The in-situ stress is one of the most important parameters in the design of underground structures. Conventional methods such as in-situ stress measurements using hydraulic fracturing method has two main disadvantages are time and cost of this methods. Acoustic emission is one of the indirect in-Situ stress measurement methods which is based on the theory of the Kaiser effect. When a rock is stressed, it release acoustic signals this phenomenon is called acoustic emission. Kaiser Effect is defined as lack of acoustic signals in the lower stress levels than the previous maximum stress level. In other words, as long as rock is not reached to the previous maximum stress level, do not show significant acoustic emission. Several factors affect on Kaiser Effect such as delay time, temperature, rock fabric, porosity, discontinuities, joints and geological structure. In this paper, effect of the delay time on Kaiser Effect has been presented. The time between coring operations and acoustic emission test is called delay time. The limestone rock is selected as main samples of test and after preloading, reloading and acoustic emission test were carried out with different delay times. The results showed that the felicity ratio is less than 1, when delay time is about 20 days and after three months has increased to be more than one.
Marly rocks of Abtalkh formation were classified by Q, RMR, RSR and RQD rock mass classification systems using 222 meters logs from exploratory boreholes in Doosti dam site. The results show that the RMR is the most suitable method for classification of studied rock masses and has highest correlation coefficient with RQD. The validity of different Q-RMR equations was studied using error ratio (ER). Cameron et al. (1981) and Morno (1982) equations have lowest ER and highest validity for studied marlstones. Bieniawski (1989) and Cameron (1981) relationships are lower and higher limits of equations for marly rocks respectively.
Ground settlement due to tunneling and the effects of the engineering geological factors on its dimensions and extensions, is a very important problem in shallow tunnel excavation projects in urban areas. Empirical method is one of the usual methods to study this subject. The empirical and dimension-less parameters of VL and k are the most important parameters in relation to this method that are estimated according to engineering geological factors. In this research, the values of these parameters were initially estimated based on preceding studies and the ground settlement was predicted using these estimated values of VL and k. In next stage, the results of predictions were compared with the real (measured) settlements happened due to Abuzar tunnel excavation. As the real settlements are less than the predicted ones, it was concluded that the real VL must be lower than the predicted values or the real k must be higher than the predicted values. With regard to the high dependency of these parameters to the soil cohesion, it seems natural cementation of Tehran alluvia has acted as a factor to increase the soil cohesion and has caused to decrease ground settlement due to excavation of Abuzar tunnel. For validation of this hypothesis, preceding findings about alluvia cementation were reviewed and the results of in-situ and laboratory shear and triaxial tests were compared with together. Then it is concluded that the higher cohesions of in-situ shear tests are occurred due to natural cementation of materials existing in Abuzar tunnel route
Evaluation of the excavation-induced ground movements is an important design aspect of supporting system in urban areas. This evaluation process is more critical to the old buildings or sensitive structures which exist in the excavation-affected zone. Frame distortion and crack generation are predictor, of building damage resulted from excavation-induced ground movements, which pose challenges to projects involving deep excavations. Geological and geotechnical conditions of excavation area have significant effects on excavation-induced ground movements and the related damages. In some cases, excavation area may be located in the jointed or weathered rocks. Under such conditions, the geological properties of supported ground become more noticeable due to the discontinuities and anisotropic effects. This paper is aimed to study the performance of excavation walls supported by nails in jointed rocks medium. The performance of nailed wall is investigated based on evaluating the excavation-induced ground movements and damage levels of structures in the excavation-affected zone. For this purpose, a set of calibrated 2D finite element models are developed by taking into account the nail-rock-structure interactions, the anisotropic properties of jointed rock, and the staged construction process using ABAQUS software. The results highlight the effects of different parameters such as joint inclinations, anisotropy of rocks and nail inclinations on deformation parameters of excavation wall supported by nails, and induced damage in the structures adjacent to the excavation area. The results also show the relationship between excavation-induced deformation and the level of damage in the adjacent structure.
| Rock type | Water absorption percentage | Point load index | Uniaxial compressive strength | Brazilian tensile strength | Weight loss (5 cycles) |
|
| Tuff | Natural | 4.84 | 10.57 | 145 | 21.53 | -0.0172 |
| Artificial | 11.48 | 6.19 | 63 | 12/66 | -0.0126 | |
| Change rate | ▲ | ▼ | ▼ | ▼ | ▼ | |
| Andesite | Nature | 1.35 | 10.48 | 84 | 12.83 | 0.0046 |
| Artificial | 8.47 | 1.83 | 34 | 5.86 | -0.0417 | |
| Change rate | ▲ | ▼ | ▼ | ▼ | ▲ | |
| Granite | Nature | 3.01 | 1.82 | 41 | 10.10 | -0.0032 |
| Artificial | 0.42 | 3.56 | 51 | 10.34 | 0.0083 | |
| Change rate | ▼ | ▲ | ▲ | ▲ | ▼ | |
| Parameters | Description | Excellent | Good | Marginal | Poor |
| Total score | 100 | 75 | 50 | 25 | |
| Water absorption (%) | Range | 0-2 | 2-3 | 3-5 | >5 |
| Score | 25 | 20 | 15 | 10 | |
| Unit weight (kN/m3) | Range | >24 | 22-24 | 18-22 | <18 |
| Score | 15 | 10 | 5 | 3 | |
| Uniaxial compressive strength (MPa) | Range | >50 | 40-50 | 30-40 | <30 |
| Score | 20 | 15 | 10 | 4 | |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | Range | >20 | 15-20 | 10-15 | <10 |
| Score | 20 | 15 | 10 | 4 | |
| Durability (%) | Range | <1% | 1%-2% | 2%-3% | >3% |
| Score | 20 | 15 | 10 | 4 |
© 2026 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Engineering Geology
Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb
