PART 9: CLASSIFICATION OF ROCK MASS - RQD, RMR & Q-SYSTEM

Soils are classified according to types & properties e.g. granular soil (f-soil) & clay (c-soil).
Rocks are also classified based on properties. This is to help in understanding their
characteristics as construction materials & components of engineering structures thus,
helping in design & construction work.
Classification of rocks based on geological aspects are subjective:
a) Igneous
b) Sediment
c) Metamorphic
For design & construction, objective classification (numerical values) is more appropriate
classification of rock based on prevailing weakness planes, number of joint set, &
engineering properties like strength, weathering grade & permeability.

A) ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION RQD:

The most basic engineering classification introduced by Deere (1964), is an index of
assessing rock quality quantitatively.
It is more sensitive index of the core quality than the core recovery:
(Length of core/Length of core barrel) 100 %)
The RQD is a modified per cent core recovery which incorporates only sound pieces of rock
core that are 100 mm or greater in length along core axis.
RQD = (Xi / total length of core, L) x 100%
Where:
Xi = Core length 100 mm
L = Length of core recovered (1.5m if barrel is full)

Core samples obtained from rock drilling

boring machine YBM 2

Wash

Wash boring machine YBM 2

Double tube core barrel is used to obtain rock core samples during wash boring. Length of
barrel is 1500 mm.
If core barrel is full with rock sample (100 % recovery, R) then, the total length of core is
1500 mm.

Double tube core barrel to obtain rock core samples during wash boring.
Triple tube core barrel ensures minimal disturbance to the core sample.
Method Of Obtaining RQD
(1)Direct Method:
Core samples of in-situ rock mass: ISRM recommends a core size of at least NX size (54.7
mm dia.) drilled with double-tube core barrel using diamond coring bit.
Artificial (not natural) fractures or joints (that occurs during drilling) can be identified by
close fitting (matched joint surface) of cores and fresh (unstained) surfaces.
All the artificial joints are ignored while counting the core length for RQD.
A slower drilling rate will also give a better RQD.

S. No
1
2
3
4
5

Rock Mass Quality

RQD (%)

Very poor
0 25
Poor
25 50
Fair
50 75
Good
75 90
Excellent
90 100
Correlation between RQD and Rock Mass Quality
Safe Bearing Pressure Guidance Values

UCS (MPa)

10
0
25
10

12

1
0.2
25
60

3
1
70
200

5
2
90
600

SBP (MPa)
RQD (%)
Fracture spacing
(mm)
Safe bearing pressure based on rock strength & fracturing

Example of RQD calculation

RQD is perhaps the most commonly used method for characterising the degree of
jointing in borehole cores, although this parameter also may implicitly include other rock
mass features like weathering and core loss.
(2) Indirect Method:
Seismic Properties Of Rock:
o The seismic survey method makes use of the variations of elastic properties of the rock
strata that affect the velocity of the seismic waves travelling through them, thus
providing useful information about the subsurface materials (e.g. cavities, dense rock,
jointed rock).
The following information of the rock masses can be inferred from seismic data:
a) Location & configuration of bed rock and geological structures in the subsurface.

b) The effect of discontinuities in rock masses may be estimated by comparing the in situ
compressional wave velocity with sonic velocity of intact drill core obtained from the
same rock mass.
[Since in situ rock are fractured and jointed hence, compressional wave velocity is lower
compared to intact core]
Based on seismic data of in situ rock mass and intact rock sample, RQD can be estimated:
RQD (%)
Velocity ratio
(VF / VL)2 100
Where:
VF = in situ compressional wave velocity (obtained from seismic refraction method in the
field)
VL = compressional wave velocity in intact rock core (obtained from ultrasonic velocity
test in laboratory).

Sonic velocity test on core sample (non-destructive test) to give Vp of rock sample
in laboratory

Type Of Rocks

P-wave
velocity
m/s

Dry, loose topsoils and silts.

Dry sands, loams; slightly sandy or gravely soft clays.
Dry gravels, moist sandy and gravely soils; dry heavy silts and clays; moist silty
and clayey soils.
Dry, heavy, gravely clay; moist, heavy clays; cobbly materials with considerable
sands and fines; soft shales; soft or weak sandstones.
Water, saturated silts or clays, wet gravels.
Compacted, moist clays; saturated sands and gravels; soils below water table; dry
medium shales, moderately soft sandstones, weathered, moist shales and schists.
Hard pan; cemented gravels; hard clay; boulder till; compact, cobbly and bouldery
materials; medium to moderately hard shales and sandstones, partially
decomposed granites, jointed and fractured hard rocks.
Hard shales and sandstones, interbedded shales and sandstones, slightly fractured
hardrocks.
Unweathered limestones, granites, gneiss, other dense rocks.

180-370
300-490
460-910
910-1460
1460-1520
1460-1830
1680-2440
2440-3660
3660-6100

(3) Indirect Method:

Volumetric Joint Count Of In Situ Rock Mass:
o Where cores are not available, RQD may be estimated from number of joints
(discontinuities) per unit volume Jv.
A simple relationship which may used to convert J v into RQD for clay-free rock masses is:
RQD = 115 3.3 Jv
Where: Jv is represents the total number of joints per cubic meter or the volumetric joint
count
Jv has been described by Palmstrom (1986) as a measure for
the number of joints within a unit volume of rock mass
J
defined by:
1
J

( joint
)
v
Where: Si is the average
spacing in metres for the i th
i 1 S i
joint set
J is total number of joint sets except the random
joint set

Take 1 m3 of a rock mass, with 2 joint sets, J1 & J2

Avg.
Avg.
Jv = Ji=1 (1 /
Jv = (1/0.2)
Jv = 5 + 3.3
Jv = 8.3
RQD = 115
RQD = 115
RQD = 88 %

spacing, S1 = 0.2
spacing, S2 = 0.3
Si)
+ (1/0.3)
3.3 Jv
3.3 8.3

Joint sets in rock

Joint sets in granite usually 3 sets

rock Joint spacing
(Almost perpendicular to each other)
distances between each joint

Joints and joint sets in

is the horizontal
in a set and measured along a
horizontal line

Take 1 m3 of rock mass with three joint sets,

J1, J2 and J3 (major joint set only). Measure
the spacing between each joint (in a given
set) along a
horizontal line.
Joint spacing for
set J1: 135, 225, 300 & 260 mm.
Average spacing, S1 = 230 mm
Joint spacing for set J2 : 350 &
spacing, S2 = 400 mm.
Joint spacing for set J3: 250, 270,
spacing, S3 = 267 mm
Joint spacings J1: 135, 225, 300
Average spacing, S1 = 230 mm =
Joint spacings J2 : 350 & 450

450 mm. Average

280 mm. Average
& 260 mm.
0.23 m
mm.

Average spacing, S2 = 400 mm = 0.4 m.

Joint spacing J3: 250, 270, 280 mm.
Average spacing, S3 = 267 mm = 0.267 m
(Note: unit for average joint spacing is in metre)
Jv = 1/0.23 + 1/0.4 + 1/0.267 = 10.60 m
RQD (%) = 115 3.3 Jv = 115 34.98 = 80 %
Compared to direct method (RQD using core sample), VOLUMETRIC JOINT COUNT gives an
indication on discontinuities orientation (dip & strike).
During drilling and transportation of cores, orientation of discontinuities is lost (rotation
and movement of core samples), unless directional drilling is used (very expensive &
usually used in petroleum exploration).
S. No
Term for Jointing
Term for Jv
Jv
1
Massive
Extremely low
< 0.3
2
Very weak jointed
Very low
0.3 1
3
Weakly jointed
Low
13
4
Moderately jointed
Moderately high
3 10
5
Strongly jointed
High
10 30
6
Very strongly jointed
Very high
30 100
7
Crushed
Extremely high
> 100
Classification of Volumetric Joint Count, Jv (Palmstrom 1996)
Though the RQD is a simple and inexpensive index, when considered alone it is not sufficient
to provide an adequate description of a rock mass because it disregards joint orientation,
joint condition, type of joint filling and stress condition.
Some Frequently Asked Question:
Which rock mass is easier to excavate, a rock with a higher or lower RQD?
Which rock mass is more suitable as a foundation for a structure, rock with RQD = 90% or
RQD = 30%?
Which rock mass will display rock fall, is the one with a higher or lower RQD?
How can we differentiate between natural fractures and those induced by drilling?
Rock Mass Classification System:
The most comprehensive & objective classification systems of rock mass are:
o RMR (Rock Mass Rating)
o Q- System
However, they are more complex than RQD.
The system includes several essential properties of a rock body that evaluate its gross
properties; i.e. material properties + mass properties.

B) ROCK MASS RATING, RMR:

Also called geomechanics classification, based on the work of Bieniawski (1984)
The system includes stand-up time of an unsupported excavation & 6 other parameters:
1) Uniaxial Compressive Strength of intact
4) Conditions of discontinuity (infilling,
rock material, UCS
persistence)
2) Rock quality designation, RQD
5) Conditions of groundwater
3) Joint or discontinuity spacing
6) Orientation of discontinuity (strike & dip
angle)
Collection Of Field Data For RMR:
The rating of 6 parameters of the RMR are given in Table 1 to 6
For eliminating doubts due to subjective judgements, the rating for different parameters
should be given a range in preference to a single value
(1) Uniaxial Compressive Strength Of Intact Rock Material (Q C)

 The strength of the intact rock material should be obtained from rock cores, the ratings
based on uniaxial compressive strength (preferred) & point-load strength as shown in
Table 1.
Qualitative
Compressiv
Point-load strength (MPa)
Rating
description
e Strength
(MPa)
Exceptionally
> 250
8
15
strong
Very strong
100 250
48
12
Strong
50 100
24
7
Average
25 50
12
4
Weak
10 25
Use of uniaxial compressive strength is
2
preferred
Very weak
2 10
- do 1
Extremely weak
12
- do 0
Note : At compressive strength less than 0.6 MPa, many rock material would be regarded
as soil
Table 1: Strength of intact rock material (Bieniawski, 1979)
(2) Rock Quality Designation (RQD)
RQD should be determined as previously discussed and rating are given in Table 2.
Qualitative description
RQD
Ratin
(%)
g
Excellent
90 100
20
Good
75 90
17
Fair
50 75
13
Poor
25 50
8
Very poor
0 25
3
Table 2: Rock Quality Designation RQD (Bieniawski, 1979)
(3) Spacing Of Discontinuities
The term discontinuity includes joints, beddings or foliations, shear zones, minor faults, or
other weakness planes. The linear distance between two adjacent discontinuities should
be measured for all sets of discontinuities & the rating should be obtained from Table 3 for
the most critical discontinuity.
Description
Spacing (m)
Rating
Very wide
>2
20
Wide
0.6 2
15
Moderate
0.2 0.6
10
Close
0.06 0.2
8
Very close
< 0.06
5
Note: If more than one discontinuities sets are present and
the spacing of discontinuities of each set varies, consider
the set with the lowest rating
Table 3: Spacing of discontinuities (Bieniawski, 1979)
(4) Condition Of Discontinuity
This parameter includes roughness of discontinuity surfaces, their separation (aperture or
opening), length or continuity, weathering of the discontinuity surfaces, and infilling
(gouge) material. The details of rating are given in Table 4.
Description
Ratin
g
Very rough and weathered, wall rock tight and discontinuous, no separation
30
Rough and slightly weathered, wall rock surface separation < 1mm
25
Slightly rough and moderately to highly weathered, wall rock surface
20
separation < 1 mm
Slicken sided wall rock surface or 1 5 mm thick gouge or 1 5 mm wide
10
continuous discontinuity

5 mm thick soft gouge, 5 mm wide continuous discontinuity

0
Table 4: Condition of discontinuities (Bieniawski, 1979)
(5) Ground Water Condition
In the case of tunnel, the rate of inflow of ground water in litres per minute per 10 m
length of the tunnel should be determined, or general condition can be described as
completely dry, damp, wet dripping & flowing.
If actual water pressure data is available, these should be stated & expressed in terms of
the ratio of the seepage pressure to the major principal stress.
The ratings as per the water condition are given in Table 5.
Inflow per 10 m tunnel length
None
< 10
10 25 25 125 > 125
(litre/min)
Joint water pressures/major
0
0 0.1
0.1
0.2 0.5
> 0.5
principal stress
0.2
General description
Completely
Damp
Wet
Dripping Flowing
dry
Rating
15
10
7
4
0
Table 5: Ground water condition (Bieniawski, 1979)

Rating of the above 5 parameters (Table 1 to Table 5) are added to obtain what is called
the basic rock mass rating - RMRbasic

(6) Orientation Of Discontinuities

Orientation of discontinuities means the DIP and STRIKE of discontinuities (weakness
planes).
The dip angle is the angle between the horizontal and the discontinuity plane taken in a
direction in which the plane dips.
The value of the dip and strike should be recorded as shown in Table 6, the orientation of
tunnel axis or slope face or foundation alignment should also be recorded.
A. Orientation of tunnel/slope/foundation axis:
.
B. Orientation of discontinuities
Set 1 Average strike: . (from to
) Dip
Set 2 Average strike: . (from to
) Dip
Set 3 Average strike: . (from to
) Dip
Table 6: Orientation of discontinuities
The influence of the strike & dip of the discontinuities is considered with respect to the
direction of tunnel drivage or slope face orientation or foundation alignment.
To facilitate a decision whether the strike & dip are favourable or not, reference should be
made to Table 7 & Table 8 which provide a quantitative assessment of critical joint
orientation effect with respect to tunnels & dams foundation respectively.
Once the ratings for the effect of the critical discontinuity are known, as shown in Table 9
an arithmetic sum of the joint adjustment rating in and the RMR basic is obtained. This
number is called the final rock mass rating RMR.
Strike perpendicular to tunnel
Drive with dip
Drive against dip
Dip 45 90
Very
favorable

Dip 20 45
Favorable

Dip 45 90
Fair

Dip 20 90
Unfavorabl
e

Strike parallel to tunnel

axis
Dip 20 45
Fair

Dip 45 90
Very
unfavorabl
e

Irrespecti
ve of
strike
Dip 0 20
Fair

Table 7: Assessment of joint orientation effect on tunnels - dips are apparent dips
along tunnel axis
(Bieniawski, 1989)
Dip 0 - 10
Very favorable

Dip 0 - 10
Dip direction
Upstream
Downstream
Unfavorable
Fair

Dip 30 - 60

Dip 60 -90

Favorable

Very
unfavorable
Table 8: Assessment of joint orientation effect on stability of dam foundation
(Bieniawski, 1989)

Joint orientation
Very
Favorabl
Fair
Unfavora
Very
assessment for:
favorable
e
ble
unfavorable
Tunnels
0
-2
-5
- 10
- 12
Raft foundation
0
-2
-7
- 15
- 25
Slopes
0
-5
- 50
- 50
- 60
Table 9: Adjustment for joint orientation (Bieniawski, 1979)
Estimation Of RMR:
The rock mass rating is an algebraic sum of ratings for all the parameters in Table 1 to 5 &
Table 9, after the adjustments for orientation of discontinuities given in Table 7 and 8.
The sum of ratings for 4 parameters in Table 2 to Table 5 is called Rock Condition Rating
(RCR) which discounts the effect of strength (c) of intact rock material & orientation of
joints.
Heavy blasting creates new fractures, hence it is suggested that 10 points should be added
to get RMR for undisturbed rock masses (e.g. excavation by TBM & road headers), and 3 to 5
points may be added depending upon the quality of the controlled blasting.
On the basis of RMR values for a given engineering structure the rock mass is classified in 5
classes (see Table 10) as:
Group I:
Very good
RMR 100 81
Group II:
Good
RMR 80 61
Group III:
Fair
RMR 60 41
Group IV:
Poor
RMR 40 21
Group V:
Very poor
RMR < 20
Separate RMR should be obtained for tunnels of different orientations after taking into
account the orientation of tunnel axis with respect to the critical joint set (Table 6).
In terms of quality & mass strength, group I rock is more suitable for excavation of tunnel
compared to groups with lower RMR, the tunnel also requires less support.
Rock Mass Rating (Rock Class)
Parameters & properties of
100 81
80 61 (II)
60 41
40 21
< 20 (V)
rock mass
(I)
(III)
(IV)
Classification of rock mass
Very good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very
poor
10 years
6 months
1 week
10 hours
30 min.
Average stand-up time
for 15m
for 8m
for 5m
for 2.5m
for 1m
span
span
span
span
span
Cohesion of rock mass (MPa)*
> 0.4
0.3 0.4
0.2 0.3
0.1 0.2
< 0.1
Angle of internal friction of
> 45
35 - 45
25 - 35 15 - 25
15
rock mass
Note * These values are applicable to slopes only in saturated and weathered rock mass
Table 10: Design parameters & engineering properties of rock mass (Bieniawski,
1979)
Separate RMR should be obtained for tunnels of different orientations after taking into
account the orientation of tunnel axis with respect to the critical joint sets (Table 6).
RMR can be used for estimating many useful parameters such as the unsupported span, the
stand-up time (bridging action period) & the support pressure for an underground opening.

 It can also be used for selecting a method of excavation & permanent support system for
underground excavation in rock (Bieniawski, 1976).
Deformation modulus & allowable bearing pressure may also be estimated.
A. Orientation of tunnel/slope/foundation axis:
.
B. Orientation of discontinuities
Set 1 Average strike: . (from to
) Dip
Set 2 Average strike: . (from to
) Dip
Set 3 Average strike: . (from to
) Dip
Table 6: Orientation of discontinuities
Application Of RMR:
(1) Average Stand-Up Time For Arched Roof:
The stand-up time depends upon effective span of the opening which is defined as the
width of the opening or the distance between the tunnel face and the last support,
whichever is smaller. For arched openings the stand-up time would be significantly higher
than that for a flat roof.
Controlled blasting will further increase the stand-up time as damage to the rock mass is
decreased.
It is important not to delay supporting of the roof in the case of rock with high stand-up
time, as this may lead to deterioration in the rock which ultimately reduces the stand-up
time.

Relationship between RMR rating, stand-up time & Unsuppoted span (Bieniawski,
1989)
(2) Estimation Of Support Pressure:
The estimation of support pressure for openings with flat roof is given as (Unal, 1983):
Pv = {(100 RMR) / 100} B
Where:
Pv : support pressure
: rock density
B : tunnel width
For rock tunnel with arched roof the estimation of short-term support pressure is given as
(Goel & Jethwa, 1991):
Pv = {(0.75 B0.1 H0.5 RMR) / (2 RMR)} MPa

Where:

Pv : short-term roof support pressure (MPa)

H : depth of tunnel in m (> 50 m)
B : span of opening in m
(Method of excavation by conventional blasting method) : Comprehensive guidelines
Bieniawski (1989) provides a comprehensive guidelines for selection of tunnel
stabilisation methods. This is applicable to tunnels excavated with conventional drill &
blast method.
These guidelines depend upon factors like depth below surface (in situ overburden stress)
tunnel size & shape & method of excavation. The stabilisation measures are the
permanent and not temporary (or primary) support.
Excavation shape: Horseshoe;
Rock Mass
Rating
Very good
rock (I)
RMR: 81 100
Good rock (II)
RMR: 61 80
Fair rock (III)
RMR: 41 60

Poor rock (IV)

RMR 21 40
Very poor
rock (V)
RMR < 20

Width: 10m; Vertical stress: 25MPa; Construction method: Drill

and blast
Excavation
Support
Rock bolts (20mm
Shotcrete
Steel sets
dia. Fully bonded)
Full face 3m advance
Generally no support required except for occasional spot
bolting
Full face 1.0 1.5m advance.
Complete support 20m from
face.
Top heading and bench 1.5 3m
in advance top heading.
Commence support after each
blast. Complete support 10m
from face.
Top heading and bench 1.0
1.5m advance in top heading.
Install support concurrently with
excavation 10m from face.
Multiple drifts 0.5 1.5m
advance in top heading. Install
support concurrently with
excavation. Shotcrete as soon as
possible after blasting.

Local bolts in crown

3m long, spaced
2.5m with occasional
wire mesh.
Systematic bolts 4m
long, spaced 1 2m
in crown and walls
with wire mesh in
crown.
Systematic bolts 4
5m long, spaced 1
1.5m in crown and
walls with wire mesh.
Systematic bolts 5
6m long, spaced 1
1.5m in crown and
walls with wire mesh.
Bolt invert.

50mm in crown
where
required.

None

50 100mm in
crown and
100mm in
sides.

None

100 150mm
in crown and
100mm in
sides.
150 200mm
in crown and
150mm in
sides and
50mm on face.

Light to medium
ribs spaced 1.5m
where required.
Medium to heavy
ribs spaced 0.75m
with steel lagging
and forepoling if
required.

Table 11: RMR guide for excavation & stabilisation methods in rock tunnel
(3) Modulus Of Deformation:
Nicholson & Bieniawski (1990) developed an empirical expression for modulus reduction
factor (MRF). This factor is calculated in order to derive modulus of deformation for a rock
mass using its RMR and Youngs modulus of its core sample:
MRF = Ed / Er = 0.0028 RMR2 + 0.9 e(RMR/22.82)
Where:
Ed is deformation modulus of rock mass
Er is deformation modulus of intact rock material
Mitri et al. (1994) used the following equation to derive the modulus of deformation of
rock masses:
MRF = Ed / Er = 0.5 {1 cos ( (RMR / 100)}
Where:
Ed is deformation modulus of rock mass
Er is deformation modulus of intact rock material
Hoek & Brown (1997) suggested the modulus of deformation of rock masses:
Ed = { (qc) / 10} {10 (RMR 10)/40} GPa, qc 100Mpa
Where:
qc is average uniaxial crushing strength of intact rock
material in MPa
The modulus of deformation of poor rock masses with water sensitive minerals decrease
significantly after saturation and with time after excavation.
(4) Allowable Bearing Pressure:
Foundation on weak, heterogeneous and highly undulating surfaces of sub-surface rock
mass may pose serious problem of differential settlement. The design of foundation
depends on the subsurface strata and its bearing capacity
Where the foundation rests directly on bedrocks (e.g. spun pile & end-bearing pile), the
bearing pressure can be obtained from available classification tables

 Pressure acting on a rock bed due to building foundation should not be more than the safe
bearing capacity of rock foundation system taking into account the effect of eccentricity.
It is often useful to estimate the safe bearing pressure (SBP) for preliminary design on the
basis of the classification approach (e.g. RMR)
Orientation of joints plays a dominant role in stress distribution below strip footing due to
low shear modulus of bedrocks. Bearing capacity of rocks will be drastically low for near
vertical joints that strike parallel to the footing length as pressure bulb extends deep into
the strata see Figure
Shear zone and clay gouge, if present below foundation level, need to be treated to
improve bearing capacity & reduce differential settlement

Orientation of joints and stress distribution below strip

Similar to the effect
of rocks displaying minerals
footing due to low shear modulus (Singh, 1973)
arrangement
(lamination & foliation) variations
in UCS & failure strain
(A rock mass classification for assessing net SBP is shown in Table 12 (Peck et al., 1974).
The terms net SBP and the allowable bearing pressure (ABP) are similar in terms of
meaning. But, the net SBP here means the ultimate SBP, whereas the ABP means bearing
pressure being considered for the designs (i.e ABP after taking into account the FOS).
Rock types/material

Safe Bearing Pressure

qns (t/m)
1000

Massive crystalline bedrock including granite, diorite,

gneiss, hard limestone and dolomite
Foliated rocks such as slate and schist in sound condition
400
Bedded limestone in sound condition
400
Sedimentary rock including hard shale and sandstone
250
Soft or broken bed rock (excluding shale) & limestone
100
Soft shales
30
Table 12: Net safe bearing pressure qns for various rock types (Peck et al., 1974)

Estimation Of Allowable Bearing Pressure Using RMR:

The RMR system may also be used to obtain net ABP as proposed by Mehrotra (1992). The
guidelines for the ABP (Table 13) are:
(1) The RMR should be obtained below the foundation at depth equal to the width of the
foundation, provided RMR does not change with depth. If the upper part of the rock,
within a depth of about one fourth of the foundation width, is of lower quality the value of
this part should be used or the inferior rock should be replaced with concrete. Values of
qa in the Table are to limit settlement & must not be increased if foundation is embedded
into rock.
(2) During earthquake loading, the values ABP may be increased by 50% in view of
rheological behaviour of rock masses.
Class No.
I
II
III
IV
V
Description of
Very
Good
Fair
Poor
Very
rock
good
poor
RMR
100 81
80 61
60 41 40 21
20 0
600
440
280
135
45 30
qa (t/m)
440
280
135
45
Table 13: Net allowable bearing pressure qa based on RMR (Mehrotra, 1992)
Classification For Bearing Pressure:
Table 14 (Krahenbuhl &
Another classification of rock masses for ABP is given in
Wagner,1983).
nd
column of Table 14 indicates sites with highly weathered rock and
[Note*: the 2
unfavourable geological structures, subjected to instability].
There is a correlation between RQD and ABP but relatively conservative compared to Table
14. For socketed piles & shallow foundations, Gill (1980) gives the following formula:
Allowable Bearing Pressure, qa = qc Nj Nd
Rock Type

Marls, marls
interbedded
with sandstone
Calc-schist, calcschist
interbedded
with quarzites
Slates, phyllites,
schists
interbedded
with hard
sandstone &
quartzite or
gneiss
Limestone,
dolomite &
marbles
Sandstone
Calcareous
conglomerates
(massive)
Quartzite
(massive)
Gneiss
(massive)
Granite &
plutonic rocks

Highly
weathered
structure
unfavorable
for stability*

Fairly
weathered
structure
unfavorable
for stability

Highly
weathered
structure
favorable for
stability

Fairly
weathered
structure
favorable for
stability

Unweathered
rock
structure
unfavorable
for stability
60

Unweathered
rock
structure
favorable for
stability
110

15

30

35

50

15

30

45

65

100

200

20

35

60

75

90

130

50

80

90

130

150

200

40 60
(massive)
60

90

120

150

170

220

100

120

200

200

330

50 70

150

120

180

200

330

30 60

150

120

180

200

330

20

250

> 330

Table 14: Allowable Pressure qa of various rock types under different weathering
conditions (Krahenbuhl & Wagner, 1983)
Allowable Bearing Pressure,
q a = q c Nj Nd

Where:

qc = avg. laboratory uniaxial compressive strength

Nj = empirical coeff. depending on the spacing of discontinuities (see Table 15),
and calculated as:

Nj
Where:

3 Bs

10 1 (300 s

s = spacing of joint in cm
B = footing width in cm

Spacing of discontinuities, cm
Nj
300
0.4
100 300
0.25
30 100
0.1
Table 15: Value of Joint Spacing & Nj for estimation of Allowable Bearing Pressure

Allowable Bearing Pressure,

q a = q c Nj Nd

Nj

3 Bs

10 1 (300 s

= opening of joints in cm
Nd is = 0.8 + 0.2 (h/D) < 2
1.0
= 1.0 for shallow foundations of buildings
h
= depth of socket in rock
D
= diameter of socket
Equation qa = qc Nj Nd may also be applied to shallow foundation considering N d = 1.0.
It may be noted that the above correlation does not take into account for orientation of
joints.
It is recommended that plate load test should be conducted on poor rocks where ABP is like
to be less than 100 t/m2.
Uncertainties on ABP may be improved by a larger number of observation pits, say at a rate
of at least 3 pits per important structure. The load test should be conducted in the pit
representing the poorest rock qualities.

Where:

Coefficient of Elastic Uniform Compression for Machine Foundation:

The coefficient of uniform compression C u is defined as the ratio between pressure and
corresponding settlement of block foundation.
Typical values of Cu for machine foundation on rock mass are listed in Table 16.
The coefficient of uniform shear is generally taken as C u/2. It may be noted that Cu is less
than 10 kg/cm3 in very poor rocks.
Rock type
Allowable Bearing
Cu
Press (t/m)
(kg/cm/cm)
Weathered granites

17
Massive limestones
160
25
Flaky limestones
75
12
Shaly limestones
50
7
Soft shales
45
7
Saturated soft shales
33
1.5
Saturated non-plastic
27
2.6
shales
Table 16: Coefficient of Elastic Uniform Compression Cu for rock masses (Ranjan et
al., 1982)

C) ROCK MASS QUALITY, Q-SYSTEM:

Q-system (Tunnel Quality Index, Barton et. al., 1974) is based on 200 case studies of tunnels
& cavern in, 6 parameters is defined: Q = [RQD/Jn] [Jr/Ja] [Jw/SRF]
Where:
RQD = Deeres Rock Quality Designation 10
Jn
= Joint set number (1, 2, 3)

Jr
= Joint roughness number for critical joint set
Ja
= Joint alteration number (weathering) for critical joint set
Jw
= Joint reduction factor due to presence of water
SRF = Stress reduction factor
For various rock conditions, the numerical ratings for the above 6 parameters are defined as
follows:
(1) Rock quality designation, RQD:
RQD as previously defined. The RQD value in % is the rating of RQD for the Q-system.
In the case of a poor rock mass where RQD < 10%, a minimum value of 10 should be used
to evaluate Q.
Condition
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 measured as 10 (including 0), a nominal value of 10 is used to evaluate
Q
(ii) RQD intervals of 5 i.e 100, 95, 90 etc. are sufficiently accurate

Table 1: Rock Quality Designation RQD (Barton et al., 1974)

(2) Joint set number (Jn):
The parameter Jn, representing the number of joint sets, is often affected by foliations,
schistocity or beddings, etc. If strongly developed, these parallel discontinuities should be
counted as a complete joint set.
If there are few joints visible or only occasional breaks in rock core due to these features,
then one should count them as a random joint set while evaluating J n from Table 2.
Rating of Jn is approximately equal to square of the number of joint sets.
Condition
(Jn)
A. Massive, none or few joints
0.5
1.0
B. One joint set
2
C. One joint set plus random
3
D. Two joint set
4
E. Two joint sets plus random
6
F. Three joint set
9
G. Three joint sets plus random
12
H. Four @ more joint sets, random, heavily jointed,
15
sugar cube, etc.
I. Crushed rock earth like
20
Note: (i) For intersection use (3.0 x Jn)
(ii) For portals use (2.0 x Jn)

Table 2: Joint set number Jn (Barton et al., 1974)

(3) Joint Roughness & Joint Alteration Number (Jr & Ja):
The parameters Jr & Ja, given in Table 3 & Table 4, respectively, represent roughness &
degree of alteration of joint walls or filling materials.
The parameters Jr & Ja, should be obtained for the weakest critical joint-set or clay-filled
discontinuity in a given zone.
Condition
Jr
a) Rock wall contact
b) Rock wall contact before 10cm shear
A. Discontinuous joint
4.0
B. Rough or irregular, undulating
3.0
C. Smooth, undulating
2.0
D. Slickensided, undulating
1.5
E. Rough or irregular, planar
1.5
F. Smooth, planar
1.0

G. Slickensided, planar
c) No rock wall contact was sheared
H. Zone containing clay minerals thick enough to prevent rock
wall contact
I. Sandy, gravelly or crushed zone thick enough to prevent rock
wall contact

0.5
1.0
1.0

Note: (i) Add 1.0 if the mean spacing of the relevant joint set is greater than 3.0m
(ii) Jr = 0.5 can be used for planar, slickensided joint having lineation, provided the lineation
are favorable orientated.
(iii) Description B to G above refer to small scale and intermediate scale features, in that
order.

Table 3: Joint roughness number Jr (Barton et al., 1974)

Condition
a) Rock wall contact
A. Tightly healed, hard, non-softening, impermeable filling (e.g. quartz @
epidote).
B. Unaltered joint walls, surface staining only.
C. Slightly altered joint walls. Non-softening mineral coatings, sandy
particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc.
D. Slickensided, undulating.
E. Softening @ low-friction clay mineral coatings (e.g. kaolinite, mica).
Also chlorite, talc, gypsum & graphite etc. & small quantities of
swelling clays (discontinuous coating 1 to 2mm @ less in thickness).
b) Rock wall contact before 10cm shear
F. Sandy particles, clay-free disintegrated rock, etc.
G. Strongly over-consolidated, non-softening, clay mineral filling
(continuous, < 5mm in thickness).
H. Medium @ low over-consolidation, softening, clay mineral filling
(continuous, < 5mm in thickness).
J. Swelling clay fillings, e.g. montmorillonite (continuous, < 5mm in
thickness). Value of Ja depends on the % of swelling clay-sized particles
& access to water, etc.

Ja

25 35
25 30

0.75
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0

20 25
8 16
25 30
16 24

4.0
6.0

12 16

8 12

8.0

6 12
c) No rock wall contact when sheared
K. Zones @ bands of disintegrated @ crushed rock & clay (see G, H, J for
description of clay condition).
L. Zones @ bands of silty @ sandy clay, small clay fraction (nonsoftening).
M.Thick, continuous zones @ bands of clay (see G, H, J for description of
clay condition).

6 24

6 24

8 12
5
13
20

Note: Values of r are intended as an approximate guide to the mineralogical properties of the alternation
products, if present.

Table 4: Joint alteration number Ja (Barton et al., 1974)

If the joint set or discontinuity with the minimum value of (J r / Ja) is favourably orientated
for stability, then a second less favourably orientated joint set or discontinuity may be of
greater significance, and its value of (J r / Ja) should be used when evaluating Q value from
equation:
Q = [RQD/Jn] [Jr/Ja] [Jw/SRF]
For the effect of the joint sets, Table 7 (in RMR system) may be referred.
Strike perpendicular to tunnel
Strike parallel to tunnel
Irrespecti
axis
ve of
Drive with dip
Drive against dip
strike
Dip 45 Dip 20 Dip 45 Dip 20 Dip 20 Dip 45 Dip 0 90
45
90
90
45
90
20
Very
Favorable
Fair
Unfavorabl
Fair
Very
Fair
favorable
e
unfavorabl
e

Table 7 (RMR): Assessment of joint orientation effect on tunnels (dips are apparent
dips along tunnel axis) (Bieniawski, 1989)
(4) Joint Water Reduction Factor (Jw):
The parameter Jw (Table 5) is a measure of water pressure, which has an adverse effect on
the shear strength of joints. This is due to reduction in the effective normal stress acting
across joint surface.
Water in addition may cause softening & possible wash-out in the case of clay-filled joints.
Water may also acts as lubricant (reducing shear strength) and causes swelling of
montmorillonite.
Condition
Appoximate
Jw
water
pressure,
MPa
A. Dry excavations @ minor inflow, i.e. 5litre/min locally.
< 0.10
1.00
B. Medium inflow @ pressure occasional out-wash of joint
0.10 0.25
0.66
fillings.
0.25 1.00
0.50
C. Large inflow @ high pressure in competent rock with unfilled
0.25 1.00
0.33
joints.
> 1.00
0.2
D. Large inflow @ high pressure, considerable out-wash of joint
> 1.00
0.1
fillings.
0.1
E. Exceptionally high inflow @ water pressure at blasting
0.05
decaying with time.
F. Exceptionally high inflow @ water pressure continuing
without noticeable decay.
Note: Factors C to F are crude estimates. Increase Jw if drainage measures are installed.

Table 5: Joint water reduction factor Jw (Barton et al., 1974)

(5) Stress Reduction Factor (SRF):
The parameter SRF (Table 6) is a measure of the followings:
i) Loosening pressure in the case of an excavation through shear zones & clay bearing
rock masses.
ii) Rock stress qc/1 in a competent rock mass where q c is uniaxial compressive strength of
rock material & 1 is the major principal stress before excavation.
iii)Squeezing or swelling pressures in incompetent rock masses & SRF can also be
regarded as a total stress parameter.
Condition
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 @ chemically
10.0
disintegrated rock, very loose surrounding rock (any depth).
B. Single-weakness zones containing clay @ chemically decomposed rock (depth of
5.0
excavation 50m).
2.5
C. Single-weakness zones containing clay @ chemically decomposed rock (depth of
7.5
excavation > 50m).
5.0
D. Multiple-shear zones in competent rock (clay-free), loose surrounding rock (any
2.5
depth).
5.0
E. Single-shear zones in competent rock (clay-free), (depth of excavation 50m).
F. Single-shear zones in competent rock (clay-free), (depth of excavation > 50m).
G. Loose open joints, heavily jointed @ sugar cube, etc. (any depth).
Note: Reduce these SRF values by 25 50% if the relevant shear zones only influence but do not intersect the
excavation.

Condition
b) Competent rock, rock stress problems
H. Low stress, near surface open joints.
J. Medium stress, favorable stress condition.
K. High stress, very tight structure (usually
favorable to stability, may be unfavorable to

qc/ 1

qt/ 1

SRF
(old)

SRF
(new)

> 200
200
10
10 5

< 0.01
0.01
0.3
0.3 0.4

2.5
1.0
0.5 2

2.5
1.0
0.5 2

wall stability).
L. Moderate slabbing after > 1 hour in massive
rock.
M.Slabbing & rock burst after a few minutes in
massive rock.
N. Heavily rock burst (strain-burst) & immediate
deformations in massive rock.

53
32
<2

0.5
0.65
0.65
1.0
>1

59
9 15
15 20

5 50
50 200
200
400

Note:
(i) For strongly anisotropic stress field (if measured): when 5 (1/3) 10, reduce qc & qt to 0.8qc & 0.8qt; when
(1/3) > 10, reduce qc & qt to 0.6qc & 0.6qt (where qc is unconfined compressive stress & q t is tensile strength
(point load), 1 & 3 are major & minor principal stress).
(ii) Few case 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).

Condition
SRF
c) Squeezing rock; plastic flow of incompetent rock under the influence of high pressures.
O. Mild squeezing rock pressure.
5 10
P. Heavy squeezing rock pressure.
10 20
d) Swelling rock; chemically swelling activity depending on presence of water.
Q. Mild swelling rock pressure.
5 10
R. Heavy swelling rock pressure.
10 15
Note:
(i) Reduce these SRF values by 25 50% if the relevant shear zones only influence but do not intersect the
excavation.
(ii) For getting the rating of SRF in case of squeezing ground condition, the degree of squeezing can be obtained
from Table 7.5.

Table 6: Stress Reduction Factor SRF (Barton et al., 1974; Grimstad & Barton, 1993)
Ratings of all the 6 parameters (as given in Table 1 to Table 6) for given rock mass are
substituted in the equation to get the rock mass quality:
Q = [RQD/Jn] [Jr/Ja] [Jw/SRF]
The Q-system may be considered a function of only 3 parameters which are approximate
measures of:
1) Block size [RQD/Jn]:
It represents overall structure of rock mass.
2) Interblock shear strength [Jr/Ja]:
It has been found that tan -1 [Jr/Ja] is a fair approximation to the actual peak sliding angle of
friction along the clay coated joint (see Table 7).
3) Active stress [Jw/SRF]:
It is a factor describing the active stress.
Description
tan-1 (Jr/Ja)
a) Rock wall contact
Jr
Ja = 0.75 Ja = 1.0 Ja = 2.0 Ja = 3.0 Ja = 4.0
A. Discontinuous joint
4.0
79
76
63
53
45
B. Rough, undulating
3.0
70
72
56
45
37
C. Smooth, undulating
2.0
69
63
45
34
27
D. Slickensided, undulating
1.5
63
56
37
27
21
E. Rough, planar
1.5
63
56
37
27
21
F. Slickensided, planar
0.5
34
27
14
9.5
7.1
b) Rock wall contact when
Jr
Ja = 4.0
Ja = 6.0 Ja = 8.0
Ja = 12.0
sheared
A. Discontinuous joint
4.0
45
34
27
18
B. Rough, undulating
3.0
37
27
21
14
C. Smooth, undulating
2.0
27
18
14
9.5
D. Slickensided, undulating
1.5
21
14
11
7.1
E. Rough, planar
1.5
21
14
11
7.1
F. Slickensided, planar
0.5
7
4.7
3.6
2.4
c) No rock wall contact when
Jr
Ja = 6.0
Ja = 8.0
Ja = 12.0
sheared
Disintegrated or crushed rock
1.0
9.5
7.1
4.7
@ clay
Jr
Ja = 5.0
1.0
11

Bands of silty @ sandy clay

Ja =
Ja = 20.0
13.0
Thick continuous bands of clay
1.0
5.7
4.4
2.9
Table 7: Estimation of angle of internal friction from the parameters J r and Ja
(Barton et al., 1974)
Q-system:

Jr

Ja = 10.0

Q = [RQD/Jn] [Jr/Ja] [Jw/SRF

a) The first quotient [RQD/Jn] represents the rock structure & is a measure of block size of the
wedge formed by the presence of different joint sets. In a given rock mass, the rating of
the parameter Jn could increase with the tunnel size in certain situations where additional
joint sets are encountered.
b) Hence it is not advisable to use Q-value obtained from a small drift to estimate the
support pressure for a large tunnel or a cavern.
c) The second quotient [Jr/Ja] represents the roughness & frictional characteristics of joint
walls or filling materials.
d) It should be noted that value of J r/Ja is collected for the critical joint set, i.e. the joint set
which is most unfavorable for stability of a key rock block.
e) The third quotient [Jw/SRF] is an empirical factor describing active stress condition. The
stress reduction factor SRF, is a measure of the 3 items mentioned previously.
f) The water reduction factor J w is measure of water pressure, which has an adverse effect
on the strength of joints due to reduction in effective normal stress. In the hydroelectric
projects where rock masses get charged with water after commissioning of projects, J w
should be reduced accordingly on the basis of judgement, while using Q for estimating the
final support requirements.
How Q-System Evaluates A Rock Mass?
Q-system:
Q = [RQD/Jn] [Jr/Ja] [Jw/SRF
Jn= Joint set number
Jr= Joint surface roughness
Ja= Joint alteration number due to weathering
Jw= Joint reduction factor due to water
SRF= Stress reduction factor
Which rock mass will yield a higher Q-value?
- rock with 2 or 4 joint sets (Jn)
- rock with fresh or weathered joints (J a)
- rock with higher RQD or lower RQD
- rock with smooth or rough joints (Jr)
- rock with dry or wet joints (SRF)