Rock Mass Classification

using the Q-system

Oleh : Ir. Yuliadi., ST., MT.

10/23/2022
Objectives of Rock Mass Classification

• Classification of rock mass behavior

• Assessment of rock mass quality
• Comparison of rock masses
• Ground support requirement
• Preliminary mine design parameters
• Common descriptive parameter for geotechnical engineers
10/23/2022
Methods of Rock Mass Characterization

• Rock Load Classification (Terzaghi, 1946)

• RQD Classification (Deere et al, 1967)

• RSR Concept (Wickam et al, 1972)

• RMR System (Bieniawski, 1973)

• Q-system (Barton et al, 1974)

• MRMR system (Laubscher, 1977)

10/23/2022
Basics of Q-system

• Originally proposed by Barton, Lien and Lunde from the Norwegian

Geotechnical Institute in 1974
• Based on 200 tunnel case records mostly in Scandinavia
• Developed as part of the NATM process for faster tunneling
• Provides recommendations for ground support based on field
inspections
• Support chart revised in 1994

10/23/2022
 Dimana :
RQD : Rock Quality Designation
Q - system Jn : Joint Set Number
Jr: Joint Set Roughness Number
Ja : Joint Set Alteration Number

Q = (RQD / Jn) * (Jr / Ja) * (Jw / SRF) Jw : Joint Water Reduction Number
SRF : Stress Reduction Factor

• Uses RQD / Jn ; Menyatakan ukuran dari

• Block Size - RQD / Jn blok batuan
• Joint Shear Strength - Jr / Ja Jr / Ja ; Menyatakan kondisi kekasaran
• Stress Condition - Jw / SRF dan kondisi geseran dari dinding
joint
• Ranges from 0.001 to 1000
Jw / SRF ; menyatakan sterss aktif
yang ada pada batuan
10/23/2022
 Parameter Q-System
Dalam menjelaskan keenam parameter yang dipakai untuk menghitung Q, Barton (1974) membagi
enam parameter tersebut menjadi tiga bagian:

• RQD/Jn merepresentasikan struktur dari massa batuan, menunjukkan ukuran blok batuan.

• Jr/Ja menunjukkan kekasaran (roughness) dan karakteristik geser dari permukaan bidang diskontinu
atau filling material dari bidang diskontinu tersebut. Suatu bidang diskontinu dengan permukaan
yang kasar dan tidak mengalami alterasi dan mengalami kontak dengan permukaan bidang lainnya,
akan mempunyai kuat geser yang tinggi dan menguntungkan untuk kestabilan lubang bukaan.
Adanya lapisan mineral clay pada permukaan kontak antara kedua bidang diskontinu tersebut, akan
mengurangi kuat geser secara signifikan. Selanjutnya kontak antar permukaan bidang diskontinu
yang mengalami pergeseran juga akan mempertinggi potensi failure pada lubang bukaan. Dengan
kata lain Jr/Ja menunjukkan shear strength atau kuat geser antar blok batuan.

• Jw/SRF terdiri dari dua parameter stress. Parameter Jw adalah ukuran tekanan air yang dapat
mempengaruhi kuat geser dari bidang diskontinu. Sedangkan parameter SRF dapat dianggap sebagai
parameter total stress yang dipengaruhi oleh letak dari lubang bukaan yang dapat mereduksi
kekuatan massa batuan. Secara empiris Jw/SRF mewakili active stress yang dialami batuan.
• Menurut Barton, dkk parameter Jn, Jr dan Ja memiliki peranan
yang lebih penting dibandingkan pengaruh orientasi bidang
diskontinu. Oleh karena itu dalam Q-system tidak terdapat
PARAMETER ADJUSTMENT terhadap orientasi bidang diskontinu.
 Hubungan antara nilai Q & kebutuhan penyanggaan terowongan
disebut dengan Eqivalent Dimension dari Penggalian ;

Nilai Q yang didapat

dihubungkan dengan
kebutuhan penyanggan
terowongan dengan
menetapkan dimensi ekivalen
(equivalent dimension) dari
galian. Dimensi ekivalen
merupakan fungsi dari ukuran
dan kegunaan dari galian,
didapat dengan membagi
span, diameter atau tinggi
dinding galian dengan harga
yang disebut Excavation
Support Ratio (ESR).
Hutchinson dan Diederichs (1996) memperkenalkan grafik hubungan
antara nilai Q dan span maksimum untuk berbagai macam nilai ESR;
Barton et al. (1980) memberikan informasi tambahan terhadap panjang rockbolt, span
maksimum, dan tekanan penyangga atap untuk melengkapi rekomendasi penyangga pada
publikasi yang diterbitkan tahun 1974.
Rekomendasi penyangga ditentukan melalui grafik yang di berikan
oleh Grimstad dan Barton (1993) seperti yang ditunjukkan oleh
gambar dibawah;
RQD estimation

• If available, use RQD data from drill hole

• Estimate RQD which is relevant to excavation ground conditions
based on

10/23/2022
Joint Set Number

• Joints sets are defined if joint spacing is less than

excavation diameter
• Ignore joints which are less than 30 cm in length
• Observe joints on face, roof and ribs and make sure that
joints are not counted twice
• Use data from previous observation if the face/ribs are
not available for observation
• Do not include fractures caused by blasting
10/23/2022
Joint Set Number Table
Description Jn
Massive, no or few joints 0.5 – 1.0
One joint set 2.0
One joint set plus random 3.0
Two joint sets 4.0
Two joint sets plus random 6.0
Three joint sets 9.0
Three joint sets plus random 12.0
Four or more joint sets, random, heavily 15.0
jointed, sugar-cube, etc.
Crushed rock, earthlike 20.0
10/23/2022
 Examples

Massive Jn =0.5-1.0 One Joint Set Jn =2.0

10/23/2022
One Joint Set + Random Jn =3.0
 Examples

Two Joint Sets Jn = 4.0 Two Joint Sets + Random Jn = 6.0

10/23/2022
Three Joint Sets Jn = 9.0
 Examples

Three Joint Sets + Random Jn = Four or more Joint Sets Jn = 15.0

12.0

10/23/2022
Crushed Rock Jn = 20.0
Joint Roughness Number

• Jr depends on roughness profile of joint based on a 1-m length

• Estimate average Jr for each joint set and then use the Jr for the
most critical joint
• Evaluate whether there is rock wall contact within at least 10 cms
of shearing (do the walls make contact before 10 cms of shear
along the joint)

10/23/2022
Types of Joints

10/23/2022
Joint Roughness Profiles
• Use Jr = 4.0 for
discontinuous joints Jr = 3.0
• Joint roughness
normally evaluated on 1 Jr = 2.0
meter joint lengths
Jr = 1.5
• Use Jr = 1.0 if there is
no rock wall contact 1 meter

when sheared
Jr = 1.5
• Use profile chart to
select Jr for joints with Jr = 1.0
rock wall contact or
rock wall contact within Jr = 0.5
10 cm shear

10/23/2022
Joint Alteration Evaluation
• Check width of joint
• Check toughness of joint
surface and rock
• Check thickness of altered
zone Rock
• Check joint surfaces for fill Al
te
material ra
tio
n Jo
int
• Check fill material
properties

10/23/2022
Rock Wall Contact Description Ja
• Rock Walls in contact
• Walls of the joint are in
Tightly Healed, hard, non-
softening, impermeable filling 0.75
contact
• There is little or no filling on
Unaltered Joint Walls, surface
staining only 1.0
the joints
Slightly altered joint walls.
Non-softening mineral 2.0
coatings, sandy particles, clay-
free dis-integrated rock, etc.
Silty or sandy clay coatings,
small clay fraction 3.0
Softening or low friction clay
mineral coating, i.e., kaolinite, 4.0
mica, chlorite, talc, gypsum,
graphite, etc.

10/23/2022
Rock Wall Contact within 10 cm Shear
• Rock Walls in contact Description Ja
within 10 cm shear
• Walls will be in contact Sandy particles, clay free dis-
4.0
within 10 cm shear integrated rock
• There is little or no filling on
the joints
Strongly over-consolidated,
non-softening clay mineral filling 6.0
(cont., <5mm)

Medium or low over-

consolidation, softening clay 8.0
mineral fillings (cont., <5mm)

Swelling clay fillings

8.0-
12.0

10/23/2022
No Rock Wall Contact
• Rock walls are not in
contact at present
• No rock wall contact even
with 10 cm shear
10/23/2022
Description Ja
Zones or bands of disintegrated
or crushed rock and clay
6.0
- non-softening fill
- softening fill 8.0
- swelling clay fill 8.0-12.0
Zones or bands of silty or sandy 5.0
clay, small non-softening clay
fraction
Thick, continuous zones or
bands of disintegrated or crushed
rock and clay
- non-softening fill 10.0
- softening fill 13.0
- swelling clay fill
13.0-20.0
Joint Water Reduction Factor

Description Approx Water Jw

Pressure
(kg/cm2)
Dry excavation or minor inflow i.e. < 5 <1.0 1.0
litres/min locally

Medium inflow or pressure, occasional 1.0 – 2.5 0.66

outwash of joint fillings

Large inflow or high pressure in 2.5 – 10.0 0.5

competent rock with unfilled joints
Large inflow or high pressure 2.5 – 10.0 0.33
Exceptionally high inflow or pressure at > 10.0 0.2 – 0.1
blasting, decaying with time
Exceptionally high inflow or pressure > 10.0 0.05

10/23/2022
Stress Reduction Factor (SRF)

• Four categories
• Loosening
• Stress
• Squeezing
• Swelling
• For competent rock, use ratio between rock strength
and estimated stress, sc/s1
• For all other cases, use the descriptions in the SRF Table
10/23/2022
 SRF for Loosening Condition

• Use when weakness zones intersect excavation, which may

cause loosening of the rock mass when the tunnel is excavated
Description SRF
Multiple occurrences of weakness zones containing clay or 10
chemically disintegrated rock (any depth)
Single weakness zone containing clay or chemically 5
disintegrated rock (depth < 50 meters)
Single weakness zone containing clay or chemically 2.5
disintegrated rock (depth > 50 meters)
Multiple shear zones in competent rock (clay free), loose 7.5
surrounding rock (any depth)
Single shear zone in competent rock (clay free), depth < 50 m 5.0
Single shear zone in competent rock (clay free), depth > 50 m 2.5
Loose open joints, heavily jointed or “sugar cubes” (any depth) 5.0
10/23/2022
 SRF for Competent Rock, Stress Problems

• Use when rock mass is competent and there are stress

related issues in design and support of the excavations
Description sc/s1 st/s1 SRF
Low stress, near surface > 200 > 13 2.5
Medium stress 10-200 0.66-13 1.0
High stress, very tight structure (usually 5-10 0.33-0.66 0.5-2.0
favorable to stability, may be unfavorable to
wall stability
Mild slabbing, spalling (massive rock) 2.5-5.0 0.16-0.33 5-10
Heavy slabbing, spalling, rock burst < 2.5 < 0.16 10-20
(massive rock)

10/23/2022
 SRF for Squeezing/Swelling Rock

• When there is squeezing rock with plastic flow of

incompetent rock under the influence of high rock pressure,
use
Description SRF
Mild squeezing rock pressure 5-10
Heavy squeezing rock pressure 10-20

 When there is swelling rock with swelling activity

depending on presence of water, use
Description SRF
Mild swelling rock pressure 5-10
Heavy swelling rock pressure 10-15

10/23/2022
Rock Support based on Q-system

10/23/2022
 Metoda Empirik – Q-System

Contoh kasus;
Terowongan akan di desain dengan span 15 m untuk lubang
bukaan tambang permanen (permanent mine openings),
batuan norite pada kedalaman 2100 m. Observasi di lapangan
diketahui bahwa terdapat 2 joint set, dengan kondisi
termasuk “undulating joint”, kasar dan tidak lapuk
(unweathered/unaltered). RQD berkisar antara 85% - 95%.
Dari hasil uji lab, UCS rata-rata 170 MPa, major principal
stress didapat harga 85 Mpa. Kondisi airtanah pada
terowongan agak merembes (Basah) tapi tidak ada tanda-
tanda aliran air.
Tentukan stabilitas Penggalian dan kebutuhan penyanggaan
dari desain terowongan tersebut.
Metoda Empirik – Q-System