Chapter 8

- Rock Mass -

Schist

Granite

1
NKVE

2
• The samples tested in the laboratory represent a very
small fraction of the volume of the rock mass.

• A major deficiency of laboratory specimens are limited in

size and therefore highly selective sample of the rock
mass.

• The results of these tests represent a highly biased

sample.

• How then can these results be used to estimate the

properties of the in situ rock mass?

3
 INTRODUCTION
• The properties of rock masses classification systems
have been developed.

• The most known classifications are the

(1) RMR system (Bieniawski, 1974)

(2) Q system (Barton, Lien and Lunde, 1974)

4
 INTRODUCTION
The rock mass classification systems are
very useful practical engineering tools
because:
1. Provide a starting point for the design of
tunnel support and other structures.
2. Force users to examine the properties of
the rock mass in a very systematic
manner.

5
 Rock Mass Properties
• The rock mass properties combine the
parameters of the strength of the intact rock
material, the spacing, number and properties of
the structural discontinuities, inclination of
dominant discontinuities and groundwater, in
situ stresses and the orientation .

• Discontinuities are fractures within a rock mass

cause tensile strength across the fracture planes
to approach zero or even lower (ISRM, 1978).

6
Rock mass properties

7
 Discontinuities in Rock ypes

Discontinuity formed by the several of

processes:

a) Sedimentary
b) Igneous
c) Metamorphic

9
10
Horizontal bedding

11
Fault

12
Fold

13
14
Joint set has same orientation

15
Sheet jointing in granite - sometimes
referred to as ‘onion skin’ joints

16
17
 Orientation of platy mineral grains with respect to
direction to highest pressure during metamorphism

18
 Effect of discontinuities on rock
mass properties
• Intact rock (lab test) strength affected by
mineral arrangement, eg. Cleavage.

• Rock mass strength affected by the

discontinuities, influences by the scale
effects.

• Slope failures
19
August October
2000 2001

2002 August
2003

June February
2004 2005
Field-sketch to show the approximate extend of the moving blocks within the major
failure
CH 23+900 – CH24+400 (The major failure)
CH 23+900 – CH24+400 (The major failure)

CROSS SECTION SHOWING THE LIKELY MECHANISME OF THE

MAJOR FAILURE BETWEEN CH 23900 – CH 24400
Basal Sliding Plane
Basal Sliding Plane
25
 Discontinuity data
• The orientation of a discontinuity in space is
described by the dip and dip direction

• The orientation of discontinuities determines the

shape of the individual blocks, beds, or mosaics
comprising the rock mass.

26
Discontinuity

27
Discontinuity Site Measurement
• Scan line mapping

• Random mapping

A-B: Scan line; T: Both end exposed

U: Both end unexposed; X: Distance between discontinuity 28
 Scan line mapping
• The systematic collection of geological data.

• The discontinuities that intersect the scanline should be

recorded using data sheet.

29
The discontinuity survey data sheet

30
Random Mapping
 Discontinuity data processing

• Presenting the data

• Stereonet plotting assistance the interpretation

via statistically trends.

• Plot of contoured pole concentrations and

corresponding great circles

32
Plot of discontinuity

33
 Rock Quality Designation Index (RQD)
• One of rock mass properties

• The Rock Quality Designation index (RQD) (Deere et al

1967) to estimate of rock mass quality from drill core.

• RQD is defined as the percentage of intact core pieces

longer than 100 mm in the total length of core (54.7 mm
diameter) and drill using a double-tube core barrel.

34
35
Measurement identify rock quality
(Source: Deere, 1989)

RQD (%) Descriptions Rock Quality

0-25 Very Poor
25-50 Poor
50-75 Moderate
75-90 Good
90-100 Very Good

36
Cont’d

Rock Quality Designation (RQD)

• Palmström (1982) suggested RQD can be estimated from
the number of discontinuities per unit volume.

• The suggested relationship for clay-free rock masses is:

➢ RQD = 115 - 3.3 Jv (1)

• where Jv is the sum of the number of joints per unit length

for all discontinuity sets known as the volumetric joint
count.

• The use of the volumetric joint count can be quite useful in

reducing this directional dependence.

• The most important use of RQD is as a component of the 37

RMR and Q rock mass classifications.
 RQD - Indirect method: volumetric joint
count
• Palmström (1982) suggested that, when no core is
available but discontinuity traces are visible in surface
exposures or exploration adits, the RQD may be estimated
from the number of discontinuities per unit volume.

• The suggested relationship for clay-free rock masses is:

• RQD = 115 - 3.3 Jv (1)
For shape of long and flat blocks

• Palmström (2005) suggested

• RQD = 110 - 2.5 Jv (2)

• For shape of block of cubical bar

38
 Indirect method: volumetric joint count
• where Jv is the total number of Joints per m3 and RQD
=100 for Jv < 4.5 (Palmstrom, 2005).

• Palmstrom (2005) defined Jv as the number of joints

intersecting a volume of one m³. Where the jointing occurs
mainly as joint sets can be determined using Equation 3.

(3)

• where S1, S2 and S3 are the average spacings for the joint
sets.
(4)

• where S1, S2, S3, etc. are average spacings for each of
the joint sets and n is the number of joint set.
40
Classification of volumetric joint count (Jv)

Degree of
Set no. Jv
jointing
2 Very low <1.0
3 Low 1-3
4 Moderately 3-10
5 High 10-30
6 Very high 30-60
7 Crushed >60
 Indirect method: volumetric joint count

• RQD is a directionally dependent parameter and its value may

change significantly, depending upon the borehole orientation.

• The use of the volumetric joint count can be quite useful in

reducing this directional dependence.

• RQD is intended to represent the rock mass quality in situ.

• When using diamond drill core, care must be taken to ensure that
fractures, which have been caused by handling or the drilling
process, are identified and ignored when determining the value
of RQD.

42
 Indirect method: volumetric joint count

• When using Palmström's relationship for exposure mapping,

blast induced fractures should not be included when estimating
Jv.

• Deere's RQD was widely used, particularly in North America,

after its introduction.

• Cording and Deere (1972), Merritt (1972) and Deere and Deere
(1988) attempted to relate RQD to Terzaghi's rock load factors
and to rockbolt requirements in tunnels.

• In the context of this discussion, the most important use of RQD

is as a component of the RMR and Q rock mass classifications
covered later in this chapter.

43
 Indirect method: Seismic method

RQD = (VF/VL)2 x 100%

• VF = velocity insitu Vp
• VL= velocity intact rock core Vp

44
Rock mass classification system
1. Rock Mass Rating system, RMR

2. Rock Tunneling Quality Index, Q

46
 Rock Mass Rating (RMR)
system
• Published by Bieniawski (1976) called the
Geomechanics Classification or the Rock Mass Rating
(RMR) system.

• The six parameters in the RMR system:

1. Uniaxial compressive strength of rock material.

2. Rock Quality Designation (RQD).
3. Spacing of discontinuities.
4. Condition of discontinuities.
5. Groundwater conditions.
6. Orientation of discontinuities.

47
Rock Mass Rating System (Bieniawski 1989)

48
Guidelines for excavation and support of 10 m span rock tunnels

49
 The example RMR rating: Question

A tunnel is to be driven through slightly weathered

granite with a dominant joint set dipping at 60o
against the direction of the drive. Index testing
and logging of diamond drilled core give typical
Point-load strength index values of 8 MPa and
average RQD values of 70%. The slightly
rough and slightly weathered joints with a
separation (aperture) of < 1mm, are spaced at
300 mm, no infilling and discontinuity length
(persistence) about 1-3 m. Tunneling conditions
are anticipated to be wet.

50
.
The example RMR rating: Answer

51
Tunnel drive with dip and drive against dip

52
Cont’d

• Note 1. For slightly rough and altered discontinuity

surfaces with a separation of < 1 mm, A.4 gives a rating
of 25.

• When more detailed information is available, Table 9.1.E

can be used to obtain a more refined rating.

• Hence, in this case, the rating is the sum of: 4 (1-3 m

discontinuity length), 4 (separation 0.1-1.0 mm), 3
(slightly rough), 6 (no infilling) and 5 (slightly weathered)
= 22.

• Note 2. F gives a description of ‘Fair’ for the conditions

assumed where the tunnel is to be driven against the
dip of a set of joints dipping at 60o.

• Using this description for ‘Tunnels and Mines’ gives an

adjustment rating of -5. 53
Cont’d

• For the case considered earlier, with RMR = 59,

suggests that a tunnel could be excavated by top
heading and bench, with a 1.5 to 3 m advance in the top
heading.

• Support should be installed after each blast and the

support should be placed at a maximum distance of 10
m from the face.

• Systematic rock bolting, using 4 m long 20 mm diameter

fully grouted bolts spaced at 1.5 to 2 m in the crown and
walls, is recommended.

• Wire mesh, with 50 to 100 mm of shotcrete for the crown

and 30 mm of shotcrete for the walls, is recommended.
54
Cont’d

• Bieniawski (1989) published a set of guidelines

for selection of support in tunnels in rock which
the value of RMR has been determined. These
guidelines valid for:-

i. 10m span horseshoe shaped tunnel. (Support

should be installed after maximum distance of
10m from support area)

ii. Constructed using drill and blast methods

iii.Rock mass subjected to a vertical stress <

25MPa (equivalent to a depth below surface of <
900m)
55
• On the basis of an evaluation of a large
number of case histories of underground
excavations, Barton et al (1974) of the
Norwegian Geotechnical Institute
proposed a Tunneling Quality Index (Q) for
the determination of rock mass
characteristics and tunnel support
requirements.

56
 Rock Tunneling Quality Index, Q
• The numerical value of the index Q varies on a
logarithmic scale from 0.001 to a maximum of 1,000 and
is defined by:

• (2)

• Where:

RQD = the Rock Quality Designation

Jn = the joint set number
Jr = the joint roughness number
Ja = the joint alteration number
Jw = the joint water reduction factor
57
SRF = stress reduction factor
 Rock Tunneling Quality Index, Q
• The meaning of the parameters:

• The first quotient (RQD/Jn), representing the structure of

the rock mass, measure the block size.

• The second quotient (Jr/Ja) represents the roughness

and frictional characteristics of the joint walls or filling
materials.

• When rock joints have thin clay mineral coatings and

fillings, the strength is reduced significantly.

58
 Rock Tunneling Quality Index, Q
The third quotient (Jw/SRF) consists of two stress parameters. The
quotient (Jw/SRF) is a empirical factor describing the 'active stress'.

• It appears that the rock tunneling quality Q can now be considered

to be a function of only three parameters which are measures of:

1. Block size (RQD/Jn)

2. Inter-block shear strength (Jr/ Ja)

3. Active stress (Jw/SRF)

59
 Example:

Question
A 15 m span crusher chamber for permanent
underground mine is to be excavated in a norite at a
depth of 2,100 m below surface. The rock mass contains
two sets of joints controlling stability. These joints are
undulating, rough and unweathered with very minor
surface staining. RQD values range from 85% to 95%
and laboratory tests on core samples of intact rock give
an average uniaxial compressive strength of 170
MPa. The principal stress directions are
approximately vertical and horizontal and the magnitude
of the horizontal principal stress is approximately 1.5
times that of the vertical principal stress. The rock mass
is locally damp but there is no evidence of flowing
water.
60
Answer:
• The numerical value of RQD is used directly in the calculation of Q and, for this rock
mass, an average value of 90 will be used.

• Table 9.3.2 shows that, for two joint sets, the joint set number, Jn = 4.

• For rough or irregular joints which are undulating, Table 9.3.3 gives a joint roughness
number of Jr = 3.

• Table 9.3.4 gives the joint alteration number, Ja = 1.0, for unaltered joint walls with
surface staining only.

• Table 9.3.5 shows that, for an excavation with minor inflow, the joint water reduction
factor, Jw = 1.0.

• For a depth below surface of 2,100 m the overburden stress will be approximately 57
MPa and, in this case, the major principal stress s1 = 85 MPa.

• Since the uniaxial compressive strength of the norite is approximately 170 MPa, this
gives a ratio of sc / s1= 2.

• Table 9.3.6 shows that, for competent rock with rock stress problems, this value of sc
/ s1 can be expected to produce heavy rock burst conditions and that the value of
SRF should lie between 10 and 20. A value of SRF = 15 will be assumed for this
calculation. Using these values gives:

61
Cont’d

• In relating the value of the index Q to the stability

and support requirements of underground
excavations, Barton et al (1974) defined an
additional parameter which they called the
Equivalent Dimension, De, of the excavation.

• This dimension is obtained by dividing the span,

diameter or wall height of the excavation by a
quantity called the Excavation Support Ratio,
ESR. Hence:

62
The value of ESR is related to the intended use of the excavation
and to the degree of security which is demanded of the support
system installed to maintain the stability of the excavation. Barton
et al (1974) suggest the following values:

63
Table 9.3 Classification of individual parameters used in the Tunneling Quality Index, Q

64
Table 9.3(cont'd.) Classification of individual parameters used in the Tunneling Quality Index, Q (After Barton et al 1974)

65
Table 9.3 (cont'd.) Classification of individual parameters in the Tunneling Quality
Index, Q (After Barton et al 1974)

66
Cont’d

• The crusher station discussed earlier falls into the category of

permanent mine openings and is assigned an excavation support
ratio ESR = 1.6.

• Hence, for an excavation span of 15 m, the equivalent dimension,

De = 15/1.6 = 9.4.

• The equivalent dimension, De, plotted against the value of Q, is

used to define a number of support categories in a chart published
in the original paper by Barton et al (1974).

• This chart has recently been updated by Grimstad and Barton (1993)
to reflect the increasing use of steel fiber reinforced shotcrete in
underground excavation support.

• Figure 9.11 is reproduced from this updated chart.

•
• From Figure 9.11 a value of De of 9.4 and a value of Q of 4.5 places
this crusher excavation in category (4) which requires a pattern of
rockbolts (spaced at 2.3 m) and 40 to 50 mm of unreinforced
shotcrete.
67
Cont’d

• Because of the mild to heavy rock burst conditions which are

anticipated, it may be prudent to destress the rock in the walls of this
crusher chamber.

• This is achieved by using relatively heavy production blasting to

excavate the chamber and omitting the smooth blasting usually used
to trim the final walls of an excavation such as an underground
powerhouse at shallower depth.

• Caution is recommended in the use of destress blasting and, for

critical applications, it may be advisable to seek the advice of a
blasting specialist before embarking on this course of action.

• Løset (1992) suggests that, for rocks with 4 < Q < 30, blasting
damage will result in the creation of new ‘joints’ with a consequent
local reduction in the value of Q for the rock surrounding the
excavation.

• He suggests that this can be accounted for by reducing the RQD

value for the blast damaged zone.

68
Cont’d

• Assuming that the RQD value for the distressed rock around the
crusher chamber drops to 50 %, the resulting value of Q = 2.9.

• From Figure 9.11, this value of Q, for an equivalent dimension, De of

9.4, places the excavation just inside category (5) which requires
rockbolts, at approximately 2 m spacing, and a 50 mm thick layer of
steel fiber reinforced shotcrete.

• Barton et al (1980) provide additional information on rockbolt length,

maximum unsupported spans and roof support pressures to
supplement the support recommendations published in the original
1974 paper.

• The length, L of rockbolts can be estimated from the excavation

width, B and the Excavation Support Ratio ESR:

69
Cont’d

• The maximum unsupported span can be estimated from:

• Maximum span (unsupported) = 2 ESR Q 0.4

• Based upon analyses of case records, Grimstad and Barton (1993)

suggest that the relationship between the value of Q and the
permanent roof support pressure Proof is estimated from:

70
Estimated support categories based on the tunneling
quality index, Q

71
72
Tunnels

73
74
75
• Poles can be plotted on the polar stereonet (Figure 9.18) on which the dip direction is
indicated on the periphery of the circle, and the dip is measured along radial lines
with zero degrees at the center.

• It should be noted that the stereonet shown on Figure 9.18 is the lower hemisphere
plot in which the dip direction scale starts at the bottom of the circle and increases in
a clockwise direction, with the north arrow corresponding to the dip direction of 1800.

• The reason for setting up the scale in this manner is that if the field readings, as
measured with a structural compass, are plotted directly on the stereonet, the poles
are correctly plotted on the lower hemisphere plot.

• The procedure for plotting poles is to lay a sheet of tracing paper on the printed polar
net and mark the north direction and each quadrant position around the edge of the
outer circle.

• A mark is then made to show the pole that represents the orientation of each
discontinuity as defined by its dip and dip direction.

• Poles for shallow dipping discontinuities lie close to the center of the circle, and poles
of steeply dipping discontinuities lie close to the periphery of the circle.
76
Step of ploting pole using equal-
area polar net : eg. 220º/70º

77
Step of ploting pole using equal
area equatorial net: eg. 220º/70º

78
Contouring Pole Concentrations
• Concentrations of pole orientations can be identified using a
counting net such as that shown in Figure 9.19.

• The Kalsbeek net is made up of mutually overlapping

hexagons, each with an area of 1/100 of the full area of the
stereo net.

• Contouring is performed by overlaying the counting net on the

pole plot and counting the number of poles in each hexagon;
this number is marked on the net.

• These numbers of poles are converted into percentages by

dividing each by the total number of poles and multiplying by
100.

• Once a percentage is written in each hexagon, contours can 79

be developed by interpolation.
• Great circles are plotted on the equatorial net (Figure 9.20), but they cannot be plotted
directly on this net because the true dip can only be scaled off the horizontal axis.

• The plotting procedure for great circles consists of the following steps:

1. Lay a piece of tracing paper on the net with a thumbtack through the center point so that
the tracing paper can be rotated on the net.

2. Mark the north direction of the net on the tracing paper.

3. Locate the dip direction of the plane on the scale around the circumference of the net
and mark this point on the tracing paper. Note that the dip direction scale on the equatorial
net for plotting great circles starts at the north point at the top of the circle and increases in
a clockwise direction.

4. Rotate the tracing paper until the dip direction mark coincides with one of the horizontal
axes of the net, that is, the 900 or 1800 points of the dip direction scale.

5. Locate the arc on the net corresponding to the dip of the plane and trace this arc on to
the paper. Note that a horizontal plane has a great circle at the circumference of the net,
and a vertical plane is represented by a straight line passing through the center of the net.

6. Rotate the tracing paper so that the two north points coincide and the great circle is 80
oriented correctly.
Step of ploting great circle: eg.
220º/70º

81
 Lines of Intersection
• The intersection of two planes is a straight line, which defines the direction
of sliding of a wedge formed by these two planes.

• The procedure for determining the orientation of the line of intersection

between two planes is:

1. Locate the line of intersection between the two planes, which is

represented by the point at which the two great circles intersect.

2. Draw a line from the center of the net through the point of intersection
and extend it to the circumference of the net.

3. The trend of the line of intersection is given by the position where the line
drawn in step 2 intersects the scale on the circumference of the net.

4. Rotate the tracing paper until the line drawn in step 2 lies over one of the
horizontal axes of the net (dip direction 90° or 180°). The plunge of the line
intersection is read off the scale on the horizontal axis, with a horizontal
plunge having a point of intersection at the circumference and a vertical
plunge at the center of the net. 82
 Step of ploting lines of
intersection: eg. 220º/70º

83
84
85
86
 i. The discontinuities dip direction must lie between ±10° of slope dip direction (opposite direction).
(90ii.0 −  f ) +  j   p

Modes of Criteria are met

failure
i. Very weak material, highly jointed or fractured or weak soil
Circular
ii. Homogenous soil

i. Dip direction lie within ± 200 from the “design slope” dip direction.
ii. ψf > ψp >  (slope angle>plane angle>friction angle)
Planar
iii. Release surfaces must be present to define the lateral boundaries of the
slide.

i. ψf > ψi >  (slope angle>intersection of 2 plane angle>friction angle)

Wedge ii. driving force due to the weight of wedge must exceed the frictional
resistance of the planes.

i. The discontinuities dip direction must lie between ±10° of slope dip
direction (opposite direction).
(90 0 −  f ) +  j   p
Toppling
ii.
87
Figure 9.21 The stereographic plot of potential instability analysis and types of failure mode (Hoek and Bray, 1981)

88
Plane Failure

89
90
91
 Limit Equilibrium Models
• The stability of rock slopes for the geological conditions
depends on the shear strength generated along the
sliding surface. For all shear type failures, the rock can
assumed to be a Mohr-Coulomb material in which the
shear strength is expressed in terms of the cohesion c
and friction angle .

• For a sliding surface on which there is an effective

normal stress, acting, the shear strength developed on
this surface is given by;

 = c +   tan 
92
  p is dip of sliding surface
W cos p
A is area of sliding surface =
A
W is weight of block lying
above sliding surface. W sin  p
s =
A
W sin  p W cos p tan 
and
Shear stress,
=c+
A A

Driving force = Resisting force

93
 The stability of rock slope:
cA + W cos p tan 
FS =
W sin  p

If the cohesion zero, thus;

W cos p tan 
FS =
W sin  p
94
3 slope conditions;

1.The slope is fully saturated; such that the

tension crack is full-filled with water.

2.The slope is partially saturated; the

tension crack is half-filled with water.

3. The slope is dry or in drainage condition;

the tension crack is empty with water. 95
Geometries of plane slope failure;
(a) tension crack in the upper slope;
(b) tension crack in the face.

Where;

Driving force = Resisting force

96
 For case (a), the weight of sliding block W is;


W =  r (1 − cot f . tan p )(bH + 1 H 2 cot f ) + 1 b 2 (tan s − tan p )
2 2

Where;

For case (b), the weight of sliding block W is;

Driving force = Resisting force

 2

W =  r H 1 −  cot p  (cot p tan  f − 1)
2 
1 z 
2  H  

cA + (W cos p − U − V sin  p ) tan 

FS =
W sin  p + V cos p 97
The water forces acting in the tension crack,
V, and on the sliding plane,
U, are as follows:

V = 1
2
 w
2
hw Where; U = 1  w hw A
2
Where A is given by:
A = ( H + b tan  s − z ) cos ec p

z = H (1 − cot f  tan  p )

b = H ( cot f  cot p − cot f )

1 1 1
cos ec p = sec p = cot p =
sin  p sin  p tan p
98
 Slope remedial
N T = T sin( T +  p )
S T = T cos( T +  p )
cA + [W cos p − U − V sin  p + T sin( T +  p )] tan 
FS =
W sin  p + V cos p − T cos( T +  p )
Where; Driving force = Resisting force

99
100
Factor of Safety for Planar Mode
• The two models are defined in:

1. Figure 9.23

2. Figure 9.24.

101
Figure 9.23 Factor of Safety calculation for a slope with no tension crack

102
Figure 9.24 Factor of Safety calculation
for a slope with a water-filled tension crack

103
104
Factor of Safety for Wedge Mode
Figure 9.25 The important data for analyzing wedge failure

105
Cont’d

• Given:

• Ca = Cohesion Øb = Friction angle

• H = height of wedge ψa = dip angle for plane a

• ψb = dip angle for plane b ψ5= dip angle for wedge intersection

• X, Y, A, B are factor which depend upon the geometry of wedge

106
Shear strength of filled discontinuities and filling materials (After Barton 1974)

107