Question 2 of 5: Support pressure for the Excavation Disturbed Zone (EDZ)
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
Notes on this paper
National Exams — 18-Geol-A5, Rock Mechanics. Closed-book, 3-hour exam; 5 questions
of 20 marks each (80 marks total); candidates were instructed to answer only 4 of the 5 — all 5 are answered below. Every page footer of the paper reads “May 2019”.
Reference texts:
Bieniawski, Z.T. (1989), Engineering Rock Mass Classifications, Wiley.
Barton, N., Lien, R. & Lunde, J. (1974), “Engineering Classification of Rock Masses for the
Design of Tunnel Support” (the NGI Q-system).
Brady, B.H.G. & Brown, E.T., Rock Mechanics for Underground Mining, 3rd ed. (Kirsch
solution, pillar/tributary-area interaction).
Hoek, E. (2007), Practical Rock Engineering, Rocscience (open-access course notes; EDZ,
Mohr–Coulomb design).
Wyllie, D.C. & Mah, C.W., Rock Slope Engineering, 5th ed. (groundwater/vibration effects on
slope stability).
page-1 NOTES
items (1–8), the Additional-Reference-Material section's own numbered Table/Figure captions (e.g. “1. Strength of intact rock material…”, “5. Groundwater…”, “Figure
6…”), and stray numbered lines bled from inside a question's own paragraph. It does not affect the solutions
below, which are worked from the real printed question text (verified against the printed paper pages).
A few words of Question 5 are assumed from context. Page 8's thick-wall-cylinder formula prints “$P_r$” where the algebra requires a tangential stress; the standard thick-wall tangential-stress form is used below. The RMR discontinuity-spacing rating chart on page 12 is not used, because Table 1 (page 9) gives the same information in exact numeric form.
Question 2: Support pressure for the Excavation Disturbed Zone (EDZ) (20 marks)
Blast-fractured EDZ block at the tunnel crown; once separated by blast-induced
fractures it hangs as a dead-weight block with no residual cohesion or arching support across those
fractures.
Drilling-and-blasting excavation always damages the rock beyond the intended profile: the detonation
stress wave and expanding gas pressure open new radial and circumferential fractures in an annular zone of rock
around the opening, and where those fractures cross pre-existing joints they isolate discrete blocks that
are no longer keyed to the surrounding rock mass. This blast-fractured annulus is the Excavation Disturbed
Zone. Inside it, a block bounded on all sides by open, unfilled, blast-induced or pre-existing fractures has
effectively zero cohesion and (once separated) very little frictional resistance along those fracture
surfaces — it is held in place only by its interlock with neighbouring blocks, which the blast
itself has just destroyed. Once that interlock is gone, the block's only remaining equilibrium condition
is gravity versus whatever support pressure is applied at the excavation boundary.
Given. Rock unit weight $\gamma=25\ \text{kN/m}^3$; the EDZ is defined by the blast
having fully disaggregated a layer of thickness $t$ around the opening into a loose, cohesionless, gravity-
loaded block (no interlock, no arching once separated).
Find. The support pressure required to hold the loosened EDZ block in place.
Approach. Take a unit plan area of the crown block. With zero cohesion across the
bounding fractures and no arching (the block has already separated from its neighbours), the block's only
load path to failure is free-fall under gravity; the support pressure needed is simply the block's own
weight per unit plan area, applied at the excavation boundary before the block can move.
Free-body equilibrium of the loosened block. For a block of thickness $t$ and unit plan
area $1\ \text{m}^2$, self-weight $W=\gamma \cdot t \cdot 1\ \text{m}^2$. With no cohesion or friction
available along the bounding fractures (they are open, blast-created surfaces with no confinement holding
them closed), the support pressure $p_s$ must balance this weight directly:
$$p_s = \frac{W}{A} = \gamma\, t$$
This is the classical Terzaghi “dead-weight” or “loosening-pressure” design load
— the lower-bound, most conservative case for roof support in blocky ground, since it assumes no
arching redistributes any of the load to the surrounding rock.
Illustrative numeric value. The EDZ thickness $t$ is not stated in this question (it
depends on blast design — hole spacing, delay timing, presplitting/smooth-wall blasting practice, and
the intact joint spacing); a commonly adopted design value for a controlled drill-and-blast excavation is
$t\approx 0.5$ m (flagged explicitly below as an assumption, not given data).
$$p_s=\gamma t = 25\ \text{kN/m}^3\times 0.5\ \text{m}=\boxed{12.5\ \text{kPa}}$$
Check: assumes an EDZ crown-block thickness $t\approx0.5$ m, a typical order-of-
magnitude value for controlled drill-and-blast damage; the source gives no thickness, so the boxed numeric
answer scales directly and linearly with whatever thickness a site-specific blast-damage survey (e.g.
sonic/acoustic-televiewer logging of the actual EDZ extent) establishes. The governing symbolic relation,
$p_s=\gamma t$, is the answer that does not depend on this assumption.