EXCAVATABILITY METHOD BASED ON ENGINEERING GEOLOGY

CONDITIONS IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF RUKOH DAM SUPPLETION

TUNNEL, INDONESIA

Z B Harwinda1,2,W Wilopo 1* and I G B Indrawan1

1
Department of Geological Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta,
Indonesia
2
Ministry of Public Works and Housing, Jakarta, Indonesia

ABSTRACT
Determination of excavation technique was one of the essential factors in tunnel
construction stability. It also had an impact on the efficiency of the construction phase.
However, in the Detail Engineering Design of the Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel, there
was no study of the most optimal excavation technique in the construction phase. This
study aimed to assess the efficiency of excavation capabilities based on engineering
geology conditions. The parameters used in this study are RMR values, GSI values, If-
index (discontinuity spacing), Point Load (Is50) values, and Excavation Power Index
(EPI). The excavatability classification used the method developed by Abdullatif and
Cruden, Pettifer and Fookes, and Tsiambaos and Saroglou. The procedure for evaluating
efficiency used the EXCASS system. The tunnel's rock mass quality was poor calcareous
siltstone. The excavation method in the tunnel was the top heading and bench with a
stand-up time of 10 hours for a 2.5 m span. Based on the result, the most optimal
excavation technique used was the easy ripping method for zones 1 and 4, while the
digging method was for zones 2, 3, and 5. Even though the recommendations were
classified, project cost efficiency studies are required to bolster the recommendations.

Keywords: excavation technique, rukoh dam suppletion tunnel, EXCASS system,

1. INTRODUCTION
Rock mass characteristics are essential in determining the classification of excavation
techniques in the tunnel construction phase (Khamehchiyan, et al, 2014). Excavation
techniques often used in tunnel construction include digging, ripping, and blasting
(Mohammad, et al, 2005). Meanwhile, mechanical excavation is the most widely applied
excavation technique in poor rocks. Mechanical excavation consists of digging and
ripping techniques (Khamehchiyan, et al, 2014).
Excavatability Assessment is the determination of the excavation techniques based on
engineering geological aspects such as geotechnical and geomechanical conditions of a
rock mass (Kesimal, et al, 2018). Tunnel excavation is mainly controlled by the strength
of intact rock, continuity condition, RQD value, RMR, and GSI value (Dagdelenler,
2021). Therefore, rock mass quality and discontinuity condition analysis are fundamental
parameters that must be met in the excavatability assessment.
Based on the detailed engineering design of the Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel, this
tunnel is the first suppletion tunnel that separates from the main dam and penetrates a
1025 m long hill (Figure 1). This tunnel also fills the Rukoh Dam with water from the

1*
Corresponding author’s email: wilopo_w@ugm.ac.id
DOI: doi.org/10.22085/icsbe.vol2.art25

260
Krueng Tiro river. This tunnel is located in the calcareous siltstone with low weathering
to fresh rock (PT Wahana Adya Konsultan, 2019). Based on the previous study, rock
mass quality analysis has not been directly correlated with the tunnel excavation method
in the research area. The excavation techniques have not been recommended in the tunnel
design either. Therefore, the stability of the tunnel needs to be considered during the
excavation tunnel (PT Wahana Adya Konsultan, 2019). Mishandling of engineering
geology conditions (Chen, et al. 2020 and Wang et al, 2021) or improper excavation
methods and support systems (Ya S, et al 2018 and Li Z, et al, 2020) can cause tunnel
collapse. Consequently, ensuring optimal excavation techniques is vital.

Figure 1. Research Location Map

(Khamehchiyan, et al, 2014)

The research's primary goal is to assess the efficiency evaluations of selected

excavatability classifications in the Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel. The excavatability
category uses the method developed by Abdullatif and Cruden, Pettifer and Fookes, and
Tsiambaos and Saroglou (Abdullatif and Cruden, 1983; Pettifer and Fookes, 1994; and
Tsiambaos and Sroglou, 2010). The method for evaluating efficiency uses the EXCASS
system (Dagdelenler, et al, 2020). This research will also contribute as a case study on
applying optimization analysis of excavation techniques in the tunnel construction phase.

2. METHODOLOGY
Determining the tunnel excavation method at the research site consisted of two
fundamental parameters. The first parameter used the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) value as
a reference in selecting excavation stages. The second parameter used a combination of
Geological Strength Index (GSI) values, discontinuity spacing (If-index), Point Load
(Is50) values, and Excavation Power Index (EPI) values as the basis for the assessment
method for tunnel excavation.
2.1 GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION AT THE TUNNEL SITE
Geological investigations at the tunnel site consisted of surface and subsurface geological
investigations. The surface geological investigation was carried out through geological
mapping in the field (US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2001). In
this research, geological mapping was carried out with a mapping area of 1,5 x 1,5 km2

261
at the research site. The elevation contours were made based on the Topographic Map of
Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel (PT Waskita Karya (Persero), 2019). The geological
trajectory map covered the entire research area with fifty observation points in the field.
The subsurface geological investigation at the Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel was
conducted during two drilling projects in 2020 and 2022. In 2020, P.T. Wahana Adya
Konsultan carried out four drill points (BTS-1, BTS-2, BTS-3, and BTS-4). In 2022, PT.
Waskita Karya (Persero) carried out four drill points (TR-1, TR-2, TR-3, and TR-4) PT.
Wahana Adya Konsultan, 2019 and PT. Waskita Karya (Persero), 2022). The rock mass
quality was calculated using these core data at the tunnel height, as shown in Figure 2
(ISRM, 2018). As an outcome of rock mass classification, the RMR and GSI value may
be used to classify the tunnel excavation method.

Figure 2. Sample of core drill data at BTS-2 (poor rock quality)

(PT Wahana Adya Konsultan, 2019)

2.2 ROCK MASS CLASSIFICATION

Bieniawski initially introduced the RMR method in 1989 (Bieniawski, 1989). The RMR
method was based on five parameters (P1–P5). P1 was the uniaxial compressive strength
(UCS) value, P2 was the RQD value (Deere D U and Deere D W, 1989), P3 was the
spacing of discontinuity, and P4 was the discontinuity condition. Finally, P5 was the
specific groundwater condition at the rock site (Bieniawski, 1989).

RMR = P1 + P2 + P3 + P4 + P5 (1)

Visual inspection of rock mass from the borehole was used to compute the GSI value on
the subsurface. However, structural problems and discontinuities were the most relevant
factor in determining its value (Hoek, et al, 2013). Therefore, a discontinuity condition
(JCond) from the drilled rock mass was required to determine the subsurface rating.
The RMR method also correlated with GSI on parameters P2 and P4 (Palmstrom and
Stille, 2010). However, the value of relief with high and complete weathering was not
considered to calculate the RMR and GSI ratings (Deere D U, 1963). Therefore, the GSI
rating can be calculated by equation 2 (Hoek and Brown, 1997). This method can also
calculate GSI values from subsurface borehole samples.

GSI = 1.5JCond89 + (RQD/ 2) (2)

262
2.3 EXCAVATIBILITY ASSESSMENT METHOD
Before conducting an excavation assessment, it was necessary to know the stages of
tunnel excavation, stand-up time, and the required tunnel support system. This research
determined the stages of tunnel excavation, stand-up time, and support systems using
empirical methods based on the RMR value at the research site.
The RMR value, GSI value, If-index, and Is50 value can be used as excavatability
classification parameters. Based on Abdullatif and Cruden, the RMR value was used as a
parameter of excavatability classifications (Abdullatif and Cruden, 1983). Therefore, the
excavatability type can be classified in Table 1.

Table 1. Excavability assessment based on RMR [10].

RMR Value Excavability Class
60 < RMR < 100 Blasting
31 < RMR < 60 Ripping
RMR < 30 Digging

The GSI, If-index, and Is50 values were parameters in the excavation assessment chart
from (Pettifer and Fookes, 1994 and Tsiambaos and Sroglou, 2010). Meanwhile, to assess
the efficiency of the excavation method, the EXCASS System method was used as the
basis for evaluation (Dagdelenler, et al, 2020).

The If Index and the value of Is50 were parameters from the method developed by Pettifer
and Fookes (Pettifer and Fookes, 1994). If Index was determined with the formula:
3
If = Jv (3)

While the value of the volumetric joint number (Jv) was obtained from the calculation
formula developed by (Palmstrom, 2001):

Jv = (110 − RQD)/2.5 (4)

The Is50 value was the point load value of a rock mass. This value was obtained by
converting the UCS value from the laboratory results. Based on ISRM standards, the
following conversion formula can be used (IRSM, 1981):
UCS
Is50 = 20
(5)

The Excavability graph from Tsiambaos and Saroglou used the parameter values of GSI
and Is50 (Tsiambaos and Sroglou, 2010). In this method, there were two alternatives
offered. The different options can be told apart by their Is50 values. For example, the
graph of rocks with an Is50 value of more than 3 MPa differs from those with an Is50
value of less than 3 MPa.
Meanwhile, to assess the excavation method's effectiveness, the EXCASS System can be
used in this study. The GSI and Is50 values were used as inputs to the calculation of the
EPI value (Dagdelenler, et al, 2020). The formula used is as follows:

263
EPIopt = 0.77 (GSI2 × √Is50 )0.52 (6)

3. RESULT AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1 GEOLOGICAL CONDITION
The surface lithology found at the Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel was calcareous
siltstone. Based on surface geological mapping, the tunnel's location had a stratigraphy
with a young to the old sequence consisting of the alluvium, the calcareous siltstone unit,
and the calcareous sandstone unit. In addition, the core drill data analysis proved the
tunnel elevation's lithology condition. As a result, the lithology in the sub-surface was
similar to the surface, as shown in Figure 3.
3.2 THE RESULT OF ROCK MASS CLASSIFICATION
This study also classified the rock mass quality at tunnel elevation. Based on the
assessment, the entire drilling data was classified as fresh calcareous siltstone. The
groundwater condition was above the tunnel elevation. The UCS value at the tunnel
elevation ranged from 4.75 to 6.5 MPa. Based on the map in Figure 3, the strike was
perpendicular to the tunnel alignment, and the dip goes from 44° to 47°. Table 2 presents
the rock mass classification in the research area.
The rock mass quality assessment at eight drill points shows that the RMR value at the
tunnel elevation is in the calcareous siltstone with poor quality, while the GSI value is in
the poor to fair. After knowing the rock mass quality, an overlay is carried out between
the rock quality values and the tunnel design. The result of the overlay process is the
zoning of the tunnel construction. Figure 4 shows the tunnel construction zoning based
on engineering geology conditions.

Figure 3. Geological map and geological cross-section of suppletion tunnel

(PT. Waskita Karya (Persero), 2019)

Table 2. Rock mass classification of suppletion tunnel.

264
 Bore Elevation RMR GSI
Hole (M)ASL Nilai Class Value Class
BTS-1 141.60 - 135.60 35 Poor 40 Poor
TR-1 141.06 - 135.06 40 Poor 49 Poor
TR-2 140.40 - 134.40 30 Poor 33 Poor
BTS-2 139.70 - 133.70 28 Poor 29 Poor
TR-3 138.40 - 132.40 35 Poor 41 Poor
BTS-3 138.06 - 132.06 21 Poor 15 Poor
TR-4 137.30 - 131.30 24 Poor 21 Poor
BTS-4 136.75 - 130.75 30 Poor 31 Poor

Figure 4. Tunnel construction zoning.

3.3 EXCAVATION METHOD

Based on tunnel construction zoning in Figure 4, it can be proposed the excavation
method in the Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel (Pettifer and Fookes, 1994). After the
tunnel has been excavated, a support system is erected. The support system ensures the
tunnel's stability until the support is completely fixed and suited for use. Table 3 shows
the proposed excavation method and support system depending on the RMR value.
As a result, the tunnel's excavation method was the top heading and bench method with a
Stand-up time of 10 hours for a 2.5 m span. The tunnel was also enhanced with systematic
rock bolts, wire mesh, steel ribs, and shotcrete.

265
 Table 3. Excavation method.
RMR
Zone
Value Class Excavation Method Support System
1 40 Poor Rock bolts: length = 4-5 m, spacing = 1-
Top heading and
2 30 Poor 1.5 m
bench: Advance 1.0-
3 28 Poor 1.5 m in the top Steel Ribs: Light to moderate ribs, spacing
4 35 Poor heading; = 1.5 m
Shotcrete: 10-15 cm in the crown and 10
Install parallel
cm insides
5 24 Poor support - 10 m from Stand-up time 10 hours for a 2.5 m span
the face.

3.4 EXCAVATION ASSESSMENT

RMR, GSI, If Index, and Is50 value are excavatability classification parameters. Table 4
shows the parameters used in the capability assessment in the research area.

Table 4. Excavability assessment parameters.

Is50 Efficiency Parameters
Zon
RMR GSI If Mp
e 𝐆𝐆𝐆𝐆𝐆𝐆𝟐𝟐 √𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈 EPI
a
1 40 49 0,153 0,23 1151 30
2 30 33 0,105 0,25 545 20
3 28 29 0,088 0,26 429 18
4 35 41 0,150 0,29 905 27
5 24 21 0,101 0,22 207 12

Based on the RMR value parameter developed by Abdullatif and Crude, Excavatability
classifications were carried out by ripping and digging methods (Abdullatif and Cruden,
1983). Table 5 details the Excavatability categories for each zone in the tunnel.

Table 5. Excavability assessment based on RMR

Excavatability
Zone RMR
classifications

1 40 Ripping
2 30 Digging
3 28 Digging
4 35 Ripping
5 24 Digging
(Abdullatif and Cruden, 1983)

Figure 5 is the result of a tunnel excavation graph plot based on the method of (Pettifer
and Fookes, 1994). The parameters used are the If Index and the Is50 value, resulting in
the excavation method digging hard in all zones.

266
 Figure 5. Excavability assessment based on Pettifer & Fookes graph
(Pettifer and Fookes, 1994)

Based on the analysis results using the method of (Tsiambaos and Saroglou, 2010),
excavatability classifications in zones 1 and 4 use the ripping method, while the digging
method is used in zones 2, 3, and 5. Figure 6 shows the parameter plots on the excavation
graph plot where the value Is50 < 3Mpa.

Figure 6. Excavability assessment based on Tsiambaos & Saroglou graph [12].

The efficiency of the recommended excavation techniques was evaluated using the
EXCASS System. GSI and Is50 values are used as inputs in the calculation of tunnel
excavation optimization (Dagdelenler, et al, 2020). The plot results on the EXCASS
System graph (Figure 7) show that the easy ripping method is the most efficient method
used in zones 1 and 4, while the digging method is used in zones 2, 3, and 5.

267
 Figure 7. Efficiency assessment based on EXCASS system
(Dagdelenler, et al, 2020).

As a result, excavatability classifications show similarities in excavation techniques in all

tunnel zones based on the Abdullatif and Cruden method and Tsiambaos and Saroglou
method but based on the Pettifer and Fookes method show different excavation
techniques. So, based on the efficiency evaluation using the EXCASS System, the most
optimal excavation technique used is the easy ripping method for zones 1 and 4, while
the digging method is for zones 2, 3, and 5 (Table 5).

Table 5. Excavatability Assessment Result

Assessment
Excavatability classifications
Result
Zone Tsiambaos and EXCASS system
Abdullatif and Pettifer and
Saroglou Dagdelenler et al
Cruden (1983) Fookes (1994)
(2010) (2020)
1 Ripping Hard Digging Ripping Easy Ripping
2 Digging Hard Digging Digging Digging
3 Digging Hard Digging Digging Digging
4 Ripping Hard Digging Ripping Easy Ripping
5 Digging Hard Digging Digging Digging

4. CONCLUSIONS
The lithology of the tunnel is calcareous siltstone with poor rock mass quality based on
the RMR classification. With poor rock quality, the proper excavation method in the
tunnel is the top heading and bench methods with parallel support 10 m from the tunnel
face. This excavation method has a stand-up time of 10 hours for a 2.5 m span.
According to the study research, rock masses of the same quality do not necessarily have
the same excavatability classes. Consequently, comparing rock mass classifications like
GSI, ID Index, Is50 value, and EPI value significantly impact establishing excavatability
types.
The excavation techniques in all tunnel zones are similarly based on the Abdullatif and
Cruden method and the Tsiambaos and Saroglou method. However, the excavation

268
techniques are different based on the Pettifer and Fookes method. So, based on the
EXCASS System's efficiency evaluation, the most optimal excavation technique for
zones 1 and 4 is the easy ripping method, but the digging method is optimal for zones 2,
3, and 5. Regardless of the appropriate excavation technique, additional cost and
equipment analysis studies are required to evaluate the project's cost-effectiveness.

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are grateful to the Sumatera I River Basin Organization (BWS) and P.T.
Waskita Karya (Persero) for their permit and support data for this research. In addition,
financial support from the Human Resource Development Agency of the Ministry of
Public Works and Housing Indonesia is gratefully acknowledged.

6. REFERENCES
Abdullatif O M, Cruden D M 1983 The relationship between rock mass quality and ease
of excavation Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 28:183–187
Badan Pusat Statistik D.I.Yogyakarta 2022 Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Dalam
Angka. (Yogyakarta: Penerbit Badan Pusa Statistik Provinsi D.I. Yogyakarta).
Bieniawski Z T 1989 Engineering rock mass classifications: a complete manual for
engineers and geologists in mining, civil, and petroleum engineering (New York:
John Wiley & Sons)
Chen Z, He C, Yang W, Guo W, Li Z, and Xu G 2020 Impact of geological conditions
on instability causes and mechanical behavior of large-scale tunnels: a case study
from the Sichuan–Tibet highway Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment
Dagdelenler G 2021 Comparison of the efficiency evaluations of selected excavatability
classifications for rock masses Arabian Journal of Geosciences 14 1281
Dagdelenler G, Sonmez H, and Saroglou 2020 A flexible system for selection of rock
mass excavation method Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment 79:
5355–5369
Deere D U 1963 Technical Description of Rock Cores for Engineering Purpose Rock
Mechanics and Engineering Geology 1(1): 16-22.
Deere D U and Deere D W 1989 Rock quality designation (RQD) after twenty years
(Washington: US Corps of Engineers)
Direktorat Jenderal Bina Marga 1997 Manual Kapasitas Jalan Indonesia (Jakarta:
Penerbit Bina Marga)
Fhadil M 2019 Analisis Simpang Bersinyal dan Hubungan Panjang Antrian dan Waktu
Tundaan Terhadap Konsumsi Bahan Bakar Minyak (Studi Kasus: Simpang
Bersinyal UPN Yogyakarta) Tugas Akhir (Yogyakarta: Universitas Islam
Indonesia)
Hoek E. and Brown E T 1997 Practical Estimates of Rock Mass Strength International
Journal Rock Mechanics Mining Science 34 1165-1186.
Hoek E, Carter T G, and Diederichs M S 2013 Quantification of the Geological Strength
Index Chart Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium ARMA 672-680.
Iduwin T and Purnama D D 2018 evaluasi kinerja simpang tak bersinyal (studi kasus :
Simpang Tiga Jambu Jl. Raya Duri Kosambi) Jurnal Forum Mekanika, Vol. 7, No.
2, 111-116.
Isnaeni M 2003 Efek Lingkungan Interaksi Transportasi dan Tata Ruang Kota Tesis
(Bandung: Institut Teknologi Bandung)

269
ISRM 1978 Suggested Methods for The Quantitative Description of Discontinuities in
Rock Masses: International Society for Rock Mechanics. International Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Mining Science & Geomechanics 15 319-368
ISRM 1981 Suggested a method rock characterization, testing, and monitoring (Oxford:
Pergamon Press)
Julianto E N 2007 Analisis Kinerja Simpang Bersinyal Simpang Bangkong dan Simpang
Milo Semarang Berdasarkan Konsumsi Bahan Bakar Minyak Tesis (Semarang:
Universitas Dipenogoro)
Kesimal A, Karaman K, Cihangir F, and Erçıkdı F 2018 Excavatability assessment of
rock masses for geotechnical studies Handbook of research on trends and digital
advances in engineering geology ss.231-256
Khafidz L, Sumarsono A, and Amirotul MHM 2016 hubungan tundaan dan panjang
antrian terhadap konsumsi bahan bakar minyak pada lajur pendekat simpang (Studi
Kasus Pada Jalan Arteri Kota Surakarta) Jurnal Matriks Teknik Sipil. 774-780.
Khamehchiyan M, Dizadji MR, and Esmaeili M 2014 Application of rock mass Index
(RMi) to the rock mass excavatability assessment in open face excavations
Geomechanics and Geoengineering 9(1): 63–71
Li Z, Wang L, Feng B, Xiao J, Zhang Q, Li L, and Liang J 2020 Comprehensive collapse
investigation and treatment: An engineering case from Qingdao expressway
tunnel. Journal of Cleaner Production
Mohamad E T, Kassim K A, and Komoo I 2005 An overview of existing rock
excavatability assessment techniques Jurnal Kejuruteraan Awam 17(2): 46–59
Munawar A 2006 Manajemen Lalu Lintas Perkotaan. (Yogyakarta: Beta Offset).
Palmström A and Stille H 2010 Rock Engineering (London: Thomas Telford) pp 408
Palmström A 2001 Measurement and characterizations of rock mass jointing In-Situ
Characteristic Rocks pp 140
Pettifer G S, Fookes P G 1994 A revision of the graphical method for assessing the
excavatability of rock Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology 27: 145–164
PT. Wahana Adya Konsultan 2019 Detail Engineering Design Bendung Pengarah
Bendungan Tiro (Pidie: Balai Wilayah Sungai Sumatera I)
PT. Wahana Adya Konsultan 2019 Laporan Geologi/Mekanika Tanah DED Bendung
Pengarah Bendungan Tiro (Pidie: Balai Wilayah Sungai Sumatera I)
PT. Waskita Karya (Persero) 2019 Topographic Map of Rukoh Dam Suppletion Tunnel
(Pidie : Balai Wilayah Sungai Sumatera I) 1
PT. Waskita Karya (Persero) 2022 Laporan Geologi/Mekanika Tanah Investigasi
Tambahan TR1 dan TR2 Bendung Pengarah Rukoh (Pidie: Balai Wilayah Sungai
Sumatera I)
Putra, A P 2012 Analisis Hubungan Kinerja Simpang Bersinyal Terhadap Konsumsi
Bahan Bakar di Kota Surakarta Skripsi (Surakarta: Universitas Sebelas Maret)
Republik Indonesia 2015 Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan No. 96 Tahun 2015 tentang
Pedoman Pelaksanaan Manajemen dan Rekayasa Lalu Lintas.
Sinambela T P, Kumaat M, and Pandey S V 2021 analisa hubungan kinerja simpang
bersinyal dengan konsumsi bahan bakar (Studi Kasus: Simpang Jl. A.A. Maramis-
Jl. Ringroad II) Jurnal TEKNO, Vol. 19, No. 78, 159-170.
Sriwati, Said L B, and Maryam, H 2019 pengaruh pertumbuhan kendaraan dan kapasitas
jalan terhadap kemacetan di Ruas Jalan Perintis Kemerdekaan Jurnal Ilmiah
Nasional, Vol. 3, No. 1, 79-86.
Tsiambaos G and Saroglou H 2010 Excavatability assessment of rock masses using the

270
 geological strength index (GSI) Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the
Environment 69(1): 13–27
US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2001 Engineering Geology Field
Manual Volume II (USA)
Wang K, Xu S, Zhong Y, Han Z, and Ma E 2021 Deformation failure characteristics of
weathered sandstone strata tunnel: A case study. Engineering Failure Analysis
p127
Ya S, Yonghua S, Zhao M, Liu S, and Li X 2018 A case study of the failure of the
Liziping tunnel. Tunneling and Underground Space Technology

271