A flexible system for selection of rock mass excavation method

Abstract

The excavation of rock masses has a crucial importance for the safety and cost of construction of engineering projects. In this study, a flexible excavation assessment (EXCASS) system was developed with two components, the geological strength index (GSI) and the point load strength index (Is50). In order to develop the system, artificial neural network (ANN) analysis were performed using datasets from surface excavations (12 sites in Turkey and 61 sites in Greece reported by Tsiambaos and Saroglou (2010)). The EXCASS system in this study includes two parameters, namely the excavation power index (EPI) and the excavation performance rating (EPR) ranging between the value of 0 and 100. The optimum excavation power index (EPIopt) can be determined theoretically by using (\( {\mathrm{GSI}}^2\times \sqrt{{\mathrm{Is}}_{50}} \)) as an input when EPR is equal to 0, for the selection of the optimum excavation method. EPR is a rating which provides relative information on the ease or difficulty of the excavation method. Although the value of EPR varies between 0 and ± 100 in the EXCASS system, the use of the excavation method for “normally classes” is recommended in order to achieve costly and efficient excavation. The EXCASS system, on the other hand, has an ability to respond to possible technological developments by associating the excavation method with the EPI rating.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

References

  1. Abdullatif OM, Cruden DM (1983) The relationship between rock mass quality and ease of excavation. Bull Eng Geol Environ 28:183–187

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ataei M, Mikaiel R, Sereshki F, Ghaysari N (2012) Predicting the production rate of diamond wire saw using statistical analysis. Arab J Geosci 5(6):1289–1295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Atkinson T (1971) Selection of open pit excavating and loading equipment. Trans Inst Min Metall 1971:101–129

    Google Scholar 

  4. Azami Y, Osanloo M, Aakbarpour-Shirazi M, Aghajani Bazzazi A (2010) Prediction of the blastability designation of rock masses using fuzzy sets. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 47:1126–1140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Basarir H, Karpuz C (2004) A rippability classification system for marls in lignite mines. Eng Geol 74(3–4):303–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bieniawski ZT (1976) Rock mass classification in rock engineering. Explor Rock Eng Proc Symp 1:97–106

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bozdag T (1988) Indirect rippability assessment of coal measure rocks, MS thesis, METU, Ankara, Turkey 86 pp

  8. Caterpillar TC (2001) Caterpillar performance handbook. Caterpillar Inc, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ceryan N, Okkan U, Kesimal A (2012) Application of generalized regression neural networks in predicting the unconfined compressive strength of carbonate rocks. Rock Mech Rock Eng 45(6):1055–1072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ceylanoğlu A, Gül Y, Akin A (2007) Investigation of diggability and rippability classification systems and proposition of a new classification system (in Turkish). Min J 46(2):13–26

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chaniotis N, Saroglou H, Tsiambaos G, Alivizatos A (2017) Excavatability of rock masses in tunneling. Proc. of 7th Int. Symposium on Tunnels and Underground Structures in SEE 2017 Zagreb

  12. Chen J, Li X, Zhu H, Rubin Y (2017) Geostatistical method for inferring RMR ahead of tunnel face excavation using dynamically exposed geological information. Eng Geo 228:214–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Church HK (1981) Excavation Handbook. Incorporated 330 West 42nd Street New York, NY United States, 10036

  14. Dagdelenler G, Akcapinar Sezer E, Gökceoglu C (2011) Some non-linear models to predict the weathering degrees of a granitic rock from physical and mechanical parameters. Expert Syst Appl 38(6):7476–7485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dinc OS, Sonmez H, Tunusluoglu C, Kasapoglu KE (2011) A new general empirical approach for the prediction of rock mass strengths of soft to hard rock masses. International Journal ofRock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 48:650–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Duncan N (1969) Engineering geology and rock mechanics, vol 2. Leonard Hill, London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fan Y, Lu W, Zhou Y, Yan P, Leng Z, Chen M (2016) Influence of tunneling methods on the strainburst characteristics during the excavation of deep rock masses. Eng Geol 201(9):85–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Franklin JA, Broch E, Walton G (1971) Logging the mechanical character of rock. Trans Inst Min Metall 80A:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gong QM, Yin LJ, Wu SY, Zhao J, Ting Y (2012) Rock burst and slabbing failure and its influence on TBM excavation at headrace tunnels in Jinping II hydropower station. Eng Geol 124(4):98–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gurocak Z, Alemdag S, Zaman MM (2008) Rock slope stability and excavatability assessment of rocks at the Kapikaya dam site, Turkey. Eng Geol 96:17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoek E, Karzulovic A (2000) "Rock mass properties for surface mines. Slope Stability in Surface Mining", In: Hustralid WA, McCarter MK, van Zyl DJA (eds) Littleton, Colorado: Society for Mining, Metallurgical and Exploration (SME). 59–70 pp

  22. Jang H, Topal E (2014) A review of soft computing technology applications in several mining problems. Applied Soft Computing Vol 22:683–651

    Google Scholar 

  23. Karpuz C, Pasamehmetoglu AG, Bozdag T, Muftuoglu Y (1990) Rippability assessment in surface coal mining. RK Singhal, M Vavra (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Mine Planning and Equipment Selection, Calgary, AB, Balkema, Rotterdam. 315–322 pp

  24. Kaya A, Bulut F, Alemdağ S (2011) Applicability of excavatability classification systems in underground excavations: a case study. Sci Res Essays 6(25):5331–5341

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kentli B, Topal T (2004) Assessment of rock slope stability for a segment of the Ankara–Pozanti motorway, Turkey. Eng Geol 74:73–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Khamehchiyan M, Dizadji MR, Esmaeili M (2014) Application of rock mass index (RMi) to the rock mass excavatability assessment in open face excavations. Geomechanics and Geoengineering 9(1):63–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kirsten HAD (1982) A classification system for excavation in natural materials. Civil Engineer in South Africa 24:293–308

    Google Scholar 

  28. MacGregor F, Fell R, Mostyn GR, Hocking G, McNally G (1994) The estimation of rock rippability. Q J Eng Geol 27:123–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Marinos P, Hoek E (2000) GSI: a geological friendly tool for rock mass strength estimation. Proceedings of the GeoEng 2000 at the International Conference on Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Melbourne, 19–24 November 2000. p 1422–1446

  30. Mishra DA, Basu A (2013) Estimation of uniaxial compressive strength of rock materials by index tests using regression analysis and fuzzy inference system. Eng Geol 160:54–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Momeni E, Armaghani JD, Hajihassan M, Amin MFM (2015) Prediction of uniaxial compressive strength of rock samples using hybrid particle swarm optimization-based artificial neural networks. Measurement 60:50–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Nicieza CG, Diaz MAR, Fernandez MIA, Vigil AEA (2012) Characterization of ground from the point of view of its excavatability. Eng Geol 126:8–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pettifer GS, Fookes PG (1994) A revision of the graphical method for assessing the excavatability of rock. Q J Eng Geol 27:145–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Scoble MJ, Muftuoglu YV (1984) Derivation of a diggability index for surface mine equipment selection. Min Sci Technol 1(4):305–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Singh RN, Denby B, Egretli I (1987) Development of a new rippability index for coal measures excavations. Proceedings of the 28th U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Tucson, AZ, Balkema, Boston. pp. 935–943

  36. Singh R, Vishal V, Singh TN, Ranjith PG (2013) A comparative study of generalized regression neural network approach and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference systems for prediction of unconfined compressive strength of rocks. Neural Comput Appl 23:499–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Singh R, Umrao RK, Ahmad M, Ansari MK (2017) Prediction of geomechanical parameters using soft computing and multiple regression approach. Measurement 99:108–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sirdesai NN, Singh TN, Ranjith PG, Singh R (2017) Effect of varied durations of thermal treatment on the tensile strength of red sandstone. Rock Mech Rock Eng 50:205–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sonmez H, Ulusay R (1999) Modification to the geological strength index (GSI) and their applicability to stability of slopes. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci pp:743–760

  40. Sonmez H, Ulusay R (2002) A discussion on the Hoek–Brown failure criterion and suggested modification to the criterion verified by slope stability case studies. Yerbilimleri (Earthsciences) 26:77–99

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sonmez H, Gokceoglu C, Kayabasi A, Nefeslioglu HA (2006) Estimation of rock modulus: for intact rocks with an artificial neural network and for rock masses with a new empirical equation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 43(2):224–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sonmez B, Dagdelenler G, Ozcan NT, Ercanoglu M, Sonmez H (2015) The development of CPT based liquefaction assessment chart using artificial neural network. Yerbilimleri (Earthsciences) 36(2):45–60

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sonmez H, Ercanoglu M, Kalender A, Dagdelenler G, Tunusluoglu C (2016) Predicting uniaxial compressive strength and deformation modulus of volcanic bimrock considering engineering dimension. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 86:91–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tsiambaos G, Saroglou H (2010) Excavatability assessment of rock masses using the geological strength index (GSI). Bull Eng Geol Environ 69(1):13–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Weaver JM (1975) Geological factors significant in the assessment of rippability. Civil Engineer in South Africa 17:313–316

    Google Scholar 

  46. Yilmazkaya E, Dagdelenler G, Ozcelik Y, Sonmez H (2018) Prediction of mono-wire cutting machine performance parameters using artificial neural network and regression models. Eng Geol 239:96–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Prof. Dr. Yilmaz Ozcelik from Hacettepe University, Department of Mining Engineering, for his contributions and comments on field studies.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Dagdelenler.

Additional information

Highlights

• A flexible excavation assessment (EXCASS) system was developed.

• The proposed EXCASS system was investigated by using simple and multi-variable regression analyses and artificial neural network (ANN).

• The EXCASS system has two parameters, excavation power index (EPI) and excavation performance rating (EPR).

• The GSI and Is50 are the main inputs of the EXCASS system.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dagdelenler, G., Sonmez, H. & Saroglou, C. A flexible system for selection of rock mass excavation method. Bull Eng Geol Environ (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10064-020-01877-w

Download citation

Keywords

  • Artificial neural network
  • Excavatability
  • EXCASS system
  • GSI
  • Excavation method