COMPUTING ROCK MASS BEHAVIOR BY ROCK QUALITY

DESIGNATION (RQD)
A SEMINAR REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE
OF
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
IN
MINING ENGINEERING
BY
BALDEV SINGH JADON
ROLL NUMBER : 15BMI70009

DEPARTMENT OF MINING ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE
JODHPUR-342001
January 2016

A SEMINAR
ON
COMPUTING ROCK MASS BEHAVIOR BY ROCK QUALITY
DESIGNATION (RQD)

BY

BALDEV SINGH JADON

UNDER THE GUIDENCE OF

Dr. D. M. SURANA
FORMER PROFESSOR & HEAD

DEPARTMENT OF MINING ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE
JODHPUR-342001
January 2016

ABSTRACT

In this seminar report, a new model was presented for computing strength of rock masses
based upon in-situ observations of RQD popularly known as rock quality designation.
This model links up the rock mass parameters from in-situ investigations with the
strength parameters of jointed rocks obtained from laboratory scale experimental
observations. Using the constitutive relation, a pressure and damage sensitive plastic
parameter to determine strength of rock masses for varied extents of discontinuity and
pressure induced damage has been reported. The plasticity characterized by hardening
and softening inclusive of damage invariably depends upon mean pressure and extent of
deformations already experienced by rock masses. The test data reveal the dependence of
in-situ strength on incremental joint parameters obtained from the joint number, joint
orientation, joint roughness, gouge parameters and water pressure. Substituting the
relationship between the RQD and modified joint factor with that between modulus ratio
and strength ratio, the model shows successfully that using damage inclusive plastic
parameter and RQD provides a relationship for estimating the strength of rock masses.
The present model is sensitive to plasticity and damage together in estimating in-situ
strength of rock masses in foundations, underground excavation and tunnels.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my gratitude and indebtedness to Dr. D. M. Surana Former

Professor & Head of Department, for his kindness in allowing me to do work on this
topic and for his inspiring guidance, constructive criticism and valuable suggestions
throughout this seminar work.
I would also like to thank Dr. A.S. Sheoran, Head of Department, for his valuable
guidance throughout the seminar work.

DATE :
BALDEV SINGH JADON
ROLL NO. 15BMI70009

iii

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Mr. BALDEV SINGH JADON, student of Final Year B.E.
(Mining Engineering) has submitted the seminar report entitled COMPUTING OF
ROCK MASS BEHAVIOUR BY ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD),
which is record of his own work carried out under my guidance.

Dated
Dr. D.M SURANA
FORMER PROF. & HEAD
Department of Mining Engineering
M.B.M Engineering College, JODHPUR

iv

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

iii

CERTIFICATE

iv

CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 What is RQD?

1.2 What is Rock Mass?

2.0 COMPUTING DISCONTINUITY FREQUENCY BY RQD

2.1 Background

2.2 Analysis

2.3 Discussion

3.0 COMPUTING THE DEFORMATION MODULUS OF ROCK MASSES BY RQD 5

3.1 Existing Relationship Between RQD and Deformation Modulus

3.2 New Relationship Between RQD and Deformation Modulus

3.2.1 Data Base

3.2.2 Discussion

3.3 Recommended Relationship Between RQD and Deformation Modulus

4.0 RQD WITH OTHER VARIABLES

10
12

4.1RQD With Hydraulic conductivity and depth

12

4.2 Relationship RQD and Intrinsic Joint Characteristics

13

4.3 Correlation between RQD and Volumetric Joint Count

15

5.0 CONCLUSION

16

REFERENCES

18

LIST OF FIGURES
Fig
1.1
2.1
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4.1
4.2
4.3

Title
Procedure for measurement and calculation of RQD (Palmstrom
A,2005)
Graph showing RQD vs Fracture Frequency in Monzonite
Poryphyry(Vali B and Arpa G, 2013)
Variation of / with RQD(Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)
/ RQD Data(Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)
Variation of / with the average discontinuity spacing s
RQD- discontinuity frequency relations for threshold values of
0.1 and 0.5m(Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)
Recommended relation between RQD and / (Zhang L and
Einstein H, 2003)
The Plots of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Depth and RQD vs
Depth(Jiang W X, Wan L, Wang X S, Wu X and Zhang X, 2009)
The Scatter Plot of Hydraulic conductivity vs RQD(Jiang W X,
Wan L, Wang X S, Wu X and Zhang X, 2009)
Correlation RQD with the variation range (Palmstrom A,2005)

Page Number
2
5
6
7
9
10
11
13
13
16

vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 What is RQD?
The RQD was developed by Deere to provide a quantitative estimate of rock mass quality
from drill core logs. It is defined as "the percentage of intact core pieces longer than 100
mm in the total length of core." The core should be at least NX size (54.7 mm in diameter)
and should be drilled with a double-tube core barrel.The RQD is an easy and quick
measurement as only certain core pieces (longer than 10cm) are included, see Fig. 1.1
It is, therefore, frequently applied in core logging and is often the only method used for
measuring the degree of jointing along the core drill hole. The most important use of RQD is
as a component of the RMR and Q rock mass classifications. RQD gives an average
measurement of the degree of jointing along the actual section (core run); therefore, it is no
meaning saying that RQD varies between 10 and 20 for that section. Measured along several
sections, the RQD has, of course, a variation. (Palmstrom A,2005)
The importance of the RQD is demonstrated by its use as a parameter in the widely
employed Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system and the Rock Quality Tunneling Index (Qsystem). The RQD equation is as follows: (Olson et al., 2015)

RQD (%) = () * 100%

Where,
= Length of core pieces > 10cm length
= Total length of core run

Fig1.1 : Procedure for Measurement and Calculation of RQD (Palmstrom A, 2005)

1.2 What is Rock Mass?

A large and indistinct body of solid earth materials, containing features on the scale of
jointing, folding, schistosity etc. The term would not be used to describe a rock only the size
of a hand specimen. Rock masses show varied levels of hardening and softening together in
relation to the tension, isotropic pressure and peak uniaxial compressive strength of
relatively intact rocks. The behaviors of mass materials, consisting of inherent and induced
discontinuities, anisotropy, and non-homogeneities, namely, rock masses, require
considerations of cumulative plastic strains in a relatively intact and fully adjusted state,
which can be explained realistically by the disturbed state concept . (Olson L. et al., 2015)

2.0 COMPUTING DISCONTINUITY FREQUENCY BY RQD

2.1 Background
According to Hudson & Harrison (2000), discontinuity frequency, being the number of
fractures per metre, is the reciprocal of the mean spacing. When a sufficiently large sample
of these individual spacing values (preferably more than 200 individual measurements) is
plotted in histogram form, a negative exponential distribution is often evident. The general
trend of this histogram is for there to be many small spacing values and few very large
spacing values in the distribution. The discontinuity spacing parameter is often used in rock
mass classification schemes such as the rock mass rating system. (Hudson, 2000)
Discontinuity spacing measurements can be separated into the following three forms:
Total spacing is the distance between two adjacent discontinuities, measured along a line
of general, but specified, location and orientation.
Set spacing is the spacing between two adjacent discontinuities from a particular
discontinuity set, measured along a line of general, but specified, location and orientation.
Normal set spacing is the set spacing measured along a line that is normal to the mean
orientation of a particular set.
Priest and Hudson reported that discontinuities are never similarly distributed in all
directions and, as a consequence, frequency values will depend on the direction of the
mapping line. They provide formulae that allow the estimation of discontinuity frequency
along any orientation for a given discontinuity set of known orientation and spacing. The
formulae allow detailed analysis of frequency variation and can be used to estimate the
directions and magnitudes of the maximum and minimum frequency values for a given rock
mass.
The Rock Quality Designation (RQD) measures the percentage of good rock within a
borehole. It was developed by Deere as a means of qualitatively describing whether a rock
mass provided favourable tunnel conditions. It is now used as a standard parameter in drill
core logging and forms a basic element of several rock mass classification systems. It is an
index related to the degree of fracturing of the core. RQD is a modified core recovery
percentage in which all the pieces of sound core over 100 mm(4 in.) long are summed and
divided by the length of the core run.
3

Priest and Hudson proposed the following relationship between a theoretical RQD* and the
mean discontinuity frequency per meter ():
RQD = 100(0.1 + 1) 0.1

(1)

Priest and Hudson (1976) also proposed that the use of this equation in conjunction with
scanline surveys on freshly exposed faces is more appropriate than the determination of
RQD from diamond core. This is because core logging may tend to underestimate RQD
values due to the formation of induced fractures during the drilling process. Priest and
Hudson suggested that a plot of versus RQD*shows a good linear approximation within
ranges of 6<<16 is provided by the tangent at the inflection point of the curve (Fig 2.1).
The equation of the tangent is given by:(Vali B and Arpa G, 2013)
RQD= 110.4 3.68

(2)

2.2 Analysis
Hence, using this equation, data analysis was carried out to find the relationship between
RQD and fracture frequency in Monzonite Porphyry. The graph and equation derived from
this is shown in fig no. 2.(Vali B and Arpa G, 2013)
2.3 Discussion
The diamond drill holes were drilled across the strike of the predominant structural
orientations, whereas the mapping was done approximately parallel to the predominant
geological structures. The effects of orientation bias will have caused the diamond holes to
intersect the predominant geological orientations more regularly than the scanlines hence
showing in the difference between the RQD values obtained from the drill holes and the
values obtained using the equation. When comparing the RQD values, they are slightly
different and this is explained by RQD being a directional parameter. It is more sensitive in
the direction it is obtained. The main reason for this was that mapping was carried out in the
horizontal direction while the RQD parameters were obtained through vertical drill holes.
But the general trend of the relationship between RQD and fracture frequency still tend to
follow the one suggested by Priest and Hudson.(Vali B and Arpa G, 2013)
4

Fig 2.1 Graph Showing RQD vs Fracture Frequency in Monzonite Poryphyry (Vali B and
Arpa G, 2013)

3.0 COMPUTING THE DEFORMATION MODULUS OF ROCK MASSES BY RQD

3.1 Existing Relationship Between RQD and Deformation Modulus
Based on field studies at Dworshak Dam, Deere et al., suggested that RQD be used for
determining the rock mass deformation modulus. By adding further data from other sites,
Coon and Merritt developed a relation between RQD and the modulus ratio / ; where
and are the deformation moduli, respectively, of the rock mass and the intact rock
(fig-3). It is noted that there are few data in the range RQD<60%.
Gardner proposed the following relation for estimating the rock mass deformation modulus
from the intact rock modulus by using a reduction factor aE which is related to RQD:
5

(3)

= 0.0231 1.32 0.15(4)

This method was adopted by the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials in the Standard Specification for Highway Bridges . For
RQD>57%, Eq. (1) is the same as the relation of Coon and Merritt . For RQD<57%, Eq. (1)
gives / =0.15: It is noted that there are no data to support the selection of / =0.15
for RQD<57%.(Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)

Fig 3.1 : Variation of / with RQD (Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)

3.2 New Relationship Between RQD and Deformation Modulus
3.2.1 Database: Because of the limitations of the existing RQD / relations, additional
data were collected from the published literature so that a new RQD / relation could
be developed. Fig 3.2shows the collected data added to the data of Coon and Merritt. The
6

data now cover the entire range 0 RQD 100% and show a nonlinear variation of
/ with RQD. The rocks for the data include mudstone, siltstone, sandstone, shale,
dolerite, granite, limestone, greywacke, gneiss, and granite gneiss.(Zhang L and Einstein H,
2003)

Fig 3.2 : / RQD Data (Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)

3.2.2 Discussion: The data in Fig. 3.2 show a large scatter, which may be caused by many
different factors. The following discusses most important four of them.
(a) Testing methods: The data in Fig. 3.2were obtained with different testing methods. For
example, Deere et al., used plate load tests while Ebisu et al. used borehole jacking tests.
Different testing methods may give different values of deformation modulus even for the
same rock mass. According to Bieniawski , even a single testing method, such as the flat
jack test, can lead to a wide scatter in the results even where the rock mass is very uniform.
(b) Directional effect: Most rock masses are anisotropic and do not have a single
deformation modulus. RQD also varies with direction through a fractured rock mass. The
dependence of both RQD and deformation modulus on direction adds to the scatter of the
data.
7

(c) Discontinuity conditions: RQD does not consider the discontinuity conditions, such as
the aperture and fillers. However, the discontinuity conditions have a great effect on the rock
mass deformation modulus. The equivalent continuum models clearly show the effect of the
discontinuity stiffness on the rock mass deformation modulus. For example, from
Kulhawys equivalent continuum model for a rock mass containing three orthogonal
discontinuity sets, the rock mass deformation modulus can be obtained from
/ =

(5)

1+1/( / )

Where is the deformation modulus of the intact rock; s and are, respectively, the
average discontinuity spacing and the normal stiffness of discontinuities. Eq. (5) applies
when the discontinuity spacing is the same for each discontinuity set and the loading is
perpendicular to one of the discontinuity sets. Fig 3.2shows the variation of / with the
average discontinuity spacing s for different values of / obtained from Eq. (5). It can be
seen that / which represents the discontinuity conditions has a large effect on the rock
mass deformation modulus. Kayabasi et al., derived the following relation from a database
showing the influence of weathering of discontinuities on the rock mass deformation
modulus:
1.1747

(1 + 0.01)
= 0.1423 [
]

(6)

where WD is the weathering degree of discontinuities.

(d) Insensitivity of RQD to discontinuity frequency: RQD used in Fig 3.3is defined in terms
of the percentage of intact pieces of rock (or discontinuity spacings) greater than a threshold
value t of 0.1 m. According to Harrison , the adoption of a threshold value t of 0.1m leads to
the insensitivity of RQD to the change of discontinuity frequency (i.e., the mean
discontinuity spacing s). For a negative exponential distribution of discontinuity spacings,
the theoretical RQD can be related to the discontinuity frequency by

RQD= 100(1 + 0.1) 0.1 100

(7)

Fig 3.3 :Variation of / with the average discontinuity spacing s for different of /
using Kulhways model (Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)
Fig 3.3shows the variation of RQD with l: It can be seen that, for a threshold value t of
0.1m, when discontinuity frequency l increases from 1 to 81 (i.e., the mean discontinuity
spacing s decreases from 1 to 0.125 m), RQD only decreases from 99.5% to 80.9%, which is
a range of only 23%. However, when the mean discontinuity spacing s decreases from 1 to
0.125 m, the rock mass deformation modulus will vary over a large range. As shown in Fig
3.2, with / = 1, / changes from 0.5 to 0.11 when s decreases from 1 to 0.125 m.
Harrisonshowed that the sensitivity of RQD to the mean discontinuity spacing s is closely
related to the adopted threshold value t: For example, if a threshold value t of 0.5m is used,
the corresponding RQD will change from 91.0% to 9.2% when l increases from 1 to 81.

Fig 3.4 : RQD-discontinuity frequency relations for threshold values of 0.1 and 0.5m (Zhang
L and Einstein H, 2003)

3.3 Recommended Relationship Between RQD and Deformation Modulus

Considering the data shown in Fig 3.2, a set of relations is recommended for estimating the
rock mass deformation modulus:

Lower bound:
/ =0.2 100.01861.91

(8)

Upper bound
/ =1.8 100.01861.91

(9)

Mean
/ =100.01861.91

(10)

10

The mean relation between RQD and / was obtained by regression of the data in Fig.
3.2 The coefficient of regression, 2 ; is 0.76. The upper bound could be put some what
higher but it was selected to be conservative. The three curves expressed by Eq. (7) are
plotted in Fig 3.5with the data in Fig 3.2included. The recommended RQD and /
relations Eq. (7) cover a wide range of / because they ignore some of the factors that
affect the rock mass deformation modulus. Since it is difficult to measure rock mass
deformation modulus, the recommended RQD and / relations Eq. (7) have practical
engineering value by indicating bounding and mean values.(Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)

Fig 3.5 : Recommended relation between RQD and / (Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003)

4.0 RQD WITH OTHER VARIABLES

4.1 RQD With Hydraulic Conductivity and Depth
The original hydraulic conductivity data and RQD data shown in Fig 4.1 are different in
resolution. To establish the relationship between hydraulic conductivity and RQD, the two
set of data are discretized in to smaller sections (with a length of 1m), the depths of which
are recorded as integral values. In this way, at each depth of a well ,a value of hydraulic
11

conductivity (or transmissivity) and a value of RQD can be obtained. The data after
discretization are shown in Fig 4.2It is clear that most of the RQD values fall in the right
part .And when the depth is less than 100m, a weak trend of increase in RQD with depth can
be identified. When the depth exceeds 100m, the RQD values become more scattered, which
is the result of the high density of discontinuities caused by the intrusion of lamprophyres.
The decrease in hydraulic conductivity and the increase in RQD with depth indicate that
there might be a correlation between hydraulic conductivity and RQD.
The relationship between hydraulic conductivity and RQD can be established by using
regression analysis .Here the negative exponential model is utilized. Such a model had also
been employed by Liao and El-Naqa . The plot of hydraulic conductivity versus RQD and
the result from regression analysis are shown in Fig 4.3It shows that an increase in RQD
would result in a decrease in hydraulic conductivity. However, the coefficient of
determination (denoted as R2) is very low. There is significant scatter in the hydraulic
conductivity value seven for sub-sections with nearly identical RQD values .Therefore, it is
difficult to predict the hydraulic conductivity of a specific position based on RQD data only.
Based on the data shown in Fig 4.2, the average values (arithmetic mean)of hydraulic
conductivity(after log transformation) and RQD at each depth are calculated. When the
depth ranges between 10 and 100m, there is a general trend of increase in RQD with depth
and a general trend of decrease in hydraulic conductivity with depth. When the depth is
below 100m, the trends are opposite due to the intrusion of lamprophyres. The relationship
between mean hydraulic conductivity and mean RQD has been established using the
negative exponential model. When the depth ranges between 11 and 100m, 2 is 0.7431, and
when the depth ranges from11to88m, 2 is 0.7809. In the following discussions on the
relationship between hydraulic conductivity and RQD, the depth range1188 utilize,
the mean value of hydraulic conductivity could be estimated using the mean value of RQD
obtained from borehole data. Such a conclusion had also been reported by El- Naqa. (Jiang
W X, Wan L, Wang X S, Wu X and Zhang X, 2009)

12

Fig 4.1 : The Plots of Hydraulic Conductivity vs Depth and RQD vs Depth (Jiang W X,
Wan L, Wang X S, Wu X and Zhang X, 2009)

Fig 4.2 : The Scatter Plot of Hydraulic conductivity vs RQD (Jiang W X, Wan L, Wang
X S, Wu X and Zhang X, 2009)

13

4.2 Relationship Between RQD Intrinsic Joint Characteristics

Sen and Eissa examined the use of log normal and negative exponential relationships
between RQD and joint volume. They showed that decreasing RQD value with increasing
difference in length of block side or joint spacing, the changes in block size tend to adjust
the stress intensity at discontinuities. These observations call for modification of the
relationship between RQD and joint and gouge parameters, namely, extent of joints, volume
of gouge, friction, material of gouge, and water pressure. The scan line as well as the
volumetric joint count has an exponential relation with RQD as the block size changes with
increasing infill magnitude. At RQD = 0, the recovered rock core sizes are less than 10 cm
(relatively fragmented state), the rock mass strength characterization should ideally be
captured using parameters considered in the calculation of modified joint factor, . Other
than RQD and modified joint factor, there are more parameters, namely, total core recovery
(TCR), solid core recovery (SCR) and core recovered from the following run (CRF), which
can also be used to map the rock mass classification at RQD = 0. Based on limited data
available, it may be stated that TCR, SCR and CRF similar to RQD do have inverse
relationships with . On the basis of previous studies, an exponential relationship between
modified joint factor and RQD is proposed as
= a exp(bRQD)
= (a / ) exp()

(11)

(12)

Where a and b are the fitting parameters determined according to the minimum size of
fragmented rock and characteristics of joints in relation to RQD. The minimum size at grain
boundaries, where fracture begins, relative to the drilling length, may have a modified joint
factor higher than 1000. However, the significant measurement of fragmented rock grain
relative to the drilling length tends to the value of modified joint factor, a, which is
conveniently considered as 1000.

14

Similarly, as per the characteristics of joints and friction in relation to RQD, the value of b
may vary between _1 and _0.01. With reference to a set of data points from , b takes a value
close to _0.2. The physical meaning associated with b relates convexity in the relationship
between and RQD, which in fact is a function of accumulated plastic strain. In hardening

and softening ranges, the modified joint factor is transformed to

and
due to the

transition of b between _1 and _0.01. In the present data sets, lower values of b are
associated largely with in-situ observation while higher values are from controlled
laboratory tests. Thus, the transition of modified joint factor ( ) considers the volumetric
effect on strength and deformation characteristics through the spacing, orientation, friction,
volume of gouge material, groundwater and internal pressure. The scan line data from core
drilling of the rock mass provide a scope for evaluation of the fitting parameters a and
b.(Trivedi A, 2015)

4.3 Correlation between RQD and Volumetric Joint Count

It turned out difficult to relate RQD to other measurements of jointing, as RQD is a onedimensional, averaged measurement based solely on core pieces larger than 10cm.
Simulations using blocks of the same size and shape penetrated by a line (i.e. borehole) at
different angles have been used for such estimations. The first attempts were made by
Palmstrom (1974) when the volumetric joint count ( ) was introduced. The following,
simple expression between RQD and was then presented:
RQD = 115 - 3.3

(13)

(RQD = 0 for > 35, and RQD = 100 for < 4.5)

This expression was included in the introduction of the Q system by Barton et al. . As seen
in Fig 4.3, the correlation between RQD and is rather poor, especially, where many of the
core pieces have lengths around 0.1m. However, when Jv is the only joint data available (no
borehole or scanline logging). (Palmstrom A, 2005)
15

Fig 4.3 : Correlation RQD with the variation range (Palmstrom A, 2005)
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
The general concept of the decrease in RQD values as fracture frequency increases is
confirmed from the analysis carried out. Where diamond core data is not readily available,
the method suggested by Priest and Hudson is a valuable tool to be used for geotechnical
investigations. There is, however, a need for further detailed research required into this area
to help improve rock mass classification systems when diamond core data is not available.
(Priest and Hudson, 2000)
Changes in discontinuity aperture and frequency should be considered simultaneously to
estimate discontinuity normal stiffness from hydraulic tests. Transmissivity, which is
dependent on both aperture and frequency of discontinuities, is obtained from packer test.
16

Discontinuity frequency is calculated from RQD, which is obtained from bore hole data.
Due to their interrelationship, the normal stiffness is successfully determined by using the
decrease in transmissivity with depth and the increase in RQD with depth. Finally, the
deformation modulus of the rock mass is estimated and compared with that obtained from in
situ measurements and empirical equations. The conclusions are as follows:
(1) The study is a mainly controlled by lithostatic stress, a decrease in permeability with
depth and an increase in RQD with depth can be identified. It is difficult to predict the
permeability in a position based on RQD only; however, the mean permeability can be
estimated by the mean RQD. Based on the relationship between RQD and discontinuity
frequency, the average increase in RQD with depth can be employed to derive the average
decrease in discontinuity frequency with depth.
(2) The discontinuity normal stiffness can be estimated by the decrease in permeability and
the decrease in discontinuity frequency with depth, which can be obtained from packer test
and RQD data, respectively. The calculated normal stiffness, which increases none linearly
with depth, is consistent with results from experimental studies.
(3) The normal stiffness has been utilized to calculate deformation modulus of the rock
mass, and their result is close enough to the deformation modulus obtained from in situ
measurements as well as from empirical equations. However, the methods currently
employed for comparison have limitations. Better ways are needed to validate the results of
deformation modulus of large scale rock masses.
The relationships between intrinsic joint parameters and the isotropic pressure provide
inputs for a numerical technique to incorporate these effects into the strength ratio. The
variability between laboratory testing and in-situ testing results is essentially due to the
plasticity, damage and the accompanying changes in the joint parameters characterized by
accumulated plastic strains. The technique considers the effect of a damage sensitive plastic
parameter on strength by initial and end conditions of the parameter of readily estimated
modified joint factor and well recognized RQD for rock masses.

17

REFERENCES
Palmstrom A,2005,Measurement of and correlation between block size and RQD, Tunneling
and Underground Space Technology, vol. 20, pp 362-377.
Vali B and Arpa G, 2013, Finding the relationship between the RQD and fracture frequency
in the different Ok Tedilithologies, Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, vol. 6, pp 403410.
Jiang W X, Wan L, Wang X S, Wu X and Zhang X, 2009, Estimation of rock mass
deformation modulus using variations in transmissivity and RQD with depth, International
Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, vol. 46, pp 1370-1377.
Trivedi A, 2015, Computing in-situ strength of rock masses based upon RQD and modified
joint factor: using pressure and damage sensitive constitutive relationship, Journal of
Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 7, pp 540-565.
Zhang L and Einstein H, 2003, using RQD to estimate the deformation modulus of rock
masses, International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, vol. 41, pp 337-341.
OLSON L, SAMSON C, McKinnon S.D,2015, 3-D laser imaging of drill core for fracture
detection and RQD, , International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, vol. 75,
pp 150-156.
Hudson, A. J., 2000, Engineering Rock Mechanics.

18

19