RMR Terzaghi

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications 1
CHAPTER 6
ROCK MASS PROPERTIES AND
CLASSIFICATIONS
Rock mass property is governed by the properties of intact rock materials and of the
discontinuities in the rock. The behaviour if rock mass is also influenced by the
conditions the rock mass is subjected to, primarily the in situ stress and groundwater.
The quality of a rock mass quality can be quantified by means of rock mass
classifications. This Chapter addresses rock mass properties and rock mass
classifications.
6.1 Rock Mass Properties and Quality
6.1.1 Properties Governing Rock Mass Behaviour
Rock mass is a matrix consisting of rock material and rock discontinuities. As discussed
early, rock discontinuity that distributed extensively in a rock mass is predominantly
joints. Faults, bedding planes and dyke intrusions are localised features and therefore
are dealt individually. Properties of rock mass therefore are governed by the parameters
of rock joints and rock material, as well as boundary conditions, as listed in Table 6.1.1a.
Table 6.1.1a Prime parameters governing rock mass property

Joint Parameters Material Parameters Boundary Conditions
Number of joint sets Compressive strength Groundwater pressure and
Orientation Modulus of elasticity flow
Spacing In situ stress
Aperture
Surface roughness
Weathering and alteration
The behaviour of rock changes from continuous elastic of intact rock materials to
discontinues running of highly fractured rock masses. The existence of rock joints and
other discontinuities plays important role in governing the behaviour and properties of the
rock mass, as illustrated in Figure 6.1.1a. Chapter 4 has covered the properties of intact
rock materials, and Chapter 5 has dealt with rocks contains 1 or 2 localised joints with
emphasis on the properties of joints. When a rock mass contains several joints, the rock
mass can be treated a jointed rock mass, and sometimes also termed a Hoek-Brown rock
mass, that can be described by the Hoek-Brown criterion (discussed later).
6.1.2 Classification by Rock Load Factor (Terzaghi 1946)
Based in extensive experiences in steel arch supported rail tunnels in the Alps, Terzaghi
(1946) classified rock mass by mean of Rock Load Factor. The rock mass is classified
into 9 classes from hard and intact rock to blocky, and to squeezing rock. The concept
used in this classification system is to estimate the rock load to be carried by the steel
arches installed to support a tunnel, as illustrated in Figure 6.1.2a. The classification is
presented by Table 6.1.2a.
Figure 6.1.2a Terzaghis rock load concept.
For obtaining the support pressure (p) from the rock load factor (Hp), Terzagh suggested
the equation below,
p = Hp H
where is the unit weight of the rock mass, H is the tunnel depth or thickness of the
overburden.
Attempts have been made to link Rock Load Factor classification to RQD. As suggested
by Deere (1970), Class I is corresponding to RQD 95-100%, Class II to RQD 90-99%,
Class III to RQD 85-95%, and Class IV to RQD 75-85%.
Singh and Goel (1999) gave the following comments to the Rock Load Factor
classification:
(a) It provides reasonable support pressure estimates for small tunnels with diameter up
to 6 metres.
(b) It gives over-estimates for large tunnels with diameter above 6 metres.
(c) The estimated support pressure has a wide range for squeezing and swelling rock
conditions for a meaningful application.
6.1.3 Classification by Active Span and Stand-Up Time (Stini 1950, Lauffer 1958)
The concept of active span and stand-up time is illustrated in Figure 6.1.3a and Figure
6.1.3b. Active span is in fact the largest dimension of the unsupported tunnel section.
Stand-up time is the length of time which an excavated opening with a given active span
can stand without any mean of support or reinforcement. Rock classes from A to G are
assigned according to the stand-up time for a given active span. Use of active span and
stand-up time will be further discussed in later sections.
Figure 6.1.3a Definition of active span.
Figure 6.1.3b Relationship between active span and stand-up time and rock mass
classes. Class A is very good and Class G is very poor.
Table 6.1.2a Rock class and rock load factor classification by Terzaghi for steel arch supported tunnels
Rock Load Factor Hp (feet)
Rock Class Definition Remark
(B and Ht in feet)
Hard and intact rock contains no joints and fractures. After
Light lining required only if spalling or
I. Hard and intact excavation the rock may have popping and spalling at excavated 0
popping occurs.
face.
Light support for protection against
II. Hard stratified Hard rock consists of thick strata and layers. Interface between strata
0 to 0.5 B spalling. Load may change between
and schistose is cemented. Popping and spalling at excavated face is common.
layers.
Massive rock contains widely spaced joints and fractures. Block size
III. Massive, Light support for protection against
is large. Joints are interlocked. Vertical walls do not require support. 0 to 0.25 B
moderately jointed spalling.
Spalling may occur.
Rock contains moderately spaced joints. Rock is not chemically
IV. Moderately
weathered and altered. Joints are not well interlocked and have small 0.25 B to 0.35 (B + Ht) No side pressure.
blocky and seamy
apertures. Vertical walls do not require support. Spalling may occur.
Rock is not chemically weathered, and contains closely spaced
V. Very blocky and
joints. Joints have large apertures and appear separated. Vertical (0.35 to 1.1) (B + Ht) Little or no side pressure.
seamy
walls need support.
VI. Completely Rock is not chemically weathered, and highly fractured with small Considerable side pressure. Softening
crushed but fragments. The fragments are loose and not interlocked. Excavation 1.1 (B + Ht) effects by water at tunnel base. Use
chemically intact face in this material needs considerable support. circular ribs or support rib lower end.
VII. Squeezing rock Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in
(1.1 to 2.1) (B + Ht)
at moderate depth volume. Moderate depth is considered as 150 ~ 1000 m. Heavy side pressure. Invert struts
VIII. Squeezing rock Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in required. Circular ribs recommended.
(2.1 to 4.5) (B + Ht)
at great depth volume. Great depth is considered as more than 1000 m.
Rock volume expands (and advances into the tunnel) due to swelling up to 250 feet, irrespective Circular ribs required. In extreme cases
IX. Swelling rock
of clay minerals in the rock at the presence of moisture. of B and Ht use yielding support.
Notes: The tunnel is assumed to be below groundwater table. For tunnel above water tunnel, Hp for Classes IV to VI reduces 50%.
The tunnel is assumed excavated by blasting. For tunnel boring machine and roadheader excavated tunnel, Hp for Classes II to VI reduces 20-25%.
6.1.4 Rock Quality Designation (RQD) (Deere 1964)
Rock quality designation (RQD) was introduced in 1960s, as an attempt to quantify rock
mass quality. Table 6.1.2a reproduces the proposed expression of rock mass quality
classification according to RQD.
As discussed earlier, RQD only represents the degree of fracturing of the rock mass. It
does not account for the strength of the rock or mechanical and other geometrical
properties of the joints. Therefore, RQD partially reflecting the rock mass quality.
Table 6.1.2a Rock mass quality classification according to RQD

RQD Rock Mass Quality
< 25 Very poor
25 50 Poor
50 75 Fair
75 90 Good
99 100 Excellent
RQD has been widely accepted as a measure of fracturing degree of the rock mass. his
parameter has been used in the rock mass classification systems, including the RMR and
the Q systems.
6.2 Rock Mass Rating RMR System
6.2.1 Concept of RMR System (1973, 1989)
The rock mass rating (RMR) system is a rock mass quality classification developed by
South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), close associated
with excavation for the mining industry (Bieniawski 1973). Originally, this
geomechanics classification system incorporated eight parameters. The RMR system in
use now incorporates five basic parameters below.
(a) Strength of intact rock material: Uniaxial compressive strength is preferred. For
rock of moderate to high strength, point load index is acceptable.
(b) RQD: RQD is used as described before.
(c) Spacing of joints: Average spacing of all rock discontinuities is used.
(d) Condition of joints: Condition includes joint aperture, persistence, roughness, joint
surface weathering and alteration, and presence of infilling.
(e) Groundwater conditions: It is to account for groundwater inflow in excavation

stability.
Table 6.2.1a is the RMR classification updated in 1989. Part A of the table shows the
RMR classification with the above 5 parameters. Individual rate for each parameter is
obtained from the property of each parameter. The weight of each parameter has already
considered in the rating, for example, maximum rating for joint condition is 30 while for
rock strength is 15. The overall basic RMR rate is the sum of individual rates.
Influence of joint orientation on the stability of excavation is considered in Part B of the

same table. Explanation of the descriptive terms used is given table Part C. With
adjustment made to account for joint orientation, a final RMR rating is obtained, it can be
also expresses in rock mass class, as shown in Table 6.2.1b. The table also gives the
meaning of rock mass classes in terms of stand-up time, equivalent rock mass cohesion
and friction angle.
RMR was applied to correlate with excavated active span and stand-up time, as shown in
Figure 6.2.1a. This correlation allow engineer to estimate the stand-up time for a given
span and a given rock mass.
Table 6.2.1a Rock mass classification RMR system

(a) Five basic rock mass classification parameters and their ratings
1. Strength of intact Point load strength index (MPa) > 10 4 10 24 12
rock material Uniaxial compressive strength (MPa) > 250 100 250 50 100 25 50 5 25 15 <1
Rating 15 12 7 4 2 1 0
2. RQD (%) 90 100 75 90 50 75 25 50 < 25
Rating 20 17 13 8 3
3. Joint spacing (m) >2 0.6 2 0.2 0.6 0.06 0.2 < 0.06
Rating 20 15 10 8 5
4. Condition of joints not continuous, very rough slightly rough surfaces, slightly rough surfaces, continuous, slickensided continuous joints, soft
surfaces, unweathered, no slightly weathered, highly weathered, surfaces, or gouge <5 mm gouge >5 mm thick, or
separation separation <1 mm separation <1 mm thick, or separation 15 mm separation >5 mm
Rating 30 25 20 10 0
5. Groundwater inflow per 10 m tunnel length (l /min), or none < 10 10 25 25 125 > 125
joint water pressure/major in situ stress, or 0 0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 > 0.5
general conditions at excavation surface completely dry damp wet dripping flowing
Rating 15 10 7 4 0
(b) Rating adjustment for joint orientations

Strike and dip orientation of joints very favourable favourable fair unfavourable very unfavourable
Rating tunnels 0 2 5 10 12
foundations 0 2 7 15 25
slopes 0 5 25 50 60
(c) Effects of joint orientation in tunnelling

Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis
Strike parallel to tunnel axis Dip 0 20
Drive with dip Drive against dip
Dip 45 90 Dip 20 45 Dip 45 90 Dip 20 45 Dip 45 90 Dip 20 45 irrespective of strike
very favourable favourable fair unfavourable very unfavourable fair fair
Table 6.2.1b Rock mass classes determined from total ratings and meaning
RMR Ratings 81 100 61 80 41 60 21 40 < 20
Rock mass class A B C D E
Description very good good rock fair rock poor rock very poor
rock rock
Average stand-up 10 year for 6 months 1 week for 10 hours 30 minutes
time 15 m span for 8 m 5 m span for 2.5 m for 0.5 m
span span span
Rock mass cohesion > 400 300 400 200 300 100 200 < 100
(KPa)
Rock mass friction > 45 35 45 25 35 15 25 < 15
angle
Figure 6.2.1a Stand-up time and RMR quality
6.2.2 Examples of using RMR System
(a) A granite rock mass containing 3 joint sets, average RQD is 88%, average joint
spacing is 0.24 m, joint surfaces are generally stepped and rough, tightly closed and
unweathered with occasional stains observed, the excavation surface is wet but not
dripping, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 160 MPa, the tunnel is
excavated to 150 m below the ground where no abnormal high in situ stress is expected.
Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:
Rock material strength 160 MPa Rating 12

RQD (%) 88% Rating 17
Joint spacing (m) 0.24 m Rating 10
Condition of joints very rough, unweathered, no separation Rating 30
Groundwater wet Rating 7
RMR 76
The calculated basic RMR is 76. It falls in rock class B which indicates the rock mass is
of good quality.
(b) A sandstone rock mass, fractured by 2 joint sets plus random fractures, average RQD
is 70%, average joint spacing is 0.11 m, joint surfaces are slightly rough, highly
weathered with stains and weathered surface but no clay found on surface, joints are
generally in contact with apertures generally less than 1 mm, average rock material
uniaxial compressive strength is 85 MPa, the tunnel is to be excavated at 80 m below

ground level and the groundwater table is 10 m below the ground surface.
Here, groundwater parameter is not directly given, but given in terms of groundwater
pressure of 70 m water head and overburden pressure of 80 m ground. Since there is no
indication of in situ stress ratio, overburden stress is taken as the major in situ stress as an
approximation.
Joint water pressure = groundwater pressure = 70 m w

In situ stress = Overburden pressure = 80 m
Joint water pressure / In situ stress = (70 1)/(80 2.7) = 0.32

Condition of joints slightly rough, highly weathered, separation < Rating 20
1mm
Groundwater water pressure/stress = 0.32 Rating 4
RMR 52
The calculated basic RMR is 52. It falls in rock class C which indicates the rock mass is
of fair quality.
(c) A highly fractured siltstone rock mass, found to have 2 joint sets and many random
fractures, average RQD is 41%, joints appears continuous observed in tunnel, joint
surfaces are slickensided and undulating, and are highly weathered, joint are separated by
about 3-5 mm, filled with clay, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 65
MPa, inflow per 10 m tunnel length is observed at approximately 50 litre/minute, with
considerable outwash of joint fillings. The tunnel is at 220 m below ground.
In the above information, joint spacing is not provided. However, RQD is given and
from the relationship between RQD and joint frequency, it is possible to calculate average
joint spacing, with the equation below,
0.1
RQD = 100 e (0.1 +1)
Joint frequency is estimated to be 20, which gives average joint spacing 0.05 m


Condition of joints continuous, slickensided, separation 1-5mm Rating 10
Groundwater inflow = 50 l/min Rating 4
RMR 34
The calculated basic RMR is 34. It falls in rock class D which indicates the rock mass is
of poor quality.
Judgement often is needed to interpret the information given in the geological and
hydrogeological investigation reports and in the borehole logs to match the descriptive
terms in the RMR table. Closest match and approximation is to be used to determine
each of the RMR parameter rating.
6.2.3 Extension of RMR Slope Mass Rating (SMR)
The slope mass rating (SMR) is an extension of the RMR system applied to rock slope
engineering. SMR value is obtained by adjust RMR value with orientation and
excavation adjustments for slopes, i.e.,
SMR = RMR + (F1F2F3) + F4
where F1 = (1 - sin A)2

and A = angle between the strikes of the slope and the joint = |j - s|.
F2 = (tan j)2
B = joint dip angle = j.
For topping, F2 = 1.0
Value of F1, F2 and F3 are given in Table 6.2.3a. Table 6.2.3b gives the classification
category of rock mass slope. Details on rock slope analysis and engineering including
excavation methods and support and stabilisation will be covered in a later chapter
dealing slope engineering.
Table 6.2.3a Adjustment rating of F1, F2, F3 and F4 for joints

Very Very
Joint Orientation Favourable Fair Unfavourable unfavourable
favourable
P |j - s| >30 30~20 20~10 10~5 <5
T |(j - s) - 180| >30 30~20 20~10 10~5 <5
F1 (for P & T) 0.15 0.40 0.70 0.85 1.00
P |j| <20 20~30 30~35 35~45 >45
F2 (for P) 0.15 0.40 0.70 0.85 1.00
F2 (for T) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
P j - s >10 10~0 0 0~-10 <-10
T j + s <110 110~120 >120 -- --
F3 (for P & T) 0 -6 -25 -50 -60
Method Natural slope Presplitting Smooth blasting Blasting/Ripping Deficient blasting
F4 +15 +10 +8 0 -8
Table 6.2.3a Classification of Rock Slope according to SMT

SMR Class Description Stability Failure Support
81~100 I Very good Completely stable None None
61~80 II Good Stable Some blocks Spot
Some joints or
41~60 III Fair Partially stable Systematic
many wedges
Palnar or large Important /
21~40 IV Poor Unstable wedges Corrective
Completely Large wedges or
0~20 V Very Poor Re-excavation
unstable circular failure
6.3 Rock Tunnel Quality Q-System
6.3.1 Concept of the Q-System
The Q-system was developed as a rock tunnelling quality index by the Norwegian
Geotechnical Institute (NGI) (Barton et al 1974). The system was based on evaluation
of a large number of case histories of underground excavation stability, and is an index
for the determination of the tunnelling quality of a rock mass. The numerical value of
this index Q is defined by:
RQD Jr Jw
Q=
Jn Ja SRF
RQD is the Rock Quality Designation measuring the fracturing degree. Jn is the joint set
number accounting for the number of joint sets. Jr is the joint roughness number
accounting for the joint surface roughness. Ja is the joint alteration number indicating
the degree of weathering, alteration and filling. Jw is the joint water reduction factor
accounting for the problem from groundwater pressure, and SRF is the stress reduction
factor indicating the influence of in situ stress.
Q value is considered as a function of only three parameters which are crude measures of:
(a) Block size: RQD / Jn
(b) Inter-block shear strength Jr / Ja
(c) Active stress Jw / SRF
Parameters and rating of the Q system is given in Table 6.3.1a. The classification
system gives a Q value which indicates the rock mass quality, shown in Table 6.3.1b.
Q value is applied to estimate the support measure for a tunnel of a given dimension and
usage, as shown in Figure 6.3.1a. Equivalent dimension is used in the figure and ESR is
given in Table 6.3.1c.
Excavation span, diameter or height (m)

Equivalent dimension, De =
Excavation Support Ratio (ESR)
Table 6.3.1a Rock mass classification Q system

1. Rock Quality Designation RQD
A Very Poor 0 25
B Poor 25 50
C Fair 50 75
D Good 75 90
E Excellent 90 100
Note: (i) Where RQD is reported or measured as 10 (including 0), a nominal value of 10 is
used to evaluate Q. (ii) RQD interval of 5, i.e., 100, 95, 90, etc., are sufficiently
accurate.
2. Joint Set Number Jn
A Massive, no or few joints 0.5 1
B One joint set 2
C One joint set plus random joints 3
D Two joint set 4
E Two joint set plus random joints 6
F Three joint set 9
G Three joint set plus random joints 12
H Four or more joint sets, heavily jointed 15
J Crushed rock, earthlike 20
Note: (i) For intersections, use (3.0 Jn). (ii) For portals, use (2.0 Jn).
3. Joint Roughness Number Jr
(a) Rock-wall contact, and (b) Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear
A Discontinuous joints 4
B Rough or irregular, undulating 3
C Smooth, undulating 2
D Slickensided, undulating 1.5
E Rough or irregular, planar 1.5
F Smooth, planar 1.0
G Slickensided, planar 0.5
Note: (i) Descriptions refer to small and intermediate scale features, in that order.
(c) No rock-wall contact when sheared
H Zone containing clay minerals thick enough to prevent rock-wall contact 1.0
J Sandy, gravelly or crushed zone thick enough to prevent rock-wall contact 1.0
Note: (ii) Add 1.0 if the mean spacing of the relevant joint set 3 m. (iii) Jr = 0.5 can be used
for planar slickensided joints having lineations, provided the lineations are oriented for
minimum strength.
4. Joint Alteration Number r approx. Ja
(a) Rock-wall contact (no mineral fillings, only coatings)
A Tight healed, hard, non-softening, impermeable filling, i.e., 0.75
quartz or epidote
B Unaltered joint walls, surface staining only 25 35 1.0
C Slightly altered joint walls. Non-softening mineral coating, 25 30 2.0
sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc.
D Silty- or sandy-clay coatings, small clay fraction (non- 20 25 3.0
softening)
E Softening or low friction mineral coatings, i.e., kaolinite or 8 16 4.0
mica. Also chlorite, talc, gypsum, graphite, etc., and small
quantities of swelling clays
(b) Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear (thin mineral fillings)

F Sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc. 25 30 4.0
G Strongly over-consolidated non-softening clay mineral 16 24 6.0
fillings (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness)
H Medium or low over-consolidated softening clay mineral 12 16 8.0
fillings (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness)
J Swelling-clay fillings, i.e., montmorillonite (continuous, but 6 12 8 12
< 5 mm thickness). Value of Ja depends on percent of
swelling clay size particles, and access to water, etc.
(c) No rock-wall contact when sheared (thick mineral fillings)
K, L, Zones or bands of disintegrated or crushed rock and clay 6 24 6, 8, or
M (see G, H, J for description of clay condition) 8 12
N Zones or bands of silty- or sandy-clay, small clay fraction - 5
(non-softening)
O, P, Thick, continuous zones or bands of clay (see G, H, J for 6 24 10, 13, or
R clay condition description) 13 20
5. Joint Water Reduction Factor Water pressure Jw

A Dry excavation or minor inflow, i.e., < 5 l/min < 1 (kg/cm2) 1.0
locally
B Medium inflow or pressure, occasional outwash of 1 2.5 0.66
joint fillings
C Large inflow or high pressure in competent rock 2.5 10 0.5
with unfilled joints
D Large inflow or high pressure, considerable outwash 2.5 10 0.33
of joint fillings
E Exceptionally high inflow or water pressure at > 10 0.2 0.1
blasting, decaying with time
F Exceptionally high inflow or water pressure > 10 (kg/cm2) 0.1 0.05
continuing without noticeable decay
Note: (i) Factors C to F are crude estimates. Increase Jw if drainage measures are installed.
(ii) Special problems caused by ice formation are not considered.
6. Stress Reduction Factor SRF

(a) Weakness zones intersecting excavation, which may cause loosening of rock mass when
tunnel is excavated
A Multiple occurrences of weakness zones containing clay or chemically 10
disintegrated rock, very loose surrounding rock (any depth)
B Single weakness zone containing clay or chemically disintegrated rock 5
(depth of excavation 50 m)
C Single weakness zone containing clay or chemically disintegrated rock 2.5
(depth of excavation > 50 m)
D Multiple shear zones in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation 7.5
50 m)
E Single shear zone in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation 50 5
m)
F Single shear zone in competent rock (clay-free) (depth of excavation > 50 2.5
m)
G Loose, open joint, heavily jointed (any depth) 5
Note: (i) Reduce SRF value by 25-50% if the relevant shear zones only influence but not
intersect the excavation.
(b) Competent rock, rock stress problems c / 1 / c SRF

H Low stress, near surface, open joints > 200 < 0.01 2.5
J Medium stress, favourable stress condition 200 10 0.01 1
0.03
K High stress, very tight structure. Usually 10 5 0.3 0.4 0.5 2
favourable to stability, may be unfavourable to wall
stability
L Moderate slabbing after > 1 hour in massive rock 53 0.5 - 0.65 5 50
M Slabbing and rock burst after a few minutes in 32 0.65 1 50 200
massive rock
N Heavy rock burst (strain-burst) and immediate <2 >1 200 400
dynamic deformation in massive rock
Note: (ii) For strongly anisotropic virgin stress field (if measured): when 5 1 / 3 10, reduce
c to 0.75 c; when 1 / 3 > 10, reduce c to 0.5 c; where c is unconfined
compressive strength, 1 and 3 are major and minor principal stresses, and is
maximum tangential stress (estimated from elastic theory). (iii) Few cases records
available where depth of crown below surface is less than span width. Suggest SRF
increase from 2.5 to 5 for such cases (see H).
(c) Squeezing rock: plastic flow in incompetent rock under the / c SRF
influence of high rock pressure
O Mild squeezing rock pressure 15 5 10
P Heavy squeezing rock pressure 5 10 20
Note: (vi) Cases of squeezing rock may occur for depth H > 350 Q1/3. Rock mass compressive
strength can be estimated from Q = 7 Q1/3 (MPa), where = rock density in g/cm3.
(d) Swelling rock: chemical swelling activity depending on presence of water SRF
R Mile swelling rock pressure 5 10
S Heavy swell rock pressure 10 15
Note: Jr and Ja classification is applied to the joint set or discontinuity that is least favourable for
stability both from the point of view of orientation and shear resistance.
Table 6.3.1b Rock mass quality rating according to Q values

Q-value Class Rock mass quality
400 ~ 1000 A Exceptionally Good
100 ~ 400 A Extremely Good
40 ~ 100 A Very Good
10 ~ 40 B Good
4 ~ 10 C Fair
1~4 D Poor
0.1 ~ 1 E Very Poor
0.01 ~ 0.1 F Extremely Poor
0.001 ~ 0.01 G Exceptionally Poor
Figure 6.3.1a Support design based on Q value
Table 6.3.1c Excavation Support Ratio (ESR) for various tunnel categories
Excavation Category ESR

A Temporary mine openings. 35
Permanent mine openings, water tunnels for hydro-electric
B 1.6
projects, pilot tunnels, drifts and headings for large excavations.
Storage rooms, water treatment plants, minor road and railway
C tunnels, surge chambers and access tunnels in hydro-electric 1.3
project.
Underground power station caverns, major road and railway
D 1.0
tunnels, civil defense chamber, tunnel portals and intersections.
Underground nuclear power stations, railway stations, sports and
E 0.8
public facilities, underground factories.
6.3.2 Examples of Using the Q-System
(a) A granite rock mass containing 3 joint sets, average RQD is 88%, average joint
spacing is 0.24 m, joint surfaces are generally stepped and rough, tightly closed and
unweathered with occasional stains observed, the excavation surface is wet but not
dripping, average rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 160 MPa, the tunnel is
excavated to 150 m below the ground where no abnormal high in situ stress is expected.
Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:
RQD 88% RQD 88

Joint set number 3 sets Jn 9
Joint roughness number rough stepped (undulating) Jr 3
Joint alteration number unaltered, some stains Ja 1
Joint water factor wet only (dry excavation or minor inflow) Jw 1
Stress reduction factor c/1 = 160/(1500.027) = 39.5 SRF 1
Q (88/9) (3/1) (1/1) 44
The calculated Q-value is 29, and the rock mass is classified as good quality.
RQD 70% RQD 70

Joint set number 2 sets plus random Jn 6
Joint roughness number slightly rough (rough planar) Jr 1.5
Joint alteration number highly weathered only stain, (altered non- Ja 2
softening mineral coating)
Joint water factor 70 m water head = 7 kg/cm2 = 7 bars Jw 0.5
Stress reduction factor c/1 = 85/(800.027) = 39.3 SRF 1
Q (70/6) (1.5/2) (0.5/1) 4.4
The calculated Q-value is 4.4, and the rock mass is classified as fair quality.
RQD 41% RQD 41

Joint set number 2 sets plus random Jn 6
Joint roughness number slickensided and undulating Jr 1.5
Joint alteration number highly weathered filled with 3-5 mm clay Ja 4
Joint water factor large inflow with considerable outwash Jw 0.33
Stress reduction factor c/1 = 65/(2200.027) = 11 SRF 1
Q (41/6) (1.5/4) (0.33/1) 0.85
The calculated Q-value is 0.85, and the rock mass is classified as very poor quality.
Again, judgement is frequently needed to interpret the descriptions given in the geological
and hydrogeological investigation reports and in the borehole logs to match the
descriptive terms in the Q table. Closest match and approximation is to be used to
determine each of the Q parameter rating.
6.3.3 Extension of Q-System QTBM for Mechanised Tunnelling

Q-system was extended to a new QTBM system for predicting penetration rate (PR) and
advance rate (AR) for tunnelling using tunnel boring machine (TBM) in 1999 (Barton
1999). The method is based on the Q-system and average cutter force in relations to the
appropriate rock mass strength. Orientation of joint structure is accounted for, together
with the rock material strength. The abrasive or nonabrasive nature of the rock is
incorporated via the cutter life index (CLI). Rock stress level is also considered. The new
parameter QTBM is to estimate TBM performance during tunnelling.
The components of the QTBM are as follows:
RQD0 Jr Jw 209 m 20 q
QTBM =
Jn Ja SRF F10 CLI 20 5
where RQD0= RQD (%) measured in the tunnelling direction, Jn, Jr, Ja, Jw, and SRF
ratings are the same parameters in the original Q-system, m is the rock mass strength
(MPa) estimated from a complicated equation including the Q-value measured in the
tunnel direction, F is the average cutter load (ton) through the same zone, CLI is the cutter
life index, q is the quartz content (%) in rock mineralogy, and is the induced biaxial
stress (MPa) on tunnel face in the same zone. The constants 20 in the m term, 20 in the
CLI term and 5 in the term are normalising constants.
The experiences on the application of QTBM varies between projects. Example of using
the QTBM is given in Figure 6.2.3a. It appears that the correlation between QTBM and
Advanced Rate is not consistent and varies with a large margin.
Rock mass classification systems, including RMR and Q, when developed, were intended
to classify rock mass quality to arrive a suitable support design. The systems were not
meant for the design of excavation methodology. In general, with increasing of rock
mass quality, penetration decreases. However, very poor rock mass does not facilitate
penetration. Parameters in those rock mass classifications were related to support design,
they were not selected to describe rock mass boreability. Although QTBM has added a
number of parameters to reflect cutting force and wear, the emphasis is obviously not be
justified. The original rock mass classifications are independent of TBM characteristics,
while penetration however is a result of interaction between rock mass properties and
TBM machine parameters (Zhao 2006).
6.4 Geological Strength Index GSI System and Others
6.4.1 GSI System
The Geological Strength Index (GSI) was introduced by Hoek in 1994. It was aimed to
estimate the reduction in rock mass strength for different geological conditions. This
system is presented in Tables 6.4.1a. The system gives a GSI value estimated from rock
mass structure and rock discontinuity surface condition. The direct application of GSI
value is to estimate the parameters in the Hoek-Brown strength criterion for rock masses.
Although it was not aimed at to be a rock mass classification, the GSI value does in fact
reflect the rock mass quality.
GSI system has been modified and updated in the recent years, mainly to cover more
complex geological features, such as sheared zones.
The use of GSI requires careful examination and understanding of engineering geological
features of the rock mass. Rock mass structure given in the chart is general description
and there ma ybe many cases that does not directly match the description.
In general, the following equivalent between rock mass structural descriptions of blocky
to the block size description is suggested below. However, simple block size description
does not include geological structural features, such as folds and shear zones.
GSI Description ISRM Designation Jv, joints/m3 RQD, %

Blocky Medium to large blocks < 10 90 ~ 100
Very block Small to medium blocks 10 30 60 ~ 90
Blocky/Folded/Faulted Very small to small blocks > 30 30 ~ 60
Crushed Crushed rock > 60 < 30
GSI does not include the parameter of rock strength, as GSI was initiated to be a tool to
estimate rock mass strength with the Hoek-Brown strength criterion. In the Hoek-
Brown criterion, rock material uniaxial strength is used as a base parameter to estimate
rock mass uniaxial strength as well as triaxial strengths of rock material and rock mass.
The use of GSI to estimate rock mass strength is given later in the section dealing with
rock mass strength.
GSI system dis not suggest a direct correlation between rock mass quality and GSI value.
However, it is suggested that GSI can be related to RMR by GSI = RMR 5, for
reasobale good quality rock mass. An approximate classification of rock mass quality
and GSI is therefore suggested in Table 6.4.1b, base on the correlation between RMR and
GSI.
Table 6.4.1a Geological Strength Index (GSI)
GEOLOGICAL STRENGTH INDEX (GSI)
VERY GOOD very rough, fresh, un-
thered surfaces with compact coating
VERY POOR Slickensided, highly

GOOD rough, slightly weathered,
POOR Slickensided, highly wea-
weathered, surfaces with soft clay

FAIR Smooth, moderately wea-
According to rock mass structure and
JOINT SURFACE CONDITION
or fillings or angular fragments.

discontinuity surface conditions observed
thered, and altered surfaces

on the rock mass at site, select the
weathered Joint surfaces

appropriate box in this chart. Estimate the
average value of the GSI from the
stained joint surfaces

contours.
coating or filling
ROCK MASS STRUCTURE Decreasing of Surface Quality
BLOCKY very well interlocked 80
undisturbed rock mass
Decreasing Interlocking of Rock Blocks

consisting of cubical blocks
70
formed by three orthogonal joint
sets
60
VERY BLOCKY interlocked,

partially disturbed rock mass 50
with multi-faced angular blocks
formed by for or more joint sets.
40
BLOCKY/FOLDED folded and

faulted with many intersecting
discontinuties forming angular 30
blocks.
CRUSHED poorly interlocked, 20

heavily broken rock mass with a
mixture of angular and rounded
blocks. 10
Table 6.4.1b Rock mass classes determined from GSI

GSI Value 76 95 56 75 36 55 21 35 < 20
Rock Mass Quality Very good Good Fair Poor Very poor
6.4.2 Examples of Using the GSI System
Examples of estimating GSI is given below, with the same rock masses used previously to
estimate RMR and Q.
(a) Granite rock mass containing 3 joint sets, average RQD is 88%, average joint spacing
is 0.24 m, joint surfaces are generally stepped and rough, tightly closed and unweathered
with occasional stains observed, the excavation surface is wet but not dripping, average
rock material uniaxial compressive strength is 160 MPa, the tunnel is excavated to 150 m
below the ground where no abnormal high in situ stress is expected.
Refer to the GSI chart, Rock Mass Structure for the above granite is blocky, and Joint
Surface Condition is very good. Therefore GSI is 755. The rock mass is classified as
good to very good quality.
Refer to the GSI chart, Rock Mass Structure for the above sandstone is very blocky, and
Joint Surface Condition is fair to poor. Therefore GSI is 405. The rock mass is
classified as fair quality.
Refer to the GSI chart, Rock Mass Structure for the above siltstone is
blocky/folded/faulted, and Joint Surface Condition is very poor. Therefore GSI is 205.
The rock mass is classified as very poor to poor quality.
It is advised that while selecting an average value of GSI, it is perhaps better to select a
range of the GSI value for that rock mass.
Summary of RMR, Q and GSI from the above three examples are given below,
RMR Quality Q Quality GSI Quality

(a) Granite rock mass 76 G 29 G 75 G
(b) Sandstone rock mass 52 F 4.4 F 40 F
(c) Siltstone rock mass 34 P 0.85 VP 20 VP
6.4.3 Correlation and Comparison between Q, RMR and GSI
Correlation between Q and RMR are found to be,
RMR = 9 lnQ + A
A varies between 26 and 62, and average of A is 44. Figure 6.4.3a shows the
comparison and correlation between RMR and Q.
Figure 6.4.3a Correlation between RMR and Q values.
Several other correlation equations have been proposed, including RMR = 13.5 logQ +
43. They are all in the general form of semi-log equation.
For generally competent rock masses with GSI > 25, the value of GSI can be related to
Rock Mass Rating RMR value as,
GSI = RMR 5
RMR is the basic RMR value by setting the Groundwater rating at 15 (dry), and without
adjustment for joint orientation. For very poor quality rock masses, the value of RMR
is very difficult to estimate and the correlation between RMR and GSI is no longer
reliable. Consequently, RMR classification should not be used for estimating the GSI
values for poor quality rock masses.
It should be noted that each classification uses a set of parameters that are different from
other classifications. For that reason, estimate the value of one classification from
another is not advisable.
6.4.3 Other Classification Systems
Several other classification approaches have been proposed. In section, a few will be
briefly discussed due to their unique application in certain aspect.
(a) Rock Mass Number, N
Rock Mass Number (N) is the rock mass quality Q value when SRF is set at 1 (i.e.,
normal condition, stress reduction is not considered). N can be computed as,
N = (RQD/Jn) (Jr/Ja) (Jw)

This system is used because the difficult in obtaining SRF in the Q-system. It has been
noticed that SRF in the Q-system is not sensitive in rock engineering design. the value
assign to SRF cover too great range. For example, SRF = 1 for c/1 = 10~200, i.e., for a
rock with c = 50 MPa, in situ stresses of 0.25 to 5 MPa yield the same SRF value.
The importance of in situ stress on the stability of underground excavation is
insufficiently represented in the Q-system.
Another application of N number is to the rock squeezing condition. Squeezing has

been noted in the Q-system but is not sufficiently dealt, due to the special behaviour and
nature of the squeezing ground. The use of N in squeezing rock mass classification will
be presented in a later section in this chapter.
(b) Rock Mass Index, RMi
Rock Mass Index is proposed as an index characterising rock mass strength as a

construction material. It is calculated by the following equation,
RMi = c Jp
where c is the uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock material, and Jp is the
jointing parameter accounting for 4 joint characteristics, namely, joint density (or block
size), joint roughness, joint alteration and joint size. Jp is in fact a reduction factor
representing the effects of jointing on the strength of rock mass. Jp = 1 for a intact rock,
Jp = 0 for a crushed rock masses.
6.5 Rock Mass Strength and Rock Mass Quality
6.5.1 Strength of Rock Mass
As discussed earlier, strength and deformation properties of a rock mass are much
governed by the existence of joints. In another word, the mechanical properties of a
rock mass is also related to the quality of the rock mass. In general, a rock mass of good
quality (strong rock, few joints and good joint surface quality) will have a higher strength
and high deformation modulus than that of a poor rock mass.
6.5.2 Hoek-Brown Strength Criterion of Rock Mass
Hoek and Brown criterion discussed in Chapter 4 is not only for rock materials. It is
also applicable to rock masses (Figure 6.5.2a). The Hoek-Brown criterion for rock mass
is described by the following equation:
1
= 3 + ( mb 3 + s)a
ci ci ci
or
1 = 3 + (mb 3 ci + s ci2)a
Figure 6.5.2a Applicability of Hoek-Brown criterion for rock material and rock masses.
The equation above is the generalised Hoek-Brown criterion of rock mass. The Hoek-
Brown criterion for intact rock material is a special form of the generalised equation when
s =1 and a = 0.5. For intact rock, mb becomes mi, i.e.,
1
= 3 + ( mi 3 + 1)0.5
ci ci ci
Note in the Hoek-Brown criterion, ci is consistently referred to the uniaxial compressive

strength of intact rock material in the Hoek-Brown criterion for rock material and for rock
mass.
In the generalised Hoek-Brown criterion, 1 is the strength of the rock mass at a confining
pressure 3. ci is the uniaxial strength of the intact rock in the rock mass. Parameter a is
generally equal to 0.5. Constants mb and s are parameters that changes with rock type and
rock mass quality. Table 6.5.2a gives an earlier suggestion of mb and s values.
Table 6.5.2a Relation between rock mass quality and Hoek.Brown constants
Hoek-Brown Failure Carbonate Lithified Arenaceous Fine grained Coarse grained
Criterion rocks with well argillaceous rocks with polyminerallic polyminerallic
developed rocks strong crystals igneous igneous and
1/c = 3/c + (mb crystal (mudstone, and poorly crystalline metamorphic
3/c + s)0.5 cleavage siltstone, shale, developed rocks crystalline
(dolomite, slate) (normal crystal (andesite, rocks
limestone, to cleavage) cleavage dolerite, (gabbro,
marble) (sandstone, basalt, gneiss, granit,
quartzite) rhyolite) diorite)
Intact rock material
Laboratory size mi = 7.0 mi = 10.0 mi = 15.0 mi = 17.0 mi = 25.0
specimens free from s = 1.0 s = 1.0 s = 1.0 s = 1.0 s = 1.0
joints
RMR = 100 ,Q = 500
Very good quality
rock mass
Tightly interlocking mb = 3.5 mb = 5.0 mb = 7.5 mb = 8.5 mb = 12.5
undisturbed rock with s = 0.1 s = 0.1 s = 0.1 s = 0.1 s = 0.1
unweathered joints
spaced at 3 m
RMR = 85, Q = 100
Good quality rock
mass
Fresh to slightly
mb = 0.7 mb = 1.0 mb = 1.5 mb = 1.7 mb = 2.5
weathered rock,
s = 0.004 s = 0.004 s = 0.004 s = 0.004 s = 0.004
slightly disturbed with
joints spaced at 1 to 3
m
RMR = 65, Q = 10
Fair quality rock mass
Several sets of
mb = 0.14 mb = 0.20 mb = 0.30 mb = 0.34 mb = 0.50
moderately weathered
s = 0.0001 s = 0.0001 s = 0.0001 s = 0.0001 s = 0.0001
joints spaced at 0.3
to 1 m
RMR = 44, Q = 1.0
Poor quality rock
mass
Numerous weathered
mb = 0.04 mb = 0.05 mb = 0.08 mb = 0.09 mb = 0.13
joints spaced at 30 to
s = 0.00001 s = 0.00001 s = 0.00001 s = 0.00001 s = 0.00001
500 mm with some
gouge clean waste
rock
RMR = 23, Q = 0.1
Very poor quality
rock mass
Numerous heavily
mb = 0.007 mb = 0.01 mb = 0.015 mb = 0.017 mb = 0.025
weathered joints
s=0 s=0 s=0 s=0 s=0
spaced at <30 mm
with gouge waste
with fines
RMR = 3, Q = 0.01
Development and application of the Hoek-Brown criterion lead to better definition of the
parameters mb and s. Table 6.5.2b presents the latest definition of mi values for the
intact rock materials, according to different rocks.
Table 6.5.2b Values of constant mi for intact rock in Hoek-Brown criterion

Rock Type Rock Name and mi Values
Granite 323 Diorite 255 Gabbro 273
Intrusive Peridotite (255)
Granodiorite 293 Dolerite (165) Norite 225
Igneous
Basalt (165)
Extrusive Rhyolite (165) Andesite 255 Porphyries (205)
Diabase (165)
Agglomerate
Volcanic Tuff (135)
(193)
Conglomerate
(418) Siltstone 72 Mudstone 42
Clastic Sandstone 174
Sedimentary
Breccia (416) Marls (72) Shale (62)

Crystalline Sparitic limestone Micritic limestone
Carbonate Dolomite (93)
limestone (123) (102) (92)
Chemical Gypsum 82 Anhydrite 122
Organic Coal (812) Chalk 72
Metamorphic
Foliated Gneiss 285 Schist 123 Phyllites (73) Slate 74

Slightly Migmatite (293) Amphibolite 266
Foliated
Non Meta-sandstone
Quartzite 203 Hornfels (194) Marble 93
Foliated (19 3)
The values in the above table are suggestive. As seen from the table, variation of mi
value for each rock can be as great as 18. If triaxial tests have been conducted, the value
of mi should be calculated from the test results.
Once the Geological Strength Index has been estimated, the parameters which describe
the rock mass strength characteristics, are calculated as follows,
GSI 100
mb = mi exp ( )
28
For GSI > 25, i.e. rock masses of good to reasonable quality, the original Hoek-Brown
criterion is applicable with,
GSI 100
s = exp ( )
9
and
a = 0.5
For GSI < 25, i.e. rock masses of very poor quality, s = 0, and a in the Hoek-Brown
criterion is no longer equal to 0.5. Value of a can be estimated from GSI by the
following equation,
GSI
a = 0.65
200
Uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass is the value of 1 when 3 is zero. From
the Hoek-Brown criterion, when 3 = 0, it gives the uniaxial compressive strength as,
1 = sa ci
Clearly, for rock masses of very poor quality, the uniaxial compressive strength of the
rock masses equal to zero.
Example of using the Hoek-Brown equation to determine rock mass strength is given
below by the same three examples used for determining the rock mass qualities RMR, Q
and GSI. Calculation in the example uses average values only, although in practice,
range of values should be used to give upper and lower bounds.
(a) Granite rock mass, with material uniaxial strength 150 MPa, mean GSI 75.
From the mi table, mi given for granite is approximately 32.
mb = mi exp[(GSI 100)/28] = 13.1
s = exp[(GSI 100)/9] = 0.062
GSI > 25, a = 0.5
The Hoek-Brown equation for the granite rock mass is,
1 = 3 + (mb 3 ci + s ci2)a
1 = 3 + (1956 3 + 1395)0.5
Uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass is, when 3 = 0,
cm = 13950.5 = 37.3 MPa
(b) Sandstone rock mass, with material uniaxial strength 85 MPa, mean GSI 40.
From the mi table, mi given for sandstone is approximately 17.
mb = mi exp[(GSI 100)/28] = 1.99

s = exp[(GSI 100)/9] = 0.0013
GSI > 25, a = 0.5
Similarly the uniaxial compressive strength is,
cm = 3 + (169 3 + 9.4)0.5 = 9.40.5 = 3.1 MPa
(c) Siltstone rock mass, with material uniaxial strength 65 MPa, mean GSI 20.
From the mi table, mi given for siltstone is approximately 7.
mb = mi exp[(GSI 100)/28] = 0.40
s = exp[(GSI 100)/9] = 0.00014
GSI < 25, a = 0.65 (GSI/200) = 0.65 (20/200) = 0.55
Similarly the uniaxial compressive strength is,
cm = 3 + (26 3 + 0.59)0.55 = 0.590.55 = 0.75 MPa
6.5.4 Correlations between Rock Mass Quality and Mechanical Properties
Correlations between rock mass strength and rock mass quality are reflected in Table
6.5.2a and the Hoek-Brown criterion relating GSI. The better rock mass quality gives
high rock mass strength. When the rock mass is solid and massive with few joints, the
rock mass strength is close to the strength of intact rock material. When the rock mass
is very poor, i.e., RMR < 23, Q < 0.1, or GSI < 25, the rock mass has very low uniaxial
compressive strength close to zero.
Attempts have also been made to correlated deformation modulus of the rock mass with
rock mass quality.
In situ rock mass modulus (Em) can be estimated from the Q and the RMR systems, in the
equations below,
Em = 25 logQ, for Q > 1
Em = 10 (Q c/100)1/3
Em = 10(15 logQ+40)/40
Em = 2 RMR 100, for RMR > 50

Em = 10(RMR10)/40 for 20 < RMR < 85
The above Em-RMR equations are generally for competent rock mass with RMR greater
than 20. For poor rocks, the equation below has been proposed,
ci 0.5 (GSI/40 0.25)

Em = ( ) 10
100
For rock mass with ci < 100 MPa. The equation is obtained by substituting GSI for
RMR in the original Em-RMR equation. The Em-GSI equation indicates that modulus Em
is reduced progressively as the value of ci falls below 100. This reduction is based
upon the reasoning that the deformation of better quality rock masses is controlled by the
discontinuities while, for poorer quality rock masses, the deformation of the intact rock
pieces contributes to the overall deformation process.
6.5.4 Relationship between Hoek-Brown and Mohr-Coulomb Criteria
There is no direct correlation between the linear Mohr-Coulomb Criterion and the non-
linear Hoek-Brown Criterion defined by the two equations. Often, the input for a design
software or numerical modelling required for rock masses are in terms of Mohr-
Coulomb parameters c and . Attempts have been made by Hoek and Brown to
estimate c and from the Hoek-Brown equation. At the same time, they caution the
user that is a major problem to obtain c and from the Hoek-Brown equation.
If a series tests have been conducted on the rock mass, obviously test results should be
used directly to obtain parameters c and , using for example, plotting the Mohr circle
and fitting with the best strength envelope, where c and can be readily calculated
Common problems were there is no or limited test results on rock mass. The suggested
approach to obtain rock mass Mohr-Coulomb parameters c and is by generate a series
13 results by the Hoek-Brown equation. Then plotting the Mohr circle using the
generated 13 data and fitting with the best linear envelope, where c and can be
readily calculated. Care must be taken when deciding the best linear line in fitting the
Mohr circles. It depends on the stress region of the engineering application. For a
tunnel problem, if the depth and stress range is known, the line should be fitting best for
the Mohr circles in that stress region. For a slope problem, the stress region may vary
from 0 to some level of stress, and the fitting a line at low stress level (where the
curvature is the greatest for the non-linear Hoek-Brown strength envelope) is very
sensitive to the stress level. Also, pore pressure needs to be considered as this affects
the effective stress level.
6.6 Squeezing Behaviour of Rock Mass
6.6.1 Squeezing Phenomenon
ISRM (Barla 1995) defines that squeezing of rock is the time dependent large
deformation, which occurs around a tunnel and other underground openings, and is
essentially associated with creep caused by exceeding shear strength. Deformation may
terminate during construction or may continue over a long time period. The degree of
squeezing often is classified to mild, moderate and high, by the conditions below,
(i) Mild squeezing: closure 1-3% of tunnel diameter;
(ii) Moderate squeezing: closure 3-5% of tunnel diameter;
(iii) High squeezing: closure > 5% of tunnel diameter.
Behaviour of rock squeezing is typically represented by rock mass squeezes plastically

into the tunnel and the phenomenon is time dependent. Rate of squeezing depends on
the degree of over-stress. Usually the rate is high at initial stage, say, several
centimetres of tunnel closure per day for the first 1-2 weeks of excavation. Closure rate
reduces with time. Squeezing may continue for years in exceptional cases. Squeezing
may occur at shallow depths in weak and poor rock masses such as mudstone and shale.
Rock masses of competent rock of poor rock mass quality at great depth (under high
cover) may also suffer from squeezing.
6.6.2 Squeezing Estimation by Rock Mass Classification
Based on case studies, squeezing may be identified from rock class classification Q-value
and overburden thickness (H). As shown in Figure 6.6.2a, the division between
squeezing and non-squeezing condition is by a line H = 350 Q1/3, where H is in metres.
Above the line, i.e., H > 350 Q1/3, squeezing condition may occur. Below the line, i.e.,
H < 350 Q1/3, the ground is of generally non-squeezing condition.
Figure 6.6.2a Predicting squeezing ground using Q-value
Another approach predicting squeezing is by using the Rock Mass Number (N). As
discussed in the previous section, N is the Q-value when SRF is set to be 1. The
parameter allow one to separate in situ stress effects from rock mass quality. In situ
stress, which is the external cause of squeezing is dealt separated by considering the
overburden depth. From Figure 6.6.2b, the line separating non-squeezing from
squeezing condition is,
H = (275 N1/3) B0.1
Where H is the tunnel depth or overburden in metres and B is the tunnel span or
diameter in metres.
Squeezing ground condition is presented by H > (275 N1/3) B0.1.
It is also possible to characterise the degree of squeezing base on the same figure. Mild
squeezing occurs when (275 N1/3) B0.1 < H < (450 N1/3) B0.1 Moderate squeezing
occurs when (450 N1/3) B0.1 < H < (630 N1/3) B0.1 High squeezing occurs when H >
(630 N1/3) B0.1.
Theoretically, squeezing conditions around a tunnel opening can occur when,
> Strength = cm + Px A/2
where is the tangential stress at the tunnel opening, cm is the uniaxial compressive
strength of the rock mass, Px is the in situ stress in the tunnel axis direction, and A is a
rock parameter proportion to friction. Squeezing may not occur in hard rocks with high
values of parameter A.
The above equation can be written in the form below for a circular tunnel under
hydrostatic in situ stress field, with overburden stress P, P=H,
2 P > cm + P A/2
ISRM classifies squeezing rock mass and ground condition in Table 6.6.2a.
Table 6.6.2a Suggested predictions of squeezing conditions

Degree of Squeezing / cm (ISRM) cm / H (Barla) cm / insitu (Hoek)
Non squeezing < 1.0 > 1.0 > 0.35
Mild squeezing 1.0 2.0 0.4 1.0 0.2 0.35
Moderate squeezing 2.0 4.0 0.2 0.4 0.15 0.2
High squeezing > 4.0 < 0.2 < 0.15
The prediction equations for squeezing require the measurements of in situ stress and
rock mass strength. Overburden stress can be estimated from the overburden depth and
rock unit weight. Uniaxial compressive strength of the rock mass can be estimated
from the Hoek-Brown criterion with rock mass quality assessment (e.g., GSI).
Studies carried out by Hoek (2000) indicate that squeezing can in fact start at rock mass
strength / in situ stress ratio of 0.3. A prediction curve was proposed by Hoek and
reproduced in Figure 6.6.2c, relating tunnel closure to rock mass strength/in situ stress
ratio. The prediction curve was compared with tunnel squeezing case histories.
Figure 6.6.2c Squeezing prediction curve and comparison with case histories.
6.7 Laboratory and Field Characterisation of Rock Mass
6.7.1 Descriptions of Rock Mass and Matrix
6.7.2 Rock Mass Strength
6.7.3 Rock Mass Deformation Modulus
6.7.4 Groundwater Flow and Permeability
6.7.5 In Situ Stress

6.5.2a
6.1.2a
1
6.1.3a
6.1.3b
2
6.2.1a
6.3.1a
3
6.4.3a
6.5.2a
4
6.6.2a
6.6.2b
5
Case Histories
Strength values considered
reliable
Strength values estimated
6.6.2c

RMR Terzaghi

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

RMR Terzaghi

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications 1

6.1 Rock Mass Properties and Quality

6.1.1 Properties Governing Rock Mass Behaviour

Table 6.1.1a Prime parameters governing rock mass property

6.1.2 Classification by Rock Load Factor (Terzaghi 1946)

Figure 6.1.2a Terzaghis rock load concept.

Figure 6.1.3a Definition of active span.

6.1.4 Rock Quality Designation (RQD) (Deere 1964)

Table 6.1.2a Rock mass quality classification according to RQD

6.2 Rock Mass Rating RMR System

6.2.1 Concept of RMR System (1973, 1989)

(b) RQD: RQD is used as described before.

(c) Spacing of joints: Average spacing of all rock discontinuities is used.

(e) Groundwater conditions: It is to account for groundwater inflow in excavation

Influence of joint orientation on the stability of excavation is considered in Part B of the

Table 6.2.1a Rock mass classification RMR system

(b) Rating adjustment for joint orientations

(c) Effects of joint orientation in tunnelling

Figure 6.2.1a Stand-up time and RMR quality

6.2.2 Examples of using RMR System

Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:

Rock material strength 160 MPa Rating 12

uniaxial compressive strength is 85 MPa, the tunnel is to be excavated at 80 m below

Joint water pressure = groundwater pressure = 70 m w

Joint water pressure / In situ stress = (70 1)/(80 2.7) = 0.32

Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:

Rock material strength 85 MPa Rating 7

Selection of RMR parameters and calculation of RMR are shown below:

Rock material strength 65 MPa Rating 7

Joint spacing (m) 0.05 m Rating 5

6.2.3 Extension of RMR Slope Mass Rating (SMR)

SMR = RMR + (F1F2F3) + F4

where F1 = (1 - sin A)2

Table 6.2.3a Adjustment rating of F1, F2, F3 and F4 for joints

Table 6.2.3a Classification of Rock Slope according to SMT

6.3 Rock Tunnel Quality Q-System

6.3.1 Concept of the Q-System

Excavation span, diameter or height (m)

Table 6.3.1a Rock mass classification Q system

quantities of swelling clays

(b) Rock wall contact before 10 cm shear (thin mineral fillings)

5. Joint Water Reduction Factor Water pressure Jw

6. Stress Reduction Factor SRF

(b) Competent rock, rock stress problems c / 1 / c SRF

Table 6.3.1b Rock mass quality rating according to Q values

Figure 6.3.1a Support design based on Q value

Excavation Category ESR

6.3.2 Examples of Using the Q-System

Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:

RQD 88% RQD 88

Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:

RQD 70% RQD 70

Selection of Q parameters and calculation of Q-value are shown below:

RQD 41% RQD 41

6.3.3 Extension of Q-System QTBM for Mechanised Tunnelling

The components of the QTBM are as follows:

6.4 Geological Strength Index GSI System and Others

6.4.1 GSI System

GSI Description ISRM Designation Jv, joints/m3 RQD, %

Table 6.4.1a Geological Strength Index (GSI)

GEOLOGICAL STRENGTH INDEX (GSI)

VERY GOOD very rough, fresh, un-

thered surfaces with compact coating