48

Ground Support Methodology Employing Shotcrete for Underground Mines

R. Pakalnis, M. Roworth, C. Caceres
University of British Columbia, Canada-Geomechanics Group- Mining Engineering Department.
P. Lourence, Kencana Mine, Newcrest

This paper compiles research work conducted for the investigation of shotcrete within
underground mines to the applied design of ground support for the operator. It looks at the
design methodology in terms of employing shotcrete as a fabric to confine the rock mass
between the individual bolts as dictated by empirical charts. The failure mechanism in
terms of its implication on design is presented with respect to the design of 6m wide tunnels
for temporary and permanent openings within weak rock masses. This is reflected by field
observations that relate laboratory tests to the onset of failure for the operator in order to
provide guidelines for design and monitoring. This is coupled with guidelines for safe entry
in terms of cure times as well as the understanding of the behaviour of the shotcrete in
terms of fibres and the overall strengths that result with respect to the design of the mine
openings. This enables the operator to better understand his workplace thereby provide a
safer work environment.

INTRODUCTION
This paper is part of a study that has been
undertaken over the past year in determining the design
parameters that govern the application of shotcrete
within weak rock masses for underground metal mines.
This paper compiles information particularly relevant to
design that the author has employed within metal mines
over the past thirty (30) years and the approach towards
support design detailed in Methodology Towards
Ground Support (Pakalnis, 2008). The paper identifies
the use of shotcrete as confining the rock mass fabric as
a single support unit, shown in Figure 1. It must be
recognized that a weak rock mass will likely result in the
individual rock blocks falling between the bolts and
therefore surface support is required to confine the rock
mass as a single support unit. It is also critical to bolt
through the shotcrete membrane within a weak rock
mass (RMR76 < 45%) to ensure that the bolts and surface
support are confined as a single support unit and do not
act independently of each other. Surface support Figure 1: Shotcrete as confining the rock mass into
requirements for temporary and permanent (storage a single unit
rooms, crusher chambers and maintenance shops)
support correspond to an Excavation Support Ratio
(ESR) of 3 and 0.6 - 1.3, respectively (Grimstad and
Barton, 1993). This is shown in Figure 2 with the range
of weak rock masses observed within Nevada operations
(20%-45%) and associated spans of 6m (20ft).
 49

Figure 2: Surface support (after Grimstad and Barton, 1993)

The major concern of the author is that the use of studies and is largely restricted to a small area of
the empirical design chart shown in Figure 2 is derived conditions, detailed in Figure 3.
for monolithic support from civil engineering case
 50
Figure 3: Empirical support for SRL study weak rock masses for temporary and permanent 6 m wide mine
tunnels (after Grimstad and Barton, 1993)

The above figure is summarized in Table 1 which
largely reflects the practices employed in weak rock
masses in Nevada operations. It must be recognized that
the shotcrete is reinforced with bolts which confine the
potential block. The significance of shotcrete as a support
element has been studied by Spokane Research
Laboratory (SRL) in terms of its strength, cure times,
quality control, fibre implications, adhesion among others
in order to understand its behaviour as a support element
(Martin et al, 2010).

Table 1: Fabric Support Requirements (after

Grimstad and Barton, 1993) for 6 m (20 ft) Span

Q RMR PERMANENT SUPPORT TEMPORARY SUPPORT

ESR=1.3 ESR=3
0.07 <20% SPILING + (ACTUAL) SPILING + (ACTUAL)

0.07-0.4 20%-35% 9-12cm (3"-5") FIBRE REINFORCED 5-9cm (2"-4") FIBRE REINFORCED
SHOTCRETE SHOTCRETE

0.4-1.1 35%-45% 5-9cm (2"-4") FIBRE REINFORCED 4-10cm(2"-4") UNREINFORCED

SHOTCRETE SHOTCRETE
 METHODOLOGY

51
This paper is an extension of the methodology
identified in (Pakalnis,2008) where stress, structure and
rock mass are quantified with respect to confining
potential blocks as summarized in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Design Methodology

 enabled one to further understand the failure mechanism

52
Within Nevada underground mines shotcrete use
associated with placed shotcrete.
is in excess of 250 000 m3 per year with an average
design thickness of 75mm (3). Figure 5 looks at the
shear strength associated with a weak shotcrete placed
and the support resistance that it would provide. This is
detailed in (Martin et al, 2010).

Figure 6: FRS confines rock mass between bolts

Figure 5: Dead Weight Design

OBSERVATIONS SHOTCRETE TESTING

Figure 5 shows that a 6m wide opening with a
75mm thick layer of shotcrete, having a shear strength of The term fibre reinforced shotcrete (FRS) as
2MPa, would result in a potential slab shear strength for referred to in this paper refers to synthetic fibre unless
sides A/C of 90 tonnes and 15tonnes for the end slices specifically referenced as steel strands.
B/D. The dead weight wedge for the 6m opening
would be equal to 0.5 times the span or 3m in height.
This results in a loading of 27 tonnes employing a FIBRE CONTENT OF FRS
specific gravity of 3.0 for the rock mass. The shotcrete The dosage of commercially used (6-7kg/m3)
itself assuming no cracks formed within the slab has a synthetic fibre reinforced shotcrete was found to have
support capacity well in excess of the loading. However, minimal affect on the 1st break strength for FRS whereas
the potential shotcrete slab if unreinforced either through steel fibre affects the 1st break strength. In addition,
metal screen and/or fibres will result in potential failure synthetic fibre dosage below 6kg/m3 results in an
as it will not fail as a monolithic (single unit) structure increase of the 1st break strength as the mix approaches
since typical mining applications are not fully enclosed. the strength of shotcrete. An increase in the amount of
The closure associated with a tunnel in a weak rock mass fibre reduces the overall combined strength.
and typical shotcrete applications will result in shotcrete
panel type support. The purpose of the shotcrete in terms
of design is to confine the fabric between the bolts as
design requires the weak rock mass to be confined as a
single unit and in turn contained by tendons passing
through the potential failure zone (Figure 6).
Recent research conducted at SRL on round
determinate panel (RDP) tests and field scale tests has
 53

Figure 7: Bag strength equivalent of synthetic FRS with varying dosage

The dosage residual strength is compared to the
equivalent bag strength for screen and shows that
generally the residual FRS strength approaches that of 12
gauge welded wire mesh (under 1.4tonne bag strength). It
must be recognized that the energy (Papworth, 2003)
associated with an increased dosage will result in greater
deformation; however, associated with this will be greater
deformation and cracking, which the operator will be
working underneath. The absence of any fibres will result
in complete failure as shown in Figure 8.
 54

Figure 8: Shotcrete RDP test with no fibres; results in no residual strength

synthetic fibre largely due to the 1st crack appearing
irrespective of the dosage. It was expected that rehab
The above was employed to understand the
may be required earlier in the cycle as the crack
significance of the energy associated with the RDP tests
approaches 10-20mm which generally involves
as typically presented in Figure 9 and the equivalent bag
placement of 6 gauge screen over the cracked shotcrete.
strength of screen. Newcrests Kencana Mine, in
This resulted in a savings of $50 000 US per month and
Indonesia, is an underground gold mine that employs
no observable difference in shotcrete performance was
1800m3 per month of synthetic fibre reinforced shotcrete
evident.
for ground support. It was recommended to reduce the
fibre content from the existing 6kg/m3 to 3kg/m3 of the

Figure 9: Morgans Relationship between energy/deflection with respect to rockmass (after Papworth, 2003)
CRITICAL CRACK WIDTH
The critical crack width of the shotcrete round
determinate panel is defined as the first visible crack
observed at the bottom of the panel. (Martin et. al., 2010)
relate the center and edge crack width to the applied load
and ram travel displacement to the available strength of
the shotcrete for two design mixes, Superstik SCAPT-
100, is steel fibre, and Superstik SCAPF, is poly fibre.
Peak strength of the FRS round panel occurs before the
first visible crack is observed after which the residual
load is rapidly reached and a hairline crack appears.
The critical design for SCAPF, which is just a
visible crack width, supports 6-KN @ 4.8-mm
displacement. The critical design for SCAPT-100,
which is just a visible crack width, supports 6-KN @ 3-
55
mm displacement Figure 10 plots the location of the
average first visible crack on the 28 day strength panels
for SCAPF and SCAPT-100.
The crack width at a corresponding RDP residual
strength reflects the support capacity of the FRS panel
which is generally under 1-tonne and is equivalent to 9
gauge (Fig.7) weldmesh (Martin et al, 2010). It must be
recognized that this is sufficient load to confine the rock
mass between the individual bolts on a 1.2m x 1.2m
pattern (Fig.7). This provides the operator a visible
measurement of the effectiveness of the shotcrete in
place.
 56

10: Critical crack width of round determinate panel tests


CURE TIME
The rate of cure or entry times have been assessed
by SRL and reported by Martin et al. (2010) and
summarized in Figure 11.
ure 11: Moulded compressive strength samples for
ous SRL shotcrete mixes
Shotcrete compressive strength is important as it
directly related to the design shear strength. A
relationship between compressive strength and shear is
0.25 based upon mohr coulomb and one generally
requires a 1MPa unconfined compressive strength in
order to drill through the shotcrete (Rispin, 2003). A
UCS of 1 MPa represents an equivalent bag strength of
approximately that of 9 gauge screen (1.9 tonne). The
moulded strengths are not shot strengths and do not
represent necessarily the field values; however, can be
considered to be conservative.
CONCLUSIONS
The above approach towards ground support for
tunnels/exposed back spans for man-entry operations has
been proven to be effective in determining overall back
stability in rock masses where failure ranges from
discrete wedges to smaller rock blocks confined by
surface support which in turn is supported by bolting. It
must be recognized that the surface support is ignored in
the Factor of Safety calculation as the shotcrete cover
upon cracking results in negating the overall arch affect
provided by the shotcrete layer but does act as a
confining plate when a bolt is placed through the
57
membrane.
The SRL shotcrete study has provided
quantifiable relationships in terms of cure times, FRS
behaviour, critical design strengths as well as
performance parameters such as crack width. This
information should be implemented, analyzed and
assessed in terms of their applicability to the operation in
place.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The work would not have been possible without
the partnership between NIOSH, the University of
British Columbia geomechanics group, and North
American mining company personnel. This continued
partnership is critical to the development of safe and
cost-effective mine strategies.
The Spokane Research Laboratory of NIOSH of
CDC has provided support for this research program.
Authors wish to personally thank Lewis Martin, Brad
Seymour, Curtis Clark, Mike Stepan of the Laboratory
for their enthusiasm and contributions to this project.
REFERENCES
Beauchamp, L. (2006) Ground Support Manual. Mines and Aggregates
Safety and Health Association, Ontario.
Grimstad, E. and Barton, N. (1993) Updating the Q-System for NMT.
Proc. Int. Symp. On Sprayed Concrete, Fagernes, (eds. Kompen,
Opsahl and Berg), Oslo: Norwegian Concrete Association.
Martin, L., B. Seymour, C. Clark, R. Pakalnis, M. Stepan, M. Roworth,
C. Caceres. 2010. An analysis of fiber-reinforced round panel
strengths as correlated to wire mesh bag strength. SME 2010
Paper in Session: Design Methodology for use of Shotcrete as
Ground Support.
Morgan, D. R.; Chen, L.; and Beaupr, D. (1990). Toughness of Fibre
Reinforced Shotcrete.
Pakalnis, R. Empirical Design MethodsUBC Geo-mechanics Update.
In NARMS-TAC 2002: Mining and Tunneling underground mining
operations. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Rock
Mass Classification in Underground Mining, Mark,C et al. (eds),
Department of Health and Human Services, pp. 119-127.
Papworth, F (2003) Design Guidelines for the Use of FRS in Ground
Support.
Pakalnis, R. (2008) Methodology Towards Ground Support. Strategic
versus Tactical Approaches in Mining, Laval Conference.