See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281455290

Geomechanical Classification of Conglomerates for the Térraba and Limón Sur

Basins, Costa Rica

Conference Paper · September 2014

CITATIONS READS

2 1,151

3 authors:

Danilo Andrés Jiménez Ugalde Alexis Cerdas

5 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS
Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad
8 PUBLICATIONS 38 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Jorge A Salazar
Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad
6 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Alexis Cerdas on 03 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Rock Mechanics for Natural Resources and Infrastructure
SBMR 2014 – ISRM Specialized Conference 09-13 September, Goiania, Brazil
© CBMR/ABMS and ISRM, 2014

Geomechanical Classification of Conglomerates for the Térraba

and Limón Sur Basins, Costa Rica
Danilo A. Jiménez Ugalde
Civil Engineer, Comité Técnico de Mecánica de Rocas, Asociación Costarricense de Geotecnia,
San José, Costa Rica, [email protected]

Alexis Cerdas Salas

Geologist, Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, San José, Costa Rica, [email protected]

Jorge Salazar Chacón

Geologist, Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad, San José, Costa Rica,
[email protected]

SUMMARY: During the Plio-Pleistocene period, the Térraba and Limón Sur basins in Costa Rica
became filled with alluvial and volcanic materials, forming a series of coarse deposits with similar
properties corresponding to the Valle del General and Paso Real formations in the south area and to
the Suretka formation in the Caribbean region. This geological process gave rise to what is
currently described as conglomerates with a clayey silt to gravel matrix, being mainly characterized
by a low uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) that is generally inferior to 20 MPa. These
conglomerates have been researched at different stages of power generation and transport
infrastructure projects, which have been related to the construction of some of the most significant
engineering works of the country. Based on the research for design purposes, the follow-up during
the excavation, and the monitoring during the operation of the works excavated in these materials,
this type of rock mass was geomechanically classified by using the RMR system.

KEYWORDS: Tunnel support, Rock mass classification, Rock mass characterization.

1 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SCENARIO piedmonts sediments of the Suretka Formation

AND GEOLOGIC HISTORY (Rivier and Seyfried, 1975 in Seyfried and
Sprechman, 1985). Similarly, Lew (1983) and
Many authors have discussed the origin and Corrigan (1986) in Astorga et. al. (1991)
formation of Costa Rica. In general terms, their mention that during the Pliocene, both in the
theories coincide at the final stage, after the forearc and the backarc of the south block, a
start of the closing of the Central American system of basins originated by compression was
isthmus in the Pliocene, with the presence of an developed, with coarse clastic sediments and
angular discordance that establishes the sediments from continental to shallow marine
beginning of the coarse clastic deposition. environments (fan and braided deltas to alluvial
These coarse clastic deposits, sometimes called fans).
molasic or piedmont deposits of fluvial and On the other hand, the Grifo Alto Formation
pyroclastic origin, fill the sedimentary basins in the Central Valley is defined as a series of
formed not only in the forearc region (Pacific andesitic and pyroclastic volcanic rocks that
side), but also in the backarc (Caribbean side). covered the sedimentary and volcanic
Therby et al. (1985) indicate that it is possible sequences preceding the Pleistocene. In
to find, in the Caribbean side of the isthmus, a particular, the pyroclastic flows are sometimes
sequence that is more or less comparable to that coarse, containing scoriaceous and massive lava
of the Pacific side, ending with molasic blocks supported by a muddy and burned matrix

SBMR 2014
(Denyer and Arias, 1991). 2.1 Conglomerate of the Suretka Formation
In the current geographic configuration and
position of Costa Rica, the sedimentary basins This conglomerate is constituted by sub-
and the remaining structural elements maintain rounded to rounded andesitic-basaltic lava
the distribution shown in Figure 1, based on blocks of 20 cm to 40 cm, originated by alluvial
which it is possible to infer that coarse granular fans. The grading of the matrix surrounding the
materials of volcaniclastic origin are mainly blocks varies from fine sand to coarse sand. In
located in the Térraba and Limón Sur basins general, the conglomerate matrix is
and in parts of the Central Valley. consolidated. The average ratio between the
blocks and the matrix is 60/40. The
conglomerate shows stratification that is clearly
evidenced by the existence of very consolidated
coarse-sandstone lenses, dipping NW with
inclination angles up to 16º. In addition, the
conglomerate is poorly to moderately fractured
in different zones of the rock mass. The
fracturing is better defined in the stratigraphic
contacts with sandstone lenses.

2.2 Conglomerate of the Paso Real Formation

This conglomerate is constituted by very

rounded lava blocks of 1 cm to 60 cm in
Figure 1. Structural tectonic map of Costa Rica. Modified diameter. The blocks are sometimes in contact
by Fernández et. al. (in Astorga et. al, 1991). with each other; however, most of them are
immersed in the matrix. The grading of the
matrix surrounding the blocks varies from fine
2 LITHOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION OF sand to coarse sand. In general, the
THE CONGLOMERATES UNDER STUDY conglomerate matrix is very consolidated. The
average ratio between the blocks and the matrix
According to descriptions for the outcrops and is 70/30. The conglomerate is poorly stratified,
excavations the conglomerates of the Térraba and it is slightly fractured to moderately
and Limón Sur basins have similar lithological fractured. Besides, it has intercalations of
and structural characteristics (Figure 2): medium conglomerates, volcanic breccias, and
lenses of medium tuffaceous sandstone.

2.3 Conglomerate of the Valle del General

Formation

This conglomerate is constituted by blocks of

20 cm to 50 cm. The blocks are formed mainly
by lava and occasionally by intrusive rocks.
Some have spheroidal alteration. The blocks are
very rounded and, in general, they are immersed
into the matrix. The grading of the matrix
surrounding the blocks varies from fine sand to
pebbles. The conglomerate matrix is moderately
consolidated. The average ratio between the
Figure 2. Spatial distribution of conglomerates in the blocks and the matrix is 70/30. The
Suretka, Paso Real and Valle del General Formations. conglomerate is roughly stratified, and it is

SBMR 2014
slightly fractured to moderately fractured. In The main argument deals with the complexity
addition, it has normal and reverse grading with of identifying discontinuities and, consequently,
intercalated paleosoils that are not very measuring the RQD. For this reason, some
developed (Mora, 1979). authors state that such systems are not
The following pictures provide a clear idea applicable (Laporte, 2012).
of the similar lithological characteristics Nevertheless, the experience of the authors
analyzed at the different sites, Figure 3. of this article has proved that, at the practical
level, the use of classic geomechanical
classifications provides a good approximation
in estimating the temporary support for
underground excavations made in
conglomerates. The present research shows that
the RMR geomechanical classification system
by Bieniawski (1989) can be applied to the
conglomerates under study; therefore, the use of
this system is proposed, and recommendations
related to the identification, description and
classification of discontinuities are provided as
an attempt to solve the limitations identified for
its application.

3.1 UCS of the conglomerates under study

The UCS value of the conglomerates under

analysis varies within a range of 1,0 MPa to
30 MPa, with an average strength of 9,2 MPa.
Figure 4 shows the distribution of simple
compression values of the conglomerates used
in this study.
The range of simple compression values for
the matrix of the conglomerates under study is
Figure 3. A: Conglomerate, Paso Real Fm. – Q. Veraguas clearly included by the RMR geomechanical
Site. B: Conglomerate, Suretka Fm. – La Florida Site. C: classification.
Conglomerate and lenses of tuffaceous sandstone, Valle
del General Fm. – Ceibo Site. D: Conglomerate and
lenses of sandstone, Suretka Fm. – Q. Rubio Site.

3 USE OF THE GEOMECHANICAL

CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR THE
CONGLOMERATES UNDER STUDY
Figure 4. Distribution of UCS values.

For some time, a technical discussion has been

3.2 Discontinuities in the conglomerates
raised regarding the convenience of applying
under study
the existing geomechanical classification
systems to granular materials that are poorly
In the strict sense, the interface between the
cemented or not very consolidated, and that are
blocks and the matrix forming the
constituted by a sandy-gravel matrix including
conglomerates constitutes a discontinuity.
grains of centimetric to metric diameters, as in
However, for geomechanical classification
the case of the conglomerates described above.
purposes, the proposal is to use the rock mass

SBMR 2014
constituted by both the matrix and the blocks as Table 1. Example for classifying the condition of
the continuum. discontinuities in the conglomerates under study.
As detailed below, three general types of Condition of the
Example Value
discontinuities were identified in the discontinuity
conglomerates under study:
Stratigraphic discontinuity: It corresponds to

-Massive appearance
-No discontinuities
the pseudo-stratification of the conglomerates.
It is possible to identify how the size of the 30
blocks changes drastically in the sedimentation
strata (coarse conglomerate – fine conglomerate
contact, conglomerate – sandstone contact).
This type of discontinuities is closed, without a

-Separation less than 1 mm

-Persistence 3 m – 10 m
filling or occasionally with a sandy filling,

-Example: Stratigraphic
-Little alteration on the
sound, flat to wavy, and rough to very rough.

discontinuity wall
Fracture: It corresponds to fractures

-Rough surface
25

discontinuity
generated by tectonic stresses. This type of
discontinuity is closed (compression structure)
or open (extension structure), with or without a
filling, sound to altered, flat to wavy, and flat to
-Separation less than 1 mm

very rough.
-Little alteration on the

Fault planes: It refers to the fault zones that

-No filling or occasional sandy discontinuity wall

shear the conglomerates. This type of -Example: Extension fracture -Example: Joints
-Rough surface

discontinuity is closed, with clayey fillings, 20

-No filling

altered and flat-striated.

Table 1 illustrates in detail the classification
of the condition of discontinuities in the
conglomerates under study.
-Separation less than 5 mm
-Sound discontinuity wall

3.3 RQD in the conglomerates under study

15
-Rough surface

The RQD was developed to quantify the quality

of the rock mass by means of drill cores (Deere,
fillings

1963). Today, the most significant use of this

parameter is to quantify the rock mass
fracturing degree in geomechanical
-Separation less than 5 mm

-Altered discontinuity wall

classification systems (Palmstrom, 2005).

-Example: Fault without
-Filling less than 5 mm

As mentioned by several authors

(Bieniawski, 1973, 1984; Edlbro, 2003) and, in
-Striated surface

10
general, by different researchers related to the
description process of drill cores and to rock
filling

engineering, the RQD involves several

limitations. For instance, the RQD is a
measurement made in one single dimension
-Separation less than 5 mm

-Altered discontinuity wall

(drill holes); therefore, it becomes a directional

-Example: Fault with soft
-Filling less than 5 mm

factor, and its definition is more sensitive to the

inclination and direction of the drill hole than to
-Striated surface

0
the spacing of fractures (Choi & Park, 2004).
filling

SBMR 2014
 In this research, due to the geomechanical
characteristics of the conglomerates, it was
possible to identify a new limitation in the
measurement of the RQD on drill cores.
In conglomerates with a low lithification
degree, which is reflected in a low UCS value
(<5 MPa), the recovery of the matrix during the Figure 6. Correlation between Jv and RQD. (Modified
drilling process is usually very low and, as a from Plamstrom, 2005).
result, the estimated RQD value in the rock
mass is not representative.
Because of this, a guide is proposed for
measuring the RQD in outcrops and drill holes,
depending on the UCS value of the rock matrix
estimated from laboratory tests (Figure 5). Figure 7. Example of drill core box.
If the UCS is below to 5 MPa, it is
recommended to use the description of outcrops
in the estimation of the number of joints per m3 4 DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA BASE
(Jv), a parameter that can be correlated to RDQ USED FOR THE GEOMECHANICAL
ranges based on the diagram in Figure 6 CLASSIFICATION OF THE
(Palmstrom, 1974). CONGLOMERATES UNDER STUDY
Figure 7 provides examples of drill cores in
conglomerates whose matrix has a UCS higher The behavior of the temporary support placed
than 5 MPa. By following the suggested along a tunnel length of 6552 m was studied.
criterion, the RQD can be measured in a The tunnels have excavation diameters varying
conventional manner in drill cores similar to from 3,5 m to 14,0 m. The distribution of
those shown. diameters in the excavations considered for the
study is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Distribution of excavation diameters.

The temporary support used in the

excavations under analysis was simplified in a
generic manner to three types: 1) without
support, 2) shotcrete, and 3) steel sets. Figure 9
provides examples of the types of support.
The distribution of the types of temporary
support used in the study is shown in Figure 10.
Figure 5. Diagram for estimation of the RQD in The research included rock mass
conglomerates.
classifications using the RMR system with data
corresponding to class IIA (70 to 80), IIB (60 to
70), IIIA (50 to 60), IIIB (40 to 50) and IVA
(30 to 40), Figure 11.
Figure 12 details the distribution of
temporary support placed according to the

SBMR 2014
excavation diameter and the rock mass The observations of the temporary support in
classification using the RMR system for 36 the tunnels were represented in the support
selected observation sites. chart proposed by Grimstad and Barton (1993).
For this purpose, an ESR = 1,6 and the ratio
proposed by Barton (1995): were
used. Figure 14 shows a good correlation
between the support defined by Grimstad and
Barton (1993) and the collected data, mainly in
those excavations that did not require any
temporary support.

Figure 12. Temporary support placed according to the

diameters and the RMR system.

Figure 9. A: Excavation without support. B: Excavation

with shotcrete. C: Excavation with steel sets and
shotcrete.

Figure 13. Stand-up time according to the excavation

diameter and the RMR (Modified from Bieniawski,
Figure 10. Distribution of temporary support. 1989).

Figure 11. Distribution of rock mass classes according to

RMR.

Figure 13 indicates the observations made

for stand-up time in the underground
excavations of the conglomerates under study. Figure 14. Proposal of temporary support using the Q
The graph on stand-up time proposed by system (Modified from Grimstad & Barton, 1993).
Bieniawski (1989) was used for comparison.

SBMR 2014
5 FINAL CONSIDERATIONS based on retrospective analyses and shear
strength tests (in the laboratory and in situ), and
Based on the study performed in the Térraba by using the Hoek and Brown failure criterion
and Limón Sur basins and by taking into (Hoek et al, 2002). The GSI was obtained by
account the recommendations given by means of the ratio GSI = RMR´89-5 (Hoek et al,
Romana (2001), it is proposed that the graph 1998).
shown in Figure 15 be used to select the type of
temporary support for underground excavations Table 2. Proposal of cohesion and internal friction angle
made in conglomerates with similar for the conglomerates under study according to the RMR.
characteristics. RMR range 75 to 60 60 to 40 40 to 30
Cohesion of the rock
200-300 100 - 200 75-100
mass (kPa)
Internal friction angle of
35-45 25-35 20-25
the rock mass (deg)

The data proposed in Table 2 were compared

with the results of the research performed by
Sonmez et al. (2009), having a good correlation
with the internal friction angle values obtained
in both studies for samples with percentages of
blocks between 60% and 70%.
Figure 15. Recommendations on support for
conglomerates according to the diameter and the RMR.
The suggested shear strength values of the
rock mass can be used for the initial analysis of
In order to use the previous graph, the underground excavations or for the preliminary
following considerations should be taken into calculation of slope stability in conglomerates
account: a) The excavation to be analyzed has a similar to those studied. As a recommendation,
diameter of 3,5 m to 14,0 m. b) The rock cover the slopes to be analyzed by using the rock
of the excavation is less than 250 m. c) The mass shear strength information shown in Table
inflow at the excavation site is less than 100 2 should not exceed 40 m in height.
l/min. d) The water head at the excavation site When the slope stability is ruled by one, two
is less than 100 kPa. d) The hydraulic gradient or even three particular geologic structures, the
at the excavation site is less than 3 m/m. e) The stability analysis has to be addressed to wedges,
temporary support constituted by shotcrete has planar failures or toppling failures. Since the
a thickness of 5 cm to 10 cm. f) For excavation shear strength of the discontinuities has to be
diameters greater than 5 m, it is proposed to use characterized, the methodology proposed by
fiber-reinforced shotcrete, with a minimum Barton (1973, 1974, 1976), Barton and
energy absorption of 500 J. Alternatively, wire Choubey (1977), Barton and Bandis (1990)
mesh can be used. g) Lattice girders and steel should be applied. By means of the
sets always have to be used together with retrospective analyses of planar failures in the
reinforced shotcrete of 10 cm to 20 cm in conglomerates under study, basic friction angles
thickness. h) Spot bolting can be used for were obtained within a range of 200 to 300 on
stabilization of metric-size blocks that planes that are generally rough-planar
sometimes appear in the conglomerates under (JRC 4 to 8) to rough-undulating type (JRC
analysis. f) In the conglomerates under study, higher than 9).
friction-type and grout-embedded bolts can be In conglomerates similar to those studied,
employed. the RMR is suggested for calculating the
For conglomerates similar to those studied, it bearing capacity of foundations, using the
is recommended to use the shear strength values methodology proposed by Serrano and
shown in Table 2. These values were obtained Olalla (1993).

SBMR 2014
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Deere D.U. (1963). Technical description of rock cores
for engineering purposes. Felsmechanik und
Ingenieurgeologie, Vol. 1, No 1, p. 16-22.
This article has been written by the authors as Denyer, P. and Arias, O. (1991). Estratigrafía de la región
part of outreach activities conducted by the central de Costa Rica. – Rev. Geól. América Central,
Technical Committee for Rock Mechanics 12: p. 1-59.
(CTMR) of the Costa Rican Association of Edelbro C. (2003). Rock mass strength – a review.
Geotechnical (ACG). The CTMR agglomerates Technical Report, Luleå University of Technology,
132 p.
professional members of the Costa Rica Grimstad, E. and Barton, N.R. (1993). Updating of the Q-
National Group of the ISRM. System for NMT. Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Sprayed Concrete – Modern Use of
Wet Mix Sprayed Concrete for Underground Support,
REFERENCES Fagernes, 1993, Ed. Kompen, Opsahl and Berg.
Norwegian Concrete Association, Oslo.
Hoek, E., Carranza-Torres, C. and Corkum, B. (2002). El
Astorga, A., Fernández, J., Barboza, G., Campos, L., criterio de rotura de Hoek-Brown – Edición 2002.
Obando, J., Aguilar, A. and Obando, L. (1991). Hoek, E., Kaiser, P.K. and Bawden W.F. (1998). Support
Cuencas sedimentarias de Costa Rica evolución of underground excavations in hard rock. A.A.
geodinámica y potencial de hidrocarburos. Rev. Geól. Balkema, Rotterdam, 215 p.
América Central, 13: p. 25-59. Laporte, G. (2012). Limitaciones de los sistemas de
Barton, N.R. 1973. Review of a new shear strength clasificación aplicados a macizos rocosos constituidos
criterion for rock joints. Engng. Geol. 7, p. 287-332. por rocas suaves volcanoclásticas y sedºimentarias
Barton, N.R. 1974. A review of the shear strength of clásticas. XI Congreso de Geotecnia, San José, Costa
filled discontinuities in rock. Norwegian Geotech. Rica, AGEO, Aug. 2012.
Inst. Publ. No. 105. Oslo: Norwegian Geotech. Inst. Mora, S. (1979). Estudio geológico de una parte de la
Barton, N.R. 1976. The shear strength of rock and rock región sureste del Valle del General, provincia de
joints. Int. J. Mech. Min. Sci. & Geomech. Abstr. Puntarenas, Costa Rica. Tesis de Lic. Escuela
13(10), p. 1-24. Centroamericana de Geología, Universidad de Costa
Barton, N.R. (1995). The influence of joint properties in Rica. Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica.
modelling jointed rock masses. Keynote lecture. Proc. Palmstrom, A. (2005). Measurements of and correlations
of 8th ISRM Congress, Tokyo. T. Fuji (Ed.). 3: p. between block size and Rock Quality Designation
1023–1032. Rotterdam: Balkema. (RQD). Tunnels and Underground Space Technology
Barton, N.R. and Bandis, S.C. 1990. Review of predictive 20 (2005) p. 362-377.
capabilities of JRC-JCS model in engineering Palmstrom A. (1974). Karakterisering av
practice. In Rock joints, proc. int. symp. on rock oppsprekningsgrad og fjellmassers kvalitet. (In
joints, Loen, Norway, (eds N. Barton and O. English: Characterization of jointing density and the
Stephansson), p. 603-610. Rotterdam: Balkema. quality of rock masses.) Internal report, A.B. Berdal,
Barton, N.R. and Choubey, V. 1977. The shear strength Norway, 26 p.
of rock joints in theory and practice. Rock Mech. Romana, M. (2001). Recomendaciones de excavación y
10(1-2), p. 1-54. sostenimiento para túneles. Revista de Obras
Bieniawski, Z.T. (1989). Engineering rock mass Públicas, Marzo 2001, Nº3408, pp. 17-28.
classification: A complete manual for engineers and Serrano, A. & Olalla, C. (1993). Carga de hundimiento
geologists in mining, civil and petroleum engineering. en macizos rocosos. CEDEX. Ministerio de Fomento
John Wiley & Sons. New York, 250 p. de España. Madrid. 98 p.
Bieniawski Z.T. (1984). Rock mechanics design in Seyfried, H. and Sprechmann, P. (1985). “Acerca de la
mining and tunneling. Balkema, Rotterdam, 272 p. formación del puente-istmo centroamericano
Bieniawski, Z.T. (1973). Engineering classification of meridional, con énfasis en el desarrollo acaecido
jointed rock masses. Trans. S. African Instn. Civ. desde el Campaniense al Eoceno.” Rev. Geól.
Engrs., Vol 15, No 12, Dec. 1973, p. 335-344. América Central, 2: p. 63-87.
Cerdas A., Jiménez D., de los Ríos M. and Loaiza E. Sonmez, H., Kasapoglu, K.E., Coskun, A., Tunusluoglu,
(2009). Caracterización geomecánica de C., Medley, E.W. and Zimmerman R.W. (2009). A
conglomerados, brechas, y lahares del Plio- Conceptual empirical approach for the overall
Pleistoceno de las Cuencas Pacífico y Limón Sur, strength of unwelded bimrocks. ISRM Regional
Costa Rica. X Congreso de Geotecnia, San José, Symp. "Rock Eng. In Difficult Ground Conditions,
Costa Rica, AGEO, Aug. 2009. Soft Rock and Karst", Dubrovnik, Croatia, Oct. 2009.
Choi S.Y. and Park H.D. (2004). Variation of the rock
quality designation (RQD) with scanline orientation
and length: a case study in Korea. Int. J. of Rock
Mech. & Mining Sciences 41, p. 207-221.

SBMR 2014

View publication stats