ENS 080312 en JZ Notes Chapter 6

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications
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
Number of joint sets
Orientation
Spacing
Aperture
Surface roughness
Weathering and alteration
Material Parameters
Compressive strength
Modulus of elasticity
Boundary Conditions
Groundwater pressure and
flow
In situ stress
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 Class
Definition
Rock Load Factor Hp (feet)

(B and Ht in feet)
Remark
I.
Hard and intact rock contains no joints and fractures. After

excavation the rock may have popping and spalling at excavated
face.
Light lining required only if spalling or

popping occurs.
II. Hard stratified

and schistose
Hard rock consists of thick strata and layers. Interface between strata
is cemented. Popping and spalling at excavated face is common.
0 to 0.5 B
Light support for protection against

spalling. Load may change between
layers.
III. Massive,
moderately jointed
Massive rock contains widely spaced joints and fractures. Block size
is large. Joints are interlocked. Vertical walls do not require support.
Spalling may occur.
0 to 0.25 B
Light support for protection against

spalling.
IV. Moderately
blocky and seamy
Rock contains moderately spaced joints. Rock is not chemically

weathered and altered. Joints are not well interlocked and have small
apertures. Vertical walls do not require support. Spalling may occur.
0.25 B to 0.35 (B + Ht)
No side pressure.
V. Very blocky and

seamy
Rock is not chemically weathered, and contains closely spaced

joints. Joints have large apertures and appear separated. Vertical
walls need support.
(0.35 to 1.1) (B + Ht)
Little or no side pressure.
VI. Completely
crushed but
chemically intact
Rock is not chemically weathered, and highly fractured with small

fragments. The fragments are loose and not interlocked. Excavation
face in this material needs considerable support.
1.1 (B + Ht)
Considerable side pressure. Softening

effects by water at tunnel base. Use
circular ribs or support rib lower end.
VII. Squeezing rock

at moderate depth
Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in

volume. Moderate depth is considered as 150 ~ 1000 m.
(1.1 to 2.1) (B + Ht)
VIII. Squeezing rock

at great depth
Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in

volume. Great depth is considered as more than 1000 m.
(2.1 to 4.5) (B + Ht)
Hard and intact
Heavy side pressure. Invert struts

required. Circular ribs recommended.
Circular ribs required. In extreme cases

Rock volume expands (and advances into the tunnel) due to swelling
up to 250 feet, irrespective
use yielding support.
of clay minerals in the rock at the presence of moisture.
of B and Ht
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%.
IX.
Swelling rock
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
RQD
< 25
25 50
50 75
75 90
99 100
Rock mass quality classification according to RQD

Rock Mass Quality
Very poor
Poor
Fair
Good
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.

rock of moderate to high strength, point load index is acceptable.
For
(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
Rating
15
12
7
4
2
2. RQD (%)
90 100
75 90
50 75
25 50
Rating
20
17
13
8
3. Joint spacing (m)
>2
0.6 2
0.2 0.6
0.06 0.2
Rating
20
15
10
8
continuous, slickensided
4. Condition of joints
not continuous, very rough slightly rough surfaces, slightly rough surfaces,
surfaces, unweathered, no
separation
5.
Rating
Groundwater
slightly weathered,
separation <1 mm
30
25
inflow per 10 m tunnel length (l /min), or
joint water pressure/major in situ stress, or
general conditions at excavation surface
Rating
(b) Rating adjustment for joint orientations
Strike and dip orientation of joints
very favourable
Rating
tunnels
0
foundations
0
slopes
0
highly weathered,
separation <1 mm
favourable
2
2
5
(c) Effects of joint orientation in tunnelling

Strike perpendicular to tunnel axis
Drive with dip
Drive against dip
Dip 45 90
Dip 20 45
Dip 45 90
Dip 20 45
very favourable
favourable
fair
unfavourable
<1
0
< 25
3
< 0.06
5
continuous joints, soft

surfaces, or gouge <5 mm gouge >5 mm thick, or
separation >5 mm
thick, or separation 15 mm
20
none
0
completely dry
15
15
1
< 10
0 0.1
damp
10
fair
5
7
25
10
10 25
0.1 0.2
wet
7
25 125
0.2 0.5
dripping
4
unfavourable
10
15
50
Strike parallel to tunnel axis

Dip 45 90
very unfavourable
Dip
20 45
fair
0
> 125
> 0.5
flowing
0
very unfavourable
12
25
60
Dip 0 20
irrespective of strike
fair
Table 6.2.1b
Rock mass classes determined from total ratings and meaning
RMR Ratings
Rock mass class
Description
Average stand-up
time
Rock mass cohesion
(KPa)
Rock mass friction
angle
Figure 6.2.1a
81 100
A
very good
rock
61 80
B
41 60
C
21 40
D
good rock
fair rock
poor rock
10 year for
15 m span
6 months
for 8 m
span
1 week for
5 m span
10 hours
for 2.5 m
span
< 20
E
very poor
rock
30 minutes
for 0.5 m
span
> 400
300 400
200 300
100 200
< 100
> 45
35 45
25 35
15 25
< 15
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
RQD (%)
Joint spacing (m)
Condition of joints
Groundwater
160 MPa
88%
0.24 m
very rough, unweathered, no separation
wet
Rating
Rating
Rating
Rating
Rating
RMR
12
17
10
30
7
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
RQD (%)
Joint spacing (m)
Condition of joints
Groundwater
85 MPa
70%
0.11 m
slightly rough, highly weathered, separation <
1mm
water pressure/stress = 0.32
Rating
Rating
Rating
Rating
7
13
8
20
Rating
RMR
4
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,
RQD = 100 e
0.1
(0.1 +1)
Joint frequency is estimated to be 20, which gives average joint spacing 0.05 m
RQD (%)
65 MPa
41%
Rating
Rating
7
8

Joint spacing (m)
Condition of joints
Groundwater
0.05 m
continuous, slickensided, separation 1-5mm
inflow = 50 l/min
Rating
Rating
Rating
RMR
9
5
10
4
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
10
Adjustment rating of F1, F2, F3 and F4 for joints

Very
favourable
Favourable
Fair
P |j - s|
T |(j - s) - 180|
F1 (for P & T)
>30
>30
0.15
30~20
30~20
0.40
20~10
20~10
0.70
10~5
10~5
0.85
<5
<5
1.00
P |j|
F2 (for P)
F2 (for T)
<20
0.15
1.00
20~30
0.40
1.00
30~35
0.70
1.00
35~45
0.85
1.00
>45
1.00
1.00
Joint Orientation
Very
Unfavourable unfavourable
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
Table 6.2.3a
+10
+8
-8
Classification of Rock Slope according to SMT
SMR
Class
Description
Stability
81~100
61~80
I
II
Very good
Good
41~60
III
Fair
21~40
IV
Poor
0~20
Very Poor
Completely stable None

Stable
Some blocks
Some joints or
Partially stable
many wedges
Palnar or large
Unstable
wedges
Completely
Large wedges or
unstable
circular failure
Failure
Support
None
Spot
Systematic
Important /
Corrective
Re-excavation
6.3
11
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:
Q=
RQD
Jn
Jr
Ja
Jw
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.
Equivalent dimension, De =
Excavation span, diameter or height (m)

Excavation Support Ratio (ESR)
Table 6.3.1a
12
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
A
Massive, no or few joints
B
One joint set
C
One joint set plus random joints
D
Two joint set
E
Two joint set plus random joints
F
Three joint set
G
Three joint set plus random joints
H
Four or more joint sets, heavily jointed
J
Crushed rock, earthlike
Note: (i) For intersections, use (3.0 Jn). (ii) For portals, use (2.0 Jn).
Jn
0.5 1
2
3
4
6
9
12
15
20
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
(a) Rock-wall contact (no mineral fillings, only coatings)
A
Tight healed, hard, non-softening, impermeable filling, i.e.,
quartz or epidote
B
Unaltered joint walls, surface staining only
C
Slightly altered joint walls. Non-softening mineral coating,
sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc.
D
Silty- or sandy-clay coatings, small clay fraction (nonsoftening)
E
Softening or low friction mineral coatings, i.e., kaolinite or
mica. Also chlorite, talc, gypsum, graphite, etc., and small
r approx.
Ja
0.75
25 35
25 30
1.0
2.0
20 25
3.0
8 16
4.0
13
quantities of swelling clays

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

Sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc.
Strongly over-consolidated non-softening clay mineral
fillings (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness)
H
Medium or low over-consolidated softening clay mineral
fillings (continuous, but < 5 mm thickness)
J
Swelling-clay fillings, i.e., montmorillonite (continuous, but
< 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
M
(see G, H, J for description of clay condition)
N
Zones or bands of silty- or sandy-clay, small clay fraction
(non-softening)
O, P, Thick, continuous zones or bands of clay (see G, H, J for
R
clay condition description)
25 30
16 24
4.0
6.0
12 16
8.0
6 12
8 12
6 24
6, 8, or
8 12
5
6 24
10, 13, or
13 20
5.
A
Joint Water Reduction Factor

Water pressure
Jw
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.
14
(b)
H
J
Competent rock, rock stress problems

Low stress, near surface, open joints
Medium stress, favourable stress condition
c / 1
> 200
200 10
/ c
< 0.01
0.01
0.03
0.3 0.4
15
SRF
2.5
1
10 5
0.5 2
High stress, very tight structure. Usually
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
K
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
400 ~ 1000
100 ~ 400
40 ~ 100
10 ~ 40
4 ~ 10
1~4
0.1 ~ 1
0.01 ~ 0.1
0.001 ~ 0.01
Class
A
A
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Rock mass quality

Exceptionally Good
Extremely Good
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
Extremely Poor
Exceptionally Poor
Figure 6.3.1a
Table 6.3.1c
16
Support design based on Q value
Excavation Support Ratio (ESR) for various tunnel categories

Excavation Category
ESR
Temporary mine openings.
35
Permanent mine openings, water tunnels for hydro-electric

projects, pilot tunnels, drifts and headings for large excavations.
1.6
Storage rooms, water treatment plants, minor road and railway

tunnels, surge chambers and access tunnels in hydro-electric
project.
1.3
Underground power station caverns, major road and railway

tunnels, civil defense chamber, tunnel portals and intersections.
1.0
Underground nuclear power stations, railway stations, sports and

public facilities, underground factories.
0.8
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
Joint set number
Joint roughness number
Joint alteration number
Joint water factor
Stress reduction factor
Q
88%
3 sets
rough stepped (undulating)
unaltered, some stains
wet only (dry excavation or minor inflow)
c/1 = 160/(1500.027) = 39.5
(88/9) (3/1) (1/1)
RQD
Jn
Jr
Ja
Jw
SRF
88
9
3
1
1
1
44
The calculated Q-value is 29, and the rock mass is classified as good quality.
17
RQD
Joint set number
Joint water factor
Q
70%
2 sets plus random
slightly rough (rough planar)
highly weathered only stain, (altered nonsoftening mineral coating)
70 m water head = 7 kg/cm2 = 7 bars
c/1 = 85/(800.027) = 39.3
(70/6) (1.5/2) (0.5/1)
RQD
Jn
Jr
Ja
70
6
1.5
2
Jw
SRF
0.5
1
4.4
The calculated Q-value is 4.4, and the rock mass is classified as fair quality.
RQD
Joint set number
Joint water factor
Q
41%
2 sets plus random
slickensided and undulating
highly weathered filled with 3-5 mm clay
large inflow with considerable outwash
c/1 = 65/(2200.027) = 11
(41/6) (1.5/4) (0.33/1)
RQD
Jn
Jr
Ja
Jw
SRF
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
18
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:
QTBM =
RQD0 Jr
Jn
Ja
q
Jw 209 m 20
SRF
F10
CLI 20
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
19
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
Blocky
Very block
Blocky/Folded/Faulted
Crushed
ISRM Designation
Medium to large blocks
Small to medium blocks
Very small to small blocks
Crushed rock
Jv, joints/m3
< 10
10 30
> 30
> 60
RQD, %
90 ~ 100
60 ~ 90
30 ~ 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 HoekBrown 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.
VERY POOR Slickensided, highly

weathered, surfaces with soft clay
coating or filling
POOR Slickensided, highly weathered surfaces with compact coating

or fillings or angular fragments.
Decreasing of Surface Quality
ROCK MASS STRUCTURE
VERY BLOCKY interlocked,

partially disturbed rock mass
with multi-faced angular blocks
formed by for or more joint sets.
BLOCKY/FOLDED folded and
faulted with many intersecting
discontinuties forming angular
blocks.
CRUSHED poorly interlocked,
heavily broken rock mass with a
mixture of angular and rounded
blocks.
80
Decreasing Interlocking of Rock Blocks
BLOCKY very well interlocked

undisturbed rock mass
consisting of cubical blocks
formed by three orthogonal joint
sets
Table 6.4.1b
FAIR Smooth, moderately weathered, and altered surfaces
According to rock mass structure and

discontinuity surface conditions observed
on the rock mass at site, select the
appropriate box in this chart. Estimate the
average value of the GSI from the
contours.
JOINT SURFACE CONDITION
GEOLOGICAL STRENGTH INDEX (GSI)
GOOD rough, slightly weathered,

stained joint surfaces
Geological Strength Index (GSI)

VERY GOOD very rough, fresh, unweathered Joint surfaces
Table 6.4.1a
20
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Rock mass classes determined from GSI
GSI Value
Rock Mass Quality
76 95
Very good
56 75
Good
36 55
Fair
21 35
Poor
< 20
Very poor
21
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,
(a) Granite rock mass

(b) Sandstone rock mass
(c) Siltstone rock mass
RMR
76
52
34
Quality
G
F
P
Q
29
4.4
0.85
Quality
G
F
VP
GSI
75
40
20
Quality
G
F
VP
22
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.
comparison and correlation between RMR and Q.
Figure 6.4.3a
Figure 6.4.3a shows the
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)
23
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
24
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
ci
ci
ci
+ s)a
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 HoekBrown 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
25
Relation between rock mass quality and Hoek.Brown constants
Hoek-Brown Failure
Criterion
1/c = 3/c + (mb
3/c + s)0.5
Intact rock material

Laboratory size
specimens free from
joints
RMR = 100 ,Q = 500
Very good quality
rock mass
Tightly interlocking
undisturbed rock with
unweathered joints
spaced at 3 m
RMR = 85, Q = 100
Good quality rock
mass
Fresh to slightly
weathered rock,
slightly disturbed with
joints spaced at 1 to 3
m
RMR = 65, Q = 10
Fair quality rock mass
Several sets of
moderately weathered
joints spaced at 0.3
to 1 m
RMR = 44, Q = 1.0
Poor quality rock
mass
Numerous weathered
joints spaced at 30 to
500 mm with some
gouge clean waste
rock
RMR = 23, Q = 0.1
Very poor quality
rock mass
Numerous heavily
weathered joints
spaced at <30 mm
with gouge waste
with fines
RMR = 3, Q = 0.01
Carbonate
rocks with well
developed
crystal
cleavage
(dolomite,
limestone,
marble)
Lithified
argillaceous
rocks
(mudstone,
siltstone, shale,
slate) (normal
to cleavage)
Arenaceous
rocks with
strong crystals
and poorly
developed
crystal
cleavage
(sandstone,
quartzite)
Fine grained
polyminerallic
igneous
crystalline
rocks
(andesite,
dolerite,
basalt,
rhyolite)
Coarse grained
polyminerallic
igneous and
metamorphic
crystalline
rocks
(gabbro,
gneiss, granit,
diorite)
mi = 7.0
s = 1.0
mi = 10.0
s = 1.0
mi = 15.0
s = 1.0
mi = 17.0
s = 1.0
mi = 25.0
s = 1.0
mb = 3.5
s = 0.1
mb = 5.0
s = 0.1
mb = 7.5
s = 0.1
mb = 8.5
s = 0.1
mb = 12.5
s = 0.1
mb = 0.7
s = 0.004
mb = 1.0
s = 0.004
mb = 1.5
s = 0.004
mb = 1.7
s = 0.004
mb = 2.5
s = 0.004
mb = 0.14
s = 0.0001
mb = 0.20
s = 0.0001
mb = 0.30
s = 0.0001
mb = 0.34
s = 0.0001
mb = 0.50
s = 0.0001
mb = 0.04
s = 0.00001
mb = 0.05
s = 0.00001
mb = 0.08
s = 0.00001
mb = 0.09
s = 0.00001
mb = 0.13
s = 0.00001
mb = 0.007
s=0
mb = 0.01
s=0
mb = 0.015
s=0
mb = 0.017
s=0
mb = 0.025
s=0
26
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
Igneous
Rock Type
Intrusive
Granite 323
Granodiorite 293
Extrusive
Rhyolite (165)
Metamorphic
Sedimentary
Volcanic
Clastic
Carbonate
Chemical
Organic
Foliated
Slightly
Foliated
Non
Foliated
Conglomerate
(418)
Breccia (416)
Crystalline
limestone (123)
Gneiss 285
Rock Name and mi Values

Diorite 255
Gabbro 273
Dolerite (165)
Norite 225
Basalt (165)
Andesite 255
Diabase (165)
Agglomerate
Tuff (135)
(193)
Sandstone 174
Siltstone 72
Marls (72)
Sparitic limestone Micritic limestone

(102)
(92)
Gypsum 82
Anhydrite 122
Coal (812)
Schist 123
Phyllites (73)
Peridotite (255)
Porphyries (205)
Mudstone 42
Shale (62)
Dolomite (93)
Chalk 72
Slate 74
Migmatite (293) Amphibolite 266

Quartzite 203
Meta-sandstone
(19 3)
Hornfels (194)
Marble 93
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,
mb = mi exp (
GSI 100
)
28
For GSI > 25, i.e. rock masses of good to reasonable quality, the original Hoek-Brown
criterion is applicable with,
s = exp (
and
a = 0.5
GSI 100
)
9
27
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,
a = 0.65
GSI
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
28
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
29
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,
Em = (
ci 0.5 (GSI/40 0.25)

) 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 nonlinear 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 MohrCoulomb 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
30
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.
31
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
Non squeezing
Mild squeezing
Moderate squeezing
High squeezing
/ cm (ISRM)
< 1.0
1.0 2.0
2.0 4.0
> 4.0
cm / H (Barla)
> 1.0
0.4 1.0
0.2 0.4
< 0.2
cm / insitu (Hoek)
> 0.35
0.2 0.35
0.15 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
32
6.5.2a
6.1.2a
6.1.3a
6.1.3b
6.2.1a
6.3.1a
6.4.3a
6.5.2a
6.6.2a
6.6.2b
Case Histories
Strength values considered
reliable
Strength values estimated
6.6.2c

ENS 080312 en JZ Notes Chapter 6

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

ENS 080312 en JZ Notes Chapter 6

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Rock Mass Properties and Quality

6.1.1 Properties Governing Rock Mass Behaviour

Prime parameters governing rock mass property

6.1.2 Classification by Rock Load Factor (Terzaghi 1946)

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Terzaghis rock load concept.

Definition of active span.

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Rock Load Factor Hp (feet)

Hard and intact rock contains no joints and fractures. After

Light lining required only if spalling or

II. Hard stratified

Light support for protection against

Light support for protection against

Rock contains moderately spaced joints. Rock is not chemically

0.25 B to 0.35 (B + Ht)

V. Very blocky and

Rock is not chemically weathered, and contains closely spaced

(0.35 to 1.1) (B + Ht)

Little or no side pressure.

Rock is not chemically weathered, and highly fractured with small

Considerable side pressure. Softening

VII. Squeezing rock

Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in

(1.1 to 2.1) (B + Ht)

VIII. Squeezing rock

Rock slowly advances into the tunnel without perceptible increase in

(2.1 to 4.5) (B + Ht)

Hard and intact

Heavy side pressure. Invert struts

Circular ribs required. In extreme cases

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

6.1.4 Rock Quality Designation (RQD) (Deere 1964)

Rock mass quality classification according to RQD

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Rock Mass Rating RMR System

6.2.1 Concept of RMR System (1973, 1989)

Strength of intact rock material: Uniaxial compressive strength is preferred.

RQD: RQD is used as described before.

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

Condition of joints: Condition includes joint aperture, persistence, roughness, joint

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

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Rock mass classification RMR system

(c) Effects of joint orientation in tunnelling

continuous joints, soft

Strike parallel to tunnel axis

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Rock mass classes determined from total ratings and meaning

Stand-up time and RMR quality

6.2.2 Examples of using RMR System

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

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

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

6.2.3 Extension of RMR Slope Mass Rating (SMR)

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Adjustment rating of F1, F2, F3 and F4 for joints

Classification of Rock Slope according to SMT

Completely stable None

Chapter 6 Rock Mass Properties and Classifications

Rock Tunnel Quality Q-System

6.3.1 Concept of the Q-System

Excavation span, diameter or height (m)