possible and estimate how the rock mass
will behave over time.
. Theoretical and practical background
Different rocks and rock masses respond in different ways over time. The main
factor that controls their behavior is geology. The mineralogical content and the
geological structure impact rocks’ mechanical behavior; ultimately, the stress
regime and the environmental conditions also influence the rock materials’ behav-
ior. Figure  provides a roadmap on the material’s anticipated mechanical behavior
grouped into ductile or brittle behavior based on the conditions the material is
initially formed. In general, as the temperature and confining pressure increase,
the rock transitions from brittle to ductile (Figure a). Brittle materials tend to
abruptly fail as the stress approaches their short-term strength, and as such, they
absorb less energy. In contrast, ductile materials can sustain an applied stress state
through more deformation (Figure b and c). When ductile materials (i.e. rock salt
or potash) are subjected to constant differential stress below their nominal yield
strength, they can behave as visco-elastic materials and further deform as time
elapses (Figure d and e). In contrast, brittle materials (i.e., granite or limestone)
under similar stress conditions may only exhibit micro-crack damage with progres-
sive crack propagation that results in the eventual interaction of the previously
isolated microcracks, which leads to sudden failure (Figure d and e).

Engineering Geology
Figure 3.
Schematic illustration and comparison between brittle and ductile rock materials, (a) transition from brittle
to ductile behavior according to confining pressure and temperature conditions; (b) absorbed energy and
temperature; (c) general stress – Strain behavior of brittle and ductile materials; (d) stain- rate and time
relationship of brittle and ductile materials subjected to constant stress exhibiting creep, and (e) examples of
brittle limestone and ductile potash before and after static load (creep) tests.
. Time-dependent phenomena
Time-dependency refers to the deformation of rock (or other materials) over

time. Mechanisms deforming or weakening the rock mass over time are called time-
dependent phenomena. Since the late 1930s, researchers started investigating the
effect of time in rock behavior, trying to apply the theory of creep widely studied
and reported on metals [10] to rock behavior. It was not until 1939 when Griggs
[11] undertook laboratory experiments to examine the phenomenon of creep of
rocks. He constructed two apparatus and performed tests on limestone, anhydride,
shale and chalk. He also examined recrystallization under creep conditions at high
pressure. At the excavation scale, addressing the effect of time in tunneling and
mining engineering has been studied since the 1950s. Researchers introduced the
idea of ‘stand-up time’ in tunnel stability. The ‘stand up time’, a reflection of time-
dependent weakening, was also included in the rock mass classification systems
[12–14], emphasizing time and its effects by producing charts illustrating the time
frame of stable unsupported spans. Since the 1960s many researchers [15–25] have
investigated the influence of time on the long-term strength of rock by performing
laboratory testing on rock samples, typically using static load (creep) tests by sus-
taining a constant stress condition. Creep phenomenon is most commonly applied
to the study of soft, mono-mineralic rocks such as halite, potash, and limestone
[26]. Following this practice, new constitutive and numerical time-dependent
models were introduced based on the experimental results and data [27–31]. These
models attempt to capture and reproduce the behavior of laboratory tests on the
rocks, including time.
In practice, as previously mentioned, there is often a miscomprehension and
misinterpretation of the different time-dependent phenomena and the mechanisms
acting and resulting in weakening rock and the rock mass over time [9]. This sec-
tion serves as an attempt to redefine and describe the various mechanisms that can
appear to be time-dependent under the appropriate conditions using the composite

Figure 4.
Nomenclature, defining time-dependent phenomena and the conditions and mechanisms that affect and govern
the rock behavior [9].
nomenclature shown in Figure . The phenomenon can be either due to a state-

change (i.e. stress decrease) or a property-change (i.e. decrease in cohesion). These
changes can be further categorized according to their reversibility or recoverability
as elastic, inelastic, and irreversible and may increase to visco-elastic or visco-
plastic strains. The physical response can be represented as creep (shear strain),
contraction or dilation (volumetric strains) over time, as well as relaxation (reduc-
tion in shear stress under sustained strain) and degradation (strength loss) depend-
ing on loading and boundary conditions. The micro-mechanical mechanisms tend
to vary according to the boundary conditions. For instance, the solid rheology (e.g.
lattice distortion, dislocation slip, van der Vaal’s bonds and/or solid diffusion)
may be damaged by new cracks that initiate or pre-existing ones propagate while
pores, grain boundaries, and pre-existing cracks creating discontinnuum elements.
Besides, the physicochemical changes can be temporal, rheological, and chemical
alterations in the micro-scale, leading to swelling, weakening, strain-softening, and
hardening. The rate and the magnitude of the time-dependent performance of rock
materials are controlled by other environmental, physical, and loading conditions
(e.g. temperature, pressure, humidity, and confinement).
Time-dependent phenomena can be a combination of many factors that can
result in various physical responses and act either simultaneously or individually.
Differentiating and recognizing these phenomena can be a complicated process,
and all components in Figure  should be taken into account.
The overall physical response can be a combination/integration of the mechanisms
that influence the long-term behavior of intact rock and rock masses and include:
• creep during which visco-elastic behavior governs where time-dependent,

inelastic strains and ‘indefinite’ deformation occur and/or visco-plastic
yield where time-dependent plastic strains occur that lead to permanent
deformation.

Engineering Geology
• dilation or contraction where volume change takes place over time

usually caused by the change of stress resulting in the propagation
and interaction of cracks (dilation) or the closure of the existing ones
(contraction).
• relaxation where the reduction of the stress with time under sustained
strain is controlled by the internal creep processes aimed at relieving the
stored elastic energy
• mechanical property degradation where strength and/or stiffness change

due to damage processes that accompany or occur as a result of the above
phenomenon.
. Time-dependent laboratory tests
Time-dependent behavior of rock materials is usually investigated in the lab-

scale by performing static load (creep) and stress relaxation tests which can be done
in uniaxial and triaxial compressive conditions.
.. Relaxation tests
Relaxation is defined as stress (or load) decrease over time when the deforma-
tion (or strain) is kept constant. Commonly, the axis on which the stress is applied
(i.e. axial stress used) determines the deformation’s axes that are maintained
constant (i.e. axial strain – constant). It has been observed that relaxation behavior
is related not only to time-dependent phenomena like creep but also to time-
dependent damage evolution of new or pre-existing cracks growth and evolution in
the specimen that initiates during loading [9, 32, 33].
Figure  shows the stages during a stress relaxation test from A to C. The rock is
initially loaded in the axial direction up to point A, which is considered the strain
threshold at which the applied strain is held constant (points A to C). In this regard,
these tests are often referred to as strain-controlled. Overtime, existing cracks and/
or new cracks are formed and propagated at this strain threshold, contributing to
the observed stress decrease (relaxation). When this stress relaxation reaches an
asymptote (no further decrease is observed), the test is terminated, which implies
that crack growth stabilization is achieved [19].
It should be stated that suggested standard test guidelines on relaxation tests on
rock samples are not provided by ISRM. However, there are guidelines provided by
ASTM [34] for relaxation testing performed on man-made materials and structures.
In section 3.2 this standard has been adopted and adjusted for rock relaxation testing.
Figure 5.
Relaxation test: (a) stress–strain response, (b) strain- time response, (c) stress-time response.

Figure 6.
Static load test: (a) stress–strain response, (b) stress-time response, (c) strain-time response.
.. Static load tests
To investigate creep, this time-dependent deformation of materials subjected

to constant load or stress less than its short-term strength, static load tests are
performed. In materials, here is a minimum load or stress, which enables them to
undergo creep behavior, below which no creep is observed [9, 35, 36]. Elevated
differential stress triggers the deformation of crystal lattices, leading to strain-
ing of the minerals, potentially microcracking, and eventually measurable strain
of the rock element. Figure  presents a typical stress–strain-time response of a
(uniaxial) creep test. The rock sample is loaded until point A, the stress threshold
where it is held constant. Over time the strain increases at different rates up to point
B, where failure occurs. This test is usually referred to as load-controlled or stress-
controlled tests.
Failure of the specimen usually denoted the completion of the test. However,
many static load tests are terminated when a constant strain-rate is achieved, infer-
ring the transition to the secondary stage of creep. For static load tests, ISRM [37]
has suggested standard guidelines.
. Time-dependent models
The time-dependent mechanisms are usually investigated by developing analyti-

cal methods adopting rheological models (comprising mechanical analogues) and
empirical models based on laboratory testing data. Specifically, creep behavior
is mathematically represented by the Burgers model. This model combines two
simplified linear visco-elastic mechanical analogues in series: the Kelvin and the
Maxwell that simulate a delayed manifestation of a static response due to boundary
conditions alteration and a continued strain rate relaxation overtime under static
boundary conditions, respectively shown in Figure .
Deformation that occurs at constant loading condition through time can be
expressed using Eq. (1) [38], where: ε1 is the axial strain, σ1 is the constant axial
stress, K is the bulk modulus, ηK is Kelvin’s model viscosity, ηM is Maxwell’s model
viscosity, GK is Kelvin’s shear modulus, GM is Maxwell’s shear modulus. ηK , ηM, GK ,
GM are the visco-elastic parameters and are considered properties of the rock.
 GΚ 
2σ σ σ σ − t 
ε 1 ( t ) = 1 + 1 + 1 − 1 e  ηΚ  (1)
9 K 3GM 3GK 3GK
During stress relaxation, the strain-state is controlled and remains constant,

thus rearranging Eq. (1) for a constant strain component, the material’s stress state
is changing according to Eq. (2).

Engineering Geology
Figure 7.
Idealized creep and relaxation behavioral curves and the equivalent visco-elastic components in the
Burgers model.
 G 
− M t  − Κ t  
G 
σ 1 ( t ) = ε 1 GM e
 η M 
+ GK e  η Κ   (2)
 
 
Goodman’s [38] approach is usually adopted to derive the Bugers model param-
eters by curve fitting laboratory creep testing results. Using a similar approach
for determining parameters and assuming that the material’s behavior can be
represented by the linear visco-elastic Burgers body in unconfined compression
[33] found that the same parameters (i.e. viscosities and shear moduli) can be also
derived from stress relaxation tests, (Figure ).
In reality and embedded in this mathematical concept are the three stages of
creep that follow the instantaneous response (0th stage) to changed boundary
conditions resulting to a constant stress-state as follows:
• 1st stage or primary or transient creep where the delayed adjustment to a new
equilibrium state takes place through visco-elastic (reversible) deformation,
and may be accompanied by some irreversible behavior, resulting in strain
accumulation with decreasing rate over time. This stage is commonly simulated
with the Kelvin model analogue.

• 2nd stage or secondary creep where the material exhibits a consistent strain
accumulation rate over time accompanied by inelastic distortion. The dura-
tion or even existence of this stage can vary depending on the ability of the
rock type to transition from ductile to more brittle materials. The Maxwell
visco-elastic model is commonly used to phenomenologically represent
this stage.
• 3rd stage or tertiary creep where strong non-linear or accelerating strains occur
(typically driving the material to rupture) due to strain-driven weakening,
chemically related strength degradation and/or interaction of growing cracks.
Visco-plastic models and/or so-called stress corrosion models are used to
simulate tertiary creep.
A combination of Kelvin and Maxwell model components is referred to as the

Burgers model which can be used to simulate stages 1 and 2 in combination.
. Damage evolution and failure in brittle rocks
Over (geological) time, ductile deformation processes involve continuum

mechanisms such as dislocation slip or migration of atomic vacancies within
crystals resulting in distortion (pure or simple shear strain) [39]. However, in brittle
materials, failure is controlled and governed by progressive damage driven by the
pre-existing and new cracks initiation and evolution in the maximum load direction
[40, 41]. Figure  presents the four distinct stages during brittle deformability and
failure: (i) closure of pre-existing cracks; (ii) linear elastic behavior; (iii) stable
crack growth; and (iv) unstable crack growth, which leads to failure and the peak
strength.
Figure 8.
Stress - strain response of brittle rock deformability and time-dependent behavior of creep and/or relaxation.

Engineering Geology
Stress–strain curves for brittle rocks can be used to determine the: (i) crack
initiation stress (CI); (ii) critical damage stress or axial yield stress (CD), and (iii)
uniaxial compressive strength (UCS). While UCS strength can inhibit the loading
rate and testing procedure influences, CD is the true upper bound yield strength
when obtained in the lab, according to ISRM [42] standards [43]. In the limit CD,
can drop in situ to the lower bound defined by CI. This lower bound is relatively
insensitive to moderate pre-existing damage and other influences and is found to
be 30–50% of standard UCS in brittle rocks as measured in the lab [44] or by in situ
back analysis [45]. Below CI, the sample is genuinely elastic, with no new damage
occurring in the sample.
. Laboratory testing program and methods
Laboratory tests were performed in two types of limestone to examine time-

effects in brittle materials. The selected Jurassic limestone comes from a quarry
north of Zurich, Switzerland (Figure a). The Cobourg limestone (Figure b)
comes from the Bowmanville quarry near Bowmanville, Ontario, Canada. It should
be noted that sample preparation were conducted according to ISRM [42].
Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) tests were conducted on 10 cylindri-
cal samples of Jurassic and 9 of Cobourg. Relaxation tests were conducted on 19
Jurassic and 16 Cobourg samples. Static Load tests were performed on 12 Jurassic
and 5 Cobourg samples.
Figure 9.
Samples of (a) Jurassic limestone, (b) Cobourg limestone.

Figure 10.
Stress-strain response of limestone: (a) Jurassic samples and (b) Cobourg samples tested in unconfined
compressive strength conditions.
. Baseline testing series
The complete stress–strain curves of the UCS tests are shown in Figure .
The average values estimated for UCS, CD and CI were 103MPa, 91MPa, 39MPa,
respectively for the Jurassic limestone and 125MPa, 111MPa and 50MPa Cobourg
limestone.
. Relaxation testing series
Two test series have been performed: (i) Jurassic limestone was utilized to exam-
ine the applicability of various testing procedures (i.e. axial strain-controlled, radial
strain-controlled, multi-step and single-step) for assessing the long-term relaxation
behavior and (b) Cobourg limestone was performed utilizing a single-step axial
strain-controlled testing procedure.
Emphasis was given to the maximum stress relaxation; the total change between
the maximum stress value at the end of loading and before relaxation started. The
lowest stress level resulted after relaxation with time. The steps of the procedure
undertaken were the following:
• the maximum stress value before relaxation was recorded,
• the initial loading portion of the stress–strain curve was then removed,
• setting the time to zero at the point where the axial strain was kept constant,
• the load rate was kept the same for all the tests, and the initial loading duration
ranged from 2 to 20minutes,
• the axial stress was then normalized to the estimated average UCS,
• the maximum normalized stress was recorded and related to the maximum
stress relaxation (the difference between the initial maximum stress and the
minimum stress at the end of the relaxation test where no further relaxation
took place).

Engineering Geology
The relations between the maximum stress relaxation and applied stress
expressed as a driving ratio of UCS from all the relaxation testing series (axial
strain-controlled) are summarized in Figure . It can be observed that there is an
apparent trend between the multi-step and the single-step tests of Jurassic lime-
stone. It can be easily seen that the multi-step tests exhibit less relaxation for similar
driving stress-ratios than the single-step. The initial drop in stress mechanism that
occurs rapidly for the first step of any test was attributed to being associated with
the elastic energy within the sample and load system. A correction procedure was
developed since the stress drop was associated with only the initial load stage. This
stress drop was added to all subsequent load steps in the multi-step tests, shown
(Figure ) as corrected and exhibits similar amounts of stress relaxation compared
with the single-step relaxation at a similar load level. Therefore, the multi-step tests,
if corrected, can be conducted when limited samples are available [33]. Cobourg
limestone shows a higher relaxation sensitivity as it exhibits more stress relaxation
than the Jurassic limestone at the same stress levels.
.. Defining the three stages of stress relaxation
All the single-step test results showed a similar behavior during stress relaxation
for both the limestones. This behavior can be characterized by three distinct stages,
which were observed in the stress relaxation versus time graphs. An example of the
test results is illustrated in Figure . The three stages can also be observed in the
radial strain response with time, although there is a slight delay during the transi-
tion from stage to stage compared to the transition time of the stress relaxation
shown as dt in Figures  and .
Figure 11.
Maximum stress–relaxation (MPa) to driving stress-ratio normalized to UCS of the single-step tests on the
Jurassic and Cobourg samples, as well as the multi-step tests of the Jurassic samples. ‘Ax’ refers to axial strain-
controlled conditions and ‘ss’ and ‘ms’ denotes single-step load and multi-step load tests, respectively.

Figure 12.
The three stages of the stress relaxation process during a relaxation test under axial strain-controlled conditions
illustrated on the Jura_33R sample.
Figure 13.
The three stages of the stress relaxation process during a relaxation test under axial strain-controlled conditions.

Engineering Geology
When the axial deformation is kept constant, the stress relaxes at a decreasing
rate; this period is defined as the first stage of stress relaxation (RI). At the end of
this stage, the stress decrease approaches a constant rate, which marks the second
stage transition (RII). The third stage of relaxation (RIII) follows where no further
stress relaxation is measurable. At this stage, the stress reaches an asymptote, and
the stress relaxation process is effectively complete, which others have observed
[19]. Some samples did not exhibit the second stage of relaxation (RII), and in the
first stage, 55% to 95% of the total stress relaxation takes place.
The radial strain does not always reach an asymptote. In this case the material is
subject to a practically constant axial stress state with ongoing additional absolute
radial strain decrease. This response is possibly related to a combination of three-
dimensional visco-elastic response and crack behavior during stable propagation
(in the axial direction) under constant axial strain.
The significance of this scientific observation should be considered during the
excavation of an underground opening. Energy release and stress relaxation in such
conditions commonly take place at the face of the excavated tunnel. The created free
space disturbs the stress regime of the in-situ conditions. For the stress to re-distribute
itself to a new equilibrium state, the rock mass tends to “relax” through the structural
geological imperfections (i.e. discontinuities, fractures, joints) of the surrounding
rock mass or the newly created fractures due to the excavation method and techniques
used. In relation to the scientific observation of the three stages (Figure ), it would
be expected that the rock mass would relax in distinct but possibly overlapping stages.
This can serve as an explanation of the sound of cracking closer to the tunnel face
without observed failure. Another component of stress relaxation is the duration of
this phenomenon until it is terminated. Knowing the duration of stress relaxation can
be valuable in the support design and the installation timing, avoiding safety implica-
tions arising from support overstressing or resulting in cost savings.
. Static load testing series
Single-step static load tests were conducted on 10 Jurassic, and 4 Cobourg

samples and they were held at stress levels above CI for seconds to several days
Figure 14.
The three stages of the stress relaxation process during a relaxation test under axial-strain–strain-controlled
conditions and the response of the material during each stage, dashed lines on the right photo show axial
stabilization of damage.

until failure occurred. Most of the single-step tests failed within the first few hours.
Several samples did not fail after several days to weeks, at which time the test was
terminated. While more practical and convenient, the single-step tests require the
testing of more specimens to fully cover the spectrum of the expected range of
time to failure. Multi-step tests were performed on three samples, 2 Jurassic and 1
Cobourg, to compare with stress levels derived from the single-step tests. The stress
difference between the steps (varying between 2–4) was 5MPa, and the duration
of each step varied from 1hour up to 10days until failure took place. A few Jurassic
samples did not fail, and it was decided to terminate these tests and unload the
samples. To examine the long-term strength and time to failure of a material, the
specimens need to fail under a constant load.
The static load testing began at load levels close to the peak strength, based on
the Baseline Test results. Subsequent tests were conducted at lower driving stress
levels approaching CD and below. In these tests, the constant target stress is applied
and maintained by controlling the axial load while measuring the strains (axial and
lateral) that increase as the sample proceeds toward failure. Samples loaded close to
the peak strength fail catastrophically into many fragments, while samples loaded
closer to CD fail less violently. Selected results are presented in this section, serving
as examples to describe the main influencing factors during the two limestone tests’
creep process.
Two aspects of time-dependency were examined: the first was to derive
visco-elastic (creep) parameters for use in the Burgers model (or related models),
and the second, the time to failure. Samples that did not fail were also examined
to assess the potential reason why some samples fail, and others do not, even at
the same driving stress-ratio. For this reason, this section focuses on analyzing
and comparing the data from this testing series to other data available in the
literature.
However, during the loading phase, the properties of the sample can be deter-
mined, such as the stiffness or the damage thresholds. The steps of the analysis
procedure were:
• the maximum stress value at which the axial load was held constant was
recorded.
• the initial loading portion of the stress–strain curve was used to estimate CI
stress thresholds.
• the load rate was similar for all the tests and depending on the instantaneous
stress level the initial loading duration ranged from 5 to 10minutes, according
to the ISRM [42] guidelines.
• setting the time to zero at the point where the axial load is kept constant,
• the maximum stress was normalized to an estimated UCS value for comparison
to the literature.
• the maximum stress was normalized to the CI value from each sample test, as it
is an independent value.
• the visco-elastic parameters were determined.
All the results presented refer to unconfined conditions.

Engineering Geology
.. Estimating the driving stress-ratio
In the literature, most of the testing results are presented in the form of time
against the driving-stress-ratio, defined and used as the stress normalized by the
strength of the sample. In most cases, the UCS is taken as an average value from
standard UCS tests. In this section, a new solution is presented to examine similar
datasets.
[45] suggested that there is a consistent relationship between UCS and CI for
brittle rocks. The author has found this to be true for a number of test series with
similar lithologies and compatible testing protocols [46]. It was decided to convert
the CI values from this study’s static load tests to an equivalent UCS value. The CI
and UCS values from the Baseline testing series for the two types of limestone were
used to develop the conversion factor (here: 2.66 for Jurassic and 2.52 for Cobourg),
shown in Figure . The conversion factors were multiplied with the CI values
estimated from the loading portion of the static load test for each sample. [26] sug-
gested that the modified UCS* can be calculated using Eqs. (3) and (4):
UCS∗ = a ∗ CI (3)
UCS B
a= (4)
CI B
where: UCS* is the estimated UCS, CI is the Crack Initiation value derived from
the static load test, α is a constant and describes the slope of the CI versus UCS
graph, and the superscript B denotes values from the Baseline Testing.
When the data (red circles and squares) are compared with other static load
test results from various rock types, the time to failure of the samples from this
Figure 15.
The relationship between UCS and CI for the Jurassic and Cobourg limestone from the baseline testing.

Figure 16.
Static load test data for hard rocks performed at room temperature in wet or dry conditions (where the driving
stress-ratio is the stress level at failure to unconfined compressive strength of the material).
study seems to follow a similar trend (Figure ). There are no samples loaded
below the CI threshold that fail from the data presented and gathered from the
literature.
Figure  categorizes the data according to the main rock type, sedimentary,
metamorphic, and igneous.
The sedimentary rocks appear to follow a similar trend with the metamorphic
rocks. In contrast, igneous rocks show more scatter because most test results have
been on igneous rocks and that there are fewer results on sedimentary and meta-
morphic. There could also be due to different grain sizes of the granitic rocks tested
characterized by grain-scale heterogeneity.
Granites and limestones, even though they fail similarly following brittle failure
theory principles, their long-term strength is directly dependent on lithology, as
better shown in Figure . Due to heterogeneous mineralogy and their different
intrinsic properties, granitic rocks allow other creep behavior within different
constituent crystal grains. Steady creep creates mechanical conflicts between the
different grains and damage results. This creep-induced damage process is less
dominant in monominerallic limestones, and therefore creep can occur with less
resultant weakening.
Differences in the trend start to emerge when examining individual sample sets.
The latter is partly because there is a lack of statistically representative data sets on
an individual sample set, except the lac du bonnet set.
From Figure , it is evident that above 0.8 ucs or the cd threshold, all samples
failed within an hour. Below the ci threshold, where pre-existing cracks are closing,
and elastic strains govern, no failure should occur as [47, 48] reported from testing
cobourg limestone samples for up to 100days. Commonly, the static load stress
levels fall between the ci and the cd thresholds. This region is an uncertain region
since between ci and cd crack propagation, and accumulation of damage occurs in
the short-term. Still, in the long-term, the time component can degrade the rock,

Engineering Geology
further leading it to failure. However, below 0.7 ucs, no failure is shown. These no-
failure points could be the result of not holding the load constant for long enough.
Data from the literature suggests that failure could be expected at such driving
stress-ratios. Tests from 6months to 1year are advised to examine if samples of the
limestones in this study would fail at such driving stress-ratios over the long-term.
The time-dependent behavior discussed in this section is interpreted to be, in part,
the result of the behavior of new microcracks, the intensity of which impacts the
final ucs value [49].
Figure 17.
Static load test data for: (a) sedimentary, (b) metamorphic, (c) igneous rocks performed at room temperature
in wet or dry conditions (where the driving stress-ratio is the stress level at failure to unconfined compressive
strength of the material).

Figure 18.
comparison of static load test data on limestone and granite performed at room temperature in dry conditions
(where the driving stress-ratio is the stress level at failure to unconfined compressive strength of the material).
Figure 19.
static load test data of jurassic and cobourg limestone performed at room temperature in dry conditions (where
the driving stress-ratio is the stress level at failure to unconfined compressive strength of the material). The ‘nf’
in the legend indicates samples or tests did not fail whereas the ‘f ’ denotes samples or tests reach failure.
. Time-dependent effects in tunneling
Time-dependent deformations associated with rock tunneling are a reality that

warrants further investigation and understanding and can be observed during
excavation and/or after the construction period of the project.
. Analysis of time-dependent rock masses using the convergence-

confinement method
Understanding the nature and origin of deformations due to an underground

opening requires, as [50] noted, both knowledge of the rock-support interaction
and field data interpretation. This tunnel wall movement, also known as conver-
gence, results from both the tunnel face advancement and the time-dependent
behavior of the rock mass.

Engineering Geology
The Convergence-Confinement Method (CCM) is a two-dimensional simplified

approach that can be used to simulate three-dimensional problems. Analytical solu-
tions based on CCM (usually examine either the effect of tunnel advancement or
the time-effect) could be partially used to select the final support. One may wonder
if it could also be possible to simulate and replicate the complete problem. Time-
dependency is acting during the timeframe of construction impacts, the so-called
Longitudinal Displacement Profiles (LDPs) for deformation estimation during
tunnel advance. LDP is an accompanying tool used with the Ground Reaction
Curves (GRC) used in the CCM to relate internal wall pressure relaxation to tunnel
displacement. Suggested analytical solutions for LDPs [50], etc.) refer to elastic or
elasto-plastic rock materials. Figure  schematically illustrates the effect of both
time and tunnel advancement on the LDP of a tunnel excavated in a visco-elastic
medium. The tunnel’s advance is simulated by reducing the internal pressure, pi,
initially acting on the tunnel core (as p0). The rock responds by convergent defor-
mations (via the GRC), which are, in turn, linked to the tunnel advance via the LDP.
This aspect of time-dependency is also discussed, examined and further analyzed
in this chapter.
Analytical and closed-form solutions that consider the time-dependent
convergence have been proposed in the literature for supported and unsupported
tunnels with linear and non-linear visco-elastic medium [51, 52], etc. Most
of these formulations also consider the tunnel advance in the estimated total
deformation yet are found to be impractical due to the complex calculations
required[53, 54].
Figure  illustrates the anticipated LDP of the tunnel displacement in an
elasto-visco-elastic medium where no tertiary creep takes place. More ductile
materials, as in the case of rock salt, can behave in such a manner. It is shown
that when no time-effect is considered, the total displacements are underesti-
mated, which can lead to erroneous calculations at the initial stages of the design
process.
Figure 20.
Schematic representation of the GRC of an elastic (t=0) and a visco-elastic material (t>0) and their relation
to the LDP. Y-axis on the left refers to the internal pressure (pi) normalized to the in-situ pressure (p0), Y-axis
on the right refers to the distance from the face (x) normalized to the tunnel radius (R) and X-axis refers to the
radial displacement at a location x normalized to the maximum radial displacement due where t denotes time
and subscripts e and ve refer to elastic and visco-elastic material, respectively.

Figure 21.
Schematic representation of the longitudinal displacement profile (LDP) in an elasto-visco-elastic medium.
. Capturing the time-effect in tunneling using a new numerical approach
An axisymmetric parametric analysis was performed within FLAC software.

The geometry of the model and the excavation sequence characteristics are shown
in Figure . A circular tunnel of 6m diameter and 400m length was excavated
in isotropic conditions. Full-face excavation was adopted. Two cases of a drill and
blast (Case 1: D&B) and a TBM (Case 2: TBM) were assumed depending on the
excavation step 1m and 3m, respectively. The rock mass was set to behave as an
elasto-visco-elastic material using the CVISC model. The analysis aimed to exam-
ine the contribution of primary and secondary creep. In this regard, the Maxwell
body’s viscous dashpots within the CVISC model were deactivated and reactivated,
Figure 22.
(Left) Schematic illustration of the excavation sequence used within the numerical axisymmetric analysis; case
1 refers to drill and blast method with 3m excavation step per cycle; case 2 refers to TBM (Tunneling boring
machine) method with 1m excavation per cycle. (Right) Parameters used for CVISC model.

Engineering Geology
accordingly. Besides, two different sets of visco-elastic (creep) parameters were

used then for both cases shown in Figure . Furthermore, the excavation cycle
duration was also simulated to consider both the time-dependent component and
the tunnel advance representing the real conditions in a tunnel problem and varied
from 2 to 8hours. In addition, two supplementary analyses were performed: with
the Kelvin-Voigt model and with the elastic model to validate the numerical models
and compared with analytical solutions.
It should be stated that the visco-elastic parameters were chosen according to the
analytical solution (Eq. (5)) of the Kelvin-Voigt model developed by [51].
σ or ó οr   t 
ur = + 1 − exp  −   (5)
2Go 2GK   TK  
(where: σ0 is the in-situ stress conditions, r is the tunnel radius, G0 the elastic
shear modulus, GK is the Kelvin shear Modulus, ηK is Kelvin’s viscosity and TK is
known as retardation time and it is the ratio of Kelvin’s viscosity over the Kelvin
Shear Modulus and is indicator of when the model will convergence and reach a
constant value.)
The selected retardation time (TK) varies one order of magnitude between
the two sets as it controls the curvature of Kelvin’s model behavior. The following
Figures  and  ‘x’ is the distance from the tunnel face, R is the tunnel radius,
ur is the absolute radial tunnel wall displacement, uremax is the maximum elastic
displacement and ur∞max is the maximum visco-elastic displacement of the Kelvin-
Voigt model. Gray and black lines are the elastic and the zero-viscosity KV models
respectively.
.. Primary stage of creep, KELVIN-VOIGT (KV)
The Kelvin-Voigt model was assumed to represent the primary stage of creep
and was used to simulate an elasto-visco-elastic rock mass’s mechanical behavior.
The results for both cases are presented in Figure . They imply that increased
cycle time or excavation delay exacerbates the rock mass’s mechanical behavior;
as in all models, an increase of the ultimate total displacement was observed. This
increase depends on the visco-elastic parameters of the Kelvin-Voigt model. The
increase of the retardation time will increase the time required by the model to
reach a constant value and become time-independent.
The deviatoric stress was related to the displacement data normalized to the
maximum displacement of the Kelvin-Voigt model (ur∞ max). Time-dependent
behavior starts for both cases when the deviatoric stress reaches a critical value (q cr)
shown in Figure b. This critical value is attained after one excavation step at the
point which the time-dependent LDPs deviate from the elastic LDP. In the drill and
blast case, this is 3m away from the tunnel, whereas for the TBM case it is 1m.
.. Secondary stage of creep, Burgers (B)
The second stage of this analysis was to investigate the influence of both primary
and secondary creep behavior stages using the Burgers model. The results presented
in Figure  show the maximum strains due to the secondary stage (Maxwell) are
effectively infinite. This is also observed on Figure . In this part, it was noticed
that the magnitude of the total displacements between the two cases varied sig-
nificantly. The excavation method influences the accumulated displacements.

Figure 23.
(Left) Numerical results of LDPs, (right) closer representation of the data; relating the deviatoric stress (q)
to the tunnel wall displacement normalized to the maximum displacement of the KELVIN-VOIGT model
(ur∞max) for: (a) the drill and blast case (DB) and (b) the TBM case.
In the drill and blast case, all two sets of parameters exhibited less displacement
than the TBM case for the same duration of the excavation cycles. During a TBM
tunnel excavation, the tunnel excavation requires more time than a drill and blast
excavation for the same excavation cycle. For instance, a TBM that excavates 1m
every 6hours, the elapsed time is three times longer than the drill and blast case of
3m excavation per cycle. In the TBM case, the time for the excavation of the same
length tunnel will result in an accumulation of displacement increase. However, this
may not always represent real conditions as TBMs are commonly preferable since
they tend to achieve better excavation rates; if proven affordable. Suppose the latter
is the case, then a TBM excavation of a two-hour excavation cycle. In that case, it is
shown that the surrounding rock mass represented by SET#1 exhibits less displace-
ment than an eight-hour excavation cycle using drill and blast.

Engineering Geology
Figure 24.
(Left) Numerical results of LDPs for: (a) the drill and blast (DB) and (b) the TBM case of the BURGERS
(B) analysis (the hours on the legend denote hours per excavation cycle), (right) closer representation of
the data.

Figure 25.
(a) Geometry and mesh conditions of the model used, rp denotes the radius of the plastic zone, and
incremental reduction of (b) intact rock strength according to long-term strength and (c) Young’s modulus.
. Predicting the long-term behavior of rock masses in tunneling
Although there are time-dependent models available to predict rock materials’

rheological behavior potential, it is commonly observed that in two-dimension
(2D) modeling, time-dependent behavior is not directly simulated using selected
2D coded software with noted limitations [1]. It is, therefore, necessary a method to
be developed and ‘pseudo’ simulate this type of behavior. For instance, the plastic
zone can be used as an indicator of the overall time-dependent displacements and
calibrated to in-situ measurements or laboratory testing [1].
[25] proposed a new methodology for predicting rock masses’ long-term
behavior using the information derived when testing rock materials under constant
loading, which results in strength degradation by ‘pseudo-simulating’ numerically
this behavior. [25] examined two main sets of numerical models in plane strain
conditions in-plane RS2 (Rocscience). The models’ main difference was that the
material included in the plastic zone changed parameters with time-steps in the one
set of models. The first aimed at pseudo-simulating time-dependent behavior by
using the Long-Term Strength (LST) according to strength-degradation Eq. (6) of
the limestone bases on the laboratory data previously shown in Figure .
(σ/UCS) = - 0.022ln ( t ) + 0.95 (6)
In addition, 19 stages were simulated, as shown in Figure a. Where in each

stage, a new σci (strength of intact rock) was assigned only to the material of the
plastic zone, according to Eq. (6). Each strength reduction represented a specific
time from 1second to 1000years. The second set of analyses were based on Young’s
modulus (Ei) reduction from the initial 40GPa to 12MPa of 10% in every modeling
stage (Figure b). It should be highlighted that the decrease in both strength and
Young’s Modulus reduction was applied to the plastic zone, assuming that the rest
model behaves as an elastic material.
Every increment on the strength-degradation models was related to a time according
to the lab results and time to failure graph shown in Figure , such as the YMR models
can be associated with a specific time. For instance, a reduction of the intact strength of
21% (0.79 σci) can simulate the deformation acquired in 1day and reflects the deforma-
tion of the 30% reduction of Young’s Modulus (Figure ). Moreover, to simulate the
rock mass’s deformation around the tunnel after a 2-year period, one can either reduce
the intact strength to 0.71 σci or reduce the Young’s Modulus to 50% (Figure ).

Engineering Geology
Figure 26.
Numerical resluts of total displacements of LST models (left colummn) and YMR (right colummn).
Relating the strength-degradation (or the LTS) with the YMR to time for specific
lithologies can produce a database that one can use to capture the time effect on the
rock mass behavior, as shown in Figure a. The yellow triangles reflect the YMR
with the time, whereas the green circles the limestone’s overall behavior based on
the laboratory data (blue and light blue diamonds and squares). When the YMR
method is used, the reduction factor can be estimated using Eq. (7), where t is time,
and E/Ei is Young’s Modulus-ratio.
YMS of limestone : ( E / Ei) = −0.028ln( t) + 1.014 (7)
Using this YMR approach proposed by [25] for the granite (Figure b) the
estimated reduction of the Young’s Modulus is given in Eq. (8).
YMS of granite : ( E / Ei ) = −0.03ln ( t ) + 1.018 (8)

Figure 27.
Driving stress-ratio and Young’s modulus-ratio in relation to time to failure from static load test data performed
at room temperature in dry conditions, (where the driving stress-ratio is the stress level at failure to unconfined
compressive strength of the material), for a. limestone and b. granite.
It should be stated that the analyses presented herein can be used for values of
at least 0.5σci and higher as the below this threshold (CI), no failure is anticipated,
below this threshold, the observed behavior is considered to be linear elastic.
. Conclusions
This research work and the resultant publications presented in this Chapter have
contributed to a better understanding of the “Time-dependent behaviour of rock
materials”. This section summarizes the key findings of this study.

Engineering Geology
It is widely accepted that significant research contributes to studying the time-

dependent behavior of geo-materials and their effects in geoengineering applica-
tions by developing models. However, these models mainly focus on simulating the
visco-elastic creep behavior and are developed based on the back-analysis of exist-
ing datasets. In many cases, these models can replicate sufficiently creep behavior
during the primary and secondary stage when appropriate parameters are derived
and used. Furthermore, the applicability of such models is commonly broader when
dealing with weak rock masses. As a result, there is a knowledge gap when dealing
with time-dependent behavior in brittle rock materials. Its effect is considered lim-
ited and usually neglected and covered by other progressive damage mechanisms.
Nevertheless, this study has shown the importance of taking into consideration
brittle time-dependent behavior, and it is recommended that engineers, scientists
and practitioners utilize the existing models to simulate time-dependent behavior
with appropriate parameters as with a few modifications, these models can capture
the behavioral trend as long as the appropriate parameters are utilized.
In this study relaxation, the decrease of applied load at constant deformation
was investigated and re-defined. It was shown that relaxation could be considered
as an inversion of a creep behavior. It was concluded herein that axial strain-
controlled tests are less sensitive to testing challenges during a relaxation test than a
creep test. Single-step and multi-step tests have been performed in this study. It was
shown that single-step is easier to perform, but there is sample consuming in order
to obtain a complete dataset to cover the total stress spectrum. From the results,
it was also shown that relaxation takes places when cracks initiate and propagate
during the sample. It attains a constant value (asymptote) when axial crack sta-
bilization is reached. The most important outcome of this work was identifying
the existence of three distinct stages that occur during time-dependent stress
relaxation. These three stages (R I, RII, and RIII ) were introduced and clearly defined.
The first two stages are similar to the first two stages in creep behavior. In contrast,
the third stage differs as the sample reaches a stable condition compared to tertiary
creep where it reaches failure.
Another set of tests, static load, both single-step and multi-step, are presented
here. This time the axial load (stress) was kept constant, focusing on time-
dependent behavior over time. Once again, it is shown that multi-step tests might
be advantageous in terms of deriving visco-elastic parameters in different target
stress levels using only one specimen; however, when considering time-to-failure
single-step tests are preferred. In this section, two types of limestone (Jurassic
and Cobourg) were investigated, and the time-to-failure behavior was compared
to other rock types from data published in the literature. It was concluded that an
overall trend does exist. This general trend was scrutinized at a second stage based
on rock types providing specific trends for sedimentary, metamorphic, igneous,
which can be used to predict time-to-failure for laboratory samples:
• Sedimentary: (σ/UCS)=− 0.022ln(t)+0.95
• Metamorphic: (σ/UCS)=− 0.023ln(t)+1.03
• Igneous: (σ/UCS)=− 0.019ln(t)+0.91
where σ/UCS is the driving stress-ration and t refers to time.

The limestone dataset was compared to the widely used dataset of Lac du Bonnet
granite, showing that the limestone’s long-term strength is higher than the granite.
The latter means that the limestone can withstand longer time-depended behavior
than the granite. The latter can be explained by the fact that these two rock types

differ in their mineralogical structures. The granite’s increased heretegoeneity

contributes to different creep rates of the various grains (quartz, feldspars, mica).
The latter generates incompatible strains over time, causing micro-cracking. Similar
processes do occur within the limestone, but due to its homogeneity, creep is con-
strained in calcite (monomineralic) and is associated with less damage increasing
the time up to failure. It was also observed that both limestones that failed at a stress
threshold above 0.8 UCS failed within the first 60minutes. On the contrary, below
CI threshold, no failure was observed, and between 0.5 to 0.8 UCS, failure will take
place at some point between the first hours to months, depending on the rock type.
Another outcome of this work was the identification of Maxwell’s viscosity thresh-
old as an indicator of failure. This observation can explain why some specimens fail
and some others did not (yet).
Time-dependent behavior during tunneling can play an important role in
the project success in the design and, most notably, in the construction process.
This fourth dimension (time-effect) in tunneling was investigated numerically
by performing an axisymmetric parametric analysis. From the research was con-
cluded that current conventional methods adopted to predict the Longitudinal
Displacement Profile of tunnel displacements have limited applications and fail to
capture the overall displacement over time. It was also presented that both the exca-
vation methods and excavation rate (tunnel advancement rate) can affect (dete-
riorate) the mec hanical behavior of the surrounding rock mass. In this work, only
creep behavior was considered a contributor to time-dependent deformation and
was simulated with the modified purely visco-elastic CVISC model assuming the
rock mass as a visco-elastic medium. It was further concluded that the retardation
time (in the Kelvin-Voigt model) does control the timing at which the maximum
tunnel displacement is reached during the primary stage of creep.
Finally, a new but yet simple tool that can be used to predict the long-term
behavior of brittle materials as limestone using either the Long-Term Strength
(LTS) appr oach (strength-degradation) and the Young’s Modulus-Ratio (YMR)
was presented. It should be stated that the proposed methodology should be used
as a first estimate to relate the strength-deterioration of the rock material over
time. Furthermore, input parameters can be derived in the plastic zone around an
underground opening using this approach that can then be used in numerical analy-
ses similar to the one presented herein.

Engineering Geology
References
[1] Paraskevopoulou, C., Vlachopoulos, [7] Benardos, A., Paraskevopoulou C.,

N., Diederichs, M.S. 2012. Long-term Diederichs, M., 2013. Assessing and
behaviour and support analysis using benchmarking the construction cost
numerical modeling, In: Proceedings of tunnels. In: Proceedings of 66th
of the 46th US Rock Mechanics – Canadian Geotechnical Conference,
Geomechanics Symposium ARMA. June GeoMontreal on Geoscience for
2012, Chicago, USA. Sustainability, September 29–October 3,
2013, Montreal, Canada.
[2] Paraskevopoulou, C., Oke, J.,
Vlachopoulos, N. 2012. Practical [8] Paraskevopoulou C., Boutsis, G.,
modelling approaches to determine Cost Overruns in Tunnelling Projects:
the long term behaviour of tunnel Investigating the Impact of Geological
construction. In: Proceedings of the and Geotechnical Uncertainty Using
Canadian Tunnelling Symposium Case Studies. Special Issue Underground
TAC on Tunnels and Underground Infrastructure Engineering of
Spaces: Sustainability and Innovations. Infrastructure Journal (MDPI).
September 2012, Montreal, Canada. Infrastructures 2020, 5(9), 73; https://
doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures5090073
[3] Paraskevopoulou, C., Diederichs,
M.S. 2013. A comparison of viscous [9] Paraskevopoulou, C. 2016. Time-
models under constant strain and dependency of rock and implications
constant stress: Implications for tunnel associated with tunnelling, PhD
analysis. In: Proceedings of the World Thesis. In: Queen’s University
Tunnel Congress on Underground – the Publications. Canada.
way to the future. June 2013, Geneva,
Switzerland. [10] Weaver, S.H. 1936. Creep curve
of steel. Trans Amer Soc. Mech. Eng.,
[4] Paraskevopoulou, C., Diederichs, LVIII, 745-751.
M.S. 2013. A comparison of viscous
material model mechanics and impacts [11] Griggs, D. 1939. Creep of Rocks.
under different boundary conditions Journal of Geology. 47, 225-251
for tunnels and shafts. In: Proceedings
of the 47th US Rock Mechanics – [12] Bieniawski, Z.T. 1974. Geomechanics
Geomechanics Symposium ARMA, June classification of rockmasses and its
2013, San Francisco, USA. application in tunnelling. In: Proc. of
the 3rd Congress, ISRM, Denver.
[5] Paraskevopoulou, C., Benardos,
A., 2012. Construction cost estimation [13] Barton, N.R., 1974. Estimating the
for Greek road tunnels in relation to shear strength of rock joints. In: Proc. of
the geotechnical conditions, In: Proc. the 3rd Congress, ISRM. Denver.
Int. Symp. Practices and Trends for
Financing and Contracting Tunnels and [14] Palmstrom, A. 1995. RMi-A
Underground Works (Tunnel Contracts rockmass characterization system
2012), March 2012, Athens. for rock engineering purposes. Ph.D.
Thesis. University of Oslo, Norway,
[6] Paraskevopoulou, C., Benardos, 400 pages.
A. 2013. Assessing the construction
cost of tunnel projects. Tunnelling [15] Widd, B.L. 1966. The time-
and Underground Space Technology dependent behaviour of rock;
Journal, 38(2013), 497-505. https://doi. Considerations with regard to a research
org/10.1016/j.tust.2013.08.005 program. CSIR Report MEG 514,

Rock Mechanics Division, National [25] Paraskevopoulou, C., 2018.

Mechanical Engineering Research Predicting the long-term behaviour
Institute, Pretoria, South Africa. of rock masses in tunnelling. In:
Proceedings of the WTC 2018, Word
[16] Bieniawski, Z.T. 1967. Mechanism of Tunnelling Congress on The Role of
Brittle Fracture of Rock, parts I, II, and Underground Space in Building Future
III. Rock Mech. Min Sci, 4 (4), 395-430. Sustainable Cities, April 2018, Dubai,
United Emirates.
[17] Wawesik, W.R. 1972. Time-
dependent rock behaviour in uniaxial [26] Paraskevopoulou, C., Perras, M.,
compression. In: Proc. of the 14th Rock Diederichs, M.S., Loew, S., Lam, T.,
Mechanics Symposium, University of Jensen., M. 2018. Time-dependent
Pennsylvania, 85-106. behaviour of brittle rocks based
on static load laboratory testing.
[18] Singh, D.P. 1975. A study of creep of Geotechnical & Geological Engineering,
rocks. Int. J. Rock Mech Sci & Geomech, 36, 337-376(2018). https://doi.
12, 271-276. org/10.1007/s10706-017-0331-8
[19] Peng, S.S. 1973. Relaxation and [27] Bukharov, G.N., Chanda, M.W.,
the behaviour of failed rock. Int. J. and Bukharov, N.G. 1995. The three
Rock Mech Min. Sci. & Geomech., 10, processes of brittle crystalline rock
235-246. creep. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min Sci. &
Geomech, 32 (4), 325-335.
[20] Kranz, R.L., and Scholz, C.H. 1977.
Critical dilatant volume of rocks at the [28] Pellet, F., Hajdu, A., Deleruyelle,
onset of tertiary creep. J. Geophys. Res., F. and Bensus, F. 2005. A visco-plastic
82 (4), 893-4,898. model including anisotropic damage for
the time-dependent behaviour of rock.
[21] Schmidtke, H., and Lajtai, E.Z. Int. J. for Num. Anal. Meth. Geomech.,
1985. The long-term strength of Lac du 29, 941-970.
Bonnet granite. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.
Geo., 22, 461-465. [29] Paraskevopoulou, C., Diederichs,
M., 2018. Analysis of time-dependent
[22] Lau, J., Gorski B., Conlon, B., deformation in tunnels using the
and Anderson, T. 2000. Long-term Convergence-Confinement Method.
loading tests on saturated granite and Tunnelling and Underground Space
granodiorite, Report: 06819-REP- Technology Journal, 71(2018), 62-80,
01300-I 0016 ROO, CANMET, Natural 19 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Resources Canada. tust.2017.07.001
[23] Cristescu, N.,D. 2009. Time effects [30] Innocente, J., Diederichs, M.S.,
in rock mechanics. In Proceedings of the Paraskevopoulou, C, Aubertin, J.D.
SME Annual Conference, Albuquerque, 2020. Numerical investigation of the
New Mexico. applicability of time-dependent creep
models. Submitted to the: Proceedings
[24] Paraskevopoulou, C., Diederichs, of the ISRM International Symposium –
M.S. 2013. Long-term behaviour in Eurock 2020 – Hard Rock Engineering,
tunnelling: limitations in using creep June 2020, Trodheim, Norway.
parameters. In: Proceedings of 66th
Canadian Geotechnical Conference, [31] Innocente, J., 2021. Time-
GeoMontreal on Geoscience for dependency and long-term
Sustainability, September 29–October 3, strength of rocks -limitations,
2013, Montreal, Canada. interpretation and application in

Engineering Geology
finite difference continuum methods. [38] Goodman, R.E. 1980. Introduction

MSc Thesis. In: Queen’s University to Rock Mechanics, John Wiley and
Publications. Canada. Sons, New York.
[32] Paraskevopoulou, C., Perras, M., [39] Davis, G.H., Reynolds, S.J., and
Diederichs, M.S., Amaan, F., Loew, Kluth, C.F. 2012. Structural Geology of
S., Lam, T., 2015. Long-term static Rocks and Regions. 3rd Edition. Wiley.
load laboratory testing behaviour of New York. (ISBN:978-1-118-21505-0),
different rock types . In: Proceedings 864 pages.
of the 68th Canadian Geotechnical
Symposium GeoQuebec on Challenges [40] Fairhurst, C., and Cook, N.G.W.
from North to South. September 2015, 1966. The phenomenon of rock splitting
Quebec, Canada. parallel to the direction of maximum
compression in the neighborhood of a
[33] Paraskevopoulou, C., Perras, surface. In: Proc. of the First Congress
M.,Diederichs, M.S., Amann, F., on the International Society of Rock
Loew,S., Lam, T., Jensen., M. 2017. Mechanics, National Laboratory of
The three stages of stress-relaxation- Civil Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 1,
Observations for the long-term 687-692.
behaviour of rocks based on laboratory
testing. Journal of Engineering Geology, [41] Diederichs, M.S., Day, J.J.,
216, 56-75(2017). http://dx.doi. Ghazvinian, E., Perras, M.,
org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.11.010 Paraskevopoulou, C., Walton, G.,
Progressive brittle damage processes
and failure in rock. Keynote Lecture in
[34] ASTM. 2013. Standard Test Methods
the Progressive Failure and Long-term
for Stress Relaxation for Materials and
Strength Degradation of Brittle Rocks
Structures. E328-13. American Society
In: PRF 2017: Progressive Failure and
for Testing and Materials.
Long-term Strength Degradation of
Brittle Rocks. ISRM Conference, June
[35] Paraskevopoulou, C., Perras, M., 2017, Ascona, Switzerland.
Diederichs, M.S., Amaan, F., Loew,
S., Lam, T., 2015. Observations for the [42] ISRM. 1979. Suggested methods for
long-term behaviour of carboniferous determining the uniaxial compressive
limestone rocks based on laboratory strength and deformability of rock
testing. In: Proceedings of the EUROCK materials. 16, 2, 138-140.
2015 Future Development of Rock
Mechanics – 64th Geomechanics [43] Martin, C.D. 1997. Seventeenth
Colloqium, October 2015, Salzburg, Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium: The
Austria. effect of cohesion loss and stress path on
brittle rock strength. Can. Geotech. J.,
[36] Paraskevopoulou, C., Perras, 34 (5), 698-725.
M.A., 2017. Investigating the long-term
behaviour of brittle rocks: Visco-elastic [44] Martin, C.D. 1993. The Strength of
creep parameters and time-to-failure. massive Lac du Bonnet granite around
In: PRF 2017: Progressive Failure and underground openings. Ph.D. Thesis.
Long-term Strength Degradation of University of Manitoba, Canada.
Brittle Rocks ISRM Conference, June
2017, Ascona, Switzerland. [45] Martin, C.D., Kaiser, P.K., and
McCreath, D.R. 1999. Hoek-Brown
[37] ISRM. 2014. Suggested methods for parameters for predicting the depth
determining the creep characteristics of of brittle failure around tunnels. Can.
rock.47, 275-290 Geotech. J., 36 (1), 136-151.

[46] Perras, M.A., and Diederichs, M.S. rock masses and implications associated
2014. A review of the Tensile Strength of with tunnelling, In: Proceedings of
Rock: Concepts and Testing. J. Geotech. EUROTUN 2017, IV International
and Geol. Eng., 32, 525-546. Conference on Computational
Methods in Tunnelling and Subsurface
[47] Gorski, B., Anderson, T., Engineering, April 2017, Innsbruck,
and Conlon, B. 2009. DGR site Austria.
characterization documents, technical
reports TR-08-11. Available at [www.
nwmo.ca].
[48] Gorski, B., Anderson, T.,

and Conlon, B. 2010. DGR site
characterization documents, technical
reports TR-08-36. Available at [www.
nwmo.ca].
[49] Diederichs, M.S. 2003. Rock

fracture and collapse under low
confinement conditions. Rock Mech.
Rock Eng., 36 (5), 339-381.
[50] Panet, M. 1995. Calcul des Tunnels

par la Me’thode de Convergence–
Confinement. Presses de l’Ecole
Nationale des Ponts et Chausse’es, Paris,
178 pages.
[51] Panet, M. 1979. Time-dependent

deformations in underground works. In:
Proc. of the 4th Int Congress on Rock
Mechanics, Montreux.
[52] Sulem, J., Panet, M. and Guenot, A.

1987. Closure analysis in deep tunnels
and Analytical solution for time-
dependent displacement in a circular
tunnel. Int. J. Rock Mech. & Min. Sci.
& Geom. Abstracts. 24(3), 145-154 and
155-164.

M.S., 2017. How time-dependency
influences the Longitudinal
Displacement Profile during the
construction of deep tunnels. In:
Proceedings of the WTC 2017, Word
Tunnelling Congress on Surface
Challenges – Underground Solutions,
June 2017, Bergen, Norway.

M.S., Perras, M. 2017. Time-dependent

Chapter 3
Neotectonics and Stressed State

Patterns of the Sakhalin Island
LeonidBogomolov, LidiaSim and PavelKamenev
Abstract
The study of neotectonics, neotectonic and modern stress of the Sakhalin has
been performed by the set of methods. The scheme of modern geodynamics of the
island has been constructed by the data of neotectonic activation of the faults. Three
types of zones with dissimilar geodynamic conditions have been distinguished:
transtension, transpression, and strike-slip (simple shift). The results of Sakhalin
modern stress reconstruction based on focal mechanisms of earthquakes allowed to
characterize the distribution of the stress state parameters over the island surface:
the Lode-Nadai factor and the direction of axes of deviatoric compression and ten-
sion. The changes in characteristics of modern tectonic stress field have been noticed
at the boundaries of regions with different regimes of modern faulting. Specific
orientations of compression axes of the neotectonic stress field are proper for North
Sakhalin. Therein, the directions of compression axes become northeast in contrast
to the predominant sublatitude orientation on the island as a whole. The obtained
data on neotectonics and inherited modern stress field are applicable to the problems
of engineering geological support of oil and gas projects’ realization in the Sakhalin
(new wells construction, control of the pipelines stability, accompanying urban
planning, etc.).
Keywords: Amur and Okhotsk microplates, the Sakhalin, fault zone, neotectonic and
modern stress, slickensides, focal mechanisms of earthquakes, geodynamic regime,
transpression, strike-slip
. Introduction
Sakhalin Island belongs to the tectonically active region of Northeast Asia.

Within its boundaries, the border between the largest tectonic plates of the Earth—
the Eurasian Plate, North American and Pacific ones—passes through the island
territory. А wide boundary zone represented by a set of independently moving
microplates expands along the convergent boundaries of these plates.
The border between the Amur and Okhotsk (Okhotsk Sea) Plates, the largest
microplates, is often associated with the Central Sakhalin Fault of meridional
strike. Inside the Sakhalin, the interplate border is drawn along the Western
Sakhalin Fault in the south, and as the arc line, partially coinciding with the
Eastern Sakhalin Fault (Figure ) [1, 2], in the Central and Northern Sakhalin.
Alternatively, this border goes along the Central Sakhalin Fault (Tym-Poronai
Fault in the Northern Sakhalin) [3].

Engineering Geology
Figure 1.
Kinematics of the modern plate movements in the Okhotsk Sea region. (A) Relative to Eurasian Plate
(not moving); (B) relative to Kuril Islands microplate. The arrows show the directions and values.
According to the paper [4], the interplate border is drawn along both the
Western Sakhalin Fault and the Central Sakhalin Fault. The analysis of neotectonic
stress to the West and East of the Central Sakhalin Fault allowed us to obtain new
information about location of the border aforementioned [5–7].
In addition to our previous publications [5, 7], this chapter presents the results
of extended tectonophysical studies based on a set of methods [6, 8–10], and the
field measurements of 2019–2020 campaigns are involved. The paper presents
the manifold manifestations of the geodynamic and seismic processes in the crust
between the Amur and Okhotsk microplates, lying within the convergence zones of
the Pacific, Eurasian, and North American tectonic plates.
The research aim is to study the recent tectonics, to reconstruct neotectonic
stress by a set of methods, and to review the published seismological and geophysi-
cal data to approve or disprove the interplate border location. This involves the
demonstration of effective but underused structural and tectonophysical methods
to study the tectonics of some regions and to develop a model of the stressed state
of Sakhalin Island. The above methods are able to give the characteristics of the
post-Miocene stress field, but we will show (taking into account the seismological
and GPS motion data) that the modern stress field in the Sakhalin crust is inherited
mostly from the post-Miocene model. The modern stress nonuniformity as well as
the climate change is proved to control both engineering geological processes and
geotechnical conditions on the territory under consideration.
. Structural-geomorphological method and the results
To reach the stated goal, the authors have compiled a structural-geomorphological

(SG) map (neotectonics scheme) of Sakhalin Island using the method developed
[11, 12], as well as a set of tectonophysical and structural methods, to study the
modern stress state and kinematic types of individual faults. Thus, the patterns of
neotectonic stress in the Northern and Central Sakhalin have been reconstructed by
the structural-geomorphological (SG) method of shear stress reconstruction [13, 14].
The stress reconstruction has been performed also in the Southern Sakhalin by the
following methods: the method of analysis of conjugate pairs of shear joints [8], the

Neotectonics and Stressed State Patterns of the Sakhalin Island
method of kinematic analysis of fracture structures [9], and the method of belts in
the study of fracturing associated with discontinuous displacements [10].
Restored orientations of the axes of local stress states (LSSs) allow to build the
unified single regional field of the Southern Sakhalin using the method [15]. The
structural-geomorphological map of the Sakhalin is constructed on the grounds of
the topography analysis using a topographic Sakhalin map of 1:500,000 scale. The
longitudinal zonation of the newest structures is clearly shown on the map; the
western and eastern zones of the latest uplifts are separated by the extended Central
Sakhalin Depression. The Central Sakhalin Fault appears in the newest structure
and serves as a border between the large Western ridge zone and the Central
Sakhalin Depression. The zones of longitudinal strike are divided with the faults of
various directions into a series of block-block uplifts, which differ in height. Some
structures coincide with those that are marked in the work [16]. Figure A shows a
selection of the newest structures.
The tectonic stress fields of Northern and Central Sakhalin have been recon-
structed using medium-scale topographical maps and satellite images by the
structural and geomorphological methods. This method envisages a special inter-
pretation of megafractures—the small rectilinear relief elements, for which high
density is an indicator of the lineament fault. The results of analysis of data on the
orientations of subsidiary cracks in the shear zones have been summarized in [8] on
the base of field simulation and shear zones mapping. If the mutual relative orienta-
tions of megafractures (two systems of joints and the ruptures, oriented along the
bisector between them) correspond with the orientation of the subsidiary cracks in
the shear zone (at this, they have a certain orientation to the fault plane), then the
fault nature of a lineament is proved. Further, the orientations of compression and
extension axes in the horizontal plane, the shift sign (right-left), and geodynamic
conditions of the fault formation (transtension or transpression) are determined.
The lower age limit of the fault activity is determined by the age of young Pliocene-
Quaternary deposits, which are developed nearly throughout the study area and
broken up with the megafractures and the latest faults. Neotectonic shear stress
determinations by the faults, marked on the structural-geomorphological map,
lend support to the validity of disjunction based on the terrane analysis. Different
heights in the opposite walls of the fault allow to estimate the vertical movement
component of displacement.
It should be noted that one of the horizontal axes can be an intermediate axis of
the principal normal stresses.
The shear kinematic types of the faults correlate with the definitions of the
kinematics of discontinuous faults mapped on the Northern Sakhalin [17, 18] as
well as with seismic dislocations formed during the Neftegorsk earthquake (EQ ) of
1995, Mw=7.0 [19]. The reconstructed patterns of tectonic stress point to mainly
submeridional extension and sublatitudinal compression over the considerable
part of the island; but the compression axis orientation changes to northeast when
the study zone moves northward (Figure B and C). The compression axes that
turn to the northeast on the Northern Sakhalin is consistent with the scheme of the
ellipsoid of the pre-late Miocene deformations of the entire Sakhalin presented in
the work [18]. According to this work, the ellipsoid of deformations had turned
around during the Pliocene-Quaternary time, the C axis or the shortening axis
became latitudinal, which brought to a change in the kinematic type of shifts along
the longitudinal meridional faults of the Sakhalin to the overthrust reverse fault
type. Since the detailed research of the folded and discontinuous structures of
different age performed by Rozhdestvenskii and Rozhdestvensky [17, 18] relate
mainly to the Northern and Central Sakhalin, one can assume the change of stress
state type cannot be applied to the Southern Sakhalin. The more so, the author notes

Engineering Geology
Figure 2.
Neotectonics and neotectonic stress of Sakhalin Island. (A) The map of Sakhalin Island, showing the structural
and geomorphological features. 1–5: total syn-erosional uplifts; 1: less than 100m, 2: 100–200m, 3: 200–500m, 4:
500–1000m, 5: more than 1000m, 6: the faults identified from the geomorphological data, 7: boundaries of the
first-order structures, 8: boundaries of the second-order structures, and 9: the boundaries of uplifts and depressions.
The digitals designate the uplifts on the map: I: Shmidt, II: West Sakhalin, III: East Sakhalin, V: Susunai, and
IV: Central Sakhalin depression. Fault numbers are given in circles: 1: Central Sakhalin, 2: Hokkaido-Sakhalin,
3: Upper Piltun, 4: Nabilsky, 5: East Sakhalin, and 10: the geomorphological section line. (B) The scheme of
neotectonic stress of Sakhalin Island. 11: Compression axes orientations in the horizontal plane and geodynamic
conditions of their formation (reconstructed by the structural-geomorphological method); 11a: strike-slip, 11b:
transtension, 11c: transpression, and 12: orientations of the subhorizontal extension (a) and compression (b) axes
of the general stress field of the South Sakhalin. (C) The scheme of the latest geodynamics of Sakhalin Island. 13–15:
Compression axes and geodynamic conditions; 13: transtension; 14: strike-slip; 15: transpression; 16: shift direction;
17: extension (a) and compression (b) axes reconstructed by the complex of field methods on the southern Sakhalin;
18: compression axes projections to a horizontal plane; 19: the boundaries of zones with different geodynamic
regimes; 20–22: geodynamic regimes of 20: strike-slip, 21: horizontal extension (transtension), and 22: horizontal
compression (transpression); and 23: oil and gas pipelines routes. The map of Bryantseva [5].

“appropriateness of the stress ellipsoid has been repeatedly questioned…,” but its
use has applied meaning, “although the anomalous structures, which are difficult to
explain from this theory point of view, are observed” [18].
The zonation of the areas with different geodynamic conditions of faults
generation within the latest stage has been conducted on the grounds of neotec-
tonic stress, reconstructed for the Northern and Central Sakhalin (Figure C).
General stress field of the Southern Sakhalin is shown below. Since the structural-
geomorphological method is based on the patterns of mutual orientation of the
subsidiary faults in the shear zone (by the data of simulation), the conditions of
additional extension or compression, obtained in each certain case, need special
additional studies to explain the cause of its occurrence. When shifts are simulating,
the subsidiary fractures’ different orientation to the actual direction of the shift
has been obtained when additional compression or extension acted normally to the
shear plane. Conducted zonation does not allow to separate the Western Amur and
Eastern Okhotsk microplates (Figure B), as the compression axes’ orientations on
the Southern Sakhalin and south part of the Northern Sakhalin are uniform.
Fifty-six local stress states (LSSs) have been determined with the set of field
methods on the Southern Sakhalin. These LSSs indicate the significant variance of
the axes of principal normal stresses of local level (Figures  and ), demonstrating
the results of tectonophysical and structural methods’ application. The method of
jointing belt distribution [10] is shown in Figure A and B. The outcrop is located in
the footwall of the Central Sakhalin Fault, whose strike is taken from the structural-
geomorphological map (Figure A).
If the fault strike is known, but there are no data for its plane orientation in the
space, then the method allows to determine this plane. To do this, the P1-P2 jointing
belt with the pole at the P point is identified in the stereogram of fracture density,
which is measured near the fault. The plane of the R1PR2 fault with the R pole is
reconstructed by the connection of the fault strike points on the external circle of
the R1R2 stereogram with the point of the P fracture belt pole. The S1 point (an
intersection of the fault plane with the P1P2 belt) is a point of the displacement line
outcrop across the fault plane on the upper hemisphere. We get the required dis-
placement line across the fault by its connection with the stereogram center. Here,
this line clearly tells about the strike-slip with some component of the thrust con-
stituent. Since the fault is a dextral reverse one with a strike-slip component [18, 20],
as well as by the relief pronounce, where the western wall is hanging, the displace-
ment line has a sign of the dextral strike-slip fault with a reverse component. The
strike-slip component dominance is obvious. The compression (σ3gen) and extension
(σ1gen ) axes are charted on the stereogram of the general stress field of the Southern
Sakhalin (see below). According to the kinematic method [9], we can obtain the
whole interval of possible displacements over the fault in this general field: from the
S1 point by uniaxial extension to the S2 point by uniaxial compression, connecting
the pole of the R fault to the σ3gen and σ1gen with the arcs of large circles. Thus, the
displacement line, reconstructed by the analysis of the jointing distribution belt
method, coincides with the direction of the strike-slip fault with a reverse compo-
nent (actually the dextral strike-slip), if the stress field has been characterized by
the compression condition. Two conclusions follow from above: (1) most of the
fractures formed by belt distribution are meant to be tensile cracks that occur under
extension conditions and (2) dextral strike-slip displacement has occurred along the
fault at this stage. Two maxima of fractures density, outlined with the 8% isoline—I
and II, are highlighted on the fractures belt (Figure B). The belt axis matches
the intermediate axis σ2; the direction of the compression axis, σ, and extension
one, σ1, are defined from the bisectors of the angles between I-I and II-II fractures
according to the method of Gzovsky [8]. The directions of intermediate axis, σ2,

Engineering Geology
Figure 3.
Stereograms of the local stress state in the South Sakhalin. 1–3: Local stress state (LSS) axes and their action
planes: minimal (σ1); 2: intermediate (σ2 ), maximum (σ3) compression axes of the principal normal stresses;
4: poles of the planes of the maximum tangential stresses (τmax) and displacement vectors; 5–8: strikes
of the τmax planes and fault kinematic types—5a: reverse faults, 5b: normal faults, 6a: dextral strike-slip
faults, 6b: sinistral strike-slip faults, 7a: reverse faults with strike-slip component, 7b: normal faults with the
reverse component, and 8: strike-slip faults with the reverse component; 9: strike-slip faults with the normal
component; 9: arcs of the large circles divergent from—a: the extension axis and b: the compression axis;
10–13: displacement lines and vectors on the slickensides, which occurred due to—10a: uniaxial compression,
10b: uniaxial extension, and 10c: triaxial stress state; 11: the same, but with undefined displacement sign; 12:
displacement lines—а: detected partial (vertical or horizontal) component of displacement, b: predicted, and
c: contradict to the reconstructed LSS; 13: fractures—a: pole of the maximums of shear fractures and b: pole
and plane of separate conjugated shear fractures or systems; 14: fractures density isolines; 15: pole and plane
of the fault and displacement lines of the hanging wall. (A) and (B) Volume 16, the left bank of the Lyutoga
river—(A) density and fracturing belt; (B) axes of the principal normal stresses; (C) volume 27, the right
bank of the Vesely stream; (D–F)—South Sokolovskii quarry—(D) recent field, (E) ancient field of LSS in
the hanging wall of the fault, and (F) the fault plane and displacement vector. Wulff-Gushenko modified grid,
upper hemisphere.

Figure 4.
A slickenside on the outcrop of the Krasnoyarkovskaya suite K2kr.
determined by two ways (both as the axis of the fractures belt and as the projection
of the displacement line of two systems of the conjuncted shear fractures) coincide
almost perfectly. This suggests the promising integration of different methods when
studying the tectonic stress fields. According to the sum of displacements, the fault
is a dextral reverse fault with a strike-slip component [20].
The unique point with the slickenlines in the Pleistocene alluvial-proluvial
loams is located close to the Central Sakhalin Fault. Despite the small number of
the slickensides, the local stress state (Figure C) of strike-slip faulting type with
meridional extension and sublatitudinal compression axes has been reconstructed
there. Measurement no. 1 and 2 are probably the traces of gravitational displacement
along the slope.
Figure D and E show an example of the detection of two LSSs from the slick-
ensides, measured in South Sokolovskii quarry, that has outcropped a melange of
the West Susunai subterrane [21]. Most of the 37 displacement vectors have allowed
to determine the LSS (Figure D), which is assumed to be more recent, as the most
of slickenlines are the traces of latest displacements. The displacements vectors
(slickenlines), which contradict this LSS, are marked with a special symbol, and
their low integrity allows the LSS to be defined as more ancient.
The presence of clearly defined slickensides near the Central Sakhalin Fault
points to high tectonic activity of the Southern Sakhalin (Figure ). The outcrops
of the Krasnoyarkovskaya suite K2kr are presented with interbedding of tuffstones,
sandstones, and tuff siltstones in the point of 47°01′51.00″ N and 142°30′00.40″ E
coordinates. The slickensides originated with sinistral reverse fault with strike-slip
component are shown in the right bottom part of Figure ; the direction of motion
of the lying wall of the fault is marked with an arrow.
Figure A and B show an example of detection of two LSSs of different ages as
well as application of the method of fractures belt distribution by Danilovich to
analyze the same planes with the slickensides.
Figure  presents the stereograms of the local stress state of the south part of
the Central and South Sakhalin (56 determinations) charted on the scheme of the
geological structure (according to Golozubov et al. [3], but simplified).

Engineering Geology
The unified regional stress field of this part of the island has been reconstructed
previously from 56 determinations of the axes of the principal normal stresses in
the South Sakhalin by the method justified in the works [14, 15]. The general field
has the following angular characteristics: the extension axis ∠1–350∠10, the inter-
mediate axis ∠2–112∠66, and the compression axis ∠3–260∠20. High-angle sinistral
strike-slip faults with the dip azimuth of 32∠83 and dextral strike-slip faults with
the dip azimuth of 125∠68 (Figure E) are the most frequent in this stress field.
A recent field studies has allowed to update the database on the local stress states
both in the South Sakhalin and in the south part of the Central Sakhalin. All deter-
minations are charted on Figure . The stereograms of different stressed state types
Figure 5.
Stereograms of tectonic stress and general stress field in the South Sakhalin. The axes of principal normal
stresses of the LSS are designated with the symbols inside the frame 1: a—extension and b—compression.
Designations of the general stress field axes and their planes are showed inside the frame 2: a—extension and
b—compression. See the other designations in Figure 3. (A)–(D) Limestone quarry and (E) the general stress
field of the South Sakhalin.

Figure 6.
The scheme of the geological structure ( from [3], simplified) and local tectonic stress of the Southern Sakhalin
(56 determinations), according to Sim et al. [5]. 1–5: heterochronous rock complexes; 1: Albian and upper
cretaceous terrigenous, partly tuff-terrigenous, 2: Paleocene-Miocene terrigenous, volcanic are not general,
3: Miocene-quaternary terrigenous, 4: Pliocene basalts, and 5: Cretaceous and Paleocene-Eocene accretionary
rock complexes of the Susunai and Tonino-Aniva terranes; 6: faults; 7-9: types of stereograms; 7: LSS of
normal fault, possibly with strike-slip component, 8: LSS of reverse or oblique fault, 9: strike-slip fault LSS.
The stereograms show the axes of principal normal (σ1 : minimum, σ2: intermediate, and σ3 : maximum
compressive) stress and the planes of maximum tangential stress with displacement vectors of the lacking wall
(Wulff grid, upper hemisphere).
are highlighted with color. The stereograms of the LSSs of normal fault and normal
fault with strike-slip component types are highlighted with reddish color and mean
compression axis is to be oriented at an angle of 50–90° with the horizon; the LSSs
of reverse fault and reverse fault with strike-slip component types are highlighted
with blue color, and the extension axis is oriented at an angle of 50–90° with the
horizon; the LSSs of strike-slip fault type, in which the compression and extension
axes are oriented at an angle of 0–30°, are highlighted with yellow color; and the

Engineering Geology
stereograms of the LSSs of unknown type, when all three axes are tilted 40–60°, are
highlighted with white color. It is apparent that normal fault and normal fault with
strike-slip component LSSs prevail over reverse fault with strike-slip component
and reverse fault ones, which contradict the hypothesis of the post-fold change of
the stressed state of strike-slip fault type to the reverse fault in the Sakhalin [7, 17].
Such hypothesis of work [7] was based on 15 LSS determinations only in the
South Sakhalin. The later studies involving 56 points of LSS determinations as well
as the analysis of seismicity (see below) have proved the prevailing strike-slip stress
field both in fold and orogenic stages.
Explicit indicators of submeridional extension and sublatitudinal compression
have been revealed on newly occurred marine terrace in the southern part of the
town of Nevelsk. This terrace is a peculiar case of outcrops considered, because
it resulted from the coseismic seabed uplift during Nevelsk earthquake (EQ ) of
August 2, 2007, M = 6.2 [22]. The vertical displacement of the earth surface reached
1.2m near the coastline. The new marine terrace (actually the drained bench,
Figure A) is located on the west wall of the West Sakhalin Fault, at 15–20km
distance from the Nevelsk EQ hypocenter. Two systems of cleft joints are well
expressed in this bench in the Lower Miocene laminated shales with interlayers of
silica marls. The post-Miocene field of strike-slip fault type, with horizontal exten-
sion and compression, has been reconstructed on the basis of the rose diagram of
Figure 7.
Indicators of post-early Miocene stresses on the newly formed marine terrace (dried bench in the southern part
of the town of Nevel’sk). (A) Image of the terrace with a scale after www.yandex.ru/maps (2014) (dark is sea
surface with visible minigulfs, mg); (B) rose diagram of jointing on its surface (the compression axis by bisector
of acute angle after Gzovsky [8] is oriented along azimuth of 92.5°, and the extension axis is oriented along the
azimuth of 182.5°); (C) view of three boudins on the dried bench; and (D) relative position of a boudin and
two minigulfs, mg, and tension cracks (indicated by T–C characters) in the boudin b4 specified in Table 1.
Yellow “x” symbol denotes a point of reference near coastline, white “+” is a point of reference inside b4 boudin.

 boudin Length, m Width, m Distance Extension,  Remark

to the next
boudin, m
b1 3.8 0.55 3 69 First line, 30m
East from the
b2 4.8 0.95 4.6 80
water’s edge
b3 1.4 0.65 8.3 405
b4 10.3 1 13.2 117
b5 2.8 1.05 8.2 213
b6 4.3 1.25 29.2 526

b7 7.1 1.3 41 488
b8 5.1 0.95 23.5 388
b9 4.1 0.5 2.16 47

259 Mean over first line
b10 2.16 0.65 2.2 78 Second line, 24m

to east of the first
b11 1.4 0.35 0.7 40
b12 1.3 0.35 7.4 448
267 Mean over second

line
b13 7.4 1.7 5.9 65 Third line, 23m to

east of the second
b14 Fragmented and partially under water
b15 1.3 0.92 1.5 68 Fourth line,
b16 >1.6 Partially under water 26m from the

third
217 Overall mean
Table 1.
The parameters of the boudins on the newly occurred marine terrace and the estimates of tensile strain.
jointing for these data (Figure B). The method of Gzovsky [8] has been used for
this reconstruction.
The boudins in the layer of silica marls (Figure C) as well as the tension
cracks in the boudins (Figure D) have confirmed surely that the extension axis is
horizontal and its direction is close to the north-south one. We have measured the
length and width of each boudin and the distance between neighboring ones in the
direction of elongation to evaluate the maximal strain. The results are represented
in Table . The level of tensile strain has been evaluated as the ratio of this distance
to the half sum of their lengths. After averaging, we come to the estimate of post-
Miocene extension of nearly 200%.
. Discussion: correspondence with geophysical data
Generally, our obtained data on the absence of significant difference in stressed

state in the West and East Sakhalin do not contradict the results of the global project
“The World Stress Map” applied to the region of the North West Pacific, that is, the
Sakhalin surroundings [23]. This project takes into account the data on Sakhalin
earthquakes’ focal mechanisms that are relevant to the pattern of the recent tectonic
stress and strain. Although the statistics of such focal mechanisms was scanty in
[23], the obtained map with the border between Amur and Okhotsk microplates

Engineering Geology
(Figure ) is of special interest. One can see in Figure  that this border is close to
the location of the Central Sakhalin Fault (Tym-Poronai Fault) in the Central part
of the island. Its location in the Northern Sakhalin corresponds well with that of
Upper Piltun and Nabilsky Faults, see Figure A.
The southern part of the microplates boundary in Figure  diverges with the
West Sakhalin Fault. This aspect is not consistent with our approach, and we
take into consideration additional regional data. The spatial distribution of the
aftershocks of strong earthquakes, Gornozavodskoe EQ , 17.08.2006, M=5.9, and
Nevelsk EQ , M=6.2, occurred nearly in the West Sakhalin Fault [22], which gave
extra reason that this fault had labeled the debated boundary. It is more vital that
the detailed analysis of the earthquake focal mechanisms, carried out in [23], has
demonstrated rather a lateral zonation of the orientation of modern tectonic stress.
A convincing argument for the dominant regime of horizontal compression and
strike-slip is the results [24] obtained from the data on the deep borehole drilling in
the north and south of the Sakhalin. It has been shown in this work that the maximum
sublatitudinal compression may exceed the vertical stress by 1.2–4 times (on average)
both in the north and south of the Sakhalin. The caliper logging data have demon-
strated the horizontal stress (sublatitudinal compression) to predominate over the ver-
tical one. There are significant wellbore breakouts of the studied vertical holes in two
antipodal angular sectors pointing the direction of the maximum stress-strain effect in
a number of studied vertical boreholes in the Northern and Southern Sakhalin.
Figure 8.
The World Stress Map data regarding to the Sakhalin, according to Heidbach et al. [23].

Besides, the data treating of IFZ-19 profile of deep seismic sounding [15],
which transected (crossed) South Sakhalin from the southwest to the northeast,
gave tilted reflecting area M1 lying in 40–60 km depth and descending toward
Okhotsk Sea. Meanwhile, there is no large fault in the Sakhalin Island, which could
be associated with the border between the Amur and Okhotsk microplates. It is
correspondent with the assumption from the work [20], that the Central Sakhalin
Fault is an eastern branch of the Western Sakhalin Fault with the westward dip and
lesser propagation depth, while the main Western Sakhalin Fault has the eastward
dip. The simulations of interaction of tectonic plates surrounding the Sakhalin
Island, which are based on GPS displacement surveys [25], have shown that one can
draw the most likely border between the Amur and Okhotsk microplates along the
Western and the Central Sakhalin Faults on the Southern Sakhalin territory, and
along the Upper Piltun and Nabilsky Faults (Figure A) on the Northern Sakhalin.
Seismological data, namely, the significant concentration of earthquakes hypo-
centers on the western coast of Sakhalin Island and in the Tatar Strait [25], can also
testify that the border between the microplates passes along the Western Sakhalin
Fault, while the Central Sakhalin Fault is its branch ending at the minor depth.
The analysis of tilt of the P and T axes by the catalog of focal mechanisms of the
earthquakes occurred in 1962–2011, published in [26], has shown the obvious non-
uniformity of orientations of these axes, see Figure . The maxima of the tilt angles
of both P and T axes are 60–70°. This implies the reverse and normal faults. The
strike-slips have a subordinate meaning. The graphs in Figure  are bimodal, with
two maxima of the P and T axes tilt distribution, and this prevents the assumption
that the recent stress field is characterized as a reverse faulting type.
So, the actual results mentioned above contradict the conclusions about the border
between the Amur and Okhotsk microplates passing along the Central Sakhalin Fault,
which have been made on the grounds of the field two-dimensional tectonophysical
studies using the ellipsoid of deformations. Those studies have demonstrated the
different tectonic forces orientation in the Sakhalin, induced by differently directed
movement of the tectonic plates, specified in [3]. On the Northern Sakhalin, the
explicit maximum of earthquakes epicenters concentrates in the eastern part of
Shmidt Peninsula and may correspond to the border between the microplates
(Figure ). Besides, the distribution graphs of the P and T axes tilt angles (Figure )
also contradict the conclusion about the change in the regime of Sakhalin Island
tectonic evolution within the folding stage (i.e., the regime of strike-slip type modi-
fied to the reverse faulting during the following orogenic stage).
The reconstruction of recent stress by the data of earthquakes focal mechanisms
was carried out by Savvichev and published in the works [5, 6]. There are the orien-
tations of maximum deviatoric extensions on the left, and compressions ones are on
the right (Figure ). Obviously, the western part of the island is more seismically
active in comparison with the eastern one due to the border between the Amur and
Figure 9.
The graphs of P and T axes tilt angles according to the earthquakes’ focal mechanisms (1962–2011) by the
catalog [26]. 135 determinations of the P and T axes in total, according to Konovalov et al. [26].

Engineering Geology
Okhotsk microplates, which passes along the Western Sakhalin Fault. Seismicity of
the Northern and west of the Southern Sakhalin is considerably more active than in
the central part of the island.
In this connection, the NE orientations of the subhorizontal axes of maximum
deviatoric compression dominate in the north of the Northern Sakhalin, and they
change the orientation to the ENE southward, up to 53°N. The first latitudinal band
of nonstable orientation of the stress axes is distinguished directly southward of
53°N. The section with vertical orientation of the compression axis engages the
attention in this band, indicating that the local geodynamic regime is a horizon-
tal compression with latitudinal direction. The focal mechanism of destructive
Neftegorsk earthquake in 1995 [19, 27] is able to confirm such regime. The second
band of nonstable orientations of the stress axes is distinguished between 51° and
52°N in the northern part of the Central Sakhalin. The isolated group of the earth-
quake focal mechanisms with a subhorizontal latitudinal orientation of the maxi-
mum deviatoric compression and steeply descending south-eastward extension
ones is distinguished in the western part of the Central Sakhalin between 49.5–
50.0°N and 142.0–42.9°E. This approximates to the geodynamic regime of horizon-
tal compression. The western part of the Southern Sakhalin is characterized with
stable orientations of horizontal compression, which become less stable, changing
the orientation to the WNW and ENE, as the Poyasok Isthmus is approached. In
the same northern part of the Southern Sakhalin, the steep orientations of the
maximum deviatoric extension in the west become unstable when approaching
eastward, where the steep dip angles are noted in the central part and the slow ones
to the SE in the eastern part. Variability of the orientations of recent deviatoric
extensions and compressions is evidently associated with the boundaries of differ-
ent geodynamic zones distinguished during neotectonic stress consideration.
Resuming, we note a reasonable correspondence of the presented results on ori-
entation of the principal compression and extension axes with the results of studies
of the earth surface strains in the vicinity of active faults of Sakhalin Island on
the base of GPS/GLONASS surveys data [28]. In accordance with this work, the
Figure 10.
The projection of principal maximum deviatoric extensions (A) and compressions (B) to the horizontal plane.
The point of dip vector origin is marked with a circle; when the dip angles are less than 15°, the circle locates
in the middle of the dip vector. The areas of different geodynamic conditions are marked with black lines (see
Figure 2C), according to Sim et al. [5].

GPS/Glonass surveys for three cross sections (on the northern, central, and south-
ern parts of Sakhalin Island) provided initial information on the horizontal veloci-
ties of the GPS displacements and the error of their determination, which allowed
to estimate strain of the earth’s surface of Sakhalin Island. The GRID_STRAIN
software suite [29] has been used for computations. The GPS-observation points
location, vectors of the average annual horizontal velocities, and the computed
horizontal deformations of surface in the northern, central, and southern parts of
Sakhalin Island are shown in Figure . As can be seen in Figure B, the shorten-
ing of the earth’s crust of Sakhalin occurs mainly in the sublatitudinal direction,
and it slightly varies from region to region. The heterogeneity of the surface defor-
mation field is appeared in the distribution of the principal elongation and shorten-
ing axes over the Sakhalin area (the terms elongation and shortening are used to
characterize the strain field and extension and compression for the stress field).
The territory of the northern part of the island (Figure B, upper frame) is
subjected to compression in a southwestern direction. Maximum velocities of defor-
mation up to 13 × 10−8 per year appear in its eastern part. Directions of the deforma-
tion velocities, in general, are consistent with the orientation of the compression
and extension axes in the restored field of tectonic stress of the Northern Sakhalin
Figure 11.
Horizontal velocities at the GPS observation points of the Sakhalin Island in relation to the Eurasian tectonic
plate (A), and velocities of dilatation and main axes of earth surface deformation (B). Upper frame: the
measurements in the northern part of the Sakhalin during 2003–2013; midframe: the same in the central
part in 2000–2011; and bottom frame: the same in the southern part in 1999–2009, according to Prytkov and
Vasilenko [28].

Engineering Geology
(Figure C) [5, 6]. However, according to the GPS measurements, no extension
area was found in this part of the island as opposed to Figure C with an extension
zone to northward of 53°N. Low values of the velocities of deformation of the earth
surface, not exceeding ~5 × 10−9 per year (Figure B, midframe), are typical for
the central part of the island. Hokkaido-Sakhalin Fault delimitates the territory with
different geodynamic conditions: the southwestern direction of the compression
axes turns to the submeridional orientation at the fault’s boundary. Alongside the
dominant sublatitudinal shortening, prevailing over most of the Southern Sakhalin
territory, the extension area is distinguished to eastward of 143°E (Figure B,
the bottom frame). The maximum velocity of deformation of shortening is ~8 ×
10−9 per year. In the vicinity of the Central Sakhalin Fault, the axes of shortening
change their western direction to northwestern, and the compression of the north-
eastern direction becomes a prevailing regime of deformation. This zone has not
been revealed when reconstructing of neotectonics stresses due to the insufficiency
of initial data for the LSS determination.
Therefore, at the subregional scale (100km and more), one can see the cor-
respondence of the results obtained using three methods: structural-geomorpho-
logical, geophysical (seismological data), and GPS measurements. Discrepancies are
observed for the zones of ~30km length, they may be related to the complexity of
fault structure on the Sakhalin, including multiple local breaks [16–18, 21], as well
as to very short period of seismic and GPS monitoring. Partially motivated by this
correspondence, we foresee the results represented in Figure C, ,  and  to be
used for several regional issues of engineering geology works and developments. The
information about the direction of maximal horizontal stress action is extremely
important for new wells’ construction in the oil and gas fields in the Northern
Sakhalin (including the Sea of Okhotsk shelf). This action may cause wellbore break-
outs followed by negative incidents: casing collapse or stuck pipe. The safe directions
of near horizontal wells drilling are determined considering stress conditions. In
the case of dangerous azimuth of the well, they (the operators) can compensate the
horizontal stress bias by drilling mud treatment like the mud weight increase, the use
of oil-based mud and inhibition additives. The data we obtained may be used for this
technology in addition to the limited information of the WSM project data [23], and
this will contribute to the technological safety of wells drilling and production.
Characteristics of the modern stress field controlling the earth surface deforma-
tions are significant also for the geological support of railway and main roads opera-
tion. These communications run in the vicinity of Central Sakhalin Fault. Moreover,
the fault zone in the center of South Sakhalin is the most populated area in the
island. The boundary between the microplates implies a zone of enhanced seismic-
ity (see the paragraph after Figure ), and seismic hazards for civil engineering.
Therefore, the particular result that the segment of this boundary in the Southern
Sakhalin does not follow the Central Sakhalin Fault is crucial for detailed seismic
zoning and seismic microzoning before urban development. Finally, we remark that
the pipelines from Sakhalin oil and gas terminals to the continent cross the active
faults of submeridional strike. Our result about the location of microplates’ bound-
ary in the Northern Sakhalin speaks in favor of that the pipelines stability control to
be focused on the section crossing eastward faults (Hokkaido-Sakhalin Fault, Upper
Piltun one, etc.) rather than the West and Central Sakhalin Faults.
. Conclusion
Zonation of the subregions of various geodynamic conditions of the latest

faults formation has been originally carried out on the Sakhalin on the base of

tectonophysical and structural-geomorphological (SG) methods. The boundaries of

the mapped zones have evinced a variability of the modern stress field parameters.
Reconstruction of the recent tectonic stresses of the Sakhalin has revealed a domi-
nance of strike-slip type of stress state with subhorizontal compression and exten-
sion axes. The compression axis is sublatitudinally oriented, and the extension is
submeridional. Sublatitudinal compression axes, reconstructed for the Central and
Northern Sakhalin by the two-dimensional SG method, are turning to the north-
east. The computed parameters of tectonic stresses as a whole are consistent with
the results obtained from the earthquake focal mechanisms and GPS/GLONASS
movements of earth’s surface. The results of this work have demonstrated that the
border between the Amur and Okhotsk microplates along the Central Sakhalin
Fault on the Southern Sakhalin and change of strike-slip stress field during the
folding stage to the reverse fault one to be inappropriate. The further research by
SG and other tectonophysical methods of stress field reconstruction may result in
the specified map of geodynamical regimes and geohazards in the Sakhalin. Such
updated map will not be so complicated as structural geological one in Figure A.
However, the visible indicators of local stress state are rare on the studied territory
due to the forest cover. Therefore, the next research stage is expected to involve
wider processing of satellite images to get raw data on faulting for the neotectonic
and modern stress field reconstruction.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank G. Bryantseva, A. Gorbunov, V. Degtyarev, and V. Parovyshny

for the successful participation in the field works and/or the assistance and O.
Zherdeva for preparing graphical materials.

Engineering Geology
References
[1] Savostin L, Verzhbitskaya A, [9] Gushchenko O. The method of

Baranov B. Modern tectonics of the kinematic analysis of destruction
Okhotsk Sea region. Doklady of the structures in reconstruction of tectonic
Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Earth stress fields. In: Grigoriev A, Osokina D,
Science Sections. 1982;(4):62-67 editors. Fields of Stress and Strain in the
Lithosphere. Vol. 1979. Moscow: Nauka.
[2] Seno T, Sakurai T, Stein S. Can the pp. 7-25. (in Russian)
Okhotsk plate be discriminated from
the north American plate? Journal of [10] Danilovich V. The Method of Belts
Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. in Studies of Fracturing Associated with
1996;(B5):11305-11315. DOI: Shearing. Irkutsk: Irkutsk Polytechnic
10.1029/96JB00532 Institute; 1961. p. 47. (in Russian)
[3] Golozubov V, Kasatkin S, Grannik V, [11] Kostenko N. Development of Folded

Nechayuk A. Deformation of the upper and Faulted Deformation in Orogenic
cretaceous and cenozoic complexes of Relief. Moscow: Nedra; 1972. p. 320. (in
the West Sakhalin terrane. Geotectonics. Russian)
2012;:333-351. DOI: 10.1134/
S0016852112050020 [12] Kostenko N, Briantseva G. On
issue of structural-geomorphological
[4] Vasilenko N, Prytkov A. GPS- interpretation in closed spaces
based modeling of the interaction environments. Bulletin of Moscow
between the lithospheric plates in University. Series 4: Geology. 2004;:34-
Sakhalin. Russian Journal of Pacific 38. (in Russian)
Geology. 2012;:35-41. DOI: 10.1134/
S1819714012010137 [13] Rebetsky Y, Sim L, Marinin A.
From the Slickensides towards Tectonic
[5] Sim L, Bogomolov L, Bryantseva G, Stresses. Methods and Algorithms.
Savvichev P. Neotectonics and tectonic GEOS: Moscow; 2017. p. 234. (in
stresses of the Sakhalin Island. Russian)
Geodynamics & Tectonophysics.
2017;:181-202. DOI: 10.5800/ [14] Polets A. The stress state of
GT-2017-8-1-0237 the Sakhalin Island and adjacent
territories. IOP Conference
[6] Sim L, Bryantseva G, Savvichev P, Series: Earth and Environmental
Kamenev P. Patterns of transition zone Science. 2019;:012010. DOI:
between Eurasian and North American 10.1088/1755-1315/324/1/012010
plates (by example of stressed state of
the Sakhalin island). Geosystems of [15] Filonenko V, Pavlenkova G. Some
Transition Zones. 2017;:3-22. DOI: features of the dynamics of the crust in
10.30730/2541-8912.2017.1.1.003-022 the Okhotsk Sea region. In: Solodilov L,
editor. Geophysics of the XXI Century:
[7] Sim LA, Bogomolov LM, Kuchai OA, 2005: Proceedings of the V.V. Fedynsky
Tataurova AA. Neotectonic and modern Seventh Geophysical Readings. Moscow:
stresses of South Sakhalin. Russian Nauchny Mir; 2006. pp. 101-107.
Journal of Pacific Geology. 2017;:223- (in Russian)
235. DOI: 10.1134/S1819714017030058
[16] Voeikova O, Nesmeyanov S,
[8] Gzovsky М. Fundamentals of Serebryakova L. Neotectonics and
Tectonophysics. Moscow: Nauka; 1975. Active Faults of Sakhalin. Moscow:
p. 536. (in Russian) Nauka; 2007. p. 187. (in Russian)

[17] Rozhdestvenskii V. Role of shifts et al. Active faults in northeastern

in formation of the Sakhalin structure. Sakhalin. Geotectonics. 2002;:227-246
Geotectonics. 1982;:99-111. (in
Russian) [26] Konovalov A, Nagornykh T,
Safonov D. Modern Studies of
[18] Rozhdestvensky V. Active rifting Earthquake Focal Mechanisms in the
in the Japan and Okhotsk seas and Sakhalin. Vladivostok: Dal’nauka; 2011.
the tectonic evolution of the Central p. 252. (in Russian)
Sakhalin fault in the Ceinozoic. Russian
Journal of Pacific Geology. 2008;:15-24. [27] Rogozhin E. Focal mechanism of
DOI: 10.1134/S1819714008010028 the Neftegorsk, Sakhalin earthquake
of May 27 (28), 1995. Geotectonics.
[19] Rogozhin E, Reisner G, 1996;:124-131
Besstrashnov V, Strom A, Borisenko L.
Seismotectonic settings of Sakhalin [28] Prytkov A, Vasilenko N. Earth
Island. Izvestiya Physics of the Solid surface deformation of the Sakhalin
Earth. 2002;:207-214 Island from GPS data. Geodynamics &
Tectonophysics. 2018;:503-514. DOI:
[20] Trifonov V, Kozhurin A. Study 10.5800/GT-2018-9-2-0358
of active faults: Theoretical and
applied implications. Geotectonics. [29] Teza G, Pesci А, Galgaro А.
2010;:510-528. DOI: 10.1134/ Grid_strain and grid_strain3: Software
S0016852110060051 packages for strain field computation in
2D and 3D environments. Computers
[21] Zharov A. Geological Structure and and Geosciences. 2008;:1142-1153.
Cretaceous-Paleogene Geodynamics DOI: 10.1016/j.cageo.2007.07.006
of South-East Sakhalin. Yuzhno-
Sakhalinsk: Sakhalin Publishing House;
2004. p. 191. (in Russian)
[22] Tikhonov I, Kim C. Confirmed

prediction of the 2 August 2007 MW
6.2 Nevelsk earthquake (Sakhalin
Island, Russia). Tectonophysics.
2010;:85-93. DOI: 10.1134/
S1028334X08040417
[23] Heidbach O, Rajabi M, Cui X,

Fuchs K, Müller K, Reinecker B, et al.
The World Stress Map database release
2016: Crustal stress pattern across
scales. Tectonophysics. 2018;:484-
498. DOI: 10.5880/WSM.2016.001
[24] Kamenev P, Bogomolov L,

Zakupiv A. On the stress state of the
Sakhalin crust according to the data of
drilling deep boreholes. Russian Journal
of Pacific Geology. 2017;:25-33. DOI:
10.1134/S1819714017010043
[25] Bulgakov R, Ivaschenko A, Kim C,

Sergeev K, Strel'tsov M, Kozhurin A,

Chapter 4
Multivariate Assessment of
California Bearing Ratio with
Contrasted Geotechnical
Properties of Soils in Ilorin-Lokoja
Highway
AttahFakeye, OlusegunIge and OlufemiOgunsanwo
Abstract
California Bearing Ratio (CBR) is an important parameter used in designing

pavement layers in road construction but testing this parameter requires time,
labor, and huge cost. The study therefore applies multivariate approach to evaluate
CBR based on contrasted geotechnical parameters along Ilorin-Lokoja highway. The
results obtained showed that the migmatite-gneiss-derived soils are slightly more
fines (< 0.075mm; 7.4–59.6%), more plastic (PI; 1.6–39%), and have low strength
(MDD=1.8mg/m3; CBR=29.0%) than the metasediments (11–57.7%, 2.0–30%,
1.6mg/m3, 23.6%) and older granite soils (8.2–32.7%, 2.6–13.4%, 1.7mg/m3,
27.8%), respectively. The principal component analysis (PCA) revealed three major
components (eigenvalues >1) which accounted for 83.8% of the total variance at the
rate of 33.4, 14.7, and 11.4%. Major contributing variables for the components were
fines (R=0.87), plasticity index (R=0.7), and coarse sand (R=0.67%). Spatial
distribution of these groups established interplay of sediment-gradation and
moisture-connection evident in hierarchical cluster analysis that revealed patterns
of homogeneity and soil relationships. Regression analysis established five models
from predictor variables such as fines, activity, free swell, liquid and plastic limits,
weighted plasticity index, optimum moisture content, and maximum dry density
with the coefficient of determination (R2=0.33) and root mean square error
(RMSE) of 7.80.
Keywords: multivariate, principal component analysis, regression, hierarchical

analysis, geotechnical properties
. Introduction
Identification and quantitative characterization of soils are of dire importance

in geotechnical assessment despite the difficulties experienced using conventional
approach. Index properties are important parameters in the analysis of geotechnical
engineering problems, particularly to estimate strength of the soil material. Conversely,
laboratory test takes 2–4days to measure compaction and California Bearing Ratio
(CBR) values for pavement design. As a result, they are expensive and time-consuming.

Engineering Geology
Also due to lack of specialized personnel, these tests are oftentimes avoided in many soil
investigation programs. Thus, the need to incorporate statistical approach in predicting
soil properties becomes inevitable.
Several authors have applied this approach in relating and predicting soil
properties. One to one relationship was presented among soil properties [1] such
as liquid limit (LL), plastic limit (PL), plasticity index (PI), optimum moisture
content (OMC), and maximum dry density (MDD). Furthermore, Carter and
Bentley explained that soil type, density, moisture content play an important role
in soil relationship [2] and correlated soil expansion index and plasticity index, fine
fraction and weighted plasticity index (i.e., product of PI and percentage passing
0.425mm). Apart from index properties, some researchers like Owoseni et al. [3]
and Yildrin and Gunaydin [4] observed that California Bearing Ratio depends on
other factors such as type of soils, permeability of soil, maximum dry density and
optimum moisture content. To correct overlapping problem and uncertainty in
prediction, Yitagesu et al. applied multiple regressions to improve the ability of
predicting soil properties, and better model the extent of their relationship [5].
This paper attempts to identify geotechnical characteristics of soils developed
on different rocks and establish relationships among various properties in order to
estimate soil strength capability in three lithological units. Multivariate approach
using principal component analysis (PCA) and hierarchical classification methods
are used to identify patterns, detect and classify new parameters into groups; and
further propose regression models to determine CBR values in view of huge cost
and labor.
. Methodology
Soil samples (130 samples) were collected along the Ilorin-Lokoja highway
(>300km length) which spans across latitude 7°25′N-8°40′N and longitude
4°30′E-6°45′E. Simultaneously, Garmin GPS was used to record coordinates of
sample locations. The topography ranges from a relatively flat to hilly, undulating
terrain with elevation ranging between 100 and 700m above sea level. The
highway is overlying the Precambrian Basement rock of South Western Nigeria
(Figure ) and cut across three geologic units: the migmatite-gneiss complex
(denoted by PCB), the metasediments/volcanic series (PCM) and the older
granite series (PCG) [6].
Majority of the rock is the migmatite—gneiss essentially made up of migmatite
and banded gneiss. Others are flaggy quartzite with biotite gneiss, undifferentiated
schist, porphyritic granite (porphyroblastic), and medium-coarse grained biotite and
hornblende granite. Temperature ranges from 25 to 35°C. Climate is dry to wet, with
a mean annual rainfall of 1200mm. Due to heavy rainfall, considerable moisture
change occur in the soils which dries up at prolonged dry season. This induces soils
susceptibility to volume changes.
. Laboratory analysis
Geotechnical tests were carried out on air-dried (35–40°C) soil samples at the
Soil Geotechnical Laboratory of Nigerian Building and Road Research Institute
following the British Standard [7] Part 2: Clause 9.2, 4.5, 5.3, 5.4, and Part 4, Clause
3.3 and 3.4 methods. The soil engineering parameters obtained include natural
moisture content, Atterberg limits, particle size distribution, free swell, compaction
test and California Bearing Ratio.

Multivariate Assessment of California Bearing Ratio with Contrasted Geotechnical Properties…
Figure 1.
Geology of Nigeria showing the study highway overlain by sampling points (red dots).
. Statistical analysis
In SPSS statistical software, 20 soil parameters were explored and their rela-
tionships examined. Data transformation was applied to ensure equal influence
on the model thus, fulfilling the linear model assumptions. The strength and
relationship trends on the dataset were examined from Pearson correlation matrix
and quantitative measures of linear associations determined. Principal component
analysis (PCA) approach was incorporated to reduce the data with many variables,
identify clusters, and transform the soil variables into new uncorrelated variables
that preserve most of the information [8]. Components with eigenvalues >1 were
retained and subjected to varimax rotation to maximize correlation between the
factors and measured variables. Thereafter, Agglomerative Hierarchical Cluster
(AHC) analysis was computed to identify analogous behavior among different soil
characteristics and soil individuals using Ward’s method and squared Euclidean
distance as a measure of similarity between soils [9].
. Results and discussions
The statistical summary of the laboratory test is shown in Table . The soils
exhibited wide variations of data clustering around the mean value (1.08–88.6%)
and high coefficients of variation (1.7–147%). The median of some parameters
was lower than the mean value, indicating a low effect of abnormality on sampling
values.
. Particle size characteristics
In the migmatite-gneiss derived soils (PCB), gravel and coarse sand varied
with coefficient of variation (CV) from 18.3 to 100% (<23.5%), medium to fine
sand was between 8.0 and 86% (>32%) while the percentage of silt and clay were
3.2–50.8% (52.4%) and 0.9–34.6% (58.8%) respectively. However, the percentage
of fines (<0.075mm) ranged between 7.4 and 59.6% (48.0%). This proportion of


Migmatite-Gneiss (PCB) =  Metasediment/Metavolcanic (PCM) =  Older Granite (PCG) = 
Properties Units Min Max Mean SD CV Min Max Mean SD CV Min Max Mean SD CV
NMC  2.6 22.7 11.8 4.5 38 3.1 18.4 12.1 4.1 34 2.4 16.2 7.5 4.3 56.8
Gravel 38.6 100 89.3 13.2 14.8 65 100 87 10.5 12.1 45 100 85.8 19.6 22.8
CS 18.3 99.2 80.4 18.9 23.5 43.1 100 74.6 15.3 20.6 19.4 100 77.5 25.8 33.3
Engineering Geology
MS 13.6 86 51.5 16.6 32.3 21.5 84.2 53.8 15.3 28.5 18.9 92.1 53.9 18.8 34.9
FS 8 79.5 28.9 14.3 49.4 15.2 71.1 36.8 13.3 36.1 14 41 28 7.9 28
Sand 20 87 59.5 14.3 24 25 81 50.1 13.9 27.8 31 81 57.6 17.4 30.2
Silt 3.2 50.8 17.1 9 52.4 6.1 44.3 20.3 8.4 41.2 2.4 24.5 15.5 7.5 48.6
Clay 0.9 34.6 12.3 7.3 58.8 1.8 28.7 15.2 7 46.3 1.2 18.8 10.8 6.6 60.8
Fines 7.4 59.6 23 11 48 11.7 57.7 28.6 10.4 36.5 8.2 32.7 21.8 7.5 34.6
Ac 0.1 8.5 1.1 1.2 110 0.2 7.9 0.9 1.4 147 0.2 5.1 1.2 1.4 123
Fsw 1.8 28.4 6.4 5.7 88.3 2.8 19.6 7.1 5.1 72.2 3.2 4.7 4 0.5 11.6
LL 13.4 69 28.4 11.7 41.1 13.4 48.5 30.3 9.7 32 16.5 32.4 23.2 5.7 24.5
PL 2.2 50 19 9.6 50.5 10.2 31.7 20.3 6.3 31 8.6 26.5 16.6 5.7 34.5
PI 1.6 39 9.4 6.5 68.7 2.1 30.1 10 7.3 72.6 2.6 13.4 6.5 3.4 51.9
wPI 0.3 31.9 5.1 4.6 90.6 0.9 25.3 5.8 5.7 97.8 0.9 7.3 3.5 2.1 60.6

BD mg/m 1 2.9 2 0.3 15 1.5 2.2 1.9 0.2 8.5 1.7 2.1 1.9 0.1 5.9
DD 0.8 2.4 1.7 0.2 13.9 1.2 1.9 1.5 0.2 10.8 1.5 1.9 1.6 0.1 8
MDD 0.9 2.6 1.8 0.3 14.4 1.3 2.1 1.6 0.2 11.9 1.6 1.9 1.7 0.1 7.6

Migmatite-Gneiss (PCB) =  Metasediment/Metavolcanic (PCM) =  Older Granite (PCG) = 
MC  7.6 27 15.9 4.8 29.8 7.6 23.9 16.5 3.8 23 9.1 19.7 14.1 3.6 25.8
OMC 5.7 25 13 4.2 32.2 10.1 22.5 15 2.9 19.6 8.9 18.2 14 2.9 20.8
CBRu 12.5 70 50.8 12.4 24.4 17 75.1 47.7 11.9 25 30.4 58.6 52.5 8 15.3
CBRs 10 56.4 29 9.7 33.4 11.2 45 23.6 7.1 30 12.1 37.2 27.8 6.5 23.3
SP 1.5 15.4 5.5 2.8 51.9 2 11.6 6 3 49.8 2.3 7.9 4.3 1.6 38.4
Dr 0.7 1 0.9 0 4.6 0.9 1 0.9 0 3.2 0.9 1 1 0 1.7

Wr 0.8 2 1.3 0.2 19.7 0.8 1.6 1.1 0.2 20.9 0.6 1.6 1 0.3 26.8
LLr 0.7 6.3 2.7 1.1 42.8 1.3 9.1 2.9 1.7 58.3 2 7.8 3.9 1.9 48.3
PIr 1.1 8.1 1.7 1 56.2 1.1 2.6 1.5 0.4 25.7 1.1 2 1.5 0.3 21.5
Parameter abbreviations are described in the Abbreviations section
Table 1.
Statistical summary of soil properties.
Engineering Geology
fines is similar to those reported by Ige et al. [10]. In the metasediment derived
soils (PCM), content of gravel and coarse sand were higher from 43 to 100%
(<20.6%), while medium to fine sand was between 15.2 and 84.2% with 36% CV.
Similarly, the percentage of silt and clay ranged between 6.1–44.3% (41.2%) and
1.8–28.7% (46.3%). The proportion of fines (11.7–57.7%; 36.6% CV) is relatively
as high as the PCB origin. Similarly, the older granite rock (PCG) exhibited a wide
range of gradation with gravel and coarse sand ranging between 19.4 and 100%
(<33.3%). Medium to fine sand content was lower (14–92%) (CV=28–34.9%)
while percentage of silt and clay varied between 2.4–24.5% and 1.2–18.8%
(CV=48.6–60.8%), respectively. The amount of fines (8.2–32.7%) and CV
(34.6%) are very low in this area.
On one hand, this granularity is similar to the work of Nwaiwu et al. [11] where
the lateritic soils are enriched with gravel and sands ranging between 28.2–40% and
42.2–48% resp. However, the high percentage passing through No. 200 (0.075mm)
BS sieve suggests the soil is predominantly of fine materials and classified according
to Unified Soils Classification System (USCS) system as clayey sand (SC), silty sand
(SM) and silty, clayey sands (SC-SM). Other soil classes obtained include poorly
graded sand with silt or clay (SP-SM, SP-SC), poorly graded gravel with clay or silty
clayey gravel (GP-GC, GC-GM), silty gravel (GM), sandy lean or fat clay, (CL, CH),
and sandy silt or elastic silt (ML, MH) that occurred in low percentage. Similarly,
according to American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) system, the most dominating classes are A-2 and A-7 soils, hence rated
as excellent to good and fair to poor materials for road use.
. Consistency limits
A wide range of plasticity (Figure ) characterized the inorganic silty clayey

soils in the area. The liquid limit varied between 13.4 and69% with a lower range
experienced in PCG derived soils (<32.4%), while plastic limit and plasticity
Figure 2.
Casagrande chart of plasticity-liquid limit relationship.

index at the PCB unit ranged between 2.2–50% and 1.62–39%, with mean values
of 28.4, 19.0, and 9.4%, respectively (Table ). The Casagrande plasticity chart
revealed majority of the soils from the migmatite-gneiss origin placed above the
A-line, indicating that they are composed of inorganic clay material and exhibited
low to medium plasticity, implying low to medium swelling and compressibility.
The moderate plasticity suggests low to medium dry strength, which could easily
crumble under load thus leading to pavement failure and possible erosion under
climatic threat. The distribution of the soil samples on the chart portrayed the
variability in soil plasticity characteristics.
Moreover, free swell (Fsw) varied from 1.8 to 28.4% in PCB, 2.8–19.6% in
PCM and 3.2–4.67% in PCG with mean values ranging from 6.4, 7.1, and 4.04%,
respectively; while soil activity with mean values oscillated between 0.09–8.5 (1.1),
0.17–7.85 (0.9), and 0.2–5.08 (1.2) within the 3 units. The weighted plasticity index
(wPI) value ranged between 0.25–31.9% (5.1%), 0.92–25.3% (5.8%), and 0.87–7.3%
(3.5%) with mean from the 3 units. In PCB soils, activity tends to be higher than
normal (8.5), high weighted plasticity index (wPI), plasticity ratio (PIr), and
swelling potential (SP) indicating that the soils are active. The result of natural
moisture content (NMC) (2.6–22.7%) is fairly high, considering the time of sample
collection. This indicates the soil potential for water retention, which is a property
of fine-grained soils. The high water content also suggests the presence of high
water table earlier reported by Adams et al. [12]. These observations correspond
with Bayamack et al. [13]. The derived plasticity parameters (wPI, PIr, SP, and LLr)
represent the effective contribution of the plasticity of fines to the performance of
the entire soil materials, depending on the amount of fines.
. Compaction and California Bearing Ratio
The maximum dry density (MDD) of the soils from PCB area (Table )
increases with mean to 2.6mg/m3 (1.77mg/m3) at 25% (13%) optimum moisture
contents (OMC). These values are higher than those obtained in metasediment
(PCM) and older granite (PCG) units with 2.1mg/m3 (1.6mg/m3) MDD and 22.5%
(15%) OMC. The low density-moisture relationship implies low strength instigated
by loose soils that are susceptible to erosion. The interaction of the subgrade with
water greatly reduces strength and therefore promotes continuous failure of the
overlying pavement. Few examples of soil compaction curves (Figure ) illustrate
distinct peak of maximum dry density at optimum moisture content.
The CBR values at 95% OMC after 48hours of immersion varied between 10 and
56.4% for PCB, 11 and 45% for PCM and 12.1 and 37.2% for PCG soils (Table ). The
mean values within the three lithological units varied between 28.8, 23.6, and 27.8%,
respectively. For unsoaked condition, the CBR varied in a higher rate from 12.5 to
75.0% within the 3 units. The result showed a reduction in strength due to soaking
suggesting a probable drastic reduction in strength by more than half during wet
condition and the penetration resistance becomes reduced due to excessive moisture.
These values are similar to those found along Ado Ekiti-Akure road (27–100%) by
Adams and Adetoro [14]. The low mean CBR value (<30%) suggests that the soils
may not withstand ground vibrations when vehicular load is applied and reinforces
its susceptibility to erosion. Soil improvement measures are therefore, envisaged for
the stability of soils for adequate strength.
. Simple linear regression
High statistically significant correlation (R>0.70) is recorded among 13 soil

attributes pairs (Table ) such as gravel, coarse sand (CS), medium sand (MS), fine

Engineering Geology
Figure 3.
Compaction curves of selected soil samples.
Properties R values Properties R values

FS and fines 0.97 Fsw and CBRu −0.62
Gravel and CS 0.96 Fsw and PI 0.61
BD and MDD 0.95 LL and PI 0.61
DD and MDD 0.95 NMC and clay 0.60
Silt and clay 0.94 MS and silt 0.60
Silt and fines 0.92 LL and MC 0.59
BD and DD 0.90 PL and MC 0.56
PI and wPI 0.89 PI and MC 0.56
Clay and fines 0.88 FS and sand −0.56
Fsw and LL 0.88 NMC and LL 0.56
FS and silt 0.80 MS and clay 0.56
LL and PL 0.80 DD and OMC −0.55
FS and clay 0.77 MDD and OMC −0.54
CS and MS 0.75 Gravel and sand 0.52
MC and OMC 0.72 fines and OMC 0.52
Gravel and MS 0.70 FS and LL 0.52
LL and CBRu −0.70 FS and PL 0.51
MS and FS 0.68 FS and OMC 0.51
MS and fines 0.68 NMC and Fsw 0.51
Fsw and wPI 0.68 Clay and Ac −0.51
Fsw and PL 0.66 fines and LL 0.51
LL and wPI 0.64 NMC and fines 0.50
PL and CBRu −0.62 Sand and fines −0.50
Table 2.
Pearson significant correlation of soil properties.
sand (FS), silt, clay, fines, swelling potential (SP), free swell (Fsw), liquid limit
(LL), plasticity index (PI), dry density (DD) and maximum dry density (MDD)
which raises the issue of multi-collinearity. However, other parameters exhibit low

correlations (R<0.50) including sand, activity (Ac), plastic limit (PL), moisture
content (MC) and optimum moisture content (OMC).
This could be attributed to the presence of high fine fractions and potential
influence from environmental factors. The result corroborates with the observa-
tions obtained on gneiss derived laterite in Central Cameroun [15] and reaffirms the
views of the earlier scholars that geotechnical properties of laterites depends on the
parent materials, climate, vegetation, topography and duration of the laterization
phenomenon [16].
. Multivariate analysis of soil properties
3.5.1 Principal component analysis
Among the multivariate analysis techniques, principal component analysis is the

most frequently used because it is the starting point in data mining which aims at
minimizing the dimensionality of the data. Seven principal components (PCs) were
extracted with eigenvalues >1 which accounted for 83.8% of the total variance of
data (Table ).
However, the first five PCs accounted for >70% of variability in measured
soil properties. While PC1 explained 33.4% of the total variance with fines as the
major contributing variable (R=0.87), PC2 accounted for additional 14.7% of the
total variance with plasticity index (PI) as the second major contributing variable
(R=0.70). In PC3, 11.4% was accounted for, with coarse sand (CS) contributing
more (R=0.67). Other components accounted for <15% and as such were removed
as they explained less variance than individual variable in the dataset [8].
Based on the communality estimates, the five factors explained more than 90%
of variance in MDD, PI, LL, DD, BD, FS, CS, SP, fines and gravel; > 80% in wPI, PL,
Fsw, Wr, LLr, NMC, sand, silt and clay; > 70% in MS, MC, CBRu, and Dr.; above
60% in PIr, OMC, and Ac; and 53% in CBRs (Table ). According to Johnson and
Wichern [17], a high communality suggests that a high proportion of the variability
is explained by the factor with a higher preference over a low communality estimate.
By implication, the factors fairly explained the variance in soaked CBR and as such
required a regression model to predict the property. The values obtained are similar
to those obtained by Shukla et al. [18].
The coefficient of linear correlation between the variables and their factors
(Table  ) give a meaning to the principal components. The parameters are well
represented and explained by the factorial axes on the correlation circle (Figure ).
Initial eigenvalues
PCs Eigen values  of Variance Cum  of variance
1 9.0 33.4 33.4
2 3.9 14.7 48.1
3 3.1 11.4 59.5

4 2.5 9.2 68.7
5 1.6 5.8 74.5
6 1.4 5.2 79.6
7 1.1 4.2 83.8
Table 3.
Eigenvalues and proportions of variance explained by PCA.

Engineering Geology
Soil variables PC PC PC PC PC Communalities
SP 0.93 — — — — 0.91
PI 0.87 — — — −0.39 0.95

LL 0.87 — — — 0.33 0.94
Fsw 0.86 — — — — 0.85
wPI 0.84 — — 0.34 — 0.89

CBRu −0.60 — — — −0.32 0.74
MDD — 0.96 — — — 0.97
DD — 0.94 — — — 0.94
BD — 0.93 — — — 0.91
OMC 0.35 −0.60 — — — 0.68
MC 0.43 −0.56 0.32 — — 0.76

LLr — — −0.78 — 0.39 0.82
Ac — — −0.75 — — 0.68
C — — 0.72 0.39 — 0.85

NMC 0.48 — 0.73 — — 0.80
S — — 0.67 0.42 — 0.86
Fines 0.32 — 0.61 0.43 0.36 0.96

FS 0.36 — 0.53 0.40 0.42 0.91
G — — — 0.94 — 0.94
CS — — — 0.94 — 0.95
MS — — — 0.78 — 0.79
S — — −0.41 0.47 −0.47 0.85
PIr — — — — −0.77 0.68

PL 0.43 — — — 0.72 0.87
Wr — — — — 0.89 0.82
Dr — — — — 0.83 0.74
CBRs −0.39 0.37 — — 0.48 0.53
Table 4.
Proportion of variance and communality estimates of soil variables.
This graph shows three groups of variables, suggesting the existence of correlation
between them.
PC1 positively correlates (> 0.84) with SP, PI, LL, Fsw, wPI and MC, NMC, PL,
CBRu (Table ) and is termed plasticity parameters. PC2 demonstrated very high
positive correlation with soil densities (MDD, DD, BD) (> 0.93) and negatively
correlated with moisture contents (MC, OMC) (<−0.6) and is termed moisture-
density or compaction parameters since the variables are important functions of
soil moisture density. It also showed moderate positive loading from CBRs (0.37)
resulting from significant correlation between MDD and OMC. Similarly, PC3
defined as fine gradation parameters showed highest positive correlation (0.72) with
clay and NMC; FS, silt and fines (0.53, 0.61, 0.67); and negatively correlated (>0.75)
with activity and liquid limit ratio (LLr). These variables are a function of fine soil
texture. PC4 and PC5 are positively correlated (>0.70) with coarse materials (gravel,
coarse and medium sand), referred to as coarse soil texture.

3.5.2 Agglomerative hierarchical analysis
Agglomerative hierarchical clustering (AHC) of the principal components

showed a representation of the soil variables in homogenous classes where soils of
same class exhibited similar values. The three major classes distinctively catego-
rized by the AHC are depicted by dendrogram (Figure ) which also displayed the
cohesiveness of clusters formed. Class 1 soils were characterized by fines (silt, clay),
plasticity and moisture contents (MC, OMC) parameters. Approximately, 47% of
these soils were of the migmatite-gneiss derived origin (PCB) with a p-value <0.001.
Figure 4.
Score plot and correlation circle obtained with PCA.
Figure 5.
Dendrogram of the studied soil variables.

Engineering Geology
Similarly, Class 3 showed significant clustering with densities (BD, DD, and MDD)
parameters of mainly metasediment origin (PCM). Class 2 soils performed poorly
owing to few parameters and p-value >0.05, which might be from the older granite
derived origin (PCG).
3.5.3 Multiple regression analysis
Following stepwise regression method, five models were generated in (Eqs. 1–5).
The result indicated that between 25 and 33% of the variation in soil properties was
explained by the combination of these predictors. In Eq. 5, 70% training dataset
accounted for 33% variance with coefficient of determination (R2=0.33) and root
mean square error of performance (RMSE=7.8). Given the p-value <0.001 computed
by analysis of variance (ANOVA), the significance level (5%) and the low bias (0.05),
the prediction by the explanatory variables is significant.
CBRs = 0.008LL − 0.29 PL − 0.5wPI − 0.1OMC + 6.87 MDD + 25.2 (1)
CBRs = 6.47 MDD − 0.014 LL − 0.32 PL − 0.59wPI − 0.12OMC

(2)
+ 0.12 Fsw + 26.7
CBRs = 8.51MDD − 0.1LL − 0.2PL − 0.56wPI − 0.1OMC + 0.11Fsw + 38.1Dr

(3)
− 0.13Wr − 0.2 LLr + 0.88PIr − 14.02
CBRs = 0.062 LL − 0.51PL − 0.82wPI − 0.28 Fsw − 38.06 (4)
CBRs = 0.31Fines + 1.88 Ac + 0.41Fsw − 0.298LL − 0.25PL − 0.73wPI

(5)
− 0.5OMC + 2.11 MDD + 36.03
. Conclusion
All the variables exhibited a large variation of data clustering around the mean
value and high coefficients of variation. The soils within the area are predominantly
very fine sands with a high percentage passing through No. 200 (0.075mm). The
natural moisture content and soil activity are moderately high which may be due
to soil potential for retaining water. The result of Atterberg limits shows most of
the soils classified as inorganic clayey soils under A-2 and A-7 groups. Their vari-
ability is locational and between lithology which reflects the influence of parent
materials and pedogenic activities. Application of correlation analysis has allowed
for the determination of the relationship between index properties, compaction
and CBR and for deriving multivariate relationships for the assessment of CBR
based on these parameters. Strong correlation existed among index properties but
showed weak relationship with CBR under soaked condition. Principal component
analysis categorized the measured soil parameters into five major groups for which
first three components explained more than half of the total variance. Hierarchical
classification validated the clustering of different individuals/variables based on
the parent material. Five empirical models were obtained between soaked CBR and
index parameters. The coefficient of determination (R2) and root mean square error
(RMSE) revealed that the models obtained were able to predict the target variable to

a good degree of accuracy. The pavement challenges witnessed on the highway are
attributable to the poor subgrade, the influence of geology and lack of drainage. It is
therefore recommended to stabilize the soil with cement or lime in order to improve
the strength and provide drainage along the road corridor.
Acknowledgements
My appreciation goes to my Supervisors, Prof. Olusegun Ige and Prof. Olufemi

Ogunsanwo for their support and indebt supervision of the research as well as
Nigerian Building and Road Research Institute for assisting in the laboratory test.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Abbreviations
Grain size distribution parameters according to their diameter
G gravel size (4.0–13.2mm)

CS coarse sand size (0.6–2mm)
MS medium sand size (0.2–0.425mm)
FS fine sand size (0.075–0.2mm)
S silt size (0.002mm)
C clay size (0.001mm)
Atterberg limit parameters
LL liquid limit
PL plastic limit
PI plasticity index
wPI weighted plasticity index [(PI × % passing 0.425mm)/100]
NMC natural moisture content
Fsw free swell
Compaction parameters
MDD maximum dry density

DD dry density
BD bulk density
OMC optimum moisture content
MC moisture content
CBRu unsoaked California Bearing Ratio
CBRs soaked California Bearing Ratio
Other derived parameters
LLr liquidity ratio (LL/MC)

PIr plasticity ratio (LL/PL)
Wr moisture ratio (MC/OMC)
Dr density ratio (DD/MDD)

Engineering Geology
Ac activity (PI/clay fraction)

SP swelling potential (PI/PIr)
SD standard deviation
CV coefficient of variation [(SD/mean) × 100]
R correlation coefficient
R2 coefficient of determination
RMSE root mean square error

References
[1] Patel RS, Desal MD. CBR predicted [8] Jollife IT. Principal Component
by index properties for alluvial soils Analysis. 2nd ed. Springer series in
of South Gujarat. In: Proceedings of Statistics. New York, USA: Springer-
the Indian Geotechnical Conference. Verlag; 2002
Mumbai: Geotrendz. IGS Mumbai
Chapter & IIT Bombay; 16-18 December [9] Murtagh F, Legendre P. Ward’s
2010. pp. 79-82 hierarchical clustering method:
Clustering criterion and agglomerative
[2] Carter M, Bentley SP. Shrinkage algorithm. Journal of Classification.
and swelling characteristics. In: Soil 2014;(3):274-295
Properties and Their Correlations.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons; [10] Ige OO, Fakeye AM, Ogunsanwo O.
2016. DOI: 10.1002/9781119130888.ch8 Geotechnical assessment of some along
Ilorin-Lokoja highway—Implication
[3] Owoseni JO, Adeyemi GO,
on suitability for road construction.
Asiwaju-Bello YA, Anifowose AYB. Bulletin of the Science Association of
Engineering geological assessment Nigeria. 2018;:149-162
of some lateritic soils in Ibadan,
southwestern Nigeria using bivariate [11] Nwaiwu CM,Afolayan JO,
and regression analyses. African Osinubi KJ. Predicting hydraulic
Journal of Science and Technology conductivity of compacted lateritic
(AJST), Science and Engineering Series. soils, a reliability approach. Electronic
2012;(1):59-71 Journal of Geotechnical Engineering.
2006;(1):45-56
[4] Yildirin B, Gunaydin O. Estimation
[12] Adams JO, Aderinola OS,
of California bearing ratio by
Akinwamide JT. Geotechnical study of
using soft computing systems.
pavement indices influencing failures
Expert Systems with Applications.
along ado-Ajabandele-Ikere road,
2011;(5):6381-6391
South Western, Nigeria. International
journal of Engineering Innovation and
[5] Yitagesu FA, Van Der Meer F, Van Research. 2015;(4):567-572
Der Werff H, Seged H. Evaluation of
soil expansion index from routinely [13] Bayamack JF, Onana VL, Ndzie AT,
determined geotechnical parameters. Ngo’oze A, Ohandja HN, Eko RM.
Soil Science Society of America Journal. Assessment of the determination of
2011;:1640-1651 California bearing ratio of laterites
with contrasted geotechnical properties
[6] Oluyide PO, Nwajide CS, from simple physical parameters.
Oni AO. The Geology of Ilorin area with Transportation Geotechnics.
explanations on the 1:250,000 series, 2019;:84-95
Sheet 50 (Ilorin). Geological Survey of
Nigeria Bulletin. 1998;:1-84 [14] Adams JO, Adetoro AE. Analysis
of road pavement failure caused by soil
[7] British Standards Institution properties along Ado-Ekiti–Akure Road,
1377: Methods of Test for Soils for Nigeria. International Journal of Novel
Civil Engineering Purposes. General Research in Engineering and Sciences.
Requirements and Sample Preparation. 2014;(1):1-7
London, United Kingdom: British
Standards Institution; 1990. p. 6. [15] Ndzie AT, Onana VL, Ngo’oze A,
ISBN: 0-580-18030 Nyassa OH, Ekodeck GE. Influence

Engineering Geology
of hydromorphic conditions in the

variability of geotechnical parameters
of gneiss derived lateritic gravels in a
savannah tropical humid area (Centre
Cameroon), for road construction
purposes. Transportation Geotechnics.
2017;:70-84
[16] Adeyemi GO, Olarewaju VO,

Akintunde OB, Meshida EA.
Mineralogical and geotechnical
characteristics of some subgrade
soils in a section of the Ibadan/
Ile-Ife expressway, Southwestern
Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences.
2003;(2):3536-3547
[17] Johnson RA, Wichern DW. Applied

Multivariate Statistical Analysis.
Eaglewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-
Hall; 1992
[18] Shukla MK, Lal R, Ebinger M.

Soil quality indicators for the north
Appalachian experimental watersheds
in Coshocton, Ohio. Soil Science.
2005;:195-205

Chapter 5
Swelling Clay Parameters

Investigation Using Design of
Experiments (A Case Study)
YacineBerrah, SerhaneBrahmi, NouarCharef
and AbderrahmanBoumezbeur
Abstract
The present paper aims to investigate geotechnical parametric effects on the

expansion behavior of clayey soils in Tebessa province northeast of Algeria using
the Design Of Experiments (DOE) methodology. It has been used as powerful tools
based on physical and mechanical properties, data results obtained within labora-
tory soil mechanics testing. This statistical tool methodology presents the factor
screening design to determine the effect of different parameters such as dry unit
weight, saturation degree, water content, plasticity index, etc., on the swelling pres-
sure parameter which can be used as expansion behavior of clay indicator. All data
previously collected in the studied prone area allows the ability of detailed analysis
using design of experiment and parametric optimization process with response
surface methodology (RSM). Each variable that present effects on swelling pressure
is also discussed. Besides, the obtained models and equations related the factors
affecting the expansion process have been determined. At the output process; the
response desirability of the screening design methodology can be optimized by
maximization or minimization of the optimal values affecting the swelling behav-
ior. This process allows us to find the best describing models, whereas output results
may be compared to empirical laboratory tests results to assess the RSM models.
Keywords: design of experiments (DOE), response surface methodology (RSM),

laboratory tests, geotechnical parameters, swelling soil, parametric optimization
process
. Introduction
The Design of Experiments theory DOE is detailed and covered in many fun-
damental books [1–3]; its application to machining studies is discussed by various
researches [4–7]. However, they have yet to make any inroads in engineering geol-
ogy except for environmental engineering areas. In fact, geological and geotechnical
engineering researchers, especially those who never heard about it and continue to
use different inefficient methods and techniques. Moreover, in DOE there are many
commercial software packages as, for example, Design-Expert by Stat-Ease, Minitab
by Minitab, R Packages powered by R foundation for Statistical Computing, S-Plus
by Mathsoft. A great literature and online sources combined are readily available as
commercial software packages that apparently make DOE almost effortless.

Engineering Geology
Though, the simplicity of DOE is really pseudo-simplicity or masked

complexity.
That is, in the first stage of DOE requires the formulation of clear objectives
study on the swelling pressure of clayey soils as mentioned in this paper. The
statistical model selected in DOE requires the quantitative formulation of the
objective(s). A response is considered as objective, which is the result of the process
under study presented in Figure . In satisfying these constraints, the software
allowed us to establish minimum criteria for the response variables, then view both
feasible and unfeasible regions of specific portions of the design space. The process
under study may be characterized by several important output parameters but only
one of them should be selected as the response. The response must satisfy certain
requirements. It should be the effective output in terms of desirable final aim of the
study, also easily measurable, preferably quantitatively and a single-valued function
of the chosen parameters (dry unit weight γ d ( kN / m3 ) , water content w (% ) , Clay
fraction Cf (%), plasticity index Ip ( %) , Limite of liquidity (%), Saturation degree
(%), the preconsolidation pressure Pc ( kPa) and the swelling pressure Ps (kPa) as
the output parameter).
Basically, swelling soil experiments is one or a series of tests in which purpose-
ful changes are made to dependent or independent input factors or variables of a
system, so we may observe and identify the reasons for changes observed in the
output response.
Expansive soil has extensively been found in all over the world and cover
especially arid and semi-arid regions, literatures and studies investigate deeply
the swelling soils behavior and assume that physical properties, geological facies,
mechanical and mineralogical characteristics present the main governs param-
eters dependency [8–13]. Swelling pressure parameter (Ps) or potential was pre-
sented in enormous conducted studies as the indicator of phenomenon that can
be used in infrastructure sustainable and geotechnical design [14–19]. The output
parameter (Ps) is defined in many ways and depend on the testing procedure,
to assess the degree of swell, many procedures including laboratory methods
determining swell pressure have been developed by geotechnical researchers and
engineers [20–22]. Though swelling pressure methods have been developed by
Figure 1.
Visualization of DOE intent.

Swelling Clay Parameters Investigation Using Design of Experiments (A Case Study)
various researchers, only three methods are standardized and also popularly used
as documented in the literature.
The swelling is a complicated phenomenon and the different parameters effects
cannot be predictable, used methods for estimating the swelling pressure of clayey
soil can be direct or indirect. Direct methods are based on tests, experiences and
the basic soil mechanics parameters and provide quick and useful identification,
various authors in literature present some empirical relationships with indirect
methods [23, 24].
The Tebessa area (Algeria) is the case study of the present work, in point, the
weathered geological facies in this arid region has primarily created cover soils in
a large basin with very plastic behavior. However, expansive soils exist and well
identified litigation and reports high difficulties to infrastructure stability.
In the present research the concept of design of experiments (DOE) has been
introduced to study the swelling behavior of the clayey soils with about 121 samples
collected and tested in soil mechanics laboratory identification (LTPE).
In various engineering branch, the DOE method is largely used especially in
manufacturing and chemical research, it is a powerful approach in experimenta-
tions; it seeks to determine the factors affecting a process in relationships with an
output of our choice. This research aims to study the swelling pressure as an output
parameter affected by several of physical and mechanical parameters as dependent
or independent input parameters. Sequential application of DOE plan is used to
find the optimal parameter and propose mathematical models to predict the swell
pressure generated by clayey soil in Tebessa area and provide recommendations in
the quality control measures.
. Material and methods
The experimentation strategy is an approach to conduct and planning. The

best-guess approach, combined, mixture and one-factor-at-a-time approach and
factorial experimentation are the main approach used. One-factor-at-a-time for
each factor consists of baseline level selected as reference, then varying successively
factor in its range remaining and fixing the other factors in the goal to analyze the
representative or abstruse factors joint effect on the response.
In this strategy, experiments are conducted by simultaneously varying six
factors over two levels (namely low level and high level). The two levels are so
chosen that they cover the practical range of the parameters under consideration
Table . This case study presents an example of using the response surface for the
modeling of the swelling pressure Ps ( kPa ) and the analysis of results with
Factor Name Unit Level Low High Std. Dev. Coding

Level Level
A γd kN / m 3 1.72 1.16 2.06 0.0000 Actual

B w  13.21 11.71 38.24 0.0000 Actual
C Cf  69.31 57.00 98.18 0.0000 Actual

D WL  109.79 36.00 160.00 0.0000 Actual
E IP  54.90 22.00 85.00 0.0000 Actual
F P kPa 224.52 79.50 270.00 0.0000 Actual
Table 1.
Factors for response surface study.

Engineering Geology
ANOVA. For the presented implementation of DOE technique, Design-Expert10

software was employed to obtain the appropriate functional equations. The right
tools at knowledge of research take in account mathematics and statistics to solve
the problem considering each potential of the approximation.
The response surface methodology RSM in DOE techniques is widely used for
machining processes. Experiments based on RSM technique relate to the determina-
tion of response surface based on the general equation [25]:
y = A 0 + A 1 x 1 +…+ A i x i + A 12 x 1 x 2 + A13 x 1 x 3 + A 11 x21 + A ij x 2i (1)
Where A0 , Ai , A ij are respectively interaction, linear, quadratic and intercept

coefficients. xi input independent variables. Continuous factors affect the quanti-
tative response which is analyzed by response surface methodology (RSM), this
later best fitting representative critical factors, commonly chosen in the screening
phase of the experimental program. The final obtained results using RSM are
polynomial models display the true response surface in the best approximation
over a region of factors.
.. Definition of the input variables and the output responses
In this study, the effects of input parameters (dry unit weight γ d (kN /m 3 ) ,
water content w (% ) , plasticity index Ip ( %) Liquidity limits Wl (%) Saturation
degree Sr ( % ) , the preconsolidation pressure Pc ( kPa) and the clay fraction
Cf (%)) on the output response the swelling pressure Ps (kPa ) . The levels for each
factor are tabulated in Table .
Significant factors are identified using two-level factors as the first technique
permit to compare the obtained results in full factorial design, where lower numbers
of runs are required in this identification.
Results of the full factorial design are then compared to the results of two-level
fractional factorial design, in which much lower number of runs are required to
identify the significant factors. Explicitly, the half-fraction design can be also
compared to the two-level factorial design.
Figure 2.
Definition of different parameters as numeric factors in design-expert, and the dialog box for definition
replication points and “alpha” parameter.

.. DOE and response data implementation
The two sides unit’s length of the cube rang between −1 to +1. “Alpha” is the
distance out of cube area measured in levels of coded factors, statistically it is
always been a point of discussion view. A variety of Alpha options is presented in
the Design-Expert software (Figure ).
. Statistical results analysis and the model properties
Regression model and test for coefficients significance on individual model

achieved using ANOVA method. Table  show summary statistics of the model,
values of “Adjusted and Predicted R2” are higher for quadratic model which is
suggested for the present analysis; experimental data analysis was performed
to identify statistical significance of the aim’s parameters. The dry unit weight,
degree of saturation, water content, plasticity index, preconsolidation pres-
sure and the swelling index on the measured response swelling pressure Ps. The
model was developed for 95% confidence level with R2 = 0.9155, and the results
are summarized in Table .
In Table  the value of 0.2 between Predicted and Adjusted R indicate the
reasonable agreement.
Adeq Precision is the SNR, greater than 4 is desirable, so the obtained model
can be used to delineate a design space.
Std. Dev. 47.60 R .


Mean 228.75 Adjusted R 0.8913

C.V.  20.81 Predicted R 0.8391
Adeq Precision 27.2634
Table 2.
Model summary fit statistics.
Source Sum of df Mean F-value p-value

squares square
Mean vs. 6.384E+06 1 6.384E+06
Total
Linear vs. 2.082E+06 6 3.470E+05 90.65 < 0.0001

Mean
2FI vs. Linear .E+  . . < . Suggested
Quadratic vs. 22389.69 6 3731.62 1.65 0.1429

2FI
Cubic vs. 1.448E+05 56 2585.61 1.44 0.1180
Quadratic
Quartic vs. 68206.19 32 2131.44 Aliased

Cubic
Residual 0.0000 6 0.0000
Total 8.906E+06 122 72998.07
Table 3.
Sequential model sum of squares [type I].

Engineering Geology
ANOVA for Quadratic model

Response : R
Source Sum of squares df Mean square F-value p-value
Model 2.309E+06 27 85524.15 37.74 < 0.0001 significant
A-γd 17098.00 1 17098.00 7.55 0.0072
B-W 5782.26 1 5782.26 2.55 0.1135
C-Cf 7180.22 1 7180.22 3.17 0.0783
D-WL 684.43 1 684.43 0.3020 0.5839
E-IP 11086.62 1 11086.62 4.89 0.0294

F-P 52922.74 1 52922.74 23.36 < 0.0001
AB 829.09 1 829.09 0.3659 0.5467
AC 1752.67 1 1752.67 0.7735 0.3814
AD 414.75 1 414.75 0.1830 0.6698
AE 12761.47 1 12761.47 5.63 0.0197
AF 2534.55 1 2534.55 1.12 0.2929
BC 221.88 1 221.88 0.0979 0.7550
BD 1146.40 1 1146.40 0.5059 0.4787
BE 2240.01 1 2240.01 0.9885 0.3227

BF 244.95 1 244.95 0.1081 0.7431
CD 4177.66 1 417 7.66 1.84 0.1778
CE 1458.91 1 1458.91 0.6438 0.4243
CF 2057.89 1 2057.89 0.9082 0.3430
DE 4307.25 1 4307.25 1.90 0.1713
DF 403.89 1 403.89 0.1782 0.6739
EF 10128.29 1 10128.29 4.47 0.0371

2
A 1219.99 1 1219.99 0.5384 0.4649
2
B 8073.28 1 8073.28 3.56 0.0622
C2 8255.06 1 8255.06 3.64 0.0594
D2 1668.27 1 1668.27 0.7362 0.3931

2
E 2479.02 1 2479.02 1.09 0.2983
2
F 578.87 1 578.87 0.2555 0.6144
Residual 2.130E+05 94 2265.96
Lack of Fit 2.130E+05 88 2420.46
Pure Error 0.0000 6 0.0000
Cor Total 2.522E+06 121

Factor coding is Coded.
Sum of squares is Type III - Partial.
F-value of . indicates a significant model. Only a . chance that F-value could occur due to noise.
P-values<. implies significant terms model. A, E, F, AE, EF are the chosen terms. Values >. implies a
not significant model term. The other terms may be used to reduce the improved model require to support hierarchy
Table 4.
Table 4.
ANOVA response surface quadratic model, analysis of variance table [Partial sum of squares - Type III].

Select the highest order polynomial where the additional terms are significant
and the model is not aliased.
The F-Value of 90.65−5.80 indicates a significant model with P- value <0.0001
that provide the suggested one 2FI vs. linear with 5.80 F-value, out of the cited
condition the models are aliased (Table ). In this case A, B, C, BC are significant
model terms where P- Values >0.10 as mentioned in Table .
Normal plot of residuals, shown in Figures –, should be in a straight line, in
the residuals the errors distribution is normal regards the strait line form. Whereas
the nonlinear patterns such as S-curve form implies a non-normality of the error
term and can be corrected by a transformation. Residuals versus predicted response
should be randomly scattered without pattern as shown in Figure . Other analysis
can be provided in other cases.
Figure 3.
Residual plots for the swelling pressure of the study soil case.
Figure 4.
All factors contribution and effects on the response output for the swelling pressure of the study soil case.

Engineering Geology
Figure 5.
Normal probability plot of residuals for swelling pressure.
Figure 6.
Residuals versus predicted response for swelling pressure.
Figure 7.
Residuals versus run for swelling pressure.

Figure 8.
Predicted response versus actual for swelling pressure.
. Equations and models graphs
For the analyzed example the final equation in terms of actual factors was
determined, which determines the swelling pressure (Ps) from the input factors for
the linear model:
Ps = 2604 − 10412 ∗ A − 11440 ∗ B + 4034 ∗ C − 2568 ∗ D + 1420 ∗ E + 133 ∗ F (2)
And it can be represented by another suggested model of Quadratic form.

The equation can be used to predict the response for each factor levels,
that should be specified by their original units. Because the coefficients are
scaled to accommodate the factor units and the intercept is not at the center
of the design space; this equation is not able to be used in determining rela-
tive impact.
Figures – shows the response surfaces describing the swelling pressure Ps
dependence on, the Dry unit weight (kN/m3) and the water content w (%), plas-
ticity index (%) and Dry unit weight (kN/m3) and the degree of saturation (%)
respectively. Plasticity index (IP) and water content (w) and the preconsolidation
pressure, the dry unite weight and the swelling index for this case study.
Figures  and  represent the factors that affect the (Ps) where the plasticity
index is fixed common parameter, saturation degree and the preconsolidation
pressure varied respectively.
. Response surface methodology and optimization process
The response surfaces method is a set of mathematical techniques that use

experimental design to determine the range of independent input variables [26].
This method makes it possible, thanks to empirical mathematical models, to
determine an approximation relation between the output responses (Y) the swelling
pressure Ps (kPa ) , and the input variables (dry unit weight γ d ( kN / m3 ) , water
content w ( %) , plasticity index Ip ( %) Saturation degree Sr( %) , the preconsolida-
tion pressure Pc ( kPa ) and the Plasticity Index Ip ( ) and limite of plasticity WL) to

Engineering Geology
Figure 9.
Response surface 3D representing the swelling pressure dependence on the plasticity index % and the limit of
liquidity (%).
Figure 10.
Response surface 3D representing the swelling pressure dependence on the dry unit weight (kN/m3) and the
water content (%).
optimize process parameters to achieve desirable responses. In this method, the

answer can be written in the following form:
Y =φ (γ d. w.Cf .. Ip.Wl. Pc ) (3)
Where Y is the swelling pressure as the output process and φ is the response
function, the approximation of Y is proposed using a quadratic mathematical
model, which helps to study the interaction effects of process parameters with
geotechnical characteristics. In the present work, the second order mathematical
model based on RSM is given by the following elements:

k k k
Y = x o + ∑yi X i + ∑y ij X i X j + ∑ X i 2 + ε ij (4)
i= 1 ij i = 1ii
(ε ij = yij − yij ) (5)
Where x0 is the free term of the regression equation, the coefficients Y1, Y2,…, Yk
and Y11 , Y22 ,…, Ykk are the linear and quadratic terms respectively, while Y12, Y13,…,
Y(k- 1) are the interactive terms and εij presents the fit error for the regression model.
Figure 11.
3D response surface of Ps (kPa) dependence on the γd (kN / m 3 ) vs IP (%).
Figure 12.
Response surface 3D representing the swelling pressure dependence on the plasticity index and the saturation
degree (%).

Engineering Geology
Figure 13.
Response surface 3D representing the swelling pressure dependence on the Preconsolidation pressure and the
plasticity index (%).
Figure 14.
3D surface of Ps vs. γd ( kN / m3 ) and w %.
On the other hand, the coefficient of determination R2 is defined by the ratio of

the dispersion of the results, given by the relationship:
2
R 2
=
∑( y i − y)
(6)
2
∑( y i − y)
Where yi : is the calculated response to the ith experience;

yi : is the average value of the measured responses.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to test the validity of the model, as well
as to examine the significance and suitability of the model. The model is adequate
within a 95% confidence interval. When the values of P are less than 0.05 (or 95%
confidence), the models obtained are considered statistically significant. In other
words, the closer the R 2 approaches to the value 1, the model is compatible with the
real (experimental) values.
3D representation on Figure  clearly optimize the parameters effects on
Ps value, based on RSM multifactor data, numerical optimization is possible.
Including factors and propagation of error for all variables is available in the settings
of Design-Expert software, and limits factor ranges to factorial levels (−1 to +1) in
coded values, the area of this experimental design provides the best predictions.
. Conclusion
Design Of Experiments DOE techniques, using specifically two-levels factorial

design method (High and low levels) can efficiently identify the significant factors.
Most importantly in this technique is to randomly test at least twice (repeat and
replications), in order to reduce the influence of the none assigned variables and the
randomness of responses. The present experimentation which was based on six param-
eters (dry unit weight γ d ( kN / m 3 ) , water content w (% ), Clay fraction Cf (%),
plasticity index Ip ( %) , Limite of liquidity (%), the preconsolidation pressure Pc ( kPa)
and the swelling pressure) on the measured response swelling pressure Ps (kPa) as the
output parameter. All parameters varied between 2 levels and revealed that dry unit
weight, plasticity index, limit of liquidity, preconsolidation pressure have the main
effects on the swelling clayey soil pressure in Tebessa province. The effect of the last
factor considered as well as all interaction, to be less or non-significant. The DOE
method is most frequently used in simple designs regards to regular fractions, but it
does not work as well in more complex settings, such as some nonregular fractions.
Fortunately, the present available general methods work satisfactorily in various
situations. It uses a representative polynomial or regression model, by means of one
or more methods under the DOE planning analysis and will depend of the user’s
goal, i.e. if users want a simple analysis, the statistical analysis using the ANOVA
approaches can be the ideal method.
In the present research optimization process stage is achieved with response
surface method RSM and it revealed that the output parameter (swelling pressure
Ps) is strongly affected by plasticity index and liquid limits when desirability is
maximized, otherwise the desirability is minimized. In the twice cases the range
of all contributed parameters is fixed. Other parameters such as saturation degree
show complexed response surface with unclear contribution. Hence the final model
of the output response (Ps) do not take in consideration parameters with complex
response surface.
Furthermore, the planning of DOE experiments is extremely important in
researches because it can reduce cost and time that needs to execute the
experimental tests.


References
[1] Box GEP, Hunter JS, Hunter WG [11] K. Terzaghi, “Stability of slopes
(2005) Statistics for experimenters. of natural clay,” in Proceedings of the
Design, innovation, and discovery, 2nd 1st International Conference on Soil
edn. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 161-165, Harvard
[2] Montgomery DC (2012) Design and University, Cambridge, Mass, USA,
analysis of experiments. Wiley, New 1936.
York
[12] Komornik, A., Wiseman, G., and
[3] Maxwell SM, Delaney HD (2003) Ben-Yaacob, Y., “Studies of In-Situ
Designing experiments and analyzing moisture and Swelling Potential
data: a model comparison perspective, Profiles,” Proceedings, 2nd International
2nd edn. Tylor & Francis, New York Research and Engineering Conference
on Expansive Soils, Texas A&M Univ.
[4] Astakhov VP (2006) Tribology of Press, College Station, TX, pp. 348-361.
metal cutting. Elsevier, London (1969).
[5] Astakhov VP, Osman MOM, [13] Fredlund, D. G., Hasan, J. U., and
Al-Ata M (1997) Statistical design of Filson, H. L., “The Prediction of Total
experiments in metal cutting—Part 1: Heave,” Proceedings of 4th International
methodology. J Test Eval 25(3):322-327 Conference on Expansive Soils,” ASCE
and International Society for Soil
[6] Astakhov VP, Al-Ata M, Osman Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
MOM (1997) Statistical design of Denver, pp. 1-17. (1980).
experiments in metal cutting. Part
2: application. J Test Eval (JTEVA) [14] Berrah, Y., Boumezbeur, A.,
25(3):328-336 Kherici, N.: Application of dimensional
analysis and regression tools to estimate
[7] Astakhov VP (2012) Design of swell pressure of expansive soil in
experiment methods in manufacturing: Tebessa (Algeria). Bull. Eng. Geol.
Basics and practical applications. Environ. (2016).
In: Davim JP (ed) Statistical and
[15] Rao, S. M., “Identification and
computational techniques in
Classification of Expansive Soils,”
manufacturing. Springer, London,
Exapnsive Soils—Recent Advances in
pp 1-54
Characterization and Treatment, Taylor
& Francis, pp. 15-24. (2006).
[8] J.-J. Zhang, B.-W. Gong, B. Hu, X.-W.
Zhou, and J. Wang, “Study of evolution [16] Jennings, J. E. B. and Knight, K.,
law of fissures of expansive clay under “The Prediction of Total Heave from
wetting and drying cycles,” Rock and the Double Oedometer Test,” Transact.
Soil Mechanics, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 2729- S. African Inst. Civil Eng., Vol. 7, pp.
2734, 2011. 285-291. (1957).
[9] ASTM. _2006b_. “Standard test [17] Yilmaz I. Indirect estimation of the
method for expansion index of soils.” swelling percent and a new classification
Annual book of ASTM standards: of soils depending on liquid limit and
D4829-03, Vol. 4.08, ASTM, West cation exchange capacity. Engineering
Conshohocken, Pa., 900-903. Geology 85, 295-301. (2006).
[10] Chen, F.H.: Foundations on [18] Magnan, D., 1993. Caractérisation in

Expansive Soils. Elsevier (2012). situ des sols gonflants : l’essai Expansol.

Engineering Geology
Thèse de doctorat, Université J. Fourier,

Grenoble (France), p 190.
[19] Vijayvergiya V.N., Ghazzaly, G.,

1973. Prediction of swelling potential
for natural clays. Proceedings, 3rd
International Conference on Expansive
Soil, Haifa, vol. I, pp. 227-236.
[20] Banerjee, A., Puppala, A.J., Patil,

U.D., Hoyos, L.R., Bhaskar, P.: A
simplified approach to determine the
response of unsaturated soils using
multistage triaxial test. IFCEE ,
332-342 (2018)
[21] Pedarla, A.: SWCC and Clay

Mineralogy Based Models for Realistic
Simulation of Swell Behavior of
Expansive Soils (2013)
[22] Pedarla, A., Chittoori, S., Puppala,

A.J.: Influence of mineralogy and
plasticity index on the stabilization
effectiveness of expansive clays. Transp.
Res. Rec. , 91-99 (2011).
[23] KAYABALI, Kamil et DEMIR,

Saniye. Measurement of swelling
pressure: direct method versus indirect
methods. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 2011, vol. 48, no 3, p. 354-364.
[24] CHEN, Fu Hua. Foundations on

expansive soils. Elsevier, 2012.
[25] Myers, R., Khuri, A., & Carter, W.

(1989). Response Surface Methodology:
1966-1988. Technometrics, (2), 137-157.
doi:10.2307/1268813
[26] SAID, Khairul Anwar Mohamad

et AMIN, Mohamed Afizal Mohamed.
Overview on the response surface
methodology (RSM) in extraction
processes. Journal of Applied Science &
Process Engineering, 2015, vol. 2, no 1.

Chapter 6
Construction Materials and Dam

Foundation While Memve’ele Dam
Building in the Craton’s Region of
South Cameroon
Sylvestre M.Ntomba, Christelle R.Magnekou Takamte,
DieudonnéBisso and Joseph MvondoOndoa
Abstract
This chapter mainly focuses on engineering geology for dam construction from
the Memve’ele region in Cameroon. Here, it deals with geotechnical and geological
proprieties of both construction and dam foundation materials. This study is done at
the aim to ensure that these materials need to be improved and how they have been
used during dam construction. Field investigations, borehole information, density and
seismic velocity measurements have been used, and results indicate that soil deposits
have slightly clay content, mechanically well for dam construction and display a weak
thickness layer particularly on the dam site. These conditions suggest that soil materials
can be used as construction (cushion, transition layers, etc.) and foundation materials
after few amendments. Ntem Formations appear weathered and fractured sometimes,
though their mechanical behaviors display a good character for civil applications.
However, engineering processes have been used to improve it by GIN (Grouting
Intensity Number) methods. These formations have been used as construction (rip rap
crushing aggregate, etc.) and dam foundation materials. Thus, this chapter contributes
to highlight materials and dam foundation conditions which are crucial criteria encoun-
tered in the dam with emphasis on both theoretical study and practical application
during dam construction.
Keywords: geophysical measurements, geological assessment, geotechnical

characters, quaternary deposits, Ntem Formations, Memve’ele dam, Cameroon
. Introduction
The building for dam required a need for better understanding geological and
mechanical properties of investigated sites. This process leads to a comprehensive
site characterization and contributes bringing additional work when construction
and dam foundation materials need some requirements in order to improve it.
These additional works lead maintaining dam stable during his service life. Rock
physical and mechanical properties are very important parameters for geological
engineering design and construction of dams. Given the number of factors in the
designing and construction of dams it can be referred primarily to locally available

Engineering Geology
materials and dam foundation conditions whether these factors fulfilled both
geological and geotechnical conditions. Thus evaluation of construction materials
and dam foundation must be performed to ensure that these factors are satisfied.
Geophysical techniques such as seismic velocity are used to derive quantitative
engineering design values in order to assess geotechnical and geological properties
during dam site investigations [1–4]. In this chapter, field investigations, borehole
logging techniques and seismic velocity measurements are given in order to assess
the geological and geotechnical of the Ntem formation and soil deposits that have
been used both as construction and foundation materials during dam construction.
Both refer to previously published work on Ntem formation characteristics [4] and
unpublished data of soil deposit natures in the dam site at Memve’ele.
. Application of geotechnical and geological results to an engineering

assessment of construction materials and dam foundation site
. Geological results
The in situ investigation in the Memve’ele dam site, comprised detail observa-
tion, description of geological units observed in the field and in the borehole cores
and the laboratory tests include tests for petrographic analysis and on rock samples.
The investigation resulted in the geology of dam site display two geological units
based on borehole information and surface investigation (Figures  and a) [4].
These two geological units are named quaternary deposits and lower Precambrian
Ntem Formations. Sometimes, Ntem Formations emerge and appear highly to
moderately weathered down to elevation 386m below which is slightly weathered
diabase. The quaternary deposits are composed of full weathered soil covers with
uneven thickness underlain by Ntem Formations in the dam site (Figure a). Full
weathered soil covers with weak thickness occur up to Ntem Formations along
the dam axis particularly. The plasticity index (15<Ip<40) and the clay content
(A-7-5 type) of soil are generally on the high side, but the clay content roughly met
the requirement. The subsurface strata are described in the Figure . The mineral
assemblages of Ntem Formations indicate a high grade metamorphism which
corresponds to granulite to amphibolite facies metamorphic conditions. Slightly
Figure 1.
Geological units in the Memve’ele displaying quaternary deposit underlain by Ntem formation based on
borehole information. Note uneven thickness of quaternary deposit between (a) and (b).

Construction Materials and Dam Foundation While Memve’ele Dam Building in the Craton’s…
Figure 2.
(a) Quaternary soil deposits underlain by Ntem formations that represent two geological units found in the
whole dam site and (b) fractured and slightly weathered rock mass.
Figure 3.
Description of strata.

Engineering Geology
(Figure b) and densely jointed zones are found at rocky outcrops, dominantly strik-
ing NE30°~40° and E-W with moderate to steep dipping angles (Figure a and b),
indicating an outline sub-parallel for all tectonic features (gneissosity, shear zone,
fault and jointed rocks). The quantitative description and statistical distributions
of discontinuities of Ntem Formations derived from boreholes and those obtained
from the geomechanical mapping through scan line at the dam site [5]. The stereo-
graphic projection can give an overall view of the number of dominant discontinuity
sets of joint and bedding directions within the rock mass. A plot of contoured pole
concentration is dominant along the mean direction of N034.44 SE (Figure c).
Quantitative description of discontinuities shows that spacing is extremely close
to moderate (0–0.1m and 30–40m), their length vary from 1 to 50m with small
Figure 4.
(a) and (b) Engineering discontinuity map, displaying some discontinuity natures, fold and gneissossity;
(c) plot of contoured concentration displaying great circle direction.


Sample N°. Depth (m) Physical properties Atterberg limits
Specific gravity Wet density (g/cm) Dry density (g/cm) Degree of saturated () Porosity LL () PL () PI LI
W Wp Ip Il
Dam site
TY 07 6.0 2.65 1.60 1.21 72.34 1.200 53.8 36.8 17.0 −0.24
TY 08 2.0 2.64 1.62 1.29 64.86 1.050 51.8 31.0 20.8 −0.25
TY 09 2.0 2.69 1.71 1.41 62.72 0.910 51.4 28.6 22.8 −0.33
TY 10 2.2 2.67 1.64 1.23 75.73 1.170 60.3 33.3 27.0 −0.01
Borrow areas
TJB101 3.0 2.76 1.65 1.33 61.02 1.070 71.6 38.0 33.6 −0.43
TJB102 3.2 2.71 1.64 1.37 55.14 0.980 58.4 28.3 30.1 −0.28
TJB103 4.0 2.72 1.51 1.26 46.83 1.160 76.2 35.1 41.1 −0.37
TJB204 3.5 2.69 1.75 1.45 65.69 0.860 52.1 27.6 24.5 −0.27
TJB205 3.5 2.69 1.64 1.31 64.03 1.050 83.6 43.5 40.1 −0.46
TJB206 3.8 2.68 1.80 1.46 73.96 0.830 68.0 36.4 31.6 −0.43
TJB402 3.5 2.64 1.56 1.32 47.30 0.990 69.9 32.3 36.6 −0.40
TJB403 3.0 2.60 1.64 1.31 67.15 0.990 74.4 41.2 33.2 −0.47
TJB405 3.2 2.65 1.70 1.37 68.85 0.940 66.4 30.4 36.0 −0.17
Sample N°. Depth (m) Consolidation (Sat.) Quick shear Coef. of permeab.
Coef. av–MPa− Modulus Es– MPa Cohe. C KPa Fric. Φ° Vertical K cm/s
Dam site
TY 07 6.0 0.48 4.8 16.00 33.30 2.96E−05

TY 08 2.0 0.77 2.3 16.00 29.50 2.95E−05

TY 09 2.0 0.95 1.9 14.20 34.70 1.96E−05
TY 10 2.2 0.46 4.4 25.10 31.00 8.62E−04
Borrow areas
TJB101 3.0 0.50 4.0 55.30 28.80 4.76E−04

TJB102 3.2 0.66 3.0 23.10 35.10 2.61E−05
Engineering Geology
TJB103 4.0 0.20 9.9 2.20 41.90
TJB204 3.5 0.28 5.9 17.00 50.10 9.35E−05

TJB205 3.5 1.00 2.2 14.00 38.00 1.55E−05
TJB206 3.8 0.35 4.8 65.00 38.20 3.73E−05
TJB402 3.5 0.52 3.6 11.10 37.10 4.77E−05

TJB403 3.0 0.26 6.9 40.10 33.10 3.14E−05
TJB405 3.2 0.41 4.8 48.80 21.60 3.32E−05
Table 1.
Geotechnical properties of soil deposits in the Memve’ele dam site.
discontinuity dominants [5]. The dam site area is considered to be passive tectoni-
cally and geological disasters are mainly composed by weathering, other phenom-
ena such as landslide, collapsing and debris flow are rare found.
. Geotechnical results investigated on quaternary deposits
A geotechnical investigation into quaternary deposits that have represented

construction materials and dam foundation of Memve’ele dam is described in this
topic. Many boreholes were drilled by drilling rig to assess the geotechnical of
the quaternary deposits from borrow areas and in the dam foundation site. The
investigation of three borrows areas and dam sites comprised mainly laboratory
tests of soil deposits. The results of mechanical tests are presented in Table . The
specific gravity values vary from 2.60 to 2.76; wet and dry densities are ranged from
1.51 to 1.61g/cm3 and 1.23 to 1.55g/cm3 respectively; porosity values vary between
0.700 and 1.190%; liquid limit values vary between 58.4 and 76.2wt. %; plasticity
limit values are ranged between 28.3 and 40.1wt. %. The deformation modulus
values vary between 1.9 and 9.9MPa; the coefficient of permeability varies between
8.62E−04 and 3.35E−05cm/s. As per the exploration well, the reserve estimations is
182.39 × 104 m3. However, slope occurs with erosion marks (Figure ) after raining
seasons.
. Geotechnical results investigated on lower Ntem Formations
A geotechnical investigation into mechanical behavior of Ntem Formations at

Memve’ele has been described in detail by Bisso et al. [4]. The rock mass qualities
of Ntem formations of the dam site were assessed using sonic well-logging in
boreholes and sonic sounding on core samples. Acoustic logging is carried out of
from bottom to top of a borehole; the spacing between two receiving detectors
and the point distance of detections are 0.2m respectively. Acoustic test of core
consists to penetrate the couple of detector and core by butter. The compres-
sional wave velocity and density results with low values at top and high at the
bottom respectively help to interpret the geophysical layers (Figure ). Layer
at top is identified as quaternary deposits and layer in the bottom corresponds
to Ntem Formations as previously shown in Figure a and description of strata
(Figure ). Thus, the compressional wave velocity and density in the rock mass
Figure 5.
Slope stability affected by raining water.

Engineering Geology
indicate that there is not only a correlation between velocity and formation
layers, but also between rock conditions encountered in the Memve’ele dam site
(Figure ), velocities of <5000m/s indicating highly fractured zone, low den-
sity and moderately weathered Ntem Formations with both widely and closely
Figure 6.
Seismic velocities, density measurements and geophysical layers in the Memve’ele dam site.
Figure 7.
Drillhole structure and cross plot of seismic velocity measurements.

spaced discontinuities, while velocities of >5000m/s correlate with fresh to

slightly weathered and high density Ntem Formations with very closely spaced
discontinuities.
During core drilling, permeability tests were performed and the permeability of
the rock mass is expressed in term of Lugeon values. According to Lugeon scale, the
Ntem Formations display high, medium and low Lugeon values in the boreholes.
However, evidence of two permeability areas is seen and consists to a permeability
area with UL>15, located between 0 and 13m of depth and an impervious area
with UL≤5, beyond of 13m of depth. The high Lugeon values observed to surface
are because of highly jointed rock masses whereas the low Lugeon values corre-
spond to sound rock with moderate fracturation rate. More detailed examination of
the competence, softening, density; alkali reactive, hardening of Ntem Formations
is displayed by Bisso et al. [4].
. Interpretations
During Memve’ele dam constructions, geological and geomechanical assess-

ment of quaternary deposits and Ntem Formations have been used to characterize
construction and dam foundation materials. It is economically rentable to used
construction materials which exist within a relatively short distance of dam
site. Interpretation properties on the surface and of measured properties in the
borehole logs as mentioned above, display that soil deposits are good to excellent
performance in the civil application works [6–9] and thus have been used during
Memve’ele dam construction [4]. According to Casagrande scale, soil materials are
classified from low plasticity to plasticity and in addition, The coefficient of perme-
ability are higher than those obtained in Kiri dam (from 1.5E−08 to 1.00E−6m/s
[10]) and recommended values of 7.00E−10 to 1.00E−06m/s. This latter property
indicates that soil materials are lesser ability to allow the passage of seeping water if
they are use as embankment materials.
The deformation modulus values further indicates the relatively clay contents in
the soil deposits. These behaviors indicate that these materials can be used as base
layer of dam and also can constituted the transition, cushion and filter materials.
The total reserve of soil deposits found near the Memve’ele dam site is 182.39 × 104
m3 and natural sand is to about 30.000m 3. These values are more important and
contribute to reduce costs if these materials have been brought far of site.
Ntem Formation conditions indicate that they are hard qualities in respect to
physical properties and good resistance against scouring. The excavated quantity of
rock material from the structure foundation is nearly 300 × 104 m3 and it has been
used for obtaining crushed aggregate and ripping rap materials for dam construc-
tion. However, conditions of site with rocks and alluvial deposits indicate very
good and relatively poor geological conditions which can constitute dam founda-
tion materials [11]. Concerning dam foundation, evidence of two dam foundation
materials is observed and some requirement needs. The thickness of upper residual
soil where is weak in the dam axis can be move to obtain Ntem Formations as foun-
dation materials but where, soil deposit is more thickened, it can be used as also
foundation materials. This study has shown that Ntem Formations are fractured
and weathered. These site conditions have contributed to improve it in excavating
the weathered materials and using vegetable cover and Grouting Intensity Number
(GIN) [12] for cover slope and introducing the cement grouting through fractures
(Figure ). This method leads to reinforce Ntem Formations and slope stability.
Overall dam structure can be fitted on the quaternary soil deposits and Ntem
Formations.

Engineering Geology
Figure 8.
(a–c) Display different usages of Ntem formations and quaternary soil deposits; (d and e) amendment of
Ntem formations and slope formed by quaternary soil deposits with grouting cement.
. Conclusion
Geological and geotechnical assessments have been applied to estimate degree

of fracture and characterize both construction and dam foundation materials in
order to use for engineering geological mapping purposes which can serve as guide
while dam construction. The interpretation presented in this chapter shows that
quaternary deposits can be used as both embankment materials and dam founda-
tion particularly where his layer is more thickened. The weak thickness of this soil
in the island site contributes to emplacement of dam on Ntem formations. Mapping
fracture zones and thus weathered grade in the Ntem Formations lead to improve
it by engineering processes as a GIN method that leads to improve it. In addition,
it has been demonstrated that, cross plots of velocity, density values can be used to
predict and identify zones of fracture, zone of weathering, nature and thickness of
layers. Previous work [4], cited in this chapter has shown that Precambrian Ntem

Formation based on geological and geotechnical results have been used for engi-
neering design and during Memve’ele dam construction. This approach may have
application in other civil applications.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their sincere acknowledges to the Head staff of Memve’ele
hydroelectric dam project, Pr. Bisso D., and to the Sinohydro Corporation Limited
for access both to the site and the data of the dam. They are grateful to anonymous
reviewers for their suggestion to improve the manuscript.

Engineering Geology
References
[1] Deere DU. Chapter 1: Geological purposes. Transportation Geotechnics.

considerations. In: Stagg KG, 2017;:35-46. DOI: 10.1016/j. trgeo.
Ziekiewicz OC, editors. Rock Mechanics 201612.001
in Engineering Practice. New York: J.
Wiley and Sons; 1968. pp. 1-20 [8] Xing H-F, Gong X-N, Zhou X-G, Fu
H-F. Construction of concrete-faced
[2] Hendron AJ. Chapter 2: Mechanical rockfill dams with weak rocks. Journal
properties of rock. In: Stagg KG, of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Ziekiewicz OC, editors. Rock Mechanics Engineering. 2016; (6):778-785
in Engineering Practice. New York: J.
Wiley and Sons; 1968. pp. 21-53 [9] Chuka OC, Moruf SB, Ewoma O,
Olatunbasun AM. The Kano-Kazaure
[3] Knill JL. The applications of seismic highway, north Central Nigeria: The
methods in the prediction of grout take significance of the engineering geology
in rock. In: Proceedings of Conference in construction. Bulletin of Engineering
on In Situ Investigations in Soils and Geology and the Environment.
Rocks. London: British Geotechnical 2011;(1):33-40
Society; 1969. pp. 93-100
[10] Ahmed Bafeto M, Olugbenga BES,
[4] Bisso D, Ntomba SM, Daffi R, Amina SG. Seepage analysis
Mengbwa RC, Magnekou Takamte RC, of kiri dam using finite elements
Ondoa JM. Geological and geotechnical method. The International Journal of
characteristics of Ntem formations: Engineering and Science. 2019;
Insight of its applications in the (11. Series II):66-86
Memve’ele dam construction
(Southern Cameroon). Geotechnical [11] Fraser AW. Engineering Geology
and Geological Engineering Journal. Considerations for Specifying Dam
2020;:4585-4601. DOI: 10.1007/ Foundation Objectives. Geology Branch;
s10706-020-01312-7 Division of Safety of Dams California
Department of Water Resources; 2001.
[5] ISRM. Suggested methods for p. 14. Available from: wfraser@water.
the quantitative descriptions of ca.gov
discontinuies in rock masses. In:
Rock Characterization, Testing and [12] Deer D, Lombardi G. Grout
Monitoring. Oxford: Pergamon Press; slurries - Thick or thin? Issues in
1981 dam grouting. In: Proceedings of the
Session Sponsored by the Geotechnical
[6] Paige-Green P, Pinard M, Engineering Division of the American
Netterberg F. A review of specifications Society of Civil Engineers in
for lateritic materials for low volume Conjunction with ASCE, Convention;
roads. Transportation Geotechnics. Denver, Colorado. 1985
2015;:86-98
[7] Onana VL, Ngo’o Ze A, Medjo ER,

Ntouala RFD, Nanga BMT, Ngono
OB, et al. Geological identification,
geotechnical and mechanical
characterization of charnockite-
derived lateritic gravels from southern
Cameroon for road construction


Engineering Geology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Geology

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Geology

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the main rock types discussed in the document?

What are the main rock types discussed in the document?

What are some of the rock structures mentioned?

What are some of the rock structures mentioned?

Chapter 1

Engineering geology is the application of geology to the engineering study for

• Rocks and geological structures: rock types, structures, plate tectonic.

• Geological masses: mass fabric, ground mass description, weathering, rocks

• Field tests and measurements: tests in boreholes and excavations, engineering

• Ground improvement: shallow and deep impaction, grout treatment, bentonite

2. Rocks and geological structures

2.1 Rock types

2.2 Rock structures

• Secondary Structures, imposed on rocks after they have already formed.

2.3 Plate tectonic

Plate tectonics is a scientific theory that describes the large-scale movement of

2.4 Engineering geological maps

The Engineer Geological Mapping is a guide to the principles, concepts, methods,

Geographical hazards are geological and environmental conditions and involve

3.1 Boundary hazards

There are three different types of converging plate boundaries recognized:

3.2 Ground subsidence

3.3 Land slide

A landslide may be defined as the movement of a mass of rock, debris, or land

3.4 Slope failure

4.1 Mass fabric

• Crystallographic preferred orientation

4.2 Ground mass description

Weathering is the collapse of rocks on the Earth’s surface by rainwater, tempera-

4.4 Rocks discontinuities

Discontinuity in geotechnical engineering (in the geotechnical literature it is

5. Field tests and measurements

5.1 Tests in boreholes and excavations

Geotechnical investigations are performed by geotechnical engineers or engi-

5.2 Engineering geophysics

Engineering geophysics consists of the spatial studies of the Earth’s surface

(for example, its elastic properties as determined by measurements of seismic

5.3 Seismic methods

5.4 Magnetic and electrical methods

Magnetic techniques, including aeromagnetic surveys to map magnetic anomalies.

Electromagnetic methods, such as magnetotellurics, ground penetrating radar,

Ground improvement refers to a technology that improves the engineering

6.1 Shallow and deep impaction

6.2 Grout treatment

A ground remediation operation performed to accomplish one of two things,

6.3 Bentonite suspension

layers (weathered igneous glass) are commonly referred to as K-bentonites when

6.4 Ground anchor

Ground anchors are a device designed to support structures, most commonly

• Structural support of temporary buildings and structures,

• Tethering marine structures.

• Supporting guyed masts.

• Anchoring utility poles.

• Landscape, anchoring trees, often semi-mature transplants.

• General security, as in anchoring small aircraft.

• Sporting activities, such as slacklining or abseiling.

7. Water reservoirs and dams

7.1 Dam design parameters

Design criteria for earth dams are: [41].