i) SOCIETY FOR

MINING, METALLURGY,
AND EXPLORATION, INC.
P.O. BOX 625002 LITTLETON, COLORADO 80162-5002
PREPRINT
NUMBER
95-41
A METHODOLOGY TO DETERMINE IN SITU ROCK MASS FAILURE
K.Y. Haramy
B.T. Brady
US Bureau of Mines
Denver, CO
For presentation at the SME Annual Meeting
Denver, Colorado - March 6-9, 1995
Permission is hereby given to publish with appropriate acknowledgments, excerpts or
summaries not to exceed one-fourth of the entire text of the paper. Permission to print in more
extended form subsequent to publication by the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration
(SME), Inc. must be obtained from the Executive Director of the Society.
If and when this paper is published by the SME, it may embody certain changes made by
agreement between the Technical Publications Committee and the author so that the form in
which it appears is not necessarily that in which it may be published later.
Current year preprints are available for sale from the SME, Preprints, P.O. Box 625002,.
Littleton, CO 80162-5002 (303-973-9550). Prior year preprints may be obtained from the
Engineering Societies Library, 345 East 47th Street, New York, NY 10017 (212-705-7611).
PREPRINT AVAILABILITY LIST IS PUBLISHED PERIODICALLY IN
MINING ENGINEERING
ABSTRACT: A scale-invariant theory of the strength
. and deformability of rock masses in static equilibrium
and at incipient failure is proposed. The theory provides
a rationale for designing structures in rock. This paper
presents results of experiments conducted by the U.S.
Bureau of Mines and theoretical methods to determine
and interpret in situ strength of rock masses using the
borehole shear tester.
INTRODUCTION
Accurate determination of in situ rock strength is
required for successful design of underground structures.
Rock mechanics properties, such as strength and
deformability, are commonly determined from laboratory
triaxial compression tests (TCT) or direct shear tests on
core samples and from in situ measurements using the
borehole shear tester (BST). Interpretation of the
relationship between these two tests is at best ambiguous.
This U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM) publication presents
recent advancements in material failure criteria that
remove this ambiguity.
Rock is distinct from other engineering materials, such
as concrete and metal. When dealing with reinforced
concrete structures, the design engineer calculates the
applied loads to a specific strength required. The
optimal geometry can then be determined with a high
degree of confidence. This is not the case when
designing underground structures. Here, the applied
loads are not well defined and may vary significantly
with mining. Additionally, the stability of an
underground structure is highly dependent upon the rock
mass physical properties and the geological conditions
within the rock mass. Except in rare instances, none of
these requirements in rock are known with any degree of
confidence. Successful design of engineering structures
in rock requires realistic mathematical models of rock
mass strength and deformability.
Developing realistic failure criteria for rock masses
and methods to measure and interpret the stresses at
failure are difficult. The rock mass may range from
small intact segments to large heavily jointed segments,
each of which can possess a different failure criterion.
The design engineer must be concerned with all size
scales in this transition. The stability of rock in the
immediate vicinity of underground openings and the
behavior of rock bolts or other support structures are
related to existing discontinuities and to fractures.
Hence, structural stability depends upon the deformation
and strength characteristics of the entire rock mass
surrounding the excavation.
The interrelations involved in determining the behavior
of rock surrounding an excavation or group of
excavations are often so complex that they are not
amenable to exact engineering analysis. In these cases,
design decisions may have to consider previous
experience. To quantify this experience so that it may be
1
extrapolated from one site to another, a number of
clas.sification schemes for rock masses have been
developed. These would include the rock mass rating
(RMR) scheme developed by Bieniawski [l] and the NGI
tunnelling quality index of Barton, et al. [2]. These
classification schemes seek to assign numerical values to
properties such as strength and deformability or features
of the rock mass considered likely to influence its
behavior and to combine these values into an overall
rating for the rock mass. Rating values for the rock
mass are determined and correlated with observed rock
mass behavior. Hoek and Brown [3,4,5] and others have
developed empirical methods to use these techniques for
designing excavations with considerable success.
However, the development of rational techniques based
on physical behavior of rock remains elusive, and the
general applicability of empirical design procedures to
design in geotechnical materials is unknown.
Recently a scale-invariant theory of the strength and
deformability of a rock mass in static equilibrium and
near incipient failure has been proposed by the USBM.
This model provides a rationale for designing structures
in rock. In this paper, this theory is applied to
interpreting in situ BST and laboratory TCT data to
determine the rock mass failure criteria. Failure criteria
are determined and compared for various rock types in
situ using the BST data and in the laboratory using the
conventional TCT data. The application of critical
phenomena physics to fracture has shown that at failure
(neglecting time-dependent effects of fracture), rocks
with a wide range of strengths satisfy the following
equation:
where 't and (J are the shear and normal stress along the
failure plane, to is the tensile strength of the rock mass
(tension is positive), 213 is a universal constant equal to
0.684 small correctional terms, and A is a material
constant. Average values for A determined from BST
and TCT reported in this paper are approximately 2.466
and 3.018, respectively; values are comparable to A
determined using Hoek and Brown material constants for
failure of undisturbed and disturbed rock masses [3].
UNIVERSALITY OF ROCK MASS STRENGTH
AT INCIPIENT FAILURE
Rational structural design in rock is based on rock
mass behavior at incipient brittle failure. Application of
a reasonable safety factor, that is, design the structure to
fail and then backing off, to the design provides a safe
working environment. This observation provides the
rationale for solving the scale problem in geotechnical
engineering.
Based on extensive experimental evidence (6), brittle
fracture or structural failure will be modeled as a three-
phase system that includes solid material, microcracks
Uoints, faults) in the solid matrix, and finally, the
macro crack that represents the final stage of the fracture
process. The macrocrack denotes coalescence of the
microcracks. Formation of the macrocrack and its
growth leads to fault formation. In this article, brittle
fracture is formulated as a continuous phase change that
exhibits the characteristics of a thermodynamic system at
its critical point (7). The phase transition is
characterized by separation of the solid into two pieces.
In general, each microcrack that forms in the solid matrix
locally breaks the translational and rotational symmetry
of the system (solid), and if each microcrack is a phase
change, then one must view the fracture problem as a
true polycritical or N-critical system and the local tensile
stress at which a given microcrack forms as the critical
point for that microcrack. Ordinary and tricritical points
are the simplest cases of polycritical points. However,
for ease of argument, we shall assume all microcracks
can be grouped into one classification class. Thus, the
system we -shall deal with is the tricritical system. In
this context, the application of a shearing stress (strain)
to an otherwise undistorted lattice can be viewed as
breaking the original symmetry of the lattice. For the
tricritical system, this breaking of a symmetry is
measured by a quantity called an order parameter. In
this paper, the order parameter will be chosen to be the
shear stress.
A scale-invariant theory of the strength and
deformability of a rock mass in static equilibrium and
near incipient failure has been developed by the USBM
(7). In this theory, brittle fracture of geotechnical
materials is shown to be treatable as a generalized phase
change occurring within the rock mass. Here the
formation of a fracture in a material is taken to be of a
phase change, in this case from a solid phase to a void
phase. The following equations are found to exhibit all
the characteristics of a thermodynamic system near its
critical point. Here the tensile strength, to' of the rock
mass and the normal stress at failure, a, across what will
be the fracture surface, play the role of the critical
temperature, T
c
' and system temperature, T, respectively.
Symbolically,
(1)
where, &r = (1 - T/Tc) is defined as the reduced
temperature of the thermodynamic system and, lOa = (1 -
alto) the reduced normal stress acting on the rock mass
at incipient failure. In this paper, tensile stresses are
positive.
The full power of the theory of critical phenomena can
then be applied to the brittle fracture of rock masses. A
simple result of this approach is that the shear strength
of the rock mass can then be written in the following
form:
~ = A ( 1 - ~ i ~ , (2)
to to
where, A and 2 ~ are the material and universal constants
2
on the order of A
corre.ctional terms.
2.00 and 28 0.684 small
One of the most powerful observations in critical
phenomena is that physical and chemical systems of the
same universality class near their respective critical
points [8,9] have identical (or nearly so) critical
exponents, such as ~ in equation 2. Properties of
apparently diverse systems of the same universality class
have identical critical exponents and, further, the
coexistence phases along the phase transition line can be
superimposed by simple scalings of the important
variables. The properly scaled data for different
thermodynamic systems (fluid-gas and magnetic) are
found to "collapse" onto a common curve. A primary
goal of the critical phenomena theory is to explain how
systems that have different microphysics continue to
exhibit data collapse and yield the same critical
exponents. For there is a paradox here; the interatomic
forces responsible for the existence of a phase transition
cannot play any role in determining the critical
exponents, since those stay the same when the atoms and
the forces change.
The mathematical reasoning used in fluid! gas and
magnetic thermodynamic systems in the vicinity of their
respective critical points has been applied to the problem
of brittle fracture [8]. When the shear strength of a
brittle material is chosen as the order parameter
1
,
equation 2 results. In the derivation of equation 2, two
assumptions are made; firstly, spatial homogeneity within
the material (vt=o), and secondly, stationarity of the
order parameter (ch/at=o). Both assumptions can be
readily relaxed to take into account anisotropy and time-
dependent effects.
Tables 1 and 2 illustrate the applicability of equation
2 to Hoek and Brown [4,5] data on shear strength of
undisturbed and disturbed rock as a function of rock type
and RMR. Several important conclusions result from
these tables and equation 2.
Rock mass behavior near incipient failure, is
independent of the physical characteristics and the
chemical makeup of the rock mass. This observation
shows universality and that the law of corresponding
states is satisfied in the immediate vicinity of the
phase change (fracture) boundary. The law of
corresponding states is the result of observation that
data, properly nomalized (scaled) fall on one and the
same curve [8].
IThe existence of a quantity which is nonzero below
the critical temperature and zero above is found to be a
common feature associated with critical points of a wide
variety of physical systems. Thus to distinguish between
two phases, one defines an order parameter being
nonzero in the ordered low temperature phase and zero
in the disordered or high temperature phase.
3
Table I.-Strength of Intact and Jointed Undisturbed Rock Masses
(Modified from Hoek and Brown 1980, 1988) (to is the tensile strength of the rock mass)
-
Fine. Grained Po1:i!!!ineralic Coarse Grained Poll!!!im:ralie Cllfbonate Rocks wi!!J Well Arenaceous Rocks with Strong and l..ilhlfjedA!llil!aoeousRo::1cs
ROCK MASS QUALITY IQ!eousCmtalineRoc:ks .and Metamo!l!hie Cmtaline Cn:stal Cleavage (Dolomite, Devel22i! COOta.l CJeav!!l:C (Mudstone, Siltsume. Shale. and SIat.e)
(Andesite, Dolaite, Diabase, and Rhyolite) (Amphibolite, Gabbro. Gneiss. Ume!;!one, and Marble) (Sandstone and Quanzite)
Granite. Norile and Quartz Diorite)
Intact RockSIlmI![cs
Laboratory Size Rock
[ )'6% [ roo
[ r'
)'.692 ..:. 01.937 [1- JM77 ";'=2572 2.=3,155 ":'=1598
Specimens Free From
10 to to to to 10 to 10 to to
Stroc:ruralDefects
(RMR= 100)
High Q!!alin: Rock Mass
TIghtly Interlocking
[ roo
[ )"'"
. [
[ rm
";'a2.846 2. =3.495 1-.! ":'=.1.754 l-.! ":'=2.664
Undisturbed Rock with
to to to to to to 10 10 to to
Unweathered Joints
Spaced at 3m.
(RMR::-85)
Good Q!!alitt Rock Mass
Fresh to Slightly
[ )'6% [ [ )"69S Jo.68l ..:." 2.743 1-.! 2. =3.354 1-.! ":'=1.685 1-.!
Weathered Rock. Slightly
to to to 10 to to to to lola
Disturbed with Joints
Spaced at 13m.
eRMR= 65)
Fair S2!:!!litl Rock Mass
Severa.lSwof
[ r'
[ roo
[ t'
)'''' r
67S
..:: =2.612 ..::. ",,3.221 ..:: :1.595
Moderately Weathered
to to to to to (0 to to to to
Joints Spaced at 0.3 -1m.
(RMR.44)
Poor 2l!!!!!I Rock Mass
NurncrousWe&lheted
[ r'
[ rOM ..:. 1.796 [1- )"'" )"'" ..:..2.125[ JM5S "::'''''2.838 "::'=3,461
Joints Spaced at 3()..
[0 to to to to to to 10 to to
500mm with
Some Gouge Filling/Clcan
Rock Wasil:. (RMR "" 23)


J ..... r'" r
684
":"1.05'[ J .....
Nurn.erousbeavily
to to to to to to to to to to
weathered spac.ed less
than 50mm widt gouge
filling/wasll:.rodc:wilh
fumes (RMR=3)
. Exponent IS bken to be the mem of exp:lI\enLS Cor all rocl: types and ro<:k mass qualities from mtal::( to poor .
Table 2.-Strength of Intact and Jointed Disturbed Rock Masses
Modified from Hoek and Brown 1980, 1988) (to is the tensile strength of the rock mass)
ROCK TYPE\.
ROCK MASS QUAlITY
Intact Rock Samg!es
Laboratory Site Rock
Specimens Free From
Structural Defects
(RMR= 100)
High Rock Mass
Tightly Interlocking
Undisturbed Rock with
Unweathered Joints
Spaced at 3m.
(RMR= S5)
Good Rock Mass
Fresh to Slightly
Weathered Rock, Slightly
Disturbed with Joints
Spaced at
(RMR = 65)
Fair Q:!!llli!J!: Rock Mass
Several Sets of
Moderately Weathered
Joints Spaced at 0.3 lm.
(RMR = 44)
Poor Q!!a1itl': Rod::: Mass
Numerous Weathered
Joints Spaced at 30
SOOmm wlth
Some Gouge F'dlin&'Clean
Rock Waste (RMR = 23)

Rock Mass

weathered spaced less
than 50rrun with gouge
filling/wa'Sleroc;kwith
fumes (RMR:: 3)
Fme Grain!. Polvmineralie
Igneous Crystaline Rod:s
(Andesite. Dolerite. Diabase, and Rhyolite)
..:.. 2572 )'.696
to to
[ roo
2. =3.107 1-.2.
to 10
[ r'
.:: :2.381
to to
[ r'
...:. = 3.659 1-.2.
1
0 to
[ r'
"':'''4.455
to to
[
"':'=2.923 l-!..
to to
C03J3e Guined Polymineralic
Igneous and MetamO!phie Crystaline
Gabbro. Gneiss,
Granite,. Norite and Qumz.: Diorite)
[ roo
..::. =3.155
to to
[ )"'"
2. "" 3.808 1-
to to
[
...:. =4.112 1-!..
1
0 to
[ roo
..::. =4.478 1-!..
to to
[ rOM
...:. :5.376
to to
r'"
to to
'"Exponent 2j3 is taken to be Ihe mean of exponents for aU rock Iypes and rock m:tSs qualities from intact to poor.
Carbonate Rocks with Well
Developed Crystal Cleavage (Dolomite,
Limestone, and Marble)
[ r'
..::= 1.598
to to
[
.:: = 1.933
to to
[
"':':2.124
to to
[
"':'=2.308
to to
[ r'"
"::=2.965
to to
..:. '1.428 )" ...
to 10
Arenaceous Rocks with SlroIlg and
Poorly Developed Crystal Cleavage
(Sandsloneand Quartzite)
J0.692
to to
[ rm
.:: =2.913 1-!.
1
0 to
[ r'
"::=3.164
to to
)'.688
to to
[ rn
.:: =3.340 1-.2.
to to
2.=2.435
[ r'"
1
0
1
0
Lithified Argillaceous Rocks
(Mudstone. Siltstone, Shale, and Slate)
[ rn
= 1.937
to to
J0.692
to 10

to to
[ r'
2. ",,2.785
to 10
[ )"'''
2.=3.449 l-!..
to to
)' ....
to to
The theory predicts that a universal scaling
hypothesis is applicable to all materials, including
brittle fracture, belonging to the same universality
class.
'. The subject matter of critical phenomena and its
powerful mathematical apparatus can be brought to
bear to the subject of brittle fracture with the
provision that one can view to as the critical point
for the rock mass phase change.
The classical Griffith theory of fracture corresponds
exactly with the classical Landau mean field theory
of critical point thermodynamic systems with 2B =
0.50. In particular, the empirical Hoek-Brown theory
of failure for geological materials results using the
commonly measured critical exponent of 28 = 0.684
0.10.
According to Tables 1 and 2, the equations for the
shear strength of undisturbed and disturbed rock masses
are statistically identical within a confidence interval of
95% and independent of material type and rock mass
quality, that is
undisturbed, (3a)
disturbed, (3b)
where Aud = 2.466 0.58, Ad = 3.018 0.88, 28 =
0.684 0.017, and to refers to the tensile strength of the
rock mass. Experience gained by using the empirical
Hoek and Brown failure criterion (1) showed that the
estimated rock mass strengths for underground
excavations were reasonable. However, when the
criterion is applied for slope stability studies where the
rock mass is disturbed by stress relaxation resulting from
excavation, the estimated rock mass strengths are
generally low.
There is no compelling reason in critical phenomena
theory as to why there should be a difference in the
disturbed and undisturbed values of A in equations 3a
and 3b. In fact, it is a simple matter to show that the
disturbed effect can be subsumed readily by making a
simple reduction in the disturbed rock mass tensile
strength by a factor of approximately 27% over its
undisturbed value. Thus, equation 3 becomes
"t = 2.466 ,
to to
(4)
where to refers to the tensile strength of the rock mass,
disturbed or undisturbed. In the following sections, this
hypothesis is applied to explain the observed differences
in BST and TCT values of rock mass strength.
4
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
The BST was used to obtain the in situ shear strength
of coal and sedimentary rocks in several underground
mines. The BST is hydraulically operated, portable, and
provides routine and rapid test measurement in a 76-mm-
diam hole up to 12 m in length for all inclinations
[l 0,1 1]. The BST performs a direct shear test inside the
borehole (figure 1). A pair of diametrically opposed
loading plates are expanded against the borehole wall
while the normal force is maintained. The unit is
retracted until a segment of rock, about 2 mm thick in
contact with each plate is sheared parallel to the borehole
axis. Each plate has a cylindrical surface (-25 mm
circumferentially and 20 mm axially) to fit the borehole
wall. Current load capacities of the device are
approximately 35 MPa and 45 MPa for normal and
shearing pressures, respectively [10]. At failure, both the
normal and shearing gauge pressures are recorded and
converted to normal (0) and shear ("t) stresses. Detailed
test procedure and data analysis are described elsewhere
[12]. The peak value of"t as a function of 0 is obtained
by repeating the test at several locations in the borehole
while altering the normal applied pressure. Tests were
performed using the BST in boreholes at different
underground mines at 0.6-m intervals in each hole with
the outer 3 m being excluded to avoid edge effects.
Cores were also obtained from the same boreholes for
triaxial laboratory testing. However, test data (TCT,
BST) do not necessarily report the same location within
the borehole.
Pulling jack
Normal stress
0= Fn
Ap
Shearing stress
't= .!'L
2A
Figure 1. Borehole Shear Tester force schematic.
Tests using the BST and TCT are reported for the four
rock types, two coals, one sedimentary rock, and one
metasedimentary rock. NX-sized cores with length-to-
diameter ratio of 2.0 were prepared to ASTM standards
for all TCT experiments. Mean shear stress and mean
normal stress were used to approximate the Mohr failure
envelopes from the TCT tests. Selection of data was
limited to rock materials for which the EST and TCT
were performed on the same material. At least 10
samples were tested for each rock type.
RESULTS: Mohr failure envelopes for two coal rocks,
a metasediment and sandstone rock, were developed
using BST and TCT data. The relationship between the
shear stress versus normal stress at failure for each rock
type was developed. The plots and the best fitting
equations to each data set are shown in figure 2. Values
of A and to for the BST and the TCT were determined
by fitting these data to equation 2, using the average
2/3 = 0.684 (determined from tables 1 and 2).
Remarkably, values of A for the EST and TCT were
found to fit closely to the undisturbed and disturbed
values, respectively (equations 3a and 3b). The values
for the tensile strength of each rock determined by this
procedure are listed in table 3. For all rocks, the TCT
experiments consistently gave higher values by an
average of 27% for tensile strength than for the BST to
values.
Using data from both tests, the reduced shear strength
Cr/to) versus reduced normal stress at failure ( = 1 -
alto) for each rock type were plotted on a log-log scale
and are shown in figure 3. As discussed earlier, these
data support the contention that the BST provides a
measurement of the undisturbed shear strength of the in
situ rock mass with an RMR value of 100, whereas the
TCT provides a measurement of the disturbed intact rock
mass. Thus, the shear strength of the undisturbed in situ
rock mass can be written:
60
5
10(85T) = 0.192 MPa Coal 1
1 o(TCT) = 0.374 MPa
40
TCT
20
ctI
0 c..
:::i:
60
P


A4 AAA Metasediment
40
20
Table 3.-Comparison of tensile strengths of coal and
coal.measure rocks using EST and TCT data
(modified from Panek, 1979.)
to' MPa to' MPa
Rock Type
BST TCT
Coal 1 ............. 0.192 0.374
Coal 2 ............. 0.350 0.363
Metasediment ........ 0.785 0.810
. Sandstone ........... 0.286 0.652
= ,
to to
(5)
where to is the tensile strength of the undisturbed rock
mass (measured by the EST). Using Hoek and Brown's
[1] relationship between the m and s values as a function
of the RMR,
where
s = e
1 o(BST) = 0.350 MPa
1 o(TCT) = 0.363 MPa
TCT
BST
TCT
(RMR-100)
9
Coal 2
Sandstone
(6a)
(6b)
O'----'---'-----'---'---'---L----'----"
-80 -60 -40 20 o -80
a,MPa
-60
Figure 2. Mohr failure envelopes.
-40 20 o
6
100
Coal 1
10
TCT
BST
1
1 10 100 1
(J
1 --
to
Coal 2
Sandstone
TCT
BST
10 100
Figure 3. Nonnalized shear strength versus reduced nonnal
stress for various rock materials.
(RMR-100)
28
(6c)
An RMR value of 100 refers to intact material. For
values of slm 1, equation 6a can be simplified to
or simply
3
-m
to(RMR) = toes 2_0)
m
(7a)
to(RMR)
loge = O.13(RMR -100) , (7b)
to
where to is the tensile strength of the intact in situ rock
mass (BST) and to(RMR) is the tensile strength of the in
situ rock mass for RMR <100. If to(BST) '" 0.73 to(TCTJ,
the relationship for the in situ rock mass strength as a
function of RMR is
to(RMR) = 1.08t
o
(TCT) e [(0.13)(RMR-IOO)] . (8)
Equations 2 and 8 can be used to detennine the shear
strength of the in situ rock mass.
Figure 4 illustrates schematic Mohr envelopes for rock
masses using this approach, BST and TCT data, and the
composite rock mass strength. The in situ shear strength
of the undisturbed rock mass is obtained by detennining
the variation of tob with the rock mass rating (RMR,
equation 8). The material constants, A and 2B, are
constants predicted and measured by theory to be 2.466
and 0.684, respectively, where A is the undisturbed value
from table 1.
a
b ----.:::


toc tob toa
Figure 4. Schematic Mohr failure envelopes using
laboratory and in situ tests.
DISCUSSION
An important result of this investigation is that the in
situ intact strength of rock mass can be reasonably
determined using the borehole shear test device. The
BST does not provide a measure of the undisturbed in
situ rock mass strength, where undisturbed is used in the
sense given by Hoek and Brown [1]. After calculating
the tensile strength of the rock as a function of its RMR
value (equations 3a and 8), the normalized equation for
shear strength (equation 2) can be used to determine the
in situ strength of a rock mass.
Application of this model of the strength and
deformability of rock masses requires a determination of
the tensile strength of the rock mass. Laboratory
measurement of to on small test samples using, say, the
Brazilian test, and extrapolating this value to the large
scale by using appropriate values of "m" and "s" in
equation 8, provides one estimate of the rock mass
tensile strength. Another method consists of measuring
the compressive strength of the rock in the laboratory,
relating this to its tensile strength, and extrapolating the
value to the large scale as discussed earlier. This
procedure will be discussed in a future USBM
publication.
REFERENCES
1. Bieniawski, Z. T., Geomechanics Classification of
Rock Masses and Its Application in Tunnelling,
Proc. 3rd Congr. Int. Soc. Rock Mech., vol. 2, part
A, pp. 27-32, 1974.
2. Barton, N. R., R. Lien, and J. Lunde, Engineering
Classification of Rock Masses for the Design of
Tunnel Support, Rock Mech., vol. 6 no. 4, pp. 189-
239, 1974.
7
3. Hoek, E. and E. T. Brown, The Hoek-Brown Failure
': t;::riterion - A 1988 Update, Proc. 15th Canadian
Rock Mechanics Symposium, pp. 31-38, 1988.
4. Hoek, E. and E. T. Brown, Underground Excavatio
ns in Rock, London Instm. Min. Metal!., 140 pp.,
1980.
5. Brady, B. H. G. and E. T. Brown, Rock Mechanics
for Underground Mining, London: George Allen and
Unwin, 527 pp., 1985.
6. Stanley, E., Introduction to Phase Transitions and
Critical Phenomena, Oxford University Press, New
York, 308 pp., 1971.
7: Binney, J. J., N. J. Dowrick, A. J. Fisher, and M. E.
J. Newman, The Theory of Critical Phenomena: An
Introduction to the Renormalization Group, Oxford
University Press, New York, 464 pp., 1992.
8. Handy, R. L., J. M. Pitt, L. E. Engle, and D. E.
Klockow, Rock Borehole Shear Test, Proc. 17th U.S.
Rock Mech. Symposium, 11 pp., 1976.
9. Panek, L. A., Criterion of Failure for Design of Rock
Mass Structures as Determined by Borehole Shear
Tests, Proc. 4th Congress. Intemat. Soc. Rock Mech,
Montreau, Switzerland, vo1.2, pp. 509-515, 1979.
10. Haramy, K.Y., Borehole Shear Tester: Equipment
and Technique, BuMines IC 8867, 19p 1981.
11. Paterson, M.S., Experimental Rock Deformation-The
Brittle Field, Springer-Verlag, New York, 308p,
1971.
12. Brady, B.T., A Thermodynamic Basis for Static and
Dynamic Scaling Laws in the Design of Structures
in Rock, Proceedings of First North American Rock
Mechanics Symposium, Balkema, pp. 481-487, 1994.