4

1.
7

2. 9

2.1. , , 10

2.2. 12

2.3. 14

2.4. 14

2.5. a 15
3.5.1. 16

3. 19

3.1. 20

3.2. 22
- 22
- 29
- 31

4. 33

4.1. 33
4.1.2. 34
4.1.3. 35

4.2. - 36
4.2.1. - 36

1
4.3. -
(IAEG) 40

4.4. 42
4.4.1. 45

5. -
-
57

5.1. , 59
5.1.1. 59
5.1.2. - 64
5.1.3. 68

5.2. 69
5.2.1. 70
5.2.2. 73

5.3. 74

6. 78

6.1. -
80

6.2.
94

7. (-
() - ()
-
102

7.1. 102

2
7.2. , -,
103

7.3. 105
7.3.1. - () -
() 108

123

125

, .
, ,

() ().
..

.
,
,
, .

, .
.. (1965) :

;
;
;
.

-
, ,
.
-

,
, ,

4

( ).

.
,
(..,
1984).

.

.

.

-
(, 1978).

, - ,

.

5


.
, .

-


.

.

-
- .
,

.

,
(-
() - ()
- .

( ),


.

6
1.

.
,

- .

- . -

-
.

, -

RQD
.
- :
,
, , , ,
, .

-


, ,
, , ,
.

- () -
()
.

7

, ,
, , .


-
.

, ,
(1973),
,
(1980); (1980, 1990 1996);
, (1996); . (2000);
, , (2002, 2003, 2004) .

,
1992, 1995 1996.

- ,
, : Deere (1967), Annon
(1970), (1973-1978), Rolofs i Beyer (1981); (1977, 1979, 1983)
.

RMR Rock Mass Rating (Bieniawski, 1970, 1973, 1974,
1975, 1976, 1979, 1989); RSR - Rock Structure Rating (Wickham, Tiedemam
Skinner, 1972 1974); Q sistem - Rock Mass Quality (Barton, Lien Lunde,
1974), ,

(2001) ERMR (Excavation Rock Mass Rating).

8


. ,
,
.

2.

-

.

,

.

.

.
1.

1.
Figure 1. Presentation of basic properties and conditions of the rock mass

9
2.1. , ,

.

.

,
, , , ( ).

,
- .

.
, .

, ()
,
(
).
.

, (,
) .
(. Intact
Rock).
, .
,
, .

(. Rock Mass)
.
.

10

, ,
-
. ,
, .

,
() . ,
, -
, .

2

.

2. : 1 4 -
(1-; 2-; 3- ; 4-
)
Figure 2. Scheme of rock massif: 1 to 4 - different petrolopic and genetically rock types
(1 deluvium; 2-landslide, 3-harvested shale, 4- granite in tectonic contact with schist)

11
2.2.

. ,

, -
. , ,
. , , .
, :

-
,
(, , ,
, ,
, .);
- ,

,
( ,
, , ,
, .).

. ,

.

, ,
.. " ".

12
 3.
Figure 3. Realistic-looking of heterogeneous limestone massif

I, II, III-quasi-homogeneous zones according to the situation of cracking

4.
P (a, b, b) -
Figure 4. Schematic view of the of heterogeneous massif according to the situation of
cracking P (a, b, b) - various parameters that describe the cracks

3
(),
I III
II.

- .

13
2.3.

-
.
-
, .

(
), ( )
.

,
.

2.4.

,
.
,
.

;
;
;
.

14
2.5. a

,
.. , ( 5).

5.
Figure 5. Scheme of discontinued

(1) .. ,
,
. ,


. (3)
(4),
.

- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- ,
- .

15

.

3.5.1.

L. Muller,

,
, ,
, ,
".

- ,
,
,
, ,
,
, .

..

.

(
).
.

( 6 7).

16
 6. : -a a; -a
; -
Figure 6. Kinematic types of cracks: a. tenzion crack b. crack of shear c. a combined
system of crack with shear and extension

3.
60 (
).

, .

.

7. .
90 3.
>60, 2
Figure 7. Dynamic analysis of systems of cracking. Tension cracks developed at an angle
of 90 to 3. Shear cracks are in pairs systems with mutual angle > 60, and their
intersection lies in 2

17

:

- ,
,
;
- ,
;
- ,
;
- -
,
(15 - 30 ) ;
- ,
,
;
-

( ,
).
- .
,
.

, ,
.

18

, -
.
.

-
..
,

,
.

3.

- ,

,
,
.
:

- ,

- .

,
,
( 8).

19
 8.
Figure 8. Scheme of influences between petrographic and technical features of rocks

, ()
.

3.1.

.

. , , ,
,
.
.
,
:

,
,
,
,

20
 ,
,
,
,
,
.

,
, .

( ) ,
,
, :

Gs
s N/3
Vs

s - N/m3

Gs - kN

Vs - m3

s=26 - 32 N/3.

.

.
:

G
N/3
V

- N/3

21
 G -

V = Vs + Vp - 3

Vs-

Vp-

(,
, .) .
, -
-
,
.

3.2.

. ,
.
, , ,
, , , , .

.
(, , , .)
, , ,
. ( 9)

()
.
.
,
, , ,
( ), .

22
 P P

P
P 1
1 1 N
T
H D
TN
1

L
P

I II III IV

9.
Figure 9. Types of strain in rocks

I - (1)
II - (1)
III - (1) P
IV - P

,
.

(sp)

,
.

, (10).

10.
Figure 10. Appearance of test fixtures for testing the strength of the pressure

23

( 11),
, .
( 101010 cm).
(ISRM-
International Society for Rock Mechanics),
H:D=2,5-3 (H-; D-
).

11.

Figure 11. Press for testing the strength of pressure for the rock mass with "own
control"

D=54 mm (.. NX ).
,
:

P
p N/m2 N/m2
A

:
P N N
- m2

24
 (s)

,
ISRM
(s).
(. Point Load
Test-PLT).
, (1950), Wittke Louis (1969), Duffaut
(1968), Reichmut (1968), Franklin (1970), D' Andrea (1965), Guidicini
(1973), Bieniawski (1974) .

, ,
( 12).
ISRM.
,
.

12.

Figure 12. Press for testing the strength
index

50
(P)
(D) :

P
Js (50)
D2

(F), ..
.

25
 P
Js
D2

P
Js (50) F
D2
0.45
D
F
50

( 13).

13. (F)
Figure 13. Diagram for obtaining the correction factor (F)

.. (De)
:

A WD De 2
4

W1 W 2
W
2

4
De 2 WD

W - ( W1 W2
7.16.)

26
 D -
-

(50) -
50

,
,
.

.

P, ()
,
.

14.
()
Figure 14. Fracture on a sample or the body in nature due to the shear forces (T)

.

17 - , () .
,
(P) ()

27
 (N),
. :

T Ntg

,
(), (T),

() :

T N tg
A A

,
, , ,
(c).
. ,
:

tg c

c -
-
t -
s -

Coulomb. ,
Terzaghi,
:

( u) tg c

:
u -

28
 , ,
:

- ;
-
;
- .

. ,
, (
).
,

( 15). (L1,b1)
(L2,b2).

. (,
, .)
( ),
()
.

15. -
Figure 15. Diagram stress - deformation of Hook body

29

- () - D,
- ( ).

( ) :

E , E (D) /2

P l
: , l L1 L2
A l
:
P - N;
- m2;
- P;
- ( P);
L1- ( P);
L2- ;
D- ( , -
P).

P, .. :

b b
, b , b b2 b1
b

- ;

b - (
P);

b- ( , ,
P); b2 - P.

1
m= .

30


:

1.
Table 1. Typical values for the strength of the pressure on specific types of rocks

K M

( )
()GN/m2
20,0 0,2 - 0,3
31,0 0,05 - 0,25
33,0 - 48,0 0,21 - 0,32
35,0 0,20 - 0,36
10,0 - 30,0 0,25 - 0,30
10,0 0,35 - 0,40

o
, .

,
, Deere
Muler.

() .

.
, ..
", ..
"
.
, ,

31
 ,
.

( 16).
,
.

16.
Figure 16. Look of the sklerometar

, .. .

..

.

() 1 ..
f, .

f= 3.2 2.8

32

()
, .

4.

,

.
,
.
:
;
- ;
-
(IAEG);
.

4.1.

- ,
- ,
- .

,

.
,
.
:

- ,
- ,
- .

33
4.1.1.

- ,

- ,

- .

. .
, , .

.

. ()
( )
(, ).

4.1.2.

34

:

- ,
;

- () ,
-
;

- (
).

, .

76%.

4.1.3.

-
( ).

- . , ,

,

.
,

.
-

.

35
 -
,
.
( 150
700 ) .
.

.
-
,
- .

,
- ,
.

4.2. -

- , ,
-
, -
.

. ,

,

().

4.2.1. -

,

,
:

36
 ;
;
.

,
. ,
-

. ,
1976 ..
- , UNESCO.

- ,
.
, -
. ,
-
, , ,
, , , ,
, ,
, .

,
. , ,
:

,
;

(,
, );

(,
).

37
 .
-
.

(hard rocks) ,
,
,
.
50 MN/m2. ,
.
,
. -
, , ,
.
. ,
. ,
,

, , ,
, .
-
.

(soft rocks)
. , 50
MN/m2, ,
, ,
. -
, ,
, , .
,
, , ,

. ,

38
(, , ),
(, , ), , ,
( ) .

.
,
.
, ,
,
. < 1.5
MPa, . ,
(hard
soils) (weak rocks) .

(, , ). ,
(
),

(, , .).

(cohesive soils)
0,002 .
.
.
,
, .

. ,
, .
, (
). , ,
.

39
 . -
,
, , ,
. ,
.

(non-cohesive, cohesionless soils)

, .. .
, ,
- .
(
) , .
( ) ,
. ,
- ,
, , .
.

4.3. -
(IAEG)

- IAEG
. ,
(), (
). ,
, ()
,
.

40
 ,
:

- ();
(LT);
(LC);
() (LS).

17.

17. IAEG
Figure 17. Scheme of connection of basic units according to recommendations of the
IAEG

-
( ).
-
-
,
. (
) (Xsr),

(Kv) (Sd).
- , ,
, .

41
 , ,
,
. ,
, ,

, , .

,
-
(),
.

,
.
,
(
, , ,
).
-
.
.

()
, ,

.
.

4.4.

(
)
. ,

42
 . ,
, .

,
, ,
()
.
()
. ()
.
..
,


. ,

( , ,
, ).

,
. ,
:

;
;
.

(
);
(
).

43
 :

;
(, ,
);

(, , ,
).

,
,
, ,
.

.

,
.. .
, ,
.. .

.

: ( ,
Bieniawski, 1974):

(
, ,
, .);

44

.

,

,
.

4.4.1.

, ,
.


( , ,
).

,
. Terzaghi
(1946), ,
,
. Lauffer (1958), ,
,

. D. Deere (1967),
.
.. RQD ,

. ,
(Rock Quality Designation).

, ,
.. (1926).
.. ,

45
 ..
(f). , ,
.
, 15
f 0.3-20.
, -
, ,

.

,

.

Franklin
(1970) Franklin, Broch Walton (1971), Louis (1974).

,
. Abdulatiff Cruden (1983)
Bieniawski
Barton, .

.. RMR (Rock Mass Rating) Z.T.
Bieniawski .. (Q-), Barton,
Lien Lunde (1974).

,
.

()
,
()

46
 .
, .

- RMR (Rock Mass Rating) Bieniawski

,
. ,
. .
()
,
.
( ) ,
( 2).

, RMR 20,

, RMR=100.

, :

1.
(sp) ..
(Js).
2. ,
. RQD-, D.Deere (
Rock Quality Designation).
3. (
, , , ,
, ).
4. , ,
, .

47
5. , ,

.

, .
,
(1973, 1974, 1976,
1979 1989). 1989 .,
2.

Bieniawski
,
() ,
, ,
.

2. Bieniawski, 1989
Table 2. Classification of the rock masses according to Bieniawski, 1989

.

1.
<1
(P) >10 4-10 2-4 1-2
-
- >250 100-250 50-100 25-50
5-25

1-5

p(P) <1
-

15 12 7 4 2 1 0
2.
RQD (%) 90-100 75-90 50-75 25-50 <25
20 17 13 8 3
3. >2 0.6-2 0.2-0.6 60-200 <60

20 15 10 8 5

48


4.
< 1 < 1 >5

>5
< 5
1-5

30 25 20 10 0

10
<10 10-25 25-125 >125

(/)


5.


0 <0.1 0.1-0.2 0.2-0.5 >0.5
-
-


15 10 7 4 0
.




0 -2 -5 -10 -12

0 -2 -7 -15 -25
0 -5 -25 -50 -60
.
100-81 80-61 60-41 40-21 <21
. I II III IV V

Barton, Lien Lunde, 1974 (Q-sistem)

(NGI), Barton, Lien Lunde, 1974.
,

49
Q (quality index).
:

Q=(RQD/Jn)*(Jr/Ja)*(Jw/SRF)

RQD - RQD D.Deere;

Jn - (joint set
number);
Jr - (joint
rougness number);
Ja - (joint
alteration number);
Jw - (joint water reduction
number);
SRF -

Q 0.001
1.000.
,
.

, (RQD/Jn)
, .
(Jr/Ja)
, (Jw/SRW)
.

,
,
.

50

.

(2001) ERMR (excavation rock mass rating). Toj
(,
).
() .
3.
,
,
.
3.
(ERMR)
Table 3. Multiple parametric classification for field as work environment (ERMR)

I II III IV V VI VII
1. <1 1-5 5-10 10-30 30-70 >70
-
(sp)

Is <0.1 0.1-0.7 0.7-1.2 1.2 - 2 2.5-4 >4
(MPa)
0 3 5 8 10 12 20
2. 1-1.5 1.5-2 2-3 3-5 5-6 >6
-


SHRV (SHRV<1 10-13 13-17 17-26 26-35 35-50 >50
0)
1 3 5 8 10 15 20
3.
12-15 15-18 18-22 22-24 24-27 27-30 >30
(kN/m3)
3 4 6 8 12 15 20
4. -
<2 2-6 6-10 10-30 30-200 >200
- Ls
(cm)
0 0-10 10-25 25-50 50-75 75-90 90-100
RQD(%)
0 4 8 13 16 18 25

51
 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.
2.- 2. - 2.- 2.-
5. - 2.- 2.
3. 3. 3. 3.
> 10 mm , 5-10 mm 3. <1mm, <1mm, 3.
4. 4. <1-2 mm, 4. 4.
4. ()
(- (- 4.
-
>10 mm) 5-10 mm)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0 1 2 4 7 8 15

<10 10-25 26-40 41-50 51-60 61-80 81-100
(ERMR)
-
- -
, -

- -


- RH5 RH8 RH9/D7 D8/D7 D9/D9G .

-
,

:
(sp Js, );
(g);
,
SHRV (
SHRV=8.72M-0.04).

:
-
(Ls) RQD;
(
,

(), , , .

52


,
. ,
Romana (1985)
28 ( 4). ,
( ).
Bieniawski,
. ,
Romana
SRMR (Slope Rock Mass Rating)
.

, Bieniawsk,

, .
,

.
, ,
.

Tabela 4. (.. SMR-Slope mass rating, Romana)

Tabela 4. Classification for slopes (called SMR-Slope mass rating, according to
Romana)
.


-
>10 4-10 2-4 1-2 , -
1. Js
- (MPa)

53
 >250 100-250 50-100 25-50 5- 1- <1
25 5
-

p(MP
a)
15 12 7 4 2 1 0
2.
RQD (%) 90-100 75-90 50-75 25-50 <25
20 17 13 8 3
3. >2 m 0.6-2m 0.2-0.6 m 60-200 mm <60 mm

20 15 10 8 5

-
4.
-
- < 1mm < 1mm >5 mm
< 5
mm >5
mm

1-5 mm

30 25 20 10 0

5.- -
-
-

15 10 7 4 0
.



- (a1- >30 30-20 20-10 10-5 <5
as)
(R)
- (a1- >30 30-20 20-10 10-5 <5
(P) as-
180)
R/P F1 0.15 0.4 0.7 0.85 1
R (b1) <20 20-30 30-35 35-45 >45
R F2 0.15 0.4 0.7 0.85 1
P F2 1 1 1 1 1
R b1-bs >10 10-0 0 0-(-10) <-10
P b1-bs <110 110-120 >120
R/P F3 0 -6 -25 -50 -60

: as- : bs-

54
a1- ; b1-

4 (). (.. SMR-Slope mass rating,

spored Romana)
Table 4 (continued). Classification for slopes (called SMR-Slope mass rating,
according to Romana)



(
-
)
+15 +10 +8 0 -8
F4
SMR=RMR- (F1*F2*F3) +F4
SMR
. V IV III II I
SMR 0-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100











-
- -


F1-
;
F2 -
( );
F3 -
;
F4 - .

55
 (GSI)

Hoek (1995)
.. ( 24).
,
Geological Strength Index.

18. GSI (Hoek ., 1985)

Figure 18. Classification according to GSI (Hoek ett all, 1985)

56
5. -
-

-
.
, ,
( 1). ,

- .
.

.

.
.

..
.
.

.

.

.

,
-
( 3),
- ()
.

57
 1. -
-
.
Diagram 1. Schedule of the investigative methods in implementing the proposed
methodology for researching and defining the engineering-geological characteristics of
the rock mass.

,

.

58
5.1. ,

5.1.1.

. ,
-
, ,
.

.

.
, ,


.
,
. ,
-
, ,
.
, , ,
.
.
,

. e,
, .

1.
.
,
,

59
.
, .
2.
.
.

,
, .
,

,
.
.
.

,
. ,
,

:
- ,
- ()
- .

, .
,


.
,
( 19 - ).

60
 ()

.
()
,
( ).
, ,
, , ,
, , .
,
.

.

() ( 19 - ).

19. :
,
Figure 19. Methods of the passing on the ground in geological mapping:
a - cross-profiling method, b - method of tracking the geological boundary

61


().
.
. ,

,
, .
,
. ,
,
,
.
3.


4. .
.


.
.

,
,
.

.
, .

62


,
,
. , ,
. ,
, .

.

, ,
.

. ,
, ,
,
, ,
- .


. ,
.
,
-
.

( ).

63
5.1.2. -
-
:

- -
;

- ( .);

- - ().

-
,
.

, ,
. -

, , ,

.

- ,
(
), ( ) (
), .. .

, ,
,
.

.
.
,
.

64

( 20)
, :
, , (),
, , ,
, ,
.

, ()

.

,
, -
,
- .

65
 20.
Figure 20. Field measurement protocol "Cadastre of the cracks"

66

(RQD)
D. Deer, Palstrom .
D. Deer
- RQD (rock quality designation),
:

RQD = 100, [ % ]

Lp 10 cm;
L Lp.

RQD :
RQD (% )

0 - 25
25 - 50
50 - 75
75 90
90 100

, RQD
,
.

.
.
RQD,
.
10 11 cm (RQD = 100 %,
), 8 10 cm,
RQD,
.

67
 ( )

RQD Palstrom:

RQD ( % ) = 115 3.3 v

v - 1m3 ( v< 4.5

RQD = 100%).

5.1.3.


,
.

:

,
;

,
.

, , .,
.

,

:

68
- ;
- ;
- .

5.2.

.

,
.
,
(
, , , ,
.) .
,
,
( )
. (,
) ,
.

,
.
,
. ,
.
,
.
,

.
.

69
5.2.1.

h
MN .
I
V1 ( 21).

21. (V1<V2)
Figure 21. Bilayer horizontal environment (V1 <V2)

MN II
V 2.
: V1<V2<V3<...<Vn.

.
,
.
MN II,
I
. .
i
, :

V1
sin i
V2

,
, ,

70
, .
MN V2, I
V1, II V2 .
C
I,
MN B.
I
CB .
MN i. ,

i.
0 F
MN : OA, AB, BE EF .
D
. D
. D
.
D , D
, 0, .
, 0,
D, V 1,
V2.
, .
, I
OAD . I,
D, , II
.

, ,

. ,

71
 ,
.
3 - 5
.
,
,

,
, ,
.
, 1929
.

,
,
. ,

.


.
()
,

.
()
.

(
, , ,
.),

,
.

72
5.2.2.

, S
( 22). MN h.
S SC,
C MN
. C
CR. S
MN S'.

. 22.
Figure. 22. Hodohrona for the reflected wave for parallel layers

S' C R,
CR .
CD SS',
. V
I ( ),

:
SC CR (4.59)
t
V

73
 SC SC S R

SCR ,
:
S R
t
V

x S,
:

S R2 x 2 2h2 x 2 4h 2

:

x 2 4h 2
t2
V2 V2

,
.

5.3.

.
, .
-

,
,
,
,

.

74

.
101 mm 86 mm.
95%

.
.


, , .
,
.

1 m, .
, ,
, . ( 23).

23.
Figure 23. Taken out core from borehole

75

. ,
, .

. ,
RQD ( )

.
,
.


.
,
.


, .

.
,

(
, , .).
.

, , ,
. .
.

. ,
,
.

76
 -

.
, .

.

.

.
(
), .
:

:
: 10.5. 2012 .
. 2
: 8-10
:
:
:

,
.
,

,
, .
:
- ;

- .

3.

77
6.

,
,
, .

,
,

.
( ).

,
R,
x y,
:

, .. ,
R=0. , R=1
.

24. 1 - , 2- , 3 -
Figure 24. 1 - strong correlation, 2 - weak correlation, 3 - no correlation

, ,
,

78
 .


.

.

( ),
Vp.

(RMR, RQD ERMR)
Vp,
.

(RMR, RQD ERMR)
Vp,
,
. .

79
6.1. -

-
.
5: -
Table 5: Physical - mechanical parameters for the the tested materials

.
.8.012-
1. Pa 130,5


.8.012-

2. Pa 121,3



.8.010-
3. % 0,1

.8.032-

4. kN/m3 27,00


.8.032-

5. kN/m3 27,80


.8.032-
6. % 96,8

.8.032-
7. % 3,20


25
8. .8.001 5%
-
max.20%
- .8.003-
9.

-
-

80


. .

6.
Table 6. Results from investigation of index dotted strength
.

[kN/m3] Js (50) [MPa] p 22Js (50) z 1.5Js (50)

27.12 5.99 131.76
[MPa] 8.98
[MPa] -
26.92 6.08 133.73 9.12 B-
26.92 5.36 117.88 8.04 C-
27.12 4.75 104.55 7.13 -.
26.92 4.65 102.39 6.98 B-.
26.92 5.14 113.17 7.72 C-.
- , B- , C-
,

, ,

.

-

. ,
,
..
. (Em)
( Cm
-m)
Hoek-Brown:

81
 :

Em- GPa
Hoek . (2002)
GSI - Hoek
Bieniawski
m,s -
GSI RMR
D -
1, 3 -
ci= p-

,

,
,
.
ROCKDATA 3.0
- .
cm1.2 MPa m 45 -
.

82
Hoek-Brown Classification
sigci 105 MPa
GSI 62
mi 9
D 0.7
Hoek-Brown Criterion
mb 1.11551
s 0.00405726
a 0.502459
Failure Envelope Range
Application Slopes
sig3max 2.78534
MPa
Unit Weight 0.027
MN/m3
Slope Height 125 m
Mohr-Coulomb Fit
c 1.2455 MPa
phi 45.0249 degrees
Rock Mass Parameters
sigt -0.381899 MPa
sigc 6.59817 MPa
sigcm 15.376 MPa
Em 12969.2 MPa
25. ROCKDATA 3.0
Figure 25. Excerpt from a computer program ROCKDATA 3.0

,

.

.

83

PR-1 PR-3,
SP-1 SP-2 .


,
.

10 m
.
.
DAQLink III
System 24 bit Acquisition System, Seismic Source Co, USA.
REFRAK.

.
1.1.
PR-1
750 m.
.

1
2.180 m/s.

0.5 m 14.5 m
.8.
.8,
.10 8.2 m
12.2 m.
-,
,

- .

84
 ,
.

.
, 2

3.150 m/s.
- .

PR-2 780 m
. 1.2.
1
.
2.100 m/s .
1.7 m 11
6.5 m C.

7 2.1 m,
3 5 m.

.

1 2,

3.120 m/s.
.
1.3.

PR-3 - 695 m.
1
2.420 m/s
.
3.7 10.2 m.
2 3 ,

85
 7.

.
1
2
4.030 m/s.

.

SP-1 . 1.4.
1 780-800 m.
.
1 .

2.100 m/s.

, .
9.5 m 16.0 m.

6.

2, 4 11 .
1
2.
3.830 m/s.
.
1.5.
SP-2.
SP-2 800 m.

.
1
.
2.5 m 8.5 m.

86
 4, 5 6
,
.

.
2
2.890 m/s.
.

-
.
7. -
Table 7. Physical - mechanical parameters for the the tested materials
.

.8.012-
1. Pa 148,7

.8.012-
2. Pa 131,1

.8.010-
3. % 0,14

.8.032-
4. kN/m3 26,80

.8.032-
5. kN/m3 27,20

.8.032-
6. % 98,5

.8.032-
7. % 1,47


8. .8.001 % 1,0

- .8.003-
9.

-
-
-
-

87


. .

8.
Table 8. Results from investigation of index dotted strength

[kN/m3] Js (50) [MPa] p 22Js (50) z 1.5Js (50)

26.87 4.23 93.16
[MPa] 6.35
[MPa] -
26.79 4.78 105.15 7.17 B-
26.83 4.70 103.33 7.05 C-
26.80 3.81 83.82 5.71 -.
26.79 3.67 80.64 5.50 B-.
26.83
26.83 3.93 86.36 5.89 C-.
- , B- , C-
,


,
.

-

. ,
,
..
. (Em)
( Cm
-m)
Hoek-Brown:

88
 :

Em - GPa
Hoek . (2002)
GSI - Hoek
Bieniawski
m,s -
GSI RMR
D -
1, 3 -

ci= p-

ROCKDATA
3.0 -
.

89
Hoek-Brown Classification
sigci 120 MPa
GSI 35
mi 7
D 0.4
Hoek-Brown Criterion
mb 0.384475
s 0.000240369
a 0.51595
Failure Envelope Range
Application Slopes
sig3max 2.44811
MPa
Unit Weight 0.0268 MN/m3
Slope Height 115 m
Mohr-Coulomb Fit
c 0.676428 MPa
phi 38.0553 degrees
Rock Mass Parameters
sigt -0.0750226 MPa
sigc 1.62891 MPa
sigcm 9.18132 MPa
Em 3373.57 MPa
26. ROCKDATA 3.0
Figure 26. Excerpt from a computer program ROCKDATA 3.0

,

,
,
.
cm0.6 MPa m 38 -
. ,

90

.

,

.

.


24 10 m
5 m.
.
24
DAQLink III 24-bit Seismic Source Co, USA.

.2.
.2.1.

SP 1.
.
1
15.2 m 15.
28.1m 6. .

23 27 m,
14. 16. 17.
23 24.7 m.
1
2.320 m/s.

91

12. 17. .
1
2
4.880 m/s.

, -,

1.
.
SP 2
.2.

. 2.2. .
1 ,
12.0 m C
24.4 m 5. . ,
23.0 m A
3.
5. 6.
. 1

2.300 m/s.
5. 6. .
1
2
3.160 m/s.
,
SP1, .

SP3
. 2.3.
.

92
 1
. 5.2 m
C
,
,
A.

6. 8. 9. 10.
14. 15. .
15. 17.

.
, 9. 16.
. 1

2.530 m/s.
1
2
3.870 m/s.
. 2.4

SP 4.
.
1
5.5 m A
31.6 m 17. .
1
A 19.
, 20.
19.0 22.7 m.
1
2.250 m/s.
2
1

93
 3.640 m/s.

.

6.2.

,
,
,
.

RMR, RQD ERMR

Vp,

. (RMR, RQD ERMR)
Q, Gsi-
Hoek
RMR.

27 28 RQD
( ) .
,
R2 .
0,79, 0,84,
.

94
 27. RQD
Vp RQD = f (Vp)
Figure 27. Correlation between RQD parameter and elastic wave speeds
Vp RQD = f (Vp) in the site Sloeshtica

Vp RQD = f (Vp)
120

100

80 R = 0,8448
RQD

60

40

20

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Vp (m/s)

28. RQD
Vp RQD = f (Vp)
Figure 28. Correlation between RQD parameter and elastic wave speeds Vp RQD =
f (Vp) in the site Rasanec
29, 30, 31 32
Bieniawski RMR
(2001) - ERMR,
Vp.
()
, () ,
R2 (0.81 0.83

95
 0.72 0.74 ),
.
, ,
,

.

29. RMR
Vp RMR = f (Vp)
Figure 29. Correlation between RMR parameter and speed of elastic waves Vp
RMR = f (Vp) Sloeshtica

30. ERMR
Vp RMR = f (Vp)
Figure 30. Depending on the parameter ERMR from the speed of elastic waves Vp
RMR = f (Vp) Sloeshtica

96

.
RMR 61 - 69 ERMR 51- 61
2.000 (m/s)
,
(70-74 RMR 65-72
ERMR 2150 (m/s)).

Vp RMR = f (Vp)
90
80
70
60
R = 0,7226
50
RMR

40
30
20
10
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Vp (m/s)

31. RMR
Vp RMR = f (Vp)
Figure 31. Correlation between RMR parameter and speed of elastic waves Vp
RMR = f (Vp) Rasanec

32. ERMR
Vp RMR = f (Vp)
Figure 32. Depending on the parameter ERMR from the speed of elastic waves Vp
RMR = f (Vp) Rasanec

97

,
.

, (),

.
.
RMR 58 - 69 ERMR 50 - 61 2.900 (m/s)
,

(69-80 RMR 65-81 ERMR
4.700 (m/s)).

sk

. 33

Bieniawski (RMR) Barton (Q ).

R2 = 0,81.

Q RMR
1,6

1,4

1,2
Quality Index (Q)

0,8 R = 0,8175
0,6

0,4

0,2

0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Rock Mass Rating (RMR)

33. Q RMR
Figure 33. Dependence between quality index Q with RMR

98
 34
-
Hoek (Gsi) Bieniawski (RMR).
,
R2 = 0,9.

Gsi RMR
Gsi- Hoek

85

80

75

70
R = 0,9099
65

60

55

50
50 55 60 65 70 75 80
Rock Mass Rating (RMR)

34. Hoek (Gsi)

Bieniawski (RMR).
Figure 34. Correlation between the quality rock mass acoording to Hoek (Gsi) and
Bieniawski (RMR).

35
D RMR .
R2 = 0,9.

99
 35. RMR D
Figure 35. Correlation between RMR and modulus of deformation D

(
0.73), .
( 36 37)
Vp
h.

Vp h
6000
Vp (m/s)

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
h

36. Vp
h PR-3
Figure 36. Dependence between the speed of elastic waves Vp and depth h for
characteristic seismic profile PR-3 in the site Sloeshtica

100
 Vp h
6000

Vp (m/s)
5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
h

37. Vp
h PR-1
Figure 37. Dependence between the speed of elastic waves Vp and depth h for
characteristic seismic profile PR-1 in the site Rasanec

.


.
e 45
5.000 .
5.000 m/s
( Bieniawski RMR 90
),
- .

, ,

Fe. 25

- .

101
7. (-
() - ())
-

7.1.

.
:

- :
o - ;
o - ;
o - .

- :
.

- : -
.

.
, . ,

,
. ,
,
,
,
.

. , ,

102
,
, -
.
.
,

. ,
,
.

,

.

.

.
, ,
.

, .
, ,
, . ,


.

7.2. , -,

103

,
.

,
.

39.

.

( , )

engineering activity

38.
Figure 38. Linear relation in the definition of the model of interaction

39 -
.
,
, ,
,
.

104
 ,

39. -
,
Figure 39. Connection between the engineering-geological and geotehnical triangle
and links between geological, geotechnical models and numerical analysis


- () ().

7.3.

(,
1995).
, ,

. , ,


,
(
), , ,
.

105
 ,
, , -
,
,
,
,

.

.

( ,
),
,
,


(ISRM).

,
- (),
- () -
().

- - ()
,

.

-
,
.
.

-
,
.

106
 -

:

;
();
- .
- - ()
-

.

-
.
-

.

.
, -
.

,
,


.

- - ()

.

, ,
, .
- ,

107
 ,
.

-
:

;
;
;
,

.

7.3.1. - () -
()

,

.
.. -
.
(1973), ,
.

-

( ).
-
.

..
-
- .

108

5.

.
-
1 : 1.000.
, -
(, ) ( 3).

, ,
- ,
-
.
. 80

: , , , ,
/, , ,
.

,
.

, -
RQD

.

( 40, 9).

109
 9. ,
-
Table 9. Average values of the mineralogical composition, chemical composition and
physico-mechanical parameters to each test separately

40. -
Figure 40. Diagram of physical mechanical characteristics

110

c
. , D (

),
Rocscience .. RocLab.

,

.
.
,
.. .
:

RMR (Bieniawski);
ERMR ();
SMR (Romana).

,
(RQD).

-
- ()
- ().

- - ()

. ,
(7)
-,
( 4).

111
 -
.

4 1
( 41
42).
:

o
(ca)
.

(m) 30 ,
-
.
.

.

(Mca).
.
.

-.
,
. ,
.

112
 41. - ()
Figure 41. A typical engineering-geological cross section (IGC) by parameter of litology

113
 42. - ()

Figure 42. A typical engineering-geological cross section (IGC) by parameter of litology

,
.

.

.
-
.

114
- - ()

- ()

( 5). , -


.

,
.

2 5 .
( ) -,
75 85.
(-)

-
.

-
RQD (
45 - ),

: ,
, , .

4 1 ( -
() ),
,
( 43 44).

115
 , .
(
)
.
, (

)
.

116
 43. - ()
Figure 43. Characteristic engineering-geological cross section (IGP) by parameter of cracking

117
 44. - ()

Figure 44. Characteristic engineering-geological cross section (IGP) by parameter of

cracking

- - () -
( )

, -
,
.

118
 (RQD 70 % , sp = 80 90 Mp, =
2.65 gr/cm3);

B
(RQD = 70 75 % , sp = 100 115Mp, = 2.65 - 2.68 gr/cm3);

B1
(RQD = 65 75 % , sp = 100 115Mp , = 2.65 - 2.68 gr/cm3);

C (RQD = 85 90 % , sp = 110
121 Mp , = 2. 69 gr/cm3);

D (RQD = 20 25 %)

- - ()

- ()

.

,
, ,
.

, ,
-
, ..
,
( ( 6/1, 6/2))
.

,
,
( 45).
,
RMR (Bieniawski),

119
ERMR () SMR (Romana).

.

-

.

.
, ,
- ,
, .

.
RMR e 60

RMR ( 75 )

- .

Bieniawski
RMR 58 75
( )
( )
RMR 23 ( ).

. ERMR 60 72

,
.

.

Romana. SMR

120
61 76
.

121
 45. - I-I
Figure 45. Engineering-geological model developed by profile I-I '

122


-

.

.

, ,
, , .


-
.

o ,
,
- ,
;

o

,
-
;

o ;

o -
;

123
 o
;
o .

- , ,
, ..

.
-
,
.

, ,
,
.

( 0.73),
.

-
,


, ,
, , ,
.

124


1. Barton N. (1994): Physical and discrete element model of exvation and

failure in jointed rock, NGI, Oslo
2. Barton N., T.L.B.Y, Chryssantakis P., Tundbridge L. (1994): Predicted and
mesaured performance of 62 m span Norwegian olympic Ice Hockey Cavern
at Gjovik, NGI, Oslo, 1994
3. Bieniawski Z.T.: Geomechanics classification of rock masses and its
application in tunneling, Proceedings of 3-rd International Conference in
Rock Mechanics, Denver 1974
4. Bieniawski Z.T.: Classification of Rock Masses for Engineering: The RMR
System and future trends. Comprehensive Rock Engineering, 1993
5. Beyer F., Rolofs F.: Size distributions of Rock Blocs from measuerement of
Rock faces, Rock mechanics, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1981
6. Brown E.T., Hoek E.: Determination of shear envelope in Rock masses,
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering , Vol. 194, 1980
7. ., ., (1994): . .
, - -
8. Deere D.U. (1969): Geological consideration, Rock Mechanics, John Wiley
and soons
9. ., (2003): , .
, - -

10. ., (1991):
-
. . , -
-
11. ., ., (2002): ,
. , - -
12. .,(1999): .
. , , - -

125
13. Hoek E., Brown E.T., (1980): Empirical strenght criterion for rock masses. J.
Geotech. Engng Div., ASCE 106 (GT9), pp 1013-1035

14. Hoek E., Brown E.T., (1997): Practical estimates of rock mass strenght.
Intnl. J. Rock MechMining Sci.Geomechanics Abstracts. 34(8), pp 1165-
1186

15. Hoek E., Marinos, P., Benissi, M., (1998): Applicability of the geological
strength index (GSI) classification for very weak and sheared rock masses.
The case of the Athens Schist Formation. Bull Eng Geol Environ (1998) 57,
pp 151-160

16. ., ., ., (2004):
- .
. ,

17. . (2005):


. . ,
-

18. ., (2013): , .
, -

19. M., (2001):

, .
. , -

20. ., ., (1995):
. 6-


21. ., - A., ., ., (2008):
-
.

126
22. Jovanovski, M., Gapkovski, N., Ilijovski, Z., (2002): Correlation between
Rock Mass Rating and deformability on a profile for arch dam Sveta Petka.
10-th International Conference of the DGKM, Ohrid.
23. Jovanovski, M., Gapkovski, N., Petrevski, Lj., (1996): Primer ekstrapolacije
rezultata istraivanja kod specifinih mekih stenskih masa. The International
Conference: Trends in the Development of Geotechnics, Beograd.
24. Jovanovic R., (1986): Uloga inzenerske geologije u razvoju geoloskih i
tehnickih nauka, Instutut za vodoprivredu Jaroslav Cerni, Beograd

25. Krvavac A., Jovanovski M., Gapovski N., Ilijovski Z., (2006): Fiziki i
analitiki modeli za karbonatne stijenske masive. II Simpozijum
makedonskog udruenja za geotehniku, Ohrid.
26. Krvavac A.,(2009). Metodologija geotehnikog modeliranja karbonatnih
stijenskih kompleksa - Doktorska disertacija, Univerzitet Sv. Kiril I Metodij
Skopje, Graevinski Fakultet - Skopje

27. Kujundzic B. (1973): Sadrina i metodika izrade inenerskogeolokih

preseka, modela i geotehnikih modela, Saoptenja IX Kongresa
Jugoslovenskog komiteta za visoke brane, Zlatibor, 1973

28. Kujundzic B. (1977): Osnove mehanike stena, Gradjevinski kalendar, SIT,

Beograd, 1977

29. Kujundzic B. (1980): Ispitivanja fiziko-mehanikih svojstva stenskih masa,

Generalni izvetaj, V Simpozijum, JDSMPR, Split, 1980

30. .., 1977: ja ja ( ),

, , 1977

31. Malinowski J., (1967): Geologia Inzynerska, Wydawnictwa geologiczne,

Warshawa

32. ., (2002):
( ), . ,
-

33. . (2011): , ,

127
34. Pavlovi, N., (1995): Neka razmatranja o geotehnikom modeliranju.
Istraivanje i sanacija klizita, Drugi simpozij, Donji Milanovac, str. 171-176.

35. Pavlovi N. (1996) : O metodologiji geotehnikog modeliranja, International

Conference, Trends of Developments on Geotecnics, Beograd, 1996

36. Pavlovi N. (1996): Interakcija geoloke sredine i inenerske delatnosti,

International Conference, Trends of Developments on Geotechnics,
Beograd,1996

37. Stilborg B. (1986): Profesional users handbook for Rock Bolting, Trans Tech
publications, 1986

38. uti J. (1976): Klasifikacija stenskih masa za potrebe podzemnih

gradjevina, IV JSHGIG, Skopje, 1976

39. Terzaghi K. (1943): Theoretical soil mechanics, John Willey and sons, New
York, (1943)

40. Waltham T., 2002: Foundations of Engineering Geology, Second Edition,

Spon Press, London and New York

128