SITI NORSALKINI MOHD. AKIP TAN
Transcript of SITI NORSALKINI MOHD. AKIP TAN
GEOPHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF WEATHERED SEDIMENTARY
ROCK MASS FOR SURFACE EXCAVATION PURPOSE
SITI NORSALKINI MOHD. AKIP TAN
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy (Civil Engineering)
School of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
FEBRUARY 2020
iv
DEDICATION
In the name of Most Kind and Merciful Allah the Almighty
This thesis is specially dedicated to:
My dearest parents, my pillar of strength, Mohd Akip Tan Bin Abdullah and
Sabariah Binti Yassin, who gave me the world, support me all the way, endless love,
belief and encouragement through the years.
My beloved husband, Mohd Azizi Bin Zailah, for his love, faith, patience, support,
understanding and for enduring the ups and downs during the completion of this thesis.
My parents in law, Zailah Bin Juraimi and Jumantan Binti Abd Manap, for their
love, supports and prayers, be it spiritually or physically.
My daughter, Nur Zulfa Natasha Binti Mohd Azizi, for her love and understanding.
My siblings, Siti Norsalkila, Siti Norrasikin, Mohd Akmall Ariffin, for their care and
devotions.
My respected supervisor, Professor Dr. Hj. Edy Tonnizam Bin Mohamad, for his
expert guidance, motivation, support and persistent supervision throughout the
journey.
My co-supervisor, Prof. Dr. Rosli Bin Saad, for his continue encouragement, support
and guidance.
my families and friends, for their care, prayers and supports.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
With His blessing, I have finally completed this study. But this is not the end,
this is just a beginning of my real journey. First and foremost, my heartfelt gratitude
to my supervisor, Professor Dr. Hj. Edy Tonnizam Bin Mohamad, for his avid
provision, enthusiastic support, and enlightening guidance throughout my research
journey. Through his proficient guidance and great insights, I was able to overcome
all the difficulties that I have encountered during this research. His rigorous approach
to academic research, extensive and profundity of knowledge in geological
engineering, have momentously benefited not only for my research, but for my life
journey as well. His support and encouragement for me has been greatly appreciated.
I am also very indebted to Professor Dr. Rosli Saad, for his guidance in the
field of geophysics. His extensiveness knowledge snarled with the respected thoughts,
given the opportunity to carry out the geophysical investigation. I am grateful for his
encouragement and enthusiasm throughout the geophysical data collection, analysis
and discussion for this study. Not to be forgotten, Dr Nordiana, for her kind supports
and motivation. Also, for all geophysics team of USM, thanks for helping me out.
My sincere appreciation also extends to UTM geology laboratory staff, my
postgraduate friends and others who have provided assistance at various occasions.
Their views and tips are useful indeed. Just to name a few, Dr Firdaus, Suzana, Maria,
Vynod and Nia. Thank you and good luck for your future undertakings.
Last of all, deepest appreciation and warm thanks to my beloved husband,
Mohd Azizi bin Zailah, for every single thing he did for me. My parents, in laws,
siblings, all the family members and dearest friends (Kak Echer,Aina, Azy, Elly,Fara,
Fyza, Mas, Shaz, Syu, Sab and Tiqa) for their encouragement and prayers in all aspects
of my life, which keep me going strong for this journey. There are no words that could
be expressed to thanks everyone so loved to me.
.
vi
ABSTRACT
An accurate and reliable assessment of ground condition is one of the critical
aspects in surface excavation work. This issue become more complex when dealing
with heterogeneous ground material with various weathering stages. Seismic velocity
and electrical resistivity method are among the common tools used to assist the
understanding of the subsurface condition. This study aims to investigate the
application of the seismic refraction and resistivity method together with the
geotechnical assessment for the purpose of surface excavation work. The study was
carried out at Iskandar Puteri, Johor namely Legoland (LEGO), SILC Site 1 (SILC 1),
SILC Site 2 (SILC 2) and SILC Site 3 (SILC 3). The sites are underlain by a thick
residual soil and interbedding of sandstone and shale from various weathering states.
The geophysical surveys that were carried out on the same outcrops were then
compared. The classification of rock mass was carried out by adopting Rock Mass
Rating (RMR) and Q-system. The field results indicate RMR range from 0 to 69 and
Q-value of 0 to 16.883 specifies weak to fair rock. Joint spacing was attained with
value of 0 – 1.95 m. The laboratory tests were carried out on 144 – 156 samples for
dry density, moisture content, point load test and slake durability. Point Load Strength
(Is50) for the samples ranges from 0 – 6.889 MPa indicates very weak to strong rock.
Laboratory evaluation indicates the rock quality deteriorates with increase of
weathering. Trial excavation was carried out on 19 panels using Komatsu PC300 - 6.
Four boreholes that were drilled then correlated with five resistivity and four seismic
velocity profiles. Resistivity value for residual soil indicates value of less than 1000
Ωm. Meanwhile for slightly weathered sandstone and shale 1500 Ωm – 12000 Ωm,
moderately weathered zone ranges from 370 Ωm – 5000 Ωm, highly weathered of 100
Ωm – 3000 Ωm and completely weathered with 30 Ωm – 2000Ωm. Boulder was
detected with resistivity value of 5000 Ωm – 12000 Ωm. Besides that, seismic velocity
for residual soil shows value of less than 750 m/s, slightly weathered zone of 1500 m/s
– 3000 m/s, highly weathered zone of 100 m/s – 2000 m/s and completely weathered
zone with velocity of 500 m/s – 1500 m/s. Boulder was not able to be detected.
Resistivity survey provide more reliable results in sensing lithology and saturated
zone. Field assessment quantified that when RMR less than 40 and Q less than 1 is
dominated by completely weathered shale is categorized as easy excavation (> 400
m3/h). On the other hand, moderate excavatability (100 m3/h – 400 m3/h) yielded when
40 < RMR < 60 and 1 < Q < 10 which consists of highly/moderately weathered
sandstone/shale and completely weathered sandstone while hard excavation (< 100
m3/h) was observed when 60 < RMR < 70 and 10 < Q < 20 which includes slightly
weathered sandstone/shale. The result showed that both Q and RMR exhibit a trend of
higher value of rating and commensurate with seismic and resistivity value. The
findings of this study contributed the development in excavatability assessment by
proposing the resistivity and seismic velocity index for interbedded sedimentary rock
mass. The proposed scheme of resistivity and velocity index based on tropically
weathered sedimentary rock mass with respect to excavation performance is
significant advanced compared to existing assessment.
vii
ABSTRAK
Penilaian efektif berkaitan profil sub-permukaan bumi merupakan aspek
kritikal dalam penilaian kerja pengorekan. Isu ini menjadi semakin kompleks dalam
zon yang rencam tahap luluhawanya. Kaedah seismik dan keberintangan elektrik
merupakan prosedur yang sering digunakan untuk memahami profil sub-permukaan.
Kajian ini bertujuan menilai keupayaan kaedah geofizik sebagai salah satu cara
penilaian sub-permukaan sebelum kerja pengorekan sebenar dilakukan. Kajian ini
dijalankan di Iskandar Puteri, Johor, melibatkan empat tempat kajian iaitu Legoland
(LEGO), SILC Site 1 (SILC1), SILC Site 2 (SILC 2) dan SILC Site 3 (SILC 3).
Kawasan kajian diliputi oleh tanah baki dan batu pasir yang berselang-lapis dengan
syal daripada tahap luluhawa yang berbeza. Survei geofizik dijalankan pada singkapan
yang sama dimana pengkelasan batuan dijalankan. Klasifikasi jasad batuan dikelaskan
dengan ‘Rock Mass Rating (RMR)’ dan ‘Q-system’ mendapati nilai RMR berjulat 0 –
69 manakala Q ialah 0 hingga 16.883 menunjukkan batuan jenis lemah hingga kuat.
Nilai jarak antara ketakselanjaran berjulat antara 0 – 1.95 m. Ujian makmal melibatkan
144 – 156 jumlah sampel untuk setiap ujian ketumpatan kering, kandungan
kelembapan, kekuatan beban titik dan pemeroian batuan. Indeks titik beban (Is50)
berjulat antara 0 ke 6.889 MPa menunjukkan tahap kekuatan berbeza. Penilaian di
makmal menunjukkan kualiti batuan menurun apabila tahap luluhawa meningkat.
Ujian pengorekan langsung menggunakan Komatsu PC300 - 6 dijalankan pada 19
panel. Lima profil keberintangan dan empat profil halaju seismik dikorelasikan dengan
empat lubang bor. Nilai keberintangan tanah baki adalah kurang daripada 1000 Ωm.
Manakala batu pasir dan syal terluluhawa sedikit menunjukkan julat 1500 Ωm – 12000
Ωm, batuan yang terluluhawa sederhana berjulat 370 Ωm – 5000 Ωm, terluluhawa
tinggi adalah 100 Ωm – 3000 Ωm dan batuan yang terluluhawa lengkap menunjukkan
nilai 30 Ωm – 2000 Ωm. Batu tongkol pula dapat dikesan dengan nilai 5000 Ωm –
12000 Ωm. Sementara itu, nilai halaju seismik bagi tanah baki adalah kurang daripada
750 m/s, batuan terluluhawa sedikit 1500 m/s – 3000 m/s, terluluhawa sederhana 500
m/s – 3000m/s, terluluhawa tinggi 100 m/s – 2000 m/s dan zon terluluhawa lengkap
500 m/s – 1500m/s. Batu tongkol tidak dapat dikesan melalui kaedah seismik ini.
Survei keberintangan memperlihatkan hasil yang lebih baik dalam mengenalpasti
litologi dan zon lembap. Penilaian di lapangan membuktikan bahawa RMR yang
kurang daripada 40 dan Q kurang daripada 1 didominasi oleh tanah baki dan syal
terluluhawa lengkap, dikategorikan sebagai pengorekan mudah (> 400 m3/jam).
Pengorekan sederhana (100 m3/jam – 400 m3/jam) apabila 40 < RMR < 60 dan 1 < Q
< 10 melibatkan batu pasir/syal yang terluluhawa tinggi/sederhana. Pengorekan sukar
dicerap apabila 60 < RMR < 70 dan 10 < Q < 20 melibatkan batu pasir/syal yang
terluluhawa sedikit. Hasil kajian ini menyumbang terhadap kemajuan penilaian
kebolehkorekan dengan menambah nilai keberintangan dan halaju seismik pada
batuan sedimen yang berselang-lapis. Skema nilai keberintangan dan halaju seismik
yang dicadang berdasarkan tahap luluhawa batuan sedimen berluluhawa tropika
dengan menilai prestasi pengorekan adalah signifikan berbanding dengan penilaian
sedia ada.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v
ABSTRACT vi
ABSTRAK vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xiii
LIST OF FIGURES xvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxii
LIST OF SYMBOLS xxiv
LIST OF APPENDICES xxvi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Overview 1
1.2 Problem Statement 3
1.3 Aim and Objectives 4
1.4 Research Scope 5
1.5 Novelty and Significant of Study 6
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1 Introduction 9
2.2 Rock Mass Characterization 11
2.2.1 Tropical Weathering 13
2.2.2 Rock Mass Classification for Excavation
Purpose 14
2.2.2.1 Rock Mass Rating (RMR) 15
2.2.2.2 Rock Mass Quality (Q-system) 16
2.2.3 Excavatability and Geomechanical Rock Mass
Classification 17
ix
2.3 Excavation Assessment 19
2.3.1 Factor Affecting Excavation 21
2.3.2 Existing Excavation Assessment 23
2.4 Geophysical Characterization 38
2.4.1 Electrical Resistivity Methods 39
2.4.1.1 Theory and Principles 40
2.4.1.2 Types of Array 43
2.4.1.3 Resistivity for Various Weathering
Grade 46
2.4.2 Seismic Refraction Methods 46
2.4.2.1 Theory and Basic Principles 48
2.4.2.2 Seismic Velocity for Various
Weathering Grade 52
2.4.3 Standard Penetration Test 53
2.4.4 Geophysical and Subsurface Properties 56
2.4.5 Geophysical Measurement and Excavatability
Studies 61
2.5 Summary 66
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 69
3.1 Introduction 69
3.2 Frameworks of Research Methodology 70
3.3 Desk Study 72
3.3.1 Site Identification 73
3.3.2 Legoland 74
3.3.3 SILC Site 1 (SILC1) 75
3.3.4 SILC Site 2 (SILC2) 77
3.3.5 SILC Site 3 (SILC3) 78
3.4 Field Works 80
3.4.1 Geological Field Mapping 81
3.4.1.1 Weathering Zone and Profiling 81
3.4.1.2 Discontinuities 85
3.4.2 In-situ Testing 87
x
3.4.2.1 Schmidt Hammer 87
3.4.3 Geophysical Method 89
3.4.3.1 Resistivity Survey 89
3.4.3.2 Seismic Refraction Survey 91
3.4.3.3 Geophysical Data Processing 93
3.4.4 Excavation Trial 95
3.5 Laboratory Works 96
3.5.1 Physical Properties 97
3.5.1.1 Dry Density 97
3.5.1.2 Moisture Content 99
3.5.2 Index Properties 100
3.5.2.1 Point Load Strength 100
3.5.2.2 Slake Durability Test 103
3.6 Summary 107
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 109
4.1 Introduction 109
4.2 Legoland (LEGO) 110
4.2.1 Geological Field Mapping and Site Observation
111
4.2.2 Laboratory Results 117
4.2.2.1 Dry Density 117
4.2.2.2 Moisture Content 119
4.2.2.3 Point Load Strength 121
4.2.2.4 Slake Durability Index 123
4.2.2.5 Summary of Laboratory Index 126
4.2.3 Rock Mass Classification 128
4.2.4 Geophysical Survey 131
4.2.4.1 2D Resistivity Imaging 132
4.2.4.2 Seismic Refraction Method 135
4.2.5 Excavation Performance 137
4.2.6 Summary of Legoland 139
xi
4.3 SILC1 147
4.3.1 Geological Field Mapping and Site Observation
147
4.3.2 Laboratory Results 153
4.3.2.1 Dry Density 153
4.3.2.2 Moisture Content 155
4.3.2.3 Point Load Strength 157
4.3.2.4 Slake Durability Index 159
4.3.2.5 Summary of Laboratory Index 162
4.3.3 Rock Mass Classification 164
4.3.4 Geophysical Survey 168
4.3.4.1 2D Resistivity Survey 168
4.3.4.2 Seismic Refraction Method 171
4.3.5 Excavation Performance 174
4.3.6 Summary of SILC1 175
4.4 SILC2 185
4.4.1 Resistivity Line 1 187
4.4.2 Resistivity Line 2 190
4.4.3 Resistivity Line 3 193
4.4.4 Resistivity Line 4 196
4.4.5 Resistivity Line 5 199
4.4.6 Summary of SILC2 202
4.5 SILC 3 206
4.5.1 Seismic Velocity Line 1 207
4.5.2 Seismic Velocity Line 2 211
4.5.3 Seismic Velocity Line 3 214
4.5.4 Seismic Velocity Line 4 217
4.5.5 Summary of SILC3 221
4.6 Proposed Excavatability Classification 225
4.7 Concluding Remarks 242
xii
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 247
5.1 Conclusions 247
5.2 Limitations and Recommendations 248
REFERENCES 251
APPENDIX 277
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
Table 2.1 Summary of parameters considered for existing excavation
assessment 25
Table 2.2 Summary of mechanical and index properties of gypsums,
marls and mudstones (Singh et al., 1987) 30
Table 2.3 Parameters in diggability index by Karpuz (1990) 31
Table 2.4 Diggability classification by Karpuz (1990) 32
Table 2.5 Rippability classification of rock (Basarir and Karpuz,
2004) 34
Table 2.6 Rippability classification of quartzite using D6 (165 HP)
ripper dozer (Mohd For et al., 2009) 35
Table 2.7 Proposed excavation index for sedimentary rock (EISR) by
Liang et al. (2016) 37
Table 2.8 Summary of studied layers with estimated ground
conditions by Ismail et al. (2018) 38
Table 2.9 Previous research on resistivity values and weathering
grade 46
Table 2.10 P- and S- wave velocities of some rocks and other materials
(McDowell et al., 2002) 47
Table 2.11 Previous research on seismic velocity for various
weathering grade 52
Table 2.12 Existing studies on relationship between geophysical
method and SPT-N 55
Table 2.13 Classification of Vp and SPT by Rose Nadia et al. (2016) 56
Table 2.14 Seismic wave velocity, Vp with rock description (Laric and
Robert, 1987) 58
Table 2.15 Relationship between weathering grade and seismic
velocity (Forth and Platt-Higgins,1981) 64
Table 2.16 Summary of test result (Edy Tonnizam et al., 2011) 64
Table 3.1 Locations and coordinate of the study area 73
Table 3.2 ISRM suggestion for classification and description of rock
masses (ISRM, 2007) 82
xiv
Table 3.3 Term and description of weathering stage (ISRM, 1981) 83
Table 3.4 Rock type and grain size of the study site 84
Table 3.5 List of equipment of 2D resistivity imaging method 90
Table 3.6 List of equipment of seismic refraction method 92
Table 3.7 Gamble’s slake durability classification (Goodman, 1980) 104
Table 4.1 Geological field data of Legoland for onsite observation
based on each panel weathering grade 115
Table 4.2 Dry density measurement for Legoland according to
weathering state 118
Table 4.3 Quantification of moisture content by weathering state for
Legoland 120
Table 4.4 Summary of point load index (Is50) measurement by
weathering state in Legoland 122
Table 4.5 Quantification of weathering state by Id1 for Legoland 124
Table 4.6 Quantification of weathering state by Id2 for Legoland 125
Table 4.7 Summary of laboratory index test of Legoland (LEGO) 127
Table 4.8 RMR for Legoland 129
Table 4.9 Q-system for Legoland 130
Table 4.10 Summary of rock mass classification measurement at
Legoland based on weathering grade 131
Table 4.11 Weathering grade and resistivity value of Legoland 133
Table 4.12 Classification of material and seismic velocity of Legoland
137
Table 4.13 Trial excavation of Legoland (LEGO) by weathering grade
138
Table 4.14 Summary of Legoland measurement 140
Table 4.15 Geological field data of SILC1 for onsite observation based
on each panel weathering grade 151
Table 4.16 Dry density measurement for SILC1 based on various
weathering grade 154
Table 4.17 Quantification of moisture content by weathering state for
SILC1 156
Table 4.18 Summary of point load index (Is50) measurement by
weathering state in SILC1 158
xv
Table 4.19 Quantification of weathering state by Id1 for SILC1 160
Table 4.20 Quantification of weathering state by Id2 for SILC1 161
Table 4.21 Summary of laboratory index test of SILC1 163
Table 4.22 RMR for SILC1 165
Table 4.23 Q-system for SILC1 166
Table 4.24 Summary of rock mass classification measurement at
SILC1 based on weathering grade 167
Table 4.25 Weathering grade and resistivity value of SILC1 169
Table 4.26 Classification of material weathering grade and seismic
velocity of SILC1 172
Table 4.27 Production rate of SILC1 by weathering grade 175
Table 4.28 Summary of SILC1 measurement 176
Table 4.29 The comparison between resistivity survey and seismic
velocity on material analysis 184
Table 4.30 Resistivity data and borehole descriptions for BH1 189
Table 4.31 Resistivity data and borehole descriptions for BH2 192
Table 4.32 Resistivity data and borehole descriptions for BH3 195
Table 4.33 Resistivity data and borehole descriptions for BH3 198
Table 4.34 Resistivity data and borehole descriptions for BH4 201
Table 4.35 Summary of N value with resistivity (Ωm) 204
Table 4.36 Seismic velocity and borehole descriptions for BH1 210
Table 4.37 Seismic velocity and borehole descriptions for BH2 212
Table 4.38 Seismic velocity and borehole descriptions for BH3 215
Table 4.39 Seismic velocity and borehole descriptions for BH4 220
Table 4.40 Summary of N value with seismic velocity 225
Table 4.41 Proposed classification for excavation performances in
weathered sedimentary rock (Liang et al., 2016) 225
Table 4.42 Summary of joint spacing measurement with excavation
performances for various weathering state of sandstone and
shale 230
Table 4.43 The relationship of borehole SPT N-value with geophysical
resistivity and seismic velocity 238
xvi
Table 4.44 Proposed excavation classification by means of geophysical
and geological for various weathering state of sandstone
and shale 240
xvii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
Figure 2.1 Classifications of weathered sedimentary rock mass
(Ibrahim Komoo, 1995b) 12
Figure 2.2 Weathering classification for rock material and mass
modified by Edy Tonnizam et al. (2007) 13
Figure 2.3 Excavation chart by Franklin et al. (1971) 26
Figure 2.4 Weaver’s rating chart (1975) 27
Figure 2.5 The relationship of total rippability rating with seismic
velocity and tractor selection (Smith, 1986) 29
Figure 2.6 Excavatability assessment chart of the rocks (Pettifer and
Fookes 1994) 33
Figure 2.7 Rock quality classification in relation to excavation (Singh
and Goel, 1999) 36
Figure 2.8 Electrical resistivity with relation of change in resistance
(δR), length (δL) and cross sectional area (δA) by
Cardimona (2002) 41
Figure 2.9 A conventional four electrode array to measure the
subsurface resistivity (Loke, 1999) 42
Figure 2.10 Current, I is induced between paired electrodes C1 and C2.
Potential difference, ∆V between paired voltmeter
electrodes, P1 and P2 is measured (Anderson et al., 2008). 43
Figure 2.11 Common resistivity arrays with their geometric factor
(Loke, 1999) 44
Figure 2.12 Schematic diagrams and sensitivity pattern for different
electrode array in 2D resistivity survey (Dahlin and Zhou,
2004). 45
Figure 2.13 The forward and reverse pole-dipole array (Loke, 1999) 45
Figure 2.14 Generalized ray paths for seismic waves (Burger 1992) 48
Figure 2.15 Compressional and dilatation due to the ground particle
motions (Bolt, 2001) 49
Figure 2.16 Particle motion is right angles to the direction of travel
(Bolt, 2001) 50
Figure 2.17 Snell’s law (Bengt, 1984) 51
xviii
Figure 2.18 Resistivity values for some common rocks (after Palacky,
1987) 57
Figure 2.19 Excavation assessment chart recommended by Caterpillar
Tractor Co. for CAT D9 type dozer (Caterpillar Tractor
Company, 2001) 62
Figure 2.20 Ranges of P-wave velocities and rippabilities in common
rocks (Milsom. 2003) 63
Figure 3.1 Research flowchart 71
Figure 3.2 Location of study area (Ng et al., 2008) 74
Figure 3.3 Study area located at Legoland (LEGO), Iskandar Puteri,
Johor (Google earth, 2014) 75
Figure 3.4 The outcrop of Legoland site 75
Figure 3.5 Survey lines of SILC Site 1 with the nearest borehole
location (Google earth, 2006) 76
Figure 3.6 The outcrop of SILC 1 77
Figure 3.7 The location of resistivity survey line on the study area
(Google earth, 2006) 78
Figure 3.8 The location of seismic refraction survey line on the study
area (Google earth, 2006) 79
Figure 3.9 The overview of SILC3 site : (A) The flatten area for new
industrial building , (B) The palm oil plantation on the hilly
area, (C) & (D) The site clearing overview for SILC3 79
Figure 3.10 Identification of rock by rock colour chart of Munsell
(2009) 84
Figure 3.11 Scanlines for the measurement of discontinuities 85
Figure 3.12 Determination of orientation of discontinuity (dip angel and
dip direction) by Brunton compass 87
Figure 3.13 The application of Schmidt hammer to measure the surface
hardness 88
Figure 3.14 Equipments of 2D resistivity imaging method 90
Figure 3.15 The resistivity survey line of the selected area: (A) On the
hilly area, (B) On the reclaimed area 91
Figure 3.16 Equipment of seismic refraction method 92
Figure 3.17 Seismic refraction survey at the study area 93
Figure 3.18 Example of pseudosection produced from RES2DINV 94
xix
Figure 3.19 2D seismic refraction profiles developed in SeisOpt2D
software 95
Figure 3.20 The onsite excavation work: (A) Drilling and excavation
work for slope at Legoland, (B) The excavation of slope
outcrop at SILC1, (C) The excavation of u-drain at SILC2,
(D) The installation of blasting work in some hard material,
(E) & (F) The mechanism of failure on the rock material 96
Figure 3.21 Regular and irregular geometry having a mass of at least
50g for four studied panels 98
Figure 3.22 The weighted sample before the drying process 100
Figure 3.23 Types of test specimen for point load testing with suggested
portions limits (ISRM, 2007) 101
Figure 3.24 The dimensions for point load test hardened steel cones
(ISRM, 2007) 102
Figure 3.25 Point load test (A) The apparatus set up with an irregular
sample, (B) The failure mechanism of sample 103
Figure 3.26 Critical dimensions of slake durability test equipment (after
ISRM, 1981) 105
Figure 3.27 Slake Durability Test apparatus 106
Figure 3.28 Samples used for slake durability: (A) before undergo
slaking test, (B) after undergo slaking test 106
Figure 4.1 The lithology and weathering state of studied outcrop at
Legoland (LEGO) 112
Figure 4.2 Range plot for dry density for various weathering state of
sandstone and shale in Legoland 119
Figure 4.3 Range plot of moisture content versus weathering state for
sandstone and shale in Legoland 121
Figure 4.4 Range plot for point load strength (Is50) for sandstone and
shale by weathering grade in Legoland 123
Figure 4.5 Range plot of slake durability (Id1) for sandstone and shale
with weathering state in Legoland 125
Figure 4.6 Range plot of slake durability (Id2) for sandstone and shale
with weathering state in Legoland 126
Figure 4.7 Resistivity profile of Legoland 134
Figure 4.8 Seismic profile for Legoland 136
Figure 4.9 Relation between Q-system, RMR and excavation
production 142
xx
Figure 4.10 Correlation between resistivity with production
performance for Legoland 145
Figure 4.11 Relationship of seismic velocity with production
performance in Legoland 146
Figure 4.12 The lithology and weathering state of studied outcrop at
SILC1 148
Figure 4.13 Range plot for dry density for various weathering state of
sandstone and shale in SILC1 155
Figure 4.14 Range plot of moisture content versus weathering state for
sandstone and shale in SILC1 157
Figure 4.15 Range plot of point load strength (Is50)versus weathering
state for sandstone and shale in SILC 159
Figure 4.16 Range plot of slake durability (Id1) for sandstone and shale
with weathering state in SILC1 161
Figure 4.17 Range plot of slake durability (Id2) for sandstone and shale
with weathering state in SILC1 162
Figure 4.18 Resistivity profile for SILC1 170
Figure 4.19 Seismic profile for SILC1 173
Figure 4.20 Relationship between Q-system, RMR and excavation
production for SILC1 178
Figure 4.21 Correlation between resistivity with excavation production
for SILC1 182
Figure 4.22 Correlation between seismic velocity with excavation
production for SILC1 183
Figure 4.23 Location of boreholes and survey line in SILC2 (Google
Earth) 186
Figure 4.24 Inversion resistivity model for L1 and BH1 188
Figure 4.25 SPT N-value and resistivity (Ωm) versus depth for BH1 at
L1 189
Figure 4.26 Inversion resistivity model for L2 and BH2 191
Figure 4.27 SPT N-value and Resistivity (Ωm) versus depth for BH2 at
L2 192
Figure 4.28 Inversion model resistivity of resistivity L3 and BH3 194
Figure 4.29 SPT N-value and Resistivity (Ωm) versus depth (m) for
BH3 at Resistivity Line 3 195
Figure 4.30 Inversion model resistivity of Line 4 with BH3 197
xxi
Figure 4.31 SPT N-value and Resistivity (Ωm) versus depth (m) for
BH3 at L4 198
Figure 4.32 Inversion model resistivity of Line 5 and BH4 200
Figure 4.33 SPT N-value and Resistivity (Ωm) versus depth (m) for
BH4 at SILC5 201
Figure 4.34 Correlation between Resistivity and N value 203
Figure 4.35 Resistivity between resistivity and SPT N for different N
value 205
Figure 4.36 Location of boreholes and survey line (google earth) 207
Figure 4.37 Seismic velocity inversion model for L1 with BH1 209
Figure 4.38 SPT N-value versus seismic velocity (m/s) for BH1 at L1 211
Figure 4.39 Seismic velocity inversion model for L2 with BH2 213
Figure 4.40 SPT N-value versus seismic velocity (m/s) at L2 with BH2 214
Figure 4.41 Seismic velocity inversion model for L3 with BH3 216
Figure 4.42 SPT N-value versus seismic velocity (m/s) for BH3 at L3 217
Figure 4.43 Seismic velocity inversion model for L4 with BH4 219
Figure 4.44 SPT N-value versus Seismic Velocity (m/s) for BH4 at L4 220
Figure 4.45 Correlation between seismic velocity and N value. 221
Figure 4.46 Relationship between seismic velocity and SPT N for
different N value 224
Figure 4.47 The correlation of RMR and electrical resistivity on studied
sites justify using Ryu et al. (2011) 232
Figure 4.48 The correlation of Q and electrical resistivity on studied
sites justify using Ryu et al. (2011) 233
Figure 4.49 The correlation for RMR and seismic velocity for studied
sites 234
Figure 4.50 The correlation for Q-value and seismic velocity for studied
sites 235
Figure 4.51 The comparison of seismic velocity for studied sites with
Caterpillar chart (2007) 236
Figure 4.52 The comparison of electrical resistivity for studied sites
with Loke (2007) resistivity value 237
xxii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
2-D
3-D
ASTM
BHP
CBR
DC
EISR
GPR
HP
ISRM
JKR
JMG
Lbs
LEGO
P-wave
Q-system
Qr
RM
RMR
RQD
RR
S-wave
SAS
SE
SH
SiLC
SILC 1
SILC 2
SILC 3
SPT
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Two-Dimensional
Three-Dimensional
American Society for Testing and Materials
Brake Horse Power
California bearing ratio
Direct current
Excavation Index for Sedimentary Rock
Ground Penetrating Radar
Horse Power
International Society for Rock Mechanics
Jabatan Kerja Raya
Jabatan Mineral & Geosains
Pound
Legoland
Primary Wave
Rock Mass Quality
Field Production Rate
Ringgit Malaysia
Rock Mass Rating
Rock Quality Designation
Rippability Rating
Secondary Wave
Signal Averaging System
Specific Energy
Schmidt Hammer
Sourtern industry Logistic Cluster
SILC Site 1
SILC Site 2
SILC Site 3
Standard Penetration Test
xxiii
SPT-N
SV
UCS
-
-
-
Standard Penetration Test N-value
Seismic velocity
Uniaxial Compressive Strength
UTM
Vs
-
-
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Versus
xxiv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
α
ρa
β
cm
δR
δA
I
𝜃𝑖𝑐
° C
ft/s
𝜃𝑖
Roj
Rdj
MPa
m
m3
mm
Ω
%
Is
∆V
Q
𝜃𝑟
δL
R
s
Id2
C1 and C2
P1 and P2
p
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Alpha
Apparent resistivity
Beta
Centimetre
Change in resistance
Cross sectional area
Current
Critical angle of incidence
Degree Celcius
Feet per second
Incidence angle
Joint orientation
Joint spacing
Megapascal
Metre
Metre cube
Millimetre
Ohm
Percentage
Point load strength index
Potential difference
Practical excavation rate
Refracted angle
Resistance length
Resistivity
Shear
Slake durability second cycle
Two current electrodes
Two potential electrodes
Value of compressional
xxv
Vp
Vs
V1
V2
V
-
-
-
-
-
Velocity of P-waves / Seismic wave velocity
Velocity of S-waves
Velocity of first layer
Velocity of second layer
Voltage
xxvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE PAGE
Appendix I Rock Mass Rating (RMR) by Bieniawski (1989) 277
Appendix II Q-system by Barton (2002) 278
Appendix III Summary of rock mass classification with excavation
performances 281
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
Detailed and reliable assessment of ground condition is one critical aspect in
excavation work in order to do a proper ground evaluation. This issue become more
fascinating when dealing with heterogeneous zone and intricate weathering stages
(Bolton et al., 2010; Hakan and Palmstrom, 2011; Edy Tonnizam et al., 2017). The
application of geophysical method widely applied in excavation work by seismic
technique lead to the use of others method such as electrical resistivity to ease the site
investigation (Soupios et al., 2007; Abidin et al., 2011). The complexity of subsurface
conditions and various underlying materials with disreputable mechanical properties
often unfavorable for the constructions. This can give rises to difficulties particularly
in impending progress or increasing the hazardous nature of the excavation works.
Sufficient information of the subsurface features can assist the construction process
efficiently.
Disagreements in excavation method are common problems in construction
especially the existence of hard material. This hard material primes to complications
because its properties often too weak to be blast and too strong to be excavated by
conventional method (Mohd For, 1995; Kavvadas, 1998; Kanji, 2014). This problem
is particularly acute in tropical region given that thick profile of weathered zone is
encountered. In relation to this, there is essential for the development of technology
related to the excavation works that is needed for site investigation by adding
geophysical methods as a tool. However, the most significant factor in evaluating the
excavation assessment are the weathering profile, rock nature and its properties. The
complexity of subsurface conditions, existences of boulders, cavities, faults,
discontinuities such as bedding, joint, foliation and the inhomogeneity of rocks
prominently influence the excavation performances. Geomechanical properties of both
2
intact rock and rock mass is theoretical thought to be great aspect for excavatability of
rock includes weathering grade, strength and discontinuities. Field and laboratory test
for instance rock strength, rebound test, durability test and wave velocity are often
applied to determine its mechanical properties in order to evaluate its excavatability.
In the meantime, borehole drilling is the most conservative implemented
method to acquire subsurface profile and its engineering properties. To establish the
requisite number of boreholes, apply at site is difficult and it is bond directly to relative
costs of the project. The result obtain from drilling methods does not offer continuous
and detailed information of the entire studied area. The samples were taken from a
range of depths depends on the subsurface for an amount of distinct points. Drilling
only provides representative samples of the site. In tropical region country as Malaysia,
inappropriate site investigation and lack of precise ground information lead to non-
efficient construction in excavation works, failure and damage of building structure,
road and cut slope.
Besides that, effective excavation require precise interpretation of different
characteristic for thick weathering profiles typically contains of a numeral of sub
classifications or weathering state produced by the weathering of surface rocks in
tropical climates. Therefore, by implementing a method that can deliver information
of the entire area of the unpredicted ground condition, the site investigation problems
can be reduced. Hence, geophysical methods are appointed as a non-destructive
technique for the site investigation engage with geotechnical work due the limitations
in providing continuous and precise information by borehole method.
Along with that, ground information could be obtained through geotechnical
and geophysical methods. Several studies on the application of geophysical methods
in engineering and environment purpose are executed all over the world with different
geological setting and target definition. The application of geophysics in civil
engineering implement the principles and methods of physics in the measurement of
subsurface characteristics and properties. The methods are used to determine ground
properties and profile for the engineering and development purposes. Note that the
important aspect in all geophysical methods is that they are non-invasive and non-
3
destructive. Geophysical approaches play a significant role in the possession of such
knowledge; it provides helpful and cost effectives information about subsurface
features at the required level of spatial resolution and target definition. Geophysical
methods comprise resistivity, seismic, ground penetrating radar, gravity and magnetic
to measure ground. The methods that have progressive growth are electrical resistivity
imaging or geo-resistivity and seismic refractions method. The techniques can produce
continuous image of subsurface profile with a measurement that provides an
improvement in accurate and sufficient information for heterogeneous ground.
The combinations of geotechnical and geophysical discipline can be beneficial
in classifying the depth of rock layer, detecting voids, cavities and boulders in
subsurface works. Since the early application of seismic refraction method to
determine depth to bedrock at 1930s, geophysical methods have been discovered as
one of the dependable practices for geotechnical evaluation (McDowell et al., 2002;
Anderson et al., 2008; Mahvelati et al., 2018). The greatest verdict when applying the
method in early stage of site investigation work is that able to discard other site
investigation technique and shortlist those with potential values for improving the
overall effectiveness of site investigation in term of cost and time consuming. This
study focuses on the use of resistivity survey and seismic refraction methods in the
study area and the result are then correlate with the geotechnical result and potential
relation between the parameters are studies to get better interpretation in term of
geophysics and engineering.
1.2 Problem Statement
The problems of geological variation, structural complexity, heterogeneous
zones and unpredictable weathering states are some examples in the tropics ground
condition that lead to difficulties in site clearing earth excavation work. Assessment of
rock mass properties are significant, primarily in the pre-construction stage and are a
consequence of the geological understanding based on field investigations and the
experienced interpretation of accessible results. Regardless of the intricacy and
difficulty in determining the engineering properties of rocks, in order to diminish rock
4
engineering dispute and assign reliable values to them. The state of weathering from
the parent rock to the ground surface reflects rock mass weathering profile. It is
significantly altered the geotechnical behaviours of rocks. The degree of weathering
illustrates the disintegration of the parent rock with depth.
Researchers have made continuous efforts in developing the method for
characterisation or description of this weathered profile. The variations of weathering
profile from different location, due to rock type and structure, topography and rate of
erosion because of regional climate variation, particularly rainfall, are amongst the
struggles in attaining broad perception from which to view the weathered profile.
Guidance in different engineering purposes of existing rock mass classification
essentially convey the development in enhancing the properties considered for
excavation assessment. Most classification emphasis on the application in tunneling
work. Concerning about weathered rock, the problems of structural complexity of the
parent rock, unpredictable variable due to wide range of properties, heterogeneity,
anisotropy and major changes in degree of weathering lead to difficulties in the method
of excavation in engineering design.
Characterization of rock masses has to some extent been developed by some
of the existing classification systems but few of them are of a general character as they
are mainly directed towards a specific engineering function or design. In geotechnical
engineering applications, the geophysical methods could be beneficial because there
are many chambers for improvement and development to cater the engineering
purposes. There is a need for better documentation and correlation of geological and
geophysical for each grade of weathering profile for surface excavation purposes in
order to adopt accurate and economical method in the construction.
1.3 Aim and Objectives
This study aims to investigate the geophysical characteristic of subsurface
profile that affecting the performance of surface excavation. In order to obtain reliable
5
and accurate information on subsurface materials for excavation purposes, this study
embark on the following objectives:
i. To characterize the rock mass and geophysical index using resistivity value and
seismic refraction velocity based on state of weathering.
ii. To evaluate and correlate the resistivity and seismic refraction value for
sandstone and shale with respect to surface excavation.
iii. To propose a surface excavation classification based on resistivity value and
seismic refraction velocity for tropically weathered sandstone and shale.
1.4 Research Scope
The study basically focuses on evaluating resistivity imaging and seismic data
as a geophysical tool to map the subsurface profile in non-bedded and bedded rock
mass area at few construction sites mainly in Johor Bahru. Special attention is provided
in determining resistivity value and seismic velocity of various weathering grade of
rock mass and evaluating them with their physical and mechanical properties related
to excavation. The study comprises of geophysics field measurement and rock mass
observation as well as laboratory testing in a way to investigate any possible
correlation between the resistivity value and seismic velocity with the excavation
performance in bedded sedimentary rock mass. Resistivity apply pole-dipole array for
the assessment of geophysical survey, while seismic velocity adopted in this study is
the primary wave (P). Two outcrops dominated by bedded sedimentary rock mass were
studied. The geophysical results were validated with existing borehole data. The
findings were then synthesized based on identified significant field observation,
physical and engineering properties of materials with resistivity value and seismic
velocity for the purpose of surface excavation works. Lastly, an inclusive resistivity
value and seismic velocity with engineering properties as one of the indirect
assessment tools in excavation assessment for tropically weathered rock mass was
proposed.
6
1.5 Novelty and Significant of Study
The economic grow is taking important part in a developed country as in
Malaysia. This study contributes to a cost efficient and improved performance of
excavation for construction purposes in a variety of materials, particularly in bedded
sedimentary rock mass. Resistivity value and seismic velocity for ground material is
very advantageous as it increases the interpretation accuracy of investigation site.
Besides that, heterogeneity issues on rock mass always a dispute during the
construction process, lead to the delay and cost expansion.
A more comprehensive classification should available to ease the assessment
of excavation process in order to enhance the economy by the development and
effective implementation of geotechnical characterization. Tropical region is
characterised by complex subsurface issues such as heterogeneities of ground, thick
weathering profile, decrease of strength due to moisture and unclear interface
boundary between soil and rock. Subsurface investigation may involve large area and
deeper regions of the ground. By comprehending geophysical method in excavation
assessment, the cost entail for total investigation work can be effectively sufficient
besides saving time consumption on the processes.
Geophysical method covered survey of large areas hence the number of
boreholes drilling to investigate the subsurface condition can be diminished. A critical
point or location of the borehole drilling will do to impact the geophysical data by
relating its properties to the pseudo section inspected. Marrying the geophysical and
geotechnical way of assessing ground could provide a simplified new option for
surface excavation. By understanding of the ground characteristic cater by seismic and
geophysical method, site investigation either for excavation purpose or preliminary
design stage could be enhance. Various geophysical method can be applied based on
the priority in different ground conditions such as rock type and strength.
By grasping resistivity and seismic velocity of tropically weathered sandstone
and shale for excavation purposes, the correlation between both rock mass and
geophysical resistivity and seismic velocity with excavation performance are
7
established. The most common available excavatability chart by Caterpillar (2007)
was modified with new range of seismic velocity for tropically weathered sandstone
and shale, besides disseminate the excavation performances into three classes which
are easy (> 400 m3/h), moderate (100 m3/h to 400 m3/h) and hard (< 100 m3/h). The
resistivity chart for excavation was proposed in addition to the new seismic velocity
chart, with reverence to excavation performances for both sandstone and shale. The
findings of this study contributed the development in excavatability assessment by
proposing the resistivity and seismic velocity value for tropically interbedded
sedimentary rock mass. The proposed scheme of resistivity and velocity index based
on tropically weathered sedimentary rock mass with respect to excavation performance
is extensively advanced compared to existing assessment.
252
Alel, M. N. A., Saad, R., Abdullah, R. A., & Wei, L. I. (2015). Applicability of
Electrical Resistivity Tomography in Subsusrface Utilities Engineering. Jurnal
Teknologi, 76(2).
Anbazhagan, P., Kumar, A., & Sitharam, T. G. (2013). Seismic site classification and
correlation between standard penetration test N value and shear wave velocity
for Lucknow City in Indo-Gangetic Basin. Pure and applied
geophysics, 170(3), 299-318.
Anbazhagan, P., Uday, A., Moustafa, S. S., & Al-Arifi, N. S. (2016). Correlation of
densities with shear wave velocities and SPT N-values. Journal of Geophysics
and Engineering, 13(3), 320-341.
Andersland, O. B., & Ladanyi, B. (1994). Mechanical Properties of Frozen Soils. In An
Introduction to Frozen Ground Engineering (pp. 121-150). Springer, Boston,
MA.
Anderson, N. L., Croxton, N., Hoover, R., & Sirles, P. (2008). Geophysical methods
commonly employed for geotechnical site characterization. Transportation
Research Circular, (E-C130).
Anomohanran, O. (2013). Seismic refraction method: A technique for determining the
thickness of stratified substratum. American Journal of Applied
Sciences, 10(8), 857.
Anuar, U. M., & Nordiana, M. M. (2018). Aquifer Detection Using 2-D Resistivity
Method and Porosity Calculation. Jurnal Teknologi, 80(6).
Aoki, H. and Matsukura, Y. (2007). A New Technique for Non-Destructive Field
Measurement of Rock-Surface Strength: An Application of the Equotip
Hardness Tester to Weathering Studies . Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms 32, 1759-1769.
Arikan, F., Ulusay, R. and Aydin, N. (2007). Characterisation of Weathered Acidic
Volcanic Rocks and a Weathering Classification based on a Rating System.
Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 66(4), (pp. 415-430).
Arikan, F., & Aydin, N. (2012). Influence of weathering on the engineering properties
of dacites in Northeastern Turkey. ISRN Soil Science, 2012.
Asry, Z., Samsudin, A. R., Yaacob, W. Z., & Yaakub, J. (2012). Groundwater
investigation using electrical resistivity imaging technique at Sg. Udang,
Melaka, Malaysia.
253
ASTM. (1990). Standard test method for slake durability of shales and similar weak
rocks (D4644). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol.
4.08, ASTM, Philadelphia, pp. 863-865.
ASTM. (2005). Standard test method for determination of rock hardness by Rebound
Hammer Method. D 5873-05.
ASTM. (2008). 4644: Standard Test Method for Slake Durability of Shales and Similar
Weak Rocks. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
ASTM. (2010). American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D2487.
Pennsylvania, United States. ASTM International.
ASTM D2216-10. (2010). Standard test methods for laboratory determination of water
(moisture) content of soil and rock by mass. Annual book of ASTM standards.
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia.
Atkinson, T., (1971). Selection of open pit excavating and loading equipment. Trans.
Ins. of Mining and Metallurgy, vol:80, pp A.101-129.
Azman Kassim and Edy Tonnizam Mohammad. (2007). Laboratory Study of
Weathered Rock for Surface Excavation Works. Technical Report, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, Johor, Malaysia.
Azwin, I. N., Saad, R., Saidin, M., Nordiana, M. M., Bery, A. A., & Hidayah, I. N. E.
(2015). Combined analysis of 2-D electrical resistivity, seismic refraction and
geotechnical investigations for Bukit Bunuh complex crater. In IOP
Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 23, No. 1, p.
012013). IOP Publishing.
Badee Alshameri. (2010). Engineering Properties of Older Alluvium. Master thesis
of Engineering (Civil-Geotechnics), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Badrakia, P., (2016). Estimation of Shear Wave Velocity Using Correlations.
International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology, 5(6), pp. 10574-10580.
Bailey, A. D., (1975). Rock types and seismic velocity versus rippability, Highway
Geology Symposium Prooceding, No: 26, pp. 135-142.
Baiyegunhi, C., Oloniniyi, T. L., & Gwavava, O. (2014). The correlation of dry density
and porosity of some rocks from the Karoo Supergroup: A case study of
selected rock types between Grahamstown and Queenstown in the Eastern
Cape Province, South Africa. IOSR Journal of Engineering (IOSRJEN) Vol, 4,
30-40.
254
Balasubramaniam, A., Likitlersuang, S., & Surarak, C. (2016). Long-term behaviour
prediction of the Bangkok MRT tunnels using simplified finite-element
modelling. Japanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication, 2(42), 1507-
1512.
Barton, N., Lien, R., & Lunde, J. (1974). Engineering classification of rock masses for
the design of tunnel support. Rock mechanics, 6(4), 189-236.
Barton, N. (1991). Geotechnical design. World Tunneling.
Barton, N. (2002). Some new Q-value correlations to assist in site characterisation and
tunnel design. International journal of rock mechanics and mining
sciences, 39(2), 185-216.
Basarir, H. and Karpuz, C. (2004). A rippability classification system for marls in
lignite mines. Journal of Engineering Geology : Vol. 74, Issues 3-4, 303-318.
Bell, F. G. (1978). The physical and mechanical properties of the fell sandstones,
Northumberland, England. Engineering Geology, 12, 1-29.
Bell, F. G. (2004). Engineering geology and construction. CRC Press.
Bengt, S. (1984). Shallow seismic refraction. Chapman and Hall Ltd. Pp 1-190.
Bery, A. A., & Saad, R. (2012). Correlation of seismic P-wave velocities with
engineering parameters (N value and rock quality) for tropical environmental
study. International Journal of Geosciences, 3(04), 749.
Bickel, J. & Kuesel. TR. (eds) (1982). Tunnel Engineering Handbook. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.
Bieniawski, Z. T. (1974). Estimating the strength of rock materials. Journal of the
Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 74(8), 312-320.
Bieniawski, Z. T. (1984). Rock mechanics design in mining and tunnelling (No.
Monograph).
Bieniawski, Z. T. (1989). Engineering rock mass classifications: a complete manual
for engineers and geologists in mining, civil, and petroleum engineering. John
Wiley & Sons.
Bieniawski, Z. T. (1993). Classification of rock masses for engineering: the RMR
system and future trends. In Rock Testing and Site Characterization (pp. 553-
573). Pergamon.
Bolt, B. A. (2001). The nature of earthquake ground motion. In The seismic design
handbook (pp. 1-45). Springer, Boston, MA.
255
Bolton, M. D., Lam, S. Y., & Vardanega, P. J. (May, 2010). Predicting and controlling
ground movements around deep excavations. In Keynote Lecture presented at
Geotechnical Challenges in Urban Regeneration: the 11th International
Conference of the DFI-EFFC. London (pp. 30-47).
Bozdag, T., (1988). Indirect rippability assessment of coal measure rocks, Ms. Thesis,
METU, Ankara, Turkey, 86 p.
Bozzano, F., Gaeta, M., & Marcoccia, S. (2006). Weathering of Valle Ricca stiff and
jointed clay. Engineering Geology, 84(3-4), 161-182.
Brady, B. H. G., & Brown, E. T. (2004). Rock Mechanics for Underground Mining,
3rd ed, (Kluwer Academic Publishers) 628 p.
Braybrooke, J. (1988). The State of the Art of Rock Cuttability and Rippability
Prediction. ifth Australia-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics:
Prediction Versus Performance; Preprints of Papers (pp. 13-42). Barton,
ACT: National conference publication (Institution of Engineers, Australia).
Broch, E., & Franklin, J. A. (1972). The point-load strength test. In International
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics
Abstracts (Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 669-676). Pergamon.
Budhu, M. (2008). SOIL MECHANICS AND FOUNDATIONS, (With CD). John Wiley
& Sons.
Burger, H. R. (1992). Exploration geophysics of the shallow subsurface (Vol. 8).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Burton, C. K. (1973). Geology and mineral resources, Johore Bahru-Kulai area, south
Johore. Ministry of Primary Industries.
Cai, M., & Horii, H. (1992). A constitutive model of highly jointed rock
masses. Mechanics of Materials, 13(3), 217-246.
Cardimona, S. (2002). Electrical resistivity techniques for subsurface
investigation. Department of Geophysics, university of Missouri Rolla-Mo.
Carrozzo, M. T., Leucci, G., Margiotta, S., Mazzone, F., & Negri, S. (2008). Integrated
geophysical and geological investigations applied to sedimentary rock mass
characterization. Annals of geophysics, 51(1).
Caterpillar Tractor Company. (2001). Caterpillar Performance Handbook. Preoria,
Illinois.
Caterpillar. (2004). Caterpillar Performance Handbook Edition (35th Ed), Preoria,
Illinois, USA, CAT publication, Caterpillar Inc.
256
Caterpillar. (2008). Caterpillar Performance Handbook Edition (38th Ed), Preoria,
Illinois, USA, CAT publication, Caterpillar Inc.
Caterpillar. (January, 2017). Caterpillar Performance Handbook Edition (47th Ed),
Preoria, Illinois, USA, CAT publication, Caterpillar Inc.
Ceryan, N., & Usturbelli, Z. H. (2011). The estimating of durability and weathering
state of tuff using rock durability indicators: a case study. International
Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference: SGEM: Surveying Geology &
mining Ecology Management, 1, 623.
Ceryan, S. (2012). 2 Weathering Indices for Assessment of Weathering Effect and
Classification of Weathered Rocks: A Case Study from NE Turke. In Earth
Sciences (pp. 19-44). Balikesir Turkey: Geology Engineering Department
Balikesir University.
Cha, Y. H., Kang, J. S., & Jo, C. H. (2006). Application of linear-array microtremor
surveys for rock mass classification in urban tunnel design. Exploration
Geophysics, 37(1), 108-113.
Chambers, J. E., Kuras, O., Meldrum, P. I., Ogilvy, R. D., & Hollands, J. (2006).
Electrical resistivity tomography applied to geologic, hydrogeologic, and
engineering investigations at a former waste-disposal site. Geophysics, 71(6),
B231-B239.
Chang, C., Zoback, M. D., & Khaksar, A. (2006). Empirical relations between rock
strength and physical properties in sedimentary rocks. Journal of Petroleum
Science and Engineering, 51(3-4), 223-237.
Chapman, D. N., Ahn, S. K., & Hunt, D. V. (2007). Investigating ground movements
caused by the construction of multiple tunnels in soft ground using laboratory
model tests. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 44(6), 631-643.
Choi, Y. O. S. O. O. N., & Park, H. D. (2006). Integrating GIS and 3D geostatistical
methods for geotechnical characterization of soil properties. Engineering
Geology for Tomorrow’s Cities. Geological Society, London.
Church, H. K., (1981). Excavation handbook, McGraw-Hill, NY, USA.
Dahlin, T., & Zhou, B. (2003). Properties and effects of measurement errors on 2D
resistivity imaging surveying. Near surface geophysics, 1(3), 105-117.
Dahlin, T., & Zhou, B. (2004). A numerical comparison of 2D resistivity imaging with
10 electrode arrays. Geophysical prospecting, 52(5), 379-398.
257
Deere, D. U., Hendron, A. J., Patton, F. D., & Cording, E. J. (1967). Design of surface
and near surface construction in rock, Proceedings of 8th US Symposium,
Rock Mechanics. Failure and Breakage of Rock, American Institute of Mining,
Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, Inc., New York.
Department of Agriculture Peninsular Malaysia (1973). Map of Soil Types in
Peninsular Malaysia L-40A Series first edition, Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
Dey, K., & Ghosh, A. K. (2008). Predicting" cuttability" with surface miners-A
rockmass classification approach.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Khairul Anuar Kassim and Ibrahim Komoo. (2005a).
Challenges of Ripping Works in Weathered Sedimentary Area. Proceedings
3rd International Conference on Geotechnical Enginnering, Semarang,
Indonesia, 1-13.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Khairul Anuar Kassim and Ibrahim Komoo. (2005b). To
Rip or to Blast: An Overview of Existing Excavation Assessment .
International Conference on Engineering and Technology (BICET 2005),
Brunei, 27-36.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad. (2007). Engineering Properties of Weathered Sedimentary
Rock Masses for Surface Excavation Works (Doctoral dissertation, Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia).
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Komoo, I., Kassim, K. A., & Gofar, N. (2008). Influence of
Moisture Content on the Strength of Weathering Sandstone. Malaysian
Journal of Civil Engineering, 20(1), 137-144.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Rosli Saad, Muhazian Md Noor, Isa, Mohamed Fauzi Bin
Md. Isa, & Ain Naadia Mazlan. (December, 2010). Excavatability Assessment
of Weathered Sedimentary Rock Mass Using Seismic Velocity Method. In AIP
Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1325, No. 1, pp. 132-136). AIP.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Abad, S. V. A. N. K., & Saad, R. (2011). Challenges of
excavation by ripping works in weathered sedimentary zone. Electron. J.
Geotech. Eng., 16, 1337-1350.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, and Abad, S. V. A. N. K. (2011). "Assessment on Blasting–
Induced Rock Slope Instability at Johor, Malaysia." Electronic Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering D 16.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Armaghani, D. J., Momeni, E., & Abad, S. V. A. N. K.
(2015). Prediction of the unconfined compressive strength of soft rocks: a PSO-
258
based ANN approach. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment, 74(3), 745-757.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Maybelle Liang and Nurmunirah Akhair. (2015). Effect of
Wet Tropical Weathering on the Strength of Sandstone. Jurnal Teknologi 76:2,
95-101.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Latifi, N., Arefnia, A., & Isa, M. F. (2016). Effects of
moisture content on the strength of tropically weathered granite from
Malaysia. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 75(1), 369-
390.
Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Danial Jahed Armaghani, Amir Mahdyar, Ibrahim Komoo,
Khairul Anuar Kassim, Arham Abdullah, & Muhd Zaimi Abd Majid. (2017).
Utilizing regression models to find functions for determining ripping
production based on laboratory tests. Measurement, 111, 216-225.
Eldar Guliyev, Thomas L. Davis. (2007). Interpretation of Vp/Vs velocity ratio for
improved tight gas sandstone reservoir characterization, Rulison field,
Colorado. San Antonio, Texas: Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
Elhakim, A. F. (2015). The use of Point Load Test for Dubai weak Calcareous
Sandstones. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering 7, 452-
457.
El-Naqa, A. (1996). Assessment of geomechanical characterization of a rock mass
using a seismic geophysical technique. Geotechnical & Geological
Engineering, 14(4), 291-305.
Fookes, P. G. (Ed.). (1997). Tropical residual soils: A Geological Society Engineering
Group working party revised report. Geological Society of London.
Forth, R. A., & Platt-Higgins, P. M. (January, 1981). Methods of investigation of
weathered rocks in Hong Kong. In ISRM International Symposium.
International Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.
Fowell, R. J. and Johnson, S. T. (1991). Cuttability Assessment Applied to Drag Tool
Tunneling Machines. Proceeding 7th International Congress Rock Mechanics.
Aachen, 985-990.
Franklin, J. A., Broch, E., & Walton, G. (1971). Logging the mechanical character of
rock.
Franklin, J. A. and Candra, R. (1972). The Slake Durability Test. International Journal
of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 9, 325-341.
259
Gamble, J. C. (1971). Durability-plasticity classification of shales and other
argillaceous rocks. Ph. D. thesis, University of Illinois.
Geological Society of London Engineering Group Party. (1977). The Description of
Rock Masses for Engineering Purposes, Quaterly Journal of Engineering
Geology, Vol.10 : 355-388.
Gobbett, D. J., Hutchison, C. S., & Burton, C. K. (1973). Geology of the Malay
Peninsula.
Gokceoglu, C., Ulusay, R., & Sonmez, H. (2000). Factors affecting the durability of
selected weak and clay-bearing rocks from Turkey, with particular emphasis
on the influence of the number of drying and wetting cycles. Engineering
Geology, 57(3-4), 215-237.
Gokceoglu, C., Zorlu, K., Ceryan, S., & Nefeslioglu, H. A. (2009). A comparative
study on indirect determination of degree of weathering of granites from some
physical and strength parameters by two soft computing techniques. Materials
Characterization, 60(11), 1317-1327.
Gomaa, A. M., Qu, Q., Maharidge, R., Nelson, S., & Reed, T. (January, 2014). New
insights into hydraulic fracturing of shale formations. In International
petroleum technology conference. International Petroleum Technology
Conference.
Gong, Q., & Zhao, J. (2009). Development of a rock mass characteristics model for
TBM penetration rate prediction. International journal of Rock mechanics and
mining sciences, 46(1), 8-18.
Goodman, R.E. (1980). Introduction to Rock Mechanics. John Wiley and Sons, N.Y.,
p. 37.
Google earth (June 14, 2014). Iskandar, Johor. 1°26'00.54"N, 103°37'44.50"E, Eye alt
505 m. DigitalGlobe 2014. http://www.earth.google.com
Google earth (November 21, 2006). Iskandar, Johor. 1°28'46.86"N, 103°35'04.22"E,
Eye alt 1.17 km. DigitalGlobe 2014. http://www.earth.google.com
Google earth (November 21, 2006). Iskandar, Johor. 1°28'30.32"N, 103°35'37.75"E,
Eye alt 1.42 km. DigitalGlobe 2013. http://www.earth.google.com
Google earth (November 21, 2006). Iskandar, Johor. 1°28'21.31"N, 103°35'21.31"E,
Eye alt 1.63 km. DigitalGlobe 2014. http://www.earth.google.com
260
Gragg, D.M., Croft, L.A., Bart Asher, and Beckett, D.P. (2006). Subsurface
geophysical investigation proposed bridge site for Breathitt Parkway extension
over 1-24 Christian Country, Kentucky.
Griffith D.H. & Barker R.D. (1993). Twodimensional resistivity imaging and
modelling in areas of complex geology. J appl Geophys 29:211–226.
Guliyev, E., & Davis, T. L. (2007). Interpretation of Vp/Vs velocity ratio for improved
tight-gas sandstone reservoir characterization, Rulison Field, Colorado. In SEG
Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2007 (pp. 1451-1455). Society of
Exploration Geophysicists.
Gumede, T. R. (2007). Measurement of typical joint characteristics in South African
gold mines and the use of these characteristics in the prediction of rock
falls. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, 107(5), 335-344.
Gupta, A. S., & Rao, S. K. (2001). Weathering indices and their applicability for
crystalline rocks. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 60(3),
201-221.
Gurocak, Z., Alemdag, S., & Zaman, M. M. (2008). Rock slope stability and
excavatability assessment of rocks at the Kapikaya dam site,
Turkey. Engineering Geology, 96(1-2), 17-27.
Hadjigeorgiou, J., & Poulin, R. (1998). Assessment of ease of excavation of surface
mines. Journal of terramechanics, 35(3), 137-153.
Hamidi, J. K., Shahriar, K., Rezai, B., & Rostami, J. (2010). Performance prediction
of hard rock TBM using Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system. Tunnelling and
Underground Space Technology, 25(4), 333-345.
Hamzah, U., & Samsudin, A. R. (2006). 2D Seismic Refraction Tomography Survey
on Metasediment at a Proposed Development Site in Dengkil, Selangor.
Harith, Z. Z. T., & Nawawi, M. N. M. (May, 2000). Mapping Faults Using Seismic
Refraction and 2-D Resistivity Imaging Technique in Kuala Ketil, Malaysia.
In 62nd EAGE Conference & Exhibition.
Haryati, A., Rashidi, N. A., Yusof, M., & Mohammad, K. (2017). Correlation Between
P-wave Velocity and Strength Index for Shale to Predict Uniaxial Compressive
Strength Value. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 103, p. 07017). EDP
Sciences.
261
Haryati, A., Hayati, A. N., Irwan, R. N., Azman, M. K., & Hilmi, H. M. (2019).
Overburden determination for quarry prospecting using seismic refraction: a
case study. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol.
244, No. 1, p. 012033). IOP Publishing.
Hassani, F. P., Scoble, M. J., & Whittaker, B. N. (1980). Application of the point load
index test to strength determination of rock and proposals for a new size-
correction chart. In The 21st US Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS).
American Rock Mechanics Association.
Hatta, K. A., Osman, S., & Azahar, S. B. (2015). Correlation of electrical resistivity
and SPT N-value from standard penetration test (SPT) of sandy soil. In Applied
Mechanics and Materials (Vol. 785, pp. 702-706). Trans Tech Publications.
Hickman, S., Todd, L., Steve, C. Anderson, N.L. and Newton, T. (2000). Geophysical
site characterization in support of highway expansion project. International
Conference on the Application of Geophysical Technologies to Planning,
Design, Construction, and Maintenance of Transportation Facilities, St. Louis,
MO.
Hoek, E., & Brown, E. T. (1980). Empirical strength criterion for rock masses. Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 106(ASCE 15715).
Hoek, E. (1983). Strength of jointed rock masses. Geotechnique, 33(3), 187-223.
Hoek, E., & Brown, E. T. (2019). The Hoek–Brown failure criterion and GSI–2018
edition. Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 11(3),
445-463.
Hudson, J. A. (1999). Technical auditing of rock mechanics modeling and rock
engineering design. In 37th US symposium on rock mechanics (Vol. 1, pp. 183-
197).
Huisman, M., Hack, H. R. G. K., & Nieuwenhuis, J. D. (2006). Predicting rock mass
decay in engineering lifetimes: the influence of slope aspect and
climate. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, 12(1), 39-51.
Ibrahim Komoo. (1985). Engineering properties of weathered rock profiles in
Peninsular Malaysia. Institution of Engineers Malaysia.
Ibrahim Komoo and Jasni Yaakub. (1990). Engineering Properties of Weathered
Metamorphic Rocks in Peninsular Malaysia. Proceedings of the 6th
International Congress (IAEG '90), (pp. 665-672). Balkema, Amsterdam,The
Netherland.
262
Ibrahim Komoo. (1995a). Geologi Kejuruteraan- Perspektif Rantau Tropika Lembap:
Kuala Lumpur. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia.
Ibrahim Komoo. (1995b). Syarahan Perdana Geologi Kejuruteraan Perspektif Rantau
Tropika Lembap. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia.
Inazaki, T., (2006). Relationship between S-wave velocities and geotechnical
properties of alluvial sediments. In Proceedings of the 19th Symposium on
Application Geophysics Engineering to Environmental Problems:
Environmental Engineering Geophysical Society, Seattle, WA, pp. 1075–
1085.
Ismail, M. A. M., Kumar, N. S., Abidin, M. H. Z., & Madun, A. (2018). Rippability
Assessment of Weathered Sedimentary Rock Mass using Seismic Refraction
Methods. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 995, No. 1, p.
012105). IOP Publishing.
ISRM. (1981). Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring. In Brown, E.T. (Ed.),
ISRM Suggested Methods. Pergamon, Oxford.
ISRM. (1988). Suggested methods for determining the fracture toughness of rock. Int.
J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr., 25, 71–97.
ISRM. (2007). The complete ISRM suggested methods for rock characterization,
testing and monitoring: 1974–2006. Kozan, Ankara.
Jafri, N. J. S., Ab Rahim, M. A., Zahid, M. Z. A. M., Bawadi, N. F., Ahmad, M. M.,
Mansor, A. F., & Omar, W. M. S. W. (2018). Assessment of soil compaction
properties based on surface wave techniques. In E3S Web of Conferences (Vol.
34, p. 01002). EDP Sciences.
Joseph, M., Serkan, S. and Paul, H. (2009). A Study on the Effect of Moisture Content
on Rock Cutting Performance. Coal Operators’ Conference. Coal 2009.
University of Wollongong & the Australasian Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy. 340-347.
Joyce, M. D. (1982). Site investigation practice (No. Monograph).
Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR), (1998). "Minit Mesyuarat Definition Rock, Unsuitable
Material & Concrete Road Kerb." Mac, Kuala Lumpur.
Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR), (eds)(2005). Standard Specification for Building Work.
Kamaruzzaman, A.Z. and Ahmad, A.R. (2010). Siasatan seismik di beberapa lokasi
kawasan Kundasang, Ranau, Sabah. Proceedings of Seminar on Engineering
and Environmental Geophysics 2010, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
263
Kanji, M. (2014). Critical Issues in Soft Rock. Journal of Rock Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering.
Karaman, K., Ercikdi, B., & Kesimal, A. (2013). The assessment of slope stability and
rock excavatability in a limestone quarry. Earth Sciences Research
Journal, 17(2), 169-181.
Karaman, K., & Kesimal, A. (2014). A comparative study of Schmidt hammer test
methods for estimating the uniaxial compressive strength of rocks. Bulletin of
Engineering Geology and the Environment, 74(2), 507-520.
Karaman, K., Kaya, A., & Kesimal, A. (2015). Use of the point load index in
estimation of the strength rating for the RMR system. Journal of African Earth
Sciences, 106, 40-49.
Karpuz, C. (1990). A Classification System for Excavation of Surface Coal Measures.
Mining Science and Technology, 11 (pp. 157-163). Amsterdam: Elsevier
Science Publishers B.V.
Kausarian, H., Shamsudin, A. R., & Yuskar, Y. (2014). Geotechnical and Rock Mass
Characterization Using Seismic Refraction Method at Kajang Rock Quarry,
Semenyih, Selango r Darul Ehsan. and Authors Pages, 13, 12.
Kavvadas, M. (1998). Hard soils—soft rocks: modelling the soil behaviour—selection
of soil parameters, general report. Napoli, Italy: Proceedings 2nd international
symposium on the geotechnics of hard soils—soft rock.
Keary, P. and Brooks, M., (1991). An introduction to geophysical exploration:
Blackwell scientific Publications, 254 p.
Kentli, B., & Topal, T. (2004). Assessment of rock slope stability for a segment of the
Ankara–Pozantı motorway, Turkey. Engineering Geology, 74(1-2), 73-90.
Kesimal, A., (2017). Excavatability assessment of rock masses for geotechnical
studies. turkey: Trends and Digital Advances in Engineering Geology.
Kesimal, A., Karaman, K., Cihangir, F., & Ercikdi, B. (2018). Excavatability
Assessment of Rock Masses for Geotechnical Studies. In Handbook of
Research on Trends and Digital Advances in Engineering Geology (pp. 231-
256). IGI Global.
Kibria, G., & Hossain, M. S. (2012). Investigation of geotechnical parameters affecting
electrical resistivity of compacted clays. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, 138(12), 1520-1529.Kirsten, H. (1982). A
264
Classification System for Excavation in Natural Materials. Civil Engineer in
South Africa: Volume 24, Issue 7,, 293-308.
Kirar, B., Maheshwari, B. & Muley, P. (2016). Correlation Between Shear Wave
Velocity (Vs) and SPT Resistance (N) for Roorkee Region. International
Journal of Geosynthetic and Ground Engineering 2:9.
Kirsten, H. A. D. (1982). A classification system for excavating in natural
materials. Civil Engineering= Siviele Ingenieurswese, 24(7), 293-308.
Knill, J. L., & Price, D. G. (1972). Seismic evaluation of rock masses. Proc. 24th Int.
Geol. Cong., Canada, 176-82.
Komatsu Ltd. (1987). Ripper Operation. Form AP6.
Kramadibrata, S. (1996). The influence of rock mass and intact rock properties on the
design of surface mines with particular reference to the excavatability of
rock (Doctoral dissertation, Curtin University).
Kramadibrata, S. (1998). Assessment on the Performance of Pontinous Surface
Miners. Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Mine Planning
and Equipment Selection, (pp. 551-556). Canada.
Kulatilake, P. H. S. W., Malama, B., & Wang, J. (2001). Physical and particle flow
modeling of jointed rock block behavior under uniaxial loading. International
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 38(5), 641-657.
Lan, H. X., Hu, R. L., Yue, Z. Q., Lee, C. F., & Wang, S. J. (2003). Engineering and
geological characteristics of granite weathering profiles in South
China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 21(4), 353-364.
Lapenna, V., Lorenzo, P., Perrone, A., Piscitelli, S., Sdao, F., & Rizzo, E. (2003).
High-resolution geoelectrical tomographies in the study of Giarrossa landslide
(southern Italy). Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 62(3),
259-268.
Laric, V.H. and Robert, J.W. (1987). Shallow seismic refraction methods in
exploration and engineering. Pp. 7-10.
Liang, M., Mohamad, E. T., Khun, M. C., & Alel, M. N. A. (2015). Estimating
Uniaxial Compressive Strength of Tropically Weathered Sedimentary Rock
Using Indirect Tests. Jurnal Teknologi, 72(3).
Liang, M., Mohamad, E. T., Faradonbeh, R. S., Armaghani, D. J., & Ghoraba, S.
(2016). Rock strength assessment based on regression tree
technique. Engineering with Computers, 32(2), 343-354.
265
Liang, M., Mohamad, E. T., Komoo, I., & Chau-Khun, M. (2017). Performance
evaluation of existing surface excavation assessment methods on weathered
sedimentary rock. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment, 76(1), 205-218.
Lim, B. K., & Jones, S. J. (1982). Some applications and problems of the seismic
refraction technique in civil engineering projects in Malaysia.
Liu, Y. C., & Chen, C. S. (2007). A new approach for application of rock mass
classification on rock slope stability assessment. Engineering geology, 89(1-
2), 129-143.
Liu, Q., Kieffer, D. S., Klima, K., & Brosch, F. J. (2009). A realistic fracture system
model for engineering analysis of underground excavations. In ISRM
International Symposium on Rock Mechanics-SINOROCK 2009. International
Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.
Loke, M. H., & Barker, R. D. (1996). Practical techniques for 3D resistivity surveys
and data inversion 1. Geophysical prospecting, 44(3), 499-523.
Loke, M.H., (1997). Electrical imaging surveys for environmental and engineering
studies. A practical guide to 2-D and 3-D surveys Penang, Malaysia, 57 pp.
Loke, M. H., (1999). RES2DINV—rapid 2-D resistivity and IP inversion using the
least-squares method. Software manual, 81 pp.
Loke, M. H., (January, 2001). Constrained time-lapse resistivity imaging inversion.
In Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and
Environmental Problems 2001 (pp. EEM7-EEM7). Society of Exploration
Geophysicists.
Loke, M. H., & Lane Jr, J. W. (2004). Inversion of data from electrical resistivity
imaging surveys in water-covered areas. Exploration Geophysics, 35(4), 266-
271.
Loke, M. H., (2007). RES2DINV ver 3.56: M.H. Loke on www.geoelectrical.com.
MacGregor, F., Fell, R., Mostyn, G. R., Hocking, G., & McNally, G. (1994). The
estimation of rock rippability. Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and
Hydrogeology, 27(2), 123-144.
Maheswari, R. U., Boominathan, A., & Dodagoudar, G. R. (2009). Use of surface
waves in statistical correlations of shear wave velocity and penetration
resistance of Chennai soils. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 28(2),
119-137.
266
Mahmoud Mostafa Abdou Abdel Naiem. (2013). "Reliability of using standard
penetration test (SPT) in predicting properties of silty clay with sand
soil." International Journal of Civil & Structural Engineering 3, no. 3: 545-
556.
Mahvelati, S., Kordjazi, A., & Coe, J. T. (2018). A review of seismic geophysical
testing in Iran for building near-surface velocity models. The Leading
Edge, 37(1), 68a1-68a10.
Mavko, G., & Mukerji, T. (1998). Bounds on low-frequency seismic velocities in
partially saturated rocks. Geophysics, 63(3), 918-924.
McAuliffe, J. R., Scuderi, L. A., & McFadden, L. D. (2006). Tree-ring record of
hillslope erosion and valley floor dynamics: landscape responses to climate
variation during the last 400 yr in the Colorado Plateau, northeastern
Arizona. Global and Planetary Change, 50(3-4), 184-201.
McCann, D. M., & Fenning, P. J. (1995). Estimation of rippability and excavation
conditions from seismic velocity measurements. Geological Society, London,
Engineering Geology Special Publications, 10(1), 335-343.
McDowell, P. W. (1993). Seismic investigation for rock engineering. In Rock Testing
and Site Characterization (pp. 619-634). Pergamon.
McDowell, P. W., Barker, R. D., Butcher, A. P., Culshaw, M. G., Jackson, P. D.,
McCann, D. M., ... & Arthur, J. C. R. (2002). Geophysics in engineering
investigations (Vol. 19). London: Ciria..
Milsom, J. (2003). Field geophysics (Vol. 25). John Wiley and Sons.
Mohd Firdaus Md Dan, Edy Tonnizam Mohamad, Ibrahim Komoo. (2016).
Characteristics of boulders formed in tropical weathered granite: A
review. Jurnal Teknologi, 78(8-6).
Mohd For Mohd Amin. (1995). Classification of Excavated Material Based on Simple
Laboratory Testings. Geological Society Malaysia, Bulletin. 38: 179-190.
Mohd For Mohd. Amin and Edy Tonnizam Mohamad. (2003). Excavatability of Hard
Materials in ILP, Mersing: Johor Bahru. Internal Report Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, Unpublished.
Mohd For Mohd Amin, Chan Sook Huei & Abdul Ghani Rafek. (2009). Rippability
Classification for Quartzite based on Specific Energy and Field Production
Rate. Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, 21(1).
267
Moustafa, S. S. (2015). Assessment of Excavatability in Sedimentary Rocks Using
Shallow Seismic Refraction Method.
Moon, V. G. (1993). Microstructural controls on the geomechanical behaviour of
ignimbrite. Engineering Geology, 35(1-2), 19-31.
Muftuoglu, Y. V. (1983). A study of factors affecting diggability in British surface
coal mines. Ph.D. thesis, University of Nottingham, Nottingham
(unpublished).
Munsell, C. (2009). Geological rock—color chart. Munsell Colour.
Namdar, A. (2010). Analysis of slope stability using limit equilibrium. Buletinul
Institutului Politehnic din lasi. Sectia Constructii, Arhitectura, 56(2), 75.
Nawawi, M.N.M, Baddrul, H.M.T. and Rosli, S. (2010). Application of geophysical
methods in civil engineering: mapping bedrocks and subsurface boulders.
Proceedings of Seminar on Engineering and Environmental Geophysics 2010,
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Nayan, K. A. M., Taha, M. R., Rosyidi, S. A., & Ismail, M. A. (2003). Civil
Engineering Application of the Spectral Analysis of Surface Wave (SAWSW)
Method.
Ng, T. F., Tate, R. & Tan, D. (2008). Geological Map of Peninsular Malaysia.
Nordiana, M. M., Saad, R., Nawawi, M. N. M., Azwin, I. N., & Mohamad, E. T.
(2013). Case study: shallow subsurface geology mapping using 2-D resistivity
imaging with EHR technique. APCBEE procedia, 5, 134-140.
Nourani, M. H., Moghadder, M. T., & Safari, M. (2017). Classification and assessment
of rock mass parameters in Choghart iron mine using P-wave velocity. Journal
of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 9(2), 318-328.
Ogunsola, N. O., Olaleye, B. M., & Saliu, M. A. (November, 2017). Effects of
Weathering on some Physical and Mechanical Properties of Ewekoro
Limestone, South-western Nigeria. International Journal of Engineering and
Applied Sciences, 4(11).
Oh, S., & Sun, C. G. (2007). Combined analysis of electrical resistivity and
geotechnical SPT blow counts for the safety assessment of fill
dam. Environmental Geology, 54(1), 31.
Okewale, I. A., & Coop, M. R. (2017). A study of the effects of weathering on soils
derived from decomposed volcanic rocks. Engineering geology, 222, 53-71.
268
Olona, J., Pulgar, J. A., Fernández‐Viejo, G., López‐Fernández, C., & González‐
Cortina, J. M. (2010). Weathering variations in a granitic massif and related
geotechnical properties through seismic and electrical resistivity
methods. Near Surface Geophysics, 8(6), 585-599.
Othman, A. A. (2005). Construed Geotechnical Characteristics of Foundation Beds by
Seismic Measurements. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering, Volume 2,
Number 2, 126-138.
Oyediran, I. A., & Falae, P. O. (2018). Integrated Geophysical and Geotechnical
Methods for Pre-Foundation Investigations. J Geol Geophys, 7(453), 2.
Palacky, G. J. (1987). Clay mapping using electromagnetic methods. First Break, 5(8),
295-306.
Palmstrom, A. (1995). RMi-a rock mass characterization system for rock engineering
purposes. na.
Parasnis, D.S., (1986). Principles of applied geophysics, 4th ed. Chapman and Hall,
London, 402 pp.
Pellerin, L. (2002). Applications of electrical and electromagnetic methods for
environmental and geotechnical investigations. Surveys in Geophysics, 23(2-
3), 101-132.
Pettifer, G. S. And Fookes, P. G., (1994). A revision of the graphical method for
assessing the excavatability of rock. Quarterly Journal of Engineering
Geology, 27, 145-164.
Plinninger, R. J., Spaun, G., & Thuro, K. (2002). Predicting tool wear in drill and
blast. Tunnels & Tunneling International Magazine, 1-5.
Pokar, M. (1998). Penggunaan kaedah pengimejan elektrik untuk menyiasat tapak-
tapak pembuangan sisa. Master thesis School of Physics, Universiti Sains
Malaysia.
Price, D. G. (2008). Engineering geology: principles and practice. Springer Science
& Business Media.
Priest, S. D., & Hudson, J. A. (June, 1981). Estimation of discontinuity spacing and
trace length using scanline surveys. In International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts (Vol. 18, No. 3,
pp. 183-197). Pergamon.
Rafek, M.B. (1980). Triassic conodonts from the Pavilion beds. Big Bar Creek, central
British Columbia: Geological Survey of Canada Paper 80-1C, p. 129-133.
269
Rafek, A. G., & Samsudin, A. R. (1989). Results of geoelectrical soundings for
mapping of a marine clay along the Tangkak-Pagoh highway Johor,
Malaysia. Exploration Geophysics, 20(2), 117-120.
Rawlings, C. G., Barton, N., Smallwood, A., & Davies, N. (January, 1995). Rock mass
characterisation using the IQ'and RMR systems. In 8th ISRM Congress.
International Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.
Reynolds, J. M., (1997). An Introduction to Applied and Environmental Geophysics,
Wiley, NY.
Riwayat, A. I., Nazri, M. A. A., & Abidin, M. H. Z. (2018a). Application of Electrical
Resistivity Method (ERM) in Groundwater Exploration. In Journal of Physics:
Conference Series (Vol. 995, No. 1, p. 012094). IOP Publishing.
Riwayat, A. I., Nazri, M. A. A., & Abidin, M. H. Z. (2018b). Detection of Potential
Shallow Aquifer Using Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERI) at UTHM
Campus, Johor Malaysia. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 995,
No. 1, p. 012103). IOP Publishing.
Robert, B.J and Jerome, V.D. (1988). Principles of engineering geology. John Wiley
& Sons. 1st edition.
Rofiqul Islam. (2005). Engineering geology and geophysical studies of granite
weathering profile at Bukit Fraser, Pahang. Graduate Thesis. National
University of Malaysia.
Rose Nadia, Rosli Saad, Nordiana Muztaza,Nur Azwin Ismail, Mohd Mokhtar Saidin.
(2016). Geotechnical Parameters Study Using Seismic Refraction
Tomography. Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78:8-6, 93-98.
Rosli, S. (2003). Penggunaan kaedah pembiasan seismik dan pengimejan elektrik 2-D
untuk mengesan batu bundar. Master thesis School of Physics, Universiti Sains
Malaysia.
Rosli, S. (2009). Novel protocol of engineering geophysics in urban environments.
Phd. Thesis School of Physics, Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Rosli, S., Nawawi, M. N. M., & Mohamad, E. T. (2012). Groundwater detection in
alluvium using 2-D electrical resistivity tomography (ERT). Electronic
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 17, 369-376.
Rucker, M. L. (2000). Applying the seismic refraction technique to exploration for
transportation facilities.
270
Rusnak, J., & Mark, C. (2000). Using the point load test to determine the uniaxial
compressive strength of coal measure rock.
Ryu, H. H., Cho, G. C., Yang, S. D., & Shin, H. K. (2011). Development of Tunnel
Electrical Resistivity Prospecting System and its Applicaton. Geoelectric
Monitoring, 179.
Santi, P. M. (1998). Improving the jar slake, slake index, and slake durability tests for
shales. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, 4(3), 385-396.
Santi, P. M. (2006). Field methods for characterizing weak rock for
engineering. Environmental & Engineering Geoscience, 12(1), 1-11.
Saptono, S., Kramadibrata, S., & Sulistianto, B. (2013). Using the Schmidt hammer
on rock mass characteristic in sedimentary rock at tutupan coal mine. Procedia
Earth and Planetary Science, 6, 390-395.
Sass, O. (2006). Determination of the internal structure of alpine talus deposits using
different geophysical methods (Lechtaler Alps,
Austria). Geomorphology, 80(1-2), 45-58.
Shaaban, H., El-Qady, G., Al-Sayed, E. S., Khozaym, A., Al-Emam, A., & Ghazala,
H. (2014). Archaeo-Geophysical Survey around Itay El-Baroud Area, Nile
Delta, Egypt. Archaeological Discovery, 2(03), 45.
Shakoor, A., & Barefield, E. H. (2009). Relationship between unconfined compressive
strength and degree of saturation for selected sandstones. Environmental &
Engineering Geoscience, 15(1), 29-40.
Shang, J., Hencher, S. R., & West, L. J. (2016). Tensile strength of geological
discontinuities including incipient bedding, rock joints and mineral veins. Rock
Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 49(11), 4213-4225.
Shang, J., Hencher, S. R., West, L. J., & Handley, K. (2017). Forensic excavation of
rock masses: a technique to investigate discontinuity persistence. Rock
Mechanics and Rock Engineering, 50(11), 2911-2928.
Sharif, E. (2011). An application of geophysical technique for assessment of
excavatability of destructed rock/intermd. Geomaterial (IGMs). In First EAGE
International Conference on Engineering Geophysics.
Shirlaw, J. N., Tan, T. S., & Wong, K. S. (December, 2005). Deep excavations in
Singapore marine clay. In Geotechnical Aspects of Underground Construction
in Soft Ground: Proc. of the 5-th Int. Symposium, Amsterdam (pp. 13-28).
271
Shishaye, H. A., & Abdi, S. (2016). Groundwater exploration for water well site
locations using geophysical survey methods. Hydrol. Curr. Res, 71, 7-226.
Shobe, C. M., Hancock, G. S., Eppes, M. C., & Small, E. E. (2017). Field evidence for
the influence of weathering on rock erodibility and channel form in bedrock
rivers. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 42(13), 1997-2012.
Singh, B., & Goel, R. K. (1999). Rock mass classification: a practical approach in
civil engineering (Vol. 46). Elsevier.
Singh, R. N., Denby, B., & Egretli, I. (January, 1987). Development of a new
rippability index for coal measures excavations. In The 28th US Symposium on
Rock Mechanics (USRMS). American Rock Mechanics Association.
Sirles, P. C. (2006). Use of geophysics for transportation projects (Vol. 357).
Transportation Research Board.
Sjøgren, B., Øfsthus, A., & Sandberg, J. (1979). Seismic classification of rock mass
qualities. Geophysical Prospecting, 27(2), 409-442.
Smith, H. J. (1986). Estimating Rippability By Rock Mass Classification. The 27th
U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics (USRMS), Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 443-
448.
Song, J. J. (2006). Estimation of areal frequency and mean trace length of
discontinuities observed in non-planar surfaces. Rock mechanics and rock
engineering, 39(2), 131-146.
Soupios, P. M., Georgakopoulos, P., Papadopoulos, N., Saltas, V., Andreadakis, A.,
Vallianatos, F., & Makris, J. P. (2007). Use of engineering geophysics to
investigate a site for a building foundation. Journal of Geophysics and
Engineering, 4(1), 94-103.
Stacey, H. (2007). Evaluation of risk of rock fall accidents in gold mine stopes based
on measured joint data. Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, 107(5), 345-350.
Stille, H., & Palmström, A. (2008). Ground behaviour and rock mass composition in
underground excavations. Tunnelling and Underground Space
Technology, 23(1), 46-64.
Storz, H., Storz, W., & Jacobs, F. (2000). Electrical resistivity tomography to
investigate geological structures of the earth's upper crust. Geophysical
Prospecting, 48(3), 455-471.
272
Stück, H. L. (2013). Dimensional sandstones: weathering phenomena, technical
properties and numerical modeling of water migration (Doctoral dissertation,
Niedersächsische Staats-und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen).
Stück, H., Koch, R., & Siegesmund, S. (2013). Petrographical and petrophysical
properties of sandstones: statistical analysis as an approach to predict material
behaviour and construction suitability. Environmental earth sciences, 69(4),
1299-1332.
Sudha, K., Israil, M., Mittal, S., & Rai, J. (2009). Soil characterization using electrical
resistivity tomography and geotechnical investigations. Journal of Applied
Geophysics, 67(1), 74-79.
Suryo, E. A., Gallage, C., Trigunarsyah, B., Mochtar, I. B., & Soemitro, R. (2011).
Application of electrical resistivity method to detect deep cracks in unsaturated
residual soil slope. In Proceedings of AP-UNSAT 2011: 5th Asia-Pasific
Conference on Unsaturated Soils (pp. 1-6). Geotechnical Engineering
Research and Development Center (GERD) Department of Civil Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering Kasetsart University, Thailand.
Taib, S., & Hasan, A. N. (2002). A meaningful correlation between shallow seismic
refraction data to borehole data in site investigation work.
Tajul Anuar Jamaludin and Mogana, S. (2000). Excavatability Assessment of
Weathered Rock Mass- Case Study for Ijok, Selangor and Kemaman,
Terengganu. Warta Geology, 26(3), 93-94.
Tajul Anuar Jamaluddin, and Ismail Yusoff. (2003). "Influence of Discontinuity on
Overbreaks and Underbreaks in Rock Excavation—Case Study from Beris
Dam, Kedah, Malaysia."
Tassone, A., Santomauro, M., Menichetti, M., Cerredo, M. E., Remesal, M. B., Lippai,
H., & Vilas, J. F. (2010). Imaging subsurface lithological and structural
features by resistivity tomography: North Beagle Channel (Tierra del Fuego,
Argentina). Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas, 27(3), 562-572.
Tating, F., Hack, R., & Jetten, V. (2013). Engineering aspects and time effects of rapid
deterioration of sandstone in the tropical environment of Sabah,
Malaysia. Engineering geology, 159, 20-30.
Tating, F., Hack, R., & Jetten, V. (2014). Weathering effects on discontinuity
properties in sandstone in a tropical environment: case study at Kota Kinabalu,
273
Sabah Malaysia. Bulletin of engineering geology and the environment, 74(2),
427-441.
Telford, W. M., Telford, W. M., Geldart, L. P., Sheriff, R. E., & Sheriff, R. E.
(1990). Applied geophysics (2nd ed). Cambridge university press, 770 pp.
Thuro, K., Plinninger, R. J., & Spaun, G. (September, 2002). Drilling, blasting and
cutting—is it possible to quantify geological parameters relating to
excavatability. In Proceedings of the 9th congress of the international
association for engineering geology and the environment, Durban, South
Africa. Engineering geology for developing countries (pp. 2853-2862).
Thuro, K., & Plinninger, R. J. (January, 2003). Hard rock tunnel boring, cutting,
drilling and blasting: rock parameters for excavatability. In 10th ISRM
Congress. International Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering.
Török, Á., & Vásárhelyi, B. (2010). The influence of fabric and water content on
selected rock mechanical parameters of travertine, examples from
Hungary. Engineering Geology, 115(3-4), 237-245.
Tsiambaos, G. and Saroglou, H. (2010). Excavatability assessment of rock masses
using the Geological Strength Index (GSI). Bulletin of Engineering Geology
and the Environment, Vol 69, Issue 1, 13-27.
Ugwu, N. U., Ranganai, R. T., Simon, R. E., & Ogubazghi, G. (2016). Geoelectric
Evaluation of Groundwater Potential and Vulnerability of Overburden
Aquifers at Onibu-Eja Active Open Dumpsite, Osogbo, Southwestern
Nigeria. Journal of Water Resource and Protection, 8(03), 311.
Ulugergerli, E. U., & Uyanik, O. (2007). Statistical correlations between seismic wave
velocities and SPT blow counts and the relative density of soils. Journal of
Testing and Evaluation, 35(2), 187-191.
Ulusay, R., Arikan, F., Yoleri, M. F., & Çaǧlan, D. (1995). Engineering geological
characterization of coal mine waste material and an evaluation in the context
of back-analysis of spoil pile instabilities in a strip mine, SW
Turkey. Engineering Geology, 40(1-2), 77-101.
Uyanik, O. (2010). Compressional and Shear-Wave Velocity Measurements in
Unconsolidated the Top-Soil andComparison of the Results. International
Journal of the Physical Sciences,Vol.5(7), 1034-1039.
274
Vardakos, S. (2004). A rock mass classification tool for personal digital assistants. The
Charles E. Via Jr. Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering. Geotechnical Engineering Group. Blacksburg, Virginia.
Vásárhelyi, B., & Ván, P. (2006). Influence of water content on the strength of
rock. Engineering Geology, 84(1-2), 70-74.
Wang, Z. (2001). Fundamentals of Seismic Rock Physics: Geophysics. 66(2): 398-412.
Wasantha, P. L. P., Ranjith, P. G., Haque, A., Kodikara, J., & Bouazza, A. (2011).
Implications of joint properties on the strength of a jointed rock mass.
In Advances in Unsaturated Soil, Geo-Hazard, and Geo-Environmental
Engineering (pp. 258-266).
Weaver, J. M. (1975). Geological Factors Significant in The Assessment of
Rippability. Civil Engineering:South African Institution of Civil Engineer,
Volume 17, Issue 12, 313-316.
Woodruff, K. D. (1971). Application of geophysics to highway design in the Piedmont
of Delaware. Newark, DE: Delaware Geological Survey, University of
Delaware.
Wu, F., Liu, T., Liu, J., & Tang, X. (2009). Excavation unloading destruction
phenomena in rock dam foundations. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment, 68(2), 257-262.
Zafirovski, Z., Peševski, I., & Papić, J. B. (2012). Methodology for extrapolation of
rock mass deformability parameters in tunneling. Facta universitatis-series:
Architecture and Civil Engineering, 10(3), 235-244.
Zainab Mohamed. (2004). Engineering Characterisation of Weathered Sedimentary
Rock for Engineering Work. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation: National
University of Malaysia.
Zainab Mohamed, Abd Ghani Rafek and Ibrahim Komoo. (2007). Characterisation
and classification of the physical deterioration of tropically weathered kenny
hill rock for civil works. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 12,
16.
Zainab Mohamed, Masahiro Chigira, Lim Choun Sian, and Ibrahim Komoo. (2011).
"Landslides in weathered granitic rocks in Japan and Malaysia."
Zhao, J., & Gong, Q. M. (2006). Rock mechanics and excavation by tunnel boring
machine–issues and challenges. In Rock Mechanics In Underground
Construction: (With CD-ROM) (pp. 83-96).
275
Zhang, L. (2016). Determination and applications of rock quality designation
(RQD). Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, 8(3), 389-
397.
Zuriati, J. (2010). Penggunaan kaedah pengimejan resistiviti 2-D dan seismik biasan
dalam kajian subpermukaan untuk kejuruteraan awam. Master thesis School of
Physics, Universiti Sains Malaysia.