Sheeting Joints Characterisation Shear S
Sheeting Joints Characterisation Shear S
Sheeting Joints Characterisation Shear S
DOI 10.1007/s00603-010-0100-y
ORIGINAL PAPER
L. R. Richards
Received: 31 December 2009 / Accepted: 5 May 2010 / Published online: 25 May 2010
Ó The Author(s) 2010. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
S. R. Hencher
Halcrow China Ltd., Hong Kong, China
2 Development of Sheeting Joints
S. R. Hencher (&)
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK Sheeting joints are common in granite and other massive
e-mail: stevehencher@btinternet.com igneous rocks but also develop more rarely in other rock
types including sandstone and conglomerate. Ollier (1975)
S. G. Lee
University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea provides an excellent review of early research and obser-
vations on their occurrence and development and Twidale
T. G. Carter and Vidal Romani (2005) discuss their occurrence specif-
Golder Associates, Toronto, Canada
ically in granitic terrain.
L. R. Richards Some sheeting joints develop at shallow dip angles,
Canterbury, New Zealand for instance during quarrying, where high horizontal
123
2 S. R. Hencher et al.
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 3
the slope as illustrated in Fig. 3b, demonstrated by here are as defined in Geotechnical Engineering Office
numerical models (Yu and Coates 1970; Selby 1993) and (1988) and BS 5930 (1999).
discussed in detail by Bahat et al. (1999). Sheeting joints Additional evidence for the great age of some sheeting
also develop parallel to the stress trajectories that curve joints is the fact that they can sometimes be observed
under valleys where there has been rapid glacial unloading cutting through otherwise highly fractured rock. Most
or valley down cutting as illustrated in Fig. 4. Failure and sheeting joints occur in massive, strong rock and it is
erosion is a continuing process with the formation of new argued that if the rock mass had been already highly
sheeting joints following the failure of sheet-bounded fractured or weathered then the topographic stresses would
slabs. Wakasa et al. (2006) calculated an average erosion be accommodated by movements within the weak mass
rate of 56 m in 1 million years from measurements of rather than by initiating a new tensile fracture (Vidal
exposed sheeting joints in granite in Korea which is sig- Romani and Twidale 1999). Therefore where sheeting
nificantly higher than erosion rates on other slopes without joints are found in highly fractured rock masses, it is likely
sheeting joints. Whilst many exposed sheeting joints are that they predate the gradual development of the other
evidently very recent, others are much older. Jahns (1943) joints as mechanical fractures during unloading and
and Martel (2006) note the apparent dissection of land- weathering (Hencher 2006; Hencher and Knipe 2007).
scapes post-dating sheet joint formation. Antiquity is also Some extensive, hillside-parallel joints have many of the
indicated by preferential and thick weathering as illustrated characteristics of ‘‘true’’ sheeting joints but owe their
in Fig. 5a, which shows a segment of core through a sheet geometry instead to the opening up of pre-existing weak-
joint infilled with completely decomposed granite (CDG) ness directions such as doming joints in plutonic igneous
with the joint infill material abutting directly against almost rock or bedding in sedimentary rock. In this case the pre-
fresh rock; Fig. 5b shows a similar thick band of highly existing fracture network defines the hillside shape rather
decomposed granite (HDG) between the walls of a sheeting than the other way around (Twidale 1973). The opening up
joint at North Point, Hong Kong. Weathering grades used of these pre-existing joint systems is probably largely in
123
4 S. R. Hencher et al.
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 5
123
6 S. R. Hencher et al.
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 7
involving two or more joints. The common persistent stress. The fact that they tend in most domains to be rough,
nature of such joints means that the difficult judgmental wavy and often persistent over considerable distances
issue of the contribution from true cohesion from rock means that they are amenable to rational assessment of
bridges is of minor importance although cohesion might be shear strength. It is generally agreed that the shear strength
a real factor for infilled and weathered zones within of persistent joints can be considered as derived from some
sheeting joints and for stepped situations where different ‘‘basic’’ frictional resistance offered by an effectively pla-
sections of joint terminate against a pre-existing cross joint. nar, natural joint plus the work done in overriding the
Key factors that always need consideration are geometry roughness features on that joint. This is generally expressed
(orientation and roughness at all scales), shear strength and by the following equation (after Patton 1966):
the potential for ingress and development of adverse water
s ¼ r tanð/b þ i Þ
pressure.
Sheeting joints characteristically are limited to shallow where s is shear strength, r is normal stress, /b° is a basic
depths and therefore they are subject only to low confining friction angle for a planar joint and i° is a dilation angle
123
8 S. R. Hencher et al.
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 9
the same joint set (with similar surface mineralogy and (Hencher and Richards 1982). Figure 15 shows dilation-
textures) provide a reasonably well-defined dilation-cor- corrected data for joints through grades II and III granite
rected strength envelope as illustrated in Fig. 14. That and Fig. 16 shows similar data for joints through friable,
strength is frictional (obeys Amonton’s laws) and com- grade IV rock. These data define essentially the same
prises an adhesional component plus a non-dilational strength envelope with /b & 40°. Similar values for dila-
damage component that varies with textural and second tion-corrected basic friction angle are reported for other
order roughness (Hencher 1995). silicate rocks (Papaliangas et al. 1995) and Byerlee (1978)
Barton (1990) suggested that the dilation-corrected basic found the same strength envelope (s = 0.85r) for a large
friction angle might be partly scale-dependent as assumed number of direct shear tests on various rock types where
for the asperity damage component in the Barton–Bandis dilation was constrained by using high confining stresses.
model (Bandis et al. 1981) but further research using the Similar strengths have been reported as a mean value
same shear apparatus and modelling setup as Bandis generally even for more weathered grades IV and V granite
(1980), but with better instrumentation, indicates that this in Hong Kong (El-Ramly et al. 2005). Papaliangas et al.
is unlikely (Hencher et al. 1993; Papaliangas et al. 1994). 1995 suggest, on the basis of these sort of results, that a
Rather it appears that the dilation-corrected basic friction, friction value of about 40° for granite joints may mark a
once the effects of small-scale roughness have been cor- transition from dilational to purely frictional behaviour and
rected for, as described above, remains fairly constant and may relate to a change from brittle to ductile behaviour
seemingly independent of the length of the sample. Scale within highly stressed asperities. Empirically it seems to be
effects do however need to be considered as a geometrical about the highest value for basic friction achievable for
effect when deciding on the appropriate field-scale i° value natural joints through many silicate rocks and applicable
to add to the dilation-corrected /b as discussed below. specifically to joints that are forced because of small-scale
This suggested procedure of first testing joints to roughness to dilate, which includes most sheeting joints.
determine a dilation-corrected basic friction angle and then That said, even higher dilation-corrected values can
adding the field-scale roughness angle component is best sometimes be measured for tightly interlocking, rough
illustrated by some case examples. textured, tensile fractures through very strong rock, at least
In the early 1980s an extensive series of direct shear for several stages of testing (Hencher 1995, 2006). Con-
tests was conducted on sheeting joints samples taken from versely, it must be remembered that where joints are
drill core as part of the North Point Rock Slope Study in smoother so that they do not dilate during shear and where
Hong Kong. Samples included strong joints with quartz the surface texture is fine, polished or coated with low
coating, joints coated with iron and manganese oxides friction minerals such as chlorite, much lower basic friction
and joints through highly decomposed, grade IV granite angles can be measured for natural joints (Brand et al.
123
10 S. R. Hencher et al.
200
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 11
123
12 S. R. Hencher et al.
Fig. 19 Sample V13, 8.7 m (North Point Study, Hong Kong) joints and particularly will affect pore pressure dissipation
following 5 stage, repeated direct shear test up to normal stress rates, potentially leading to an adverse stability state due to
285 kPa equivalent of more than 10 m confining stress. Note the
the potential for a lengthened period of reduced effective
localised nature of damage (white areas) on the weathered, stepped
surface coated in brown iron and black manganese dioxide. Note that stress following a rain storm event. Experience from the
main step feature has survived intact (and was responsible for dilating piezometric monitoring of ‘‘infilled’’ and of ‘‘clean’’
the joint) at that stress level sheeting joints at Tuen Mun (Carter et al. 2002) showed
that although similar maximum pore pressure spike levels
when assessing stability. Where the joint is infilled with a were recorded for both joint types, it took days instead of
mixture of weathered rock and rock fragments however the hours for the dissipation of the excess head in the filled
Hoek–Brown strength criterion might be used to provide joints compared with the clean joints.
some estimate of strength without laboratory testing
(Carter et al. 2002) although Brown (2008) cautions against 4.6 Estimating Shear Strength Using Empirical
applying the original criterion outside the original data set Methods
and expresses specific concern for application for rocks
with uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) below about 30 Because of the inherent difficulties, need for quality
or 40 MPa. Carter et al. (2008) and Carvalho et al. (2007) equipment and expertise required for measuring shear
discuss a modified Hoek–Brown criterion for low strength strength of rock joints, various empirical criteria have been
rocks that may be more applicable for such application. proposed for estimating shear strength based on index tests
As discussed earlier, incremental movement of sheeting and idealised joint shapes. The most widely used strength
joints may take place over many years before final slab criterion is that proposed by Barton (1973). This takes the
detachment and, following each movement, sediment may ‘‘basic friction’’ measured for saw-cut or other artificially
be washed in to accumulate in hollows on the joint prepared planar surfaces then adding in a component to
(Fig. 20). The presence of washed-in sediment may indi- account for roughness adjusted for the strength of the rock
cate that the rock mass has moved but this is not always the asperities and for scale. Details are given in many text
case as illustrated by a case at Kwun Tong Road, Hong books including Brady and Brown (1985) and Wyllie and
Kong, discussed later, where the observed sediments were Mah (2004). The advantages of this criterion are its
deposited in an erosional pipe along a sheeting joint rather apparent ease of use and application in numerical model-
than in a void opened up by dilation. The presence of in- ling but there are difficulties in determining each of the
washed sediment in a joint might cause alarm during various parameters. Basic friction is taken to be a lower
ground investigation (clay infill having relatively low shear bound component with a ‘‘limiting value’’ of 28.5–31.5°
strength) but in many cases such sediments are patchy in (Barton and Bandis 1990) but the friction measured for a
occurrence and confined to local down warps on a partially saw-cut surface is not necessarily a lower bound either for
dilated joint. The sediment is probably playing little or no natural or artificial joints (see Fig. 17). Hencher (1976) for
part in decreasing frictional resistance which is controlled example reports the sliding angle reducing from about 32°
by contact between rock asperities. When the infill to only 12° for saw-cut surfaces of Darleydale Sandstone
becomes of such thickness that rock wall contact is no after about 4 m in tilt tests with continual removal of rock
longer to be relied upon then of course the infill strength flour between test runs. Furthermore, considerable vari-
itself needs to be assessed for design. The infill will also ability is sometimes reported from tests carried out on
affect hydraulic conductivity properties of such infilled artificially prepared surfaces. Stimpson (1981) measured
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 13
values ranging from 24° to 38° using limestone core pieces base-line parameters must be utilised within the equations
in sliding tests. Tests reported by the Norwegian Geo- whatever approach is adopted. It is a prevalent miscon-
technical Institute (NGI) for the Åknes landslide investi- ception in the literature (e.g. Simons et al. 2001) that
gation gave values ranging from 21° to 36.4° for tilt tests dilation-corrected data from direct shear tests on natural
on saw-cut joints with about 73% of data between 25° and joints can be used interchangeably in empirical equations.
30.2° (Kveldsvik et al. 2008). Nicholson (1994) reports a This is incorrect because the dilation-corrected strength
variation in 12.5° for tests carried out on carefully prepared already includes a frictional component contributed from
saw-cut, lapped surfaces of Berea sandstone, all suggesting textural and roughness damage (part equivalent of JRC)
that the recommendation of some lower ‘‘limiting value’’ and its substitution for the saw-cut or residual /b of Barton
of 28.5 to 31.5° may not be universally applicable. There is could lead to overestimations of field-scale strength by
also some confusion in the literature regarding application maybe 10° in many cases.
of some of the Barton early equations as to whether /b
(which is stipulated as sawn surface value determinations)
or /r (residual values from multi-reversal shear box test- 5 Case Examples of Landslides Involving Sheeting
ing) is the appropriate parameter for application in the Joints
equation. In the authors’ opinion is also extremely unwise
to rely on the widely publicised Schmidt Hammer rela- A number of landslides involving sliding on sheeting joints
tionships proposed between residual strength and base have been studied in some detail in Hong Kong and pro-
friction angle as a means for sorting out the correct value vide some insight into operative shear strength and mech-
for shear strength determination. anisms of failure.
The contribution to shear strength from roughness for
small-scale roughness can be measured or estimated from 5.1 Sau Mau Ping Road, Hong Kong, Early 1970s
standard shape profiles, but this can be difficult in practice
and varies according to shearing direction and with scale, An example of an in-depth study of slope stability gov-
requiring appropriate judgement for its effective application. erned by potential sliding on sheeting joint is presented by
Beer et al. (2002) carried out an online survey of people’s Hoek (2009) and Wyllie and Mah (2004). Figure 21a
estimates of joint roughness coefficient (JRC) for three shows a section of the slope as it is today, little changed
randomly selected joints. Considerable scatter was reported from the slope photographed in the early 1970s, with an
and for one of the three joints a possibly bi-modal distribu- extensive section of exposed sheeting joint following a
tion of estimates was determined with the two centres of failure during blasting to construct the road. It was antic-
population at 8.9 and 17.9, perhaps reflecting different ipated that the exposed sheeting joint would extend through
individual’s perception of controlling roughness scale. Like the adjacent 60-m-high slope with an overall angle of 508
any other stochastic parameter, considerable difficulties can and individual batters 20 m high and inclined at 708. The
occur when representing joint roughness with a single value slope that was of concern has now been cut back as illus-
JRC estimate, as clearly demonstrated by determinations for trated in Fig. 21b (compare to Hoek’s Fig. 4). Hoek goes
the Åknes landslide by workers from NGI and MIT through a reasoned series of sensitivity calculations based
(Kveldsvik et al. 2008) where JRC measured for foliation on various assumptions, culminating in the decision to cut
joints at a 0.25-m scale ranged from 2.5 to 20 with a mean of back rather than drain or reinforce the slope. The inter-
10.6. At a 1-m scale, JRC estimates covered the full possible pretation at the time was that the additional strength
range (from 0 to 20) with a mean of about 8 and standard offered by dilation in overcoming roughness could be
deviation of *4. The range of calculated factor of safety for expressed as apparent cohesion. If these analyses and cal-
this range of JRC was from about 0.8–2.0 taking all other culations were repeated today probably a slightly different
parameters at their mean values. As is obvious, considerable approach would be taken in the way that shear strength was
judgement is still needed in application of such empirical dealt with and consequently on the measures adopted. In
procedures so that overall estimates for joint surface strength particular a cohesive component of strength is insensitive
can be considered realistic. Furthermore, once the second to water pressure assumptions, whereas if strength is
order roughness contribution has been decided upon, then an expressed as friction plus dilation angle, both of these are
additional roughness angle, i°, still needs to be determined dependent on effective stress and a different answer would
and added, to account for larger scale roughness not sampled ensue. Apparent cohesion is clearly a good concept for
in the JRC assessment (Barton 1990). jointed rock masses (e.g. Brown 2008) but not for the shear
An important point that arises from this review of strength of persistent rock joints. The result and conclu-
empirical strength criteria for estimating field strength of sions might still be the same (cutting back the slope to the
rock joints is that it needs to be emphasised that the correct dip angle of the sheeting joint is certainly a pragmatic
123
14 S. R. Hencher et al.
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 15
6 Engineering Works
Fig. 24 Schematic representation of history of Leung King landslide Slopes in sheeting joint terrain often appear extremely
prior to detachment threatening because of the persistent, daylighting and
123
16 S. R. Hencher et al.
steeply dipping nature of the joints. The fact that such extensive, difficult slopes such as at Tuen Mun Road where
steeply dipping joints are associated with failures at all some sections were stabilised by anchors and buttresses and
scales from small rock falls to major translational move- other sections were protected by nets and other measures
ments has, over the years, necessitated that engineering (Carter et al. 2002; Pine and Roberds 2005).
works be implemented to reduce the risks.
A modern approach to assessing the need for preventive
measures is to use quantified risk assessment as described by 7 Engineering Options
Pine and Roberds (2005) for the widening of the Tuen Mun
Highway in Hong Kong (Fig. 1b). This project involved Some of the options for improving the stability of slopes
remediation and stabilisation of several sections of high cut are listed in Fig. 25 and illustrated in Fig. 26. These can be
and natural slopes dominated by potential sheeting joint split into passive options that either deal with the possible
failures and by the potential for failure of rock blocks and failure by controlling surface deterioration at source or
boulders bouncing down exposed sheeting joints to impact installing preventative reinforcement to increase local
the road below. Design of the slope cut backs and stabilisa- factors of safety, or adding walls or buttresses to restrain
tion measures was based on a combination of reliability detached debris before it causes injury or damage and
criteria and conventional Hong Kong standard factor of active measures that enhance overall factors of safety of
safety design targets aimed at achieving an ALARP (as low larger sections of slope by major engineering works
as reasonably possible) risk target which, in actuarial terms, including cut backs or buttresses or heavy tie-back cabling.
translated to less than 0.01 fatalities per year per 500 m
section of the slopes under remediation. 7.1 Surface Treatment
6.2 General Considerations Many risks can be mitigated through surface treatment to
stabilise or remove relatively small blocks of rock. There is
Remediation of sheeting joint-controlled stability hazards a temptation to use hard slope treatments like chunam (old
on high rock slopes is often not trivial and implementation
of the works can itself increase the risk levels albeit tem-
porarily. Factors that will influence the decision on which
measures to implement include the specific nature of the
hazards, topographic and access constraints, locations of the
facilities at risk, cost and timing. The risks associated with
carrying out works next to active roads both to road users
and to construction workers themselves and how to mitigate
these are addressed in some detail in Geotechnical Engi-
neering Office (2000a) and Halcrow China Limited (2002c).
Pre-contract stabilisation works will often be needed to
allow initial site access and preparation. Preventive mea-
sures such as rock bolting may be carried out at an early
stage to assist in the safe working of the site and designed to
form part of the permanent works. Options for the use of
protective barriers and catch nets to minimise disruption to
traffic during the works also need to be addressed, as do
contractual controls and alternatives for supervision of the
works. The use of a risk register, as piloted for tunnels
(Brown 1999), with clear identification of particular risks
and responsible parties, helps to ensure that all hazards and
consequences are adequately dealt with during construction.
Decision analysis is now widely applied at an early stage to
assess whether to mitigate slope hazards (e.g. by rockfall
catch nets) or to remediate/resolve the problem by excava-
tion and/or support approaches. If construction of intrusive
engineering measures to stabilise hazards might be unduly
risky, then passive protection can be adopted instead. A Fig. 25 Engineering options for stabilising slopes in sheeting joint
hybrid solution is often the most pragmatic solution for terrain
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 17
123
18 S. R. Hencher et al.
with reference to reducing risk by Pine and Roberds the effectiveness of individual drains can change with time
(2005). Such catch nets or fences can be positioned on- as subsurface flow paths migrate. With exposed sheeting
slope as illustrated in Fig. 28 (from Carter et al. 2002) or in joints forming ledges on a slope, care must be taken that
the toe zone of the slope depending on energy requirements the step zones are not shotcreted otherwise free drainage
and site restrictions. Where energies computed from may be impeded and water might dam up behind the
rockfall analyses are too extreme for toe-zone protection shotcrete. If the exposed joint is weathered the weak
alone to maintain risk levels below prescribed criteria for material may back-sap and possibly pipe leading to
highway users, on-slope energy protection fences become a destabilisation, partially caused by lack of free drainage.
necessity to reduce total energy impact at road level. This This can be rectified by installing closely spaced horizontal
was the approach adopted at Tuen Mun Road in Hong drains with geotextile filter fabric sleeves so as to prevent
Kong for sections of the slopes which were to remain in blocking together with protection of the weathered mate-
place and where sheeting joint geometries were considered rial. No-fines concrete whilst appearing to be suitable to
hazardous enough to allow potential release of blocks of protect weathered zones often ends up with lower perme-
sizes that could not be stopped by toe-zone fencing alone. ability than designed and should not be relied upon without
The photograph in Fig. 28 shows an on-slope 3,000 kJ some additional drainage measures.
fence designed and installed above the highway to catch
rockfall blocks from the 100 m of slope upslope of the 7.5 Reinforcement
fence. This fence is located about 80 m vertically above the
main carriageway of the highway, where the main toe-zone The factor of safety against slab sliding can be improved by
fence and catch ditch are located. a variety of options. For sheeting joints specifically, pro-
vided there has not been previous movement, the rough
7.4 Drainage interlocking nature of these tension fractures provides
considerable shear strength (where not severely weathered)
Drainage can be very effective in preventing the develop- and this needs to be accounted for in design in order to
ment of adverse water pressures, but there is a need to avoid over-conservatism. If the joint can be prevented from
target subsurface flow channels many of which will be sliding by reinforcing at strategic locations then full
shallow and ephemeral. The paths may be tortuous and advantage can be taken of the considerable natural fric-
hard to identify and drainage measures can therefore be tional resistance. Active stabilisation of blocks is possible
rather hit or miss (Hencher 2010). Regular patterns of long if they are of relatively small size and access is feasible
horizontal drain holes can be very effective, but it must either by rope access techniques down the slope, using
never be expected that all drains will yield water flows and ‘‘spyder’’ drills or even better if tracks can be constructed,
using more conventional drilling equipment. Depending on
configuration, rock blocks may be stabilised by dowelled
concrete buttressing (to provide direct support to a well-
defined potential release block), through various forms of
tie-down and/or overturning control tie-back reinforce-
ment, comprising deep sub-vertical dowelling. Sub-hori-
zontal cable anchors can be used if capacities larger than
about 20 tonnes per reinforcement member are required.
Often the most significant reinforcement is needed where
extensive sheeting joint zones define slabs of large pro-
portions. In such cases, the preferred method in Hong Kong
is to use passive dowel designs rather than tensioned
bolting for necessary shear constraint. This is because it is
considered that active reinforcement members are more
subject to corrosion damage and that passive dowels allow
both mobilisation of a normal force (due to the restraint
provided by the full column bond against asperity ride
during shear), plus active shear restraint provided by the
steel of the dowels resisting block slide mobilisation
(Spang and Egger 1990).
Fig. 28 Catch net to stop rock falls, above Tuen Mun Highway, The Geotechnical Engineering Office in Hong Kong has
Hong Kong published some guidelines on prescriptive measures for
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 19
123
20 S. R. Hencher et al.
123
Sheeting Joints: Characterisation, Shear Strength and Engineering 21
catch nets and ditches). On steep hill slopes where Byerlee J (1978) Friction of rocks. Pure Appl Geophys 116:615–626
detached or partially detached sheeting structures exist, Carter TG, Mierzejewski J, Kwong AKL (1998) Site investigation for
rock slope excavation and stabilization adjacent to a major
buttresses and/or anchor blocks have application for pre- highway in Hong Kong. In: Proceedings international conference
venting initial movement that would otherwise lead to on urban ground engineering, session 2, Geotechnics, Paper 14,
progressive deterioration. Preventing initial movement will 10 pp
optimise the contribution from peak shear strength. Seep- Carter TG, de Graaf P, Booth P, Barrett S, Pine R (2002) Integration
of detailed field investigations and innovative design key factors
age points on faces can help to identify the likely routes for to the successful widening of the Tuen Mun Highway. In:
channel flow which should be targeted with raking drains. Proceedings of the 22nd annual seminar, organised by the
Geotechnical Division of the Hong Kong Institution of Engi-
Acknowledgments This research was supported in part by a grant neers, 8th May, 2002, pp 187–201
(NEMA-06-NH-05) from the Natural Hazard Mitigation Research Carter TG, Diederichs MS, Carvalho JL (2008) Application of
Group, National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), Ministry modified Hoek–Brown transition relationships for assessing
of Public Administration and Security, Korea. strength and post-yield behaviour at both ends of the rock
competence scale. Proc SAIMM 108(6):325–338
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Carvalho JL, Carter TG, Diederichs MS (2007) An approach for
Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which per- prediction of strength and post yield behaviour for rock masses
mits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any of low intact strength. In: Proc 1st Can–US Rock Symp
medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. Meeting society’s challenges and demands. Vancouver, pp
249–257
Cloos H (1922) Tectonik und magma. Bd I Abh d Preuss Geol Land, 89
Diederichs MS (2003) Rock fracture and collapse under low
confinement conditions. Rock Mech Rock Eng 36:339–381
References El-Ramly H, Morgenstern NR, Cruden DM (2005) Probabilistic
assessment of stability of a cut slope in residual soil. Géotech-
Archambault G, Verreault N, Riss J, Gentier S (1999) Revisiting nique 55(1):77–84
Fecker–Rengers–Barton’s methods to characterize joint shear Fecker E, Rengers N (1971) Measurement of large scale roughness of
dilatancy. In: Amadei B, Kranz RL, Scott GA, Smeallie PH (eds) rock planes by means of profilograph and geological compass.
Rock mechanics for industry. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 423–430 In: Proceedings symposium on rock fracture, Nancy, France,
Baecher GB, Christian JT (2003) Reliability and statistics in Paper 1–18
geotechnical engineering. Wiley and Sons, 605 p Geotechnical Engineering Office (1988) Guide to rock and soil
Bahat D, Grossenbacher K, Karasaki K (1999) Mechanism of descriptions. (Geoguide 3). Geotechnical Engineering Office,
exfoliation joint formation in granitic rocks, Yosemite National Hong Kong, 189 p. Available at http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/
Park. J Struct Geol 21:85–96 publications/manuals/manu_eg3.htm
Bandis SC (1980) Experimental studies of scale effects on the shear Geotechnical Engineering Office (2000a) Highway slope manual.
strength, and deformation of rock joints. Unpublished PhD Geotechnical Engineering Office, Hong Kong, 114 p. Available
thesis, The University of Leeds, 385 p plus 4 appendices at http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/manuals/manu_em2.
Bandis SC, Lumsden AC, Barton NR (1981) Experimental studies of htm
scale effects on the shear behaviour of rock joints. Int J Rock Geotechnical Engineering Office (2000b) Technical guidelines on
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 18:1–21 landscape treatment and bio-engineering of man-made slopes
Barton NR (1973) Review of a new shear-strength criterion for rock and retaining walls. GEO Publication No. 1/2000, Geotechnical
joints. Eng Geol 7:287–332 Engineering Office, Hong Kong, 146 p. Available at http://
Barton NR (1990) Scale effects or sampling bias? In: Proceedings of www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/manuals/manu_ep1.htm
1st international workshop on scale effects in rock masses. Loen, Goodman RE (1980) Introduction to rock mechanics. Wiley and Sons,
Norway, pp 31–55 New York
Barton NR, Bandis SC (1990) Review of predictive capabilities of Hack R (1998) Slope stability probability classification, SSPC, 2nd
JRC-JCS model in engineering practice. In: Barton N, Stephans- edn. International Institute for Aerospace Survey and Earth
son O (eds) Rock joints, proceedings international symposium Sciences (ITC), Publication No. 43, 258 p
on rock joints, Loen, Norway. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 603–610 Halcrow Asia Partnership Ltd (1998) Report on the landslide at Ten
Beer AJ, Stead D, Coggan JS (2002) Estimation of the joint roughness Thousand Buddha’s Monastery of 2 July 1997. GEO Report No.
coefficient (JRC) by visual comparison. Rock Mech Rock Eng 77, Geotechnical Engineering Office, Hong Kong, 96 p. http://
35:65–74 www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/geo_reports/geo_rpt077.htm
Brady BHG, Brown ET (1985) Rock mechanics for underground Halcrow China Ltd (2002a) Investigation of some selected landslides
mining. George Allen and Unwin, London, 527 p in 2000 (Volume 1). GEO Report No. 129, Geotechnical
Brand EW, Hencher SR, Youdan JD (1983) Rock slope engineering Engineering Office, Hong Kong, 144 p. Available at http://
in Hong Kong. In: Proceedings of the 5th international rock www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/geo_reports/geo_rpt129.htm
mechanics congress, Melbourne, C, 17–24 Halcrow China Ltd (2002b) Investigation of some selected landslides
Brown RHA (1999) The management of risk in the design and in 2000 (Volume 2). GEO Report No. 130, Geotechnical
construction of tunnels. Korean Geotechnical Society, Tunnel Engineering Office, Hong Kong, 173 p. Available at http://
Committee Seminar, 21st Seminar, 21st September, 22 p www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/geo_reports/geo_rpt130.htm
Brown ET (2008) Estimating the mechanical properties of rock Halcrow China Ltd (2002c) Study on the provision of temporary
masses. In: Potvin Y, Carter J, Dyskin A, Jeffrey R (eds) protective barriers and associated measures and methods of and
Proceedings, 1st southern hemisphere international rock the supervision to be specified and provided for rock breaking
mechanics symposium, Perth, 16–19 September, vol 1, pp 3–22 operations. Unpublished Report to the Geotechnical Engineering
BS 5930 (1999) Code of practice for site investigation. 206 p Office, Hong Kong Government
123
22 S. R. Hencher et al.
Hencher SR (1976) Correspondence: a simple sliding apparatus for Papaliangas TT, Hencher SR, Lumsden AC (1995) A comprehensive
the measurement of rock friction. Géotechnique 26(4):641–644 peak strength criterion for rock joints. In: Proceedings 8th
Hencher SR (1983) Landslide studies 1982 case study no. 2 Junk Bay international congress on rock mechanics, Tokyo, vol 1, pp 359–
Road. Special project report no SPR 3/83, Geotechnical Control 366
Office, Hong Kong, 32 p Parry S, Campbell SDG, Fletcher CJN (2000) Kaolin in Hong Kong
Hencher SR (1995) Interpretation of direct shear tests on rock joints. saprolites—genesis and distribution. In: Proceedings conference
In: Daeman JJK, Schultz RA (eds) Proceedings 35th US engineering geology HK 2000, IMM HK Branch, pp 63–70
symposium on rock mechanics. Lake Tahoe, pp 99–106 Patton FD (1966) Multiple modes of shear failure through rock. In:
Hencher SR (2006) Weathering and erosion processes in rock— Proceedings 1st international congress international society rock
implications for geotechnical engineering. In: Proceedings mechanics, Lisbon, vol 1, pp 509–513
symposium on Hong Kong soils and rocks, March 2004, Patton FD, Deere DU (1970) Significant geological factors in rock
Institution of Mining, Metallurgy and Materials and Geological slope stability. In: Proceedings symposium on planning open pit
Society of London, pp 29–79 mines, Johannesburg, A.A. Balkema, pp 143–151
Hencher SR (2010) Preferential flow paths through soil and rock and Pine RJ, Roberds WJ (2005) A risk-based approach for the design of
their association with landslides. Hydrol Process (in press) rock slopes subject to multiple failure modes—illustrated by a
Hencher SR, Knipe RJ (2007) Development of rock joints with time case study in Hong Kong. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 42:261–275
and consequences for engineering. In: Proceedings of the 11th Rabinowicz E (1965) Friction and wear of materials. John Wiley,
congress of the international society for rock mechanics, vol 1, New York
pp 223–226 Richards LR, Cowland JW (1982) The effect of surface roughness on
Hencher SR, Richards LR (1982) The basic frictional resistance of the field shear strength of sheeting joints in Hong Kong granite.
sheeting joints in Hong Kong Granite. Hong Kong Eng Hong Kong Eng 10(10):39–43
11(2):21–25 Richards LR, Cowland JW (1986) Stability evaluation of some urban
Hencher SR, Richards LR (1989) Laboratory direct shear testing of rock slopes in a transient groundwater regime. In: Proceedings
rock discontinuities. Ground Eng 22(2):24–31 conference on rock engineering and excavation in an urban
Hencher SR, Toy JP, Lumsden AC (1993) Scale dependent shear environment, IMM, Hong Kong, pp 357–363 (discussion 501–
strength of rock joints. In: da Cunha P (ed) Scale effects in rock 506)
masses 93. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 233–240 Roorda J, Thompson JC, White OL (1982) The analysis and
Hoek E (1968) Brittle failure of rock. In: Stagg KG, Zienkiewicz OC prediction of lateral instability in highly stressed, near-surface
(eds) Rock mechanics in engineering practice. Wiley and Sons, rock strata. Can Geotech J 19(4):451–462
London, pp 99–124 Schneider HJ (1976) The friction and deformation behaviour of rock
Hoek E (2009) A slope stability problem in Hong Kong. Published joints. Rock Mech 8:169–184
online at http://www.rocscience.com/hoek/pdf/7_A_slope_ Scholtz CH (1990) The mechanics of earthquakes and faulting.
stability_problem_in_Hong_Kong.pdf Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 439 p
Holzhausen GR (1989) Origin of sheet structure, 1. Morphology and Selby MJ (1993) Hillslope materials and processes, 2nd edn, Oxford
boundary conditions. Eng Geol 27:225–278 University Press, 451 p
International Society for Rock Mechanics (1978) Suggested methods Simons N, Menzies B, Mathews M (2001) A short course in soil and
for the quantitative description of discontinuities in rock masses. rock slope engineering. Thomas Telford, 432 p
Int J Rock Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 15(6):319–368 Spang K, Egger P (1990) Action of fully-grouted bolts in jointed rock
Jahns RH (1943) Sheet structure in granites, its origin and use as a and factors of influence. Rock Mech Rock Eng 23:201–229
measure of glacial erosion in New England. J Geol 51:71–98 Stimpson B (1981) A suggested technique for determining the basic
Johnson AM (1970) Formation of sheet structure in granite, chap 10. In: friction angle of rock surfaces using core. Int J Rock Mech Min
Physical processes on geology, Freeman Cooper and Company Sci Geomech Abstr 18:63–65
Kikuchi K, Mito Y (1993) Characteristics of seepage flow through the Twidale CR (1973) On the origin of sheet jointing. Rock Mech
actual rock joints. In: Proceedings 2nd international workshop on 5:163–187
scale effects in rock masses, Lisbon, pp 305–312 Twidale CR, Vidal Romani JR (2005) Landforms and geology of
Kulatilake PHSW, Shou G, Huang TH, Morgan RM (1995) New peak granite terrains. Taylor and Francis, 352 p
shear strength criteria for anisotropic rock joints. Int J Rock Vidal Romani JR, Twidale CR (1999) Sheet fractures, other stress
Mech Min Sci Geomech Abstr 32:673–697 forms and some engineering implications. Geomorphology
Kveldsvik V, Nilsen B, Einstein HH, Nadim F (2008) Alternative 31:13–27
approaches for analyses of a 100,000 m3 rock slide based on Wakasa S, Matsuzaki H, Tanaka Y, Matskura Y (2006) Estimation of
Barton–Bandis shear strength criterion. Landslides 5:161–176 episodic exfoliation rates of rock sheets on a granite dome in
Martel SJ (2006) Effect of topographic curvature on near-surface Korea from cosmogenic nuclide analysis. Earth Surf Proc Land
stresses and application to sheeting joints. Geophys Res Lett 31:1246–1256
33:LO1308 Wise DU (1964) Microjointing in basement, Middle Rocky Moun-
Nichols T C Jr (1980) Rebound, its nature and effect on engineering tains of Montana and Wyoming. Geol Soc Am Bull 75:287–306
works. Q J Eng Geol 13:133–152 Wyllie DC, Mah CW (2004) Rock Slope Engineering, 4th edn, Spon,
Nicholson GA (1994) A test is worth a thousand guesses—a paradox. 431 p
In: Nelson PP, Laubach SE (eds) Proc 1st NARMS symposium, Yu YS, Coates DF (1970) Analysis of rock slopes using the finite
pp 523–529 element method. Department of Energy, Mines and Resources
Ollier CD (1975) Weathering. Longman, 304 p Mines Branch, Mining Research Centre, Research Report, R229
Papaliangas TT, Hencher SR, Lumsden AC (1994) Scale independent (Ottawa)
shear strength of rock joints. In: Proceedings IV CSMR/integral Yu YF, Siu CK, Pun WK (2005) Guidelines on the use of prescriptive
approach to applied rock mechanics, Santiago, Chile, pp 123– measures for rock slopes. GEO Report 161, 34 p
133
123